<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The God Bucket</title>
	<atom:link href="http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-god-bucket/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-god-bucket/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on technology from a citizen scientist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:01:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Shanahan</title>
		<link>http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-god-bucket/comment-page-1/#comment-2195</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Shanahan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=2212#comment-2195</guid>
		<description>Definition of a species, not able to interbreed with their nearest related species. Scientists are still working to prove that neanderthal were a completely separate species, and not a sub-species that could breed with homo sapiens. The work involves sequencing their DNA, and is almost complete.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Definition of a species, not able to interbreed with their nearest related species. Scientists are still working to prove that neanderthal were a completely separate species, and not a sub-species that could breed with homo sapiens. The work involves sequencing their DNA, and is almost complete.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Shanahan</title>
		<link>http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-god-bucket/comment-page-1/#comment-2194</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Shanahan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=2212#comment-2194</guid>
		<description>Thought provoking discussion on the radio this week. Are we the only intelligent lifeform. The question was - what if a separate species evolved to rival our intelligence? What would this mean? Well science has already found that such a species did exist until it died out 25000 years ago...neanderthal man. A separately evolved species of &quot;humankind&quot; with not quite the equal but still a lot more intelligence than any other species except us. Except for the iceage, we would be sharing this planet today. Interesting how this would impact on our belief as being superior to all species.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thought provoking discussion on the radio this week. Are we the only intelligent lifeform. The question was &#8211; what if a separate species evolved to rival our intelligence? What would this mean? Well science has already found that such a species did exist until it died out 25000 years ago&#8230;neanderthal man. A separately evolved species of &#8220;humankind&#8221; with not quite the equal but still a lot more intelligence than any other species except us. Except for the iceage, we would be sharing this planet today. Interesting how this would impact on our belief as being superior to all species.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ugo</title>
		<link>http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-god-bucket/comment-page-1/#comment-2115</link>
		<dc:creator>Ugo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=2212#comment-2115</guid>
		<description>Well said. I was thinking of replying to Nova&#039;s article on Twine, but since it needs registration I will probably avoid it. Too bad, it would have been fun to ask where does one gets the ludicrous idea that &quot;modern-day science [...] takes the position that universe is strictly a physical phenomenon and that everything about can be explained by physical measurements and laws.&quot; and to explain why asking &quot;where&quot; the universe is located is meaningless.

In the end, Nova&#039;s article comes down to trying once again to prove the existence of god by defining god in a way that would satisfy the proof. Too bad that definition is not what 99% of the religious people on this planet call God, i.e. a personal, sentient being that intervenes directly in this world to punish the evil and reward the good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said. I was thinking of replying to Nova&#8217;s article on Twine, but since it needs registration I will probably avoid it. Too bad, it would have been fun to ask where does one gets the ludicrous idea that &#8220;modern-day science [...] takes the position that universe is strictly a physical phenomenon and that everything about can be explained by physical measurements and laws.&#8221; and to explain why asking &#8220;where&#8221; the universe is located is meaningless.</p>
<p>In the end, Nova&#8217;s article comes down to trying once again to prove the existence of god by defining god in a way that would satisfy the proof. Too bad that definition is not what 99% of the religious people on this planet call God, i.e. a personal, sentient being that intervenes directly in this world to punish the evil and reward the good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

