For your PC needs
How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
but skeptics can't?
http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
but skeptics can't?
http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
On Friday, August 10, 2012 12:52:07 PM UTC+10, Graham Cooper wrote:
> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
>
>
> but skeptics can't?
>
>
>
> http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
>
>
>
> http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
>
>
>
> http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
How come all your images are complete shit compared to those taken by members of the Cloud Appreciation Society?
http://cloudappreciationsociety.org/...&t=cloud87&i=0
On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
Sylvia.
On Aug 10, 1:22*pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> > How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>
> Sylvia.
the words BLINK DETECTED on the LCD screen.
You should be able to make out a smaller skull with 1 eye open and 1
shut.
http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
Herc
On 10/08/2012 1:26 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Aug 10, 1:22 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>
>> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> the words BLINK DETECTED on the LCD screen.
The camera clearly has a crude algorithm designed to detect faces -
crude because it needs to be fast, and false positives are not a real
problem. But this means that it will find faces where human brains can
readily see that there is none.
Sylvia.
Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> but skeptics can't?
>
> http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
>
> http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
>
> http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
>
The average theologian (there are exceptions, of course) uses
"atheist" to mean a person who denies the existence of a God.
Even an atheist would agree that some atheists (a small minority)
would fit this definition. However, most atheists would stongly
dispute the adequacy of this definition. Rather, they would hold
that an atheist is a person without a belief in God.
The distiniction is small but important. Denying something means
that you have knowledge of what it is that you are being asked to
affirm, but that you have rejected that particular concept. To be
without a belief in God merely means that yhe term "god" has no
importance, or possibly no meaning, to you. Belief in God is not
a factor in your life. Surely this is quite different from denying
the existence of God. Atheism is not a belief as such. It is the
lack of belief.
When we examine the components of the word "atheism," we can see
this distinction more clearly. The word is made up of "a-" and
"-theism." Theism, we will all agree, is a belief in a God or gods.
The prefix "a-" can mean "not" (or "no") or "without." If it means
"not," then we have as an atheist someone who is not a theist
(i.e., someone who does not have a belief in a God or gods). If it
means "without," then an atheist is someone without theism, or
without a belief in God.
On Aug 10, 1:37*pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 1:26 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> > On Aug 10, 1:22 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
> >> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
> >> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>
> >> Sylvia.
>
> > the words BLINK DETECTED on the LCD screen.
>
> The camera clearly has a crude algorithm designed to detect faces -
> crude because it needs to be fast, and false positives are not a real
> problem. But this means that it will find faces where human brains can
> readily see that there is none.
>
> Sylvia.
but you all claim my cloud photos don't *resemble* faces, or anything
at all.
http://pro1og.com/AK47.png
In Amortised Complexity Analysis a rudimentary heuristic measurement
is
sufficient to work out the complexity of an algorithm.
e.g. 6 random words display on the screen.
your 6 word "sentence" will get on average 0-10 Google direct hits.
my 6 word sentence on screen will score 10X that, average 50 Google
hits.
a rudimentary metric is sufficient to demonstrate that Skeptics 0
scoring system is hyperbole.
Like this:
http://www.wisdomofchopra.com/quiz.php
Welcome to the wisdomofchopra.com quiz!
You will be presented with a quote, and your task is to try and tell
if it has been randomly generated or if it is a genuine quote from Dr
Chopra. Good luck!
"Imagination is in the midst of unique life"
[REAL] [RANDOM]
Herc
Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>
>
> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> if it has been randomly generated or if it is a genuine quote from Dr
> Chopra. Good luck!
>
> "Imagination is in the midst of unique life"
>
> [REAL] [RANDOM]
>
> Herc
I cant think of a single atrocity done "in the name of" atheism. I guess
you could possibly successfully argue that those killed "in the name of"
Communism could MAYBE be considered as such, but I cant for the life of
me think of a time when thousands of people were killed solely in the
name of Science.
Religion, regardless of the flavor, has always had the power to unite
people. You don't like the man in the village over, and wish him dead,
and you need to rally the troops? Tell your tribe that God wants the
enemy dead. You don't even really need a reason! The Magical Sky Wizard
(whichever one you chose) can't be argued with! It is the ultimate power
and means of control on a social level. It unites the people under one
banner and gives them a sense of purpose, along with immediately
validating any behavior (no matter how nasty and out of character) as
OK.
"Oh dear, I feel sortof bad about killing all the women and children
during that battle. I hope I can feel better about it… and my leaders
say that it is OK. Why is it OK? Well, because God said it was OK. Ah,
well, there's the rationalization. Even Granny can't get mad at me for
beheading all those children, and raping the mothers. They didn't
believe in the same God as us, so they aren't really humans. I am a
holy, just man with high social standing now!"
Religion is the ultimate rationalizer.
On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
>Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>>
>>
>> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>
>Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
On Aug 10, 3:14*pm, Fred Nurk <frednurk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
> >Sylvia Else wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> >>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
> >> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
> >> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>
> >Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
>
> Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
Do you perverts mind keeping your filth out of my religion group
crossposts??
Newsgroups: aus.tv, sci.skeptic, alt.astrology, alt.bible, alt.atheism
NOTE: THE TOPIC
http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
The Son Of God
"BroilJAB" <DesignDenier@wmconnect.com> wrote in message
news:0925f5d4cbc6aa9@swing.com...
> The average theologian (there are exceptions, of course) uses
> "atheist" to mean a person who denies the existence of a God.
> Even an atheist would agree that some atheists (a small minority)
> would fit this definition. However, most atheists would stongly
> dispute the adequacy of this definition. Rather, they would hold
> that an atheist is a person without a belief in God.
> The distiniction is small but important. Denying something means
> that you have knowledge of what it is that you are being asked to
> affirm, but that you have rejected that particular concept. To be
> without a belief in God merely means that yhe term "god" has no
> importance, or possibly no meaning, to you. Belief in God is not
> a factor in your life. Surely this is quite different from denying
> the existence of God. Atheism is not a belief as such. It is the
> lack of belief.
>
> When we examine the components of the word "atheism," we can see
> this distinction more clearly. The word is made up of "a-" and
> "-theism." Theism, we will all agree, is a belief in a God or gods.
> The prefix "a-" can mean "not" (or "no") or "without." If it means
> "not," then we have as an atheist someone who is not a theist
> (i.e., someone who does not have a belief in a God or gods). If it
> means "without," then an atheist is someone without theism, or
> without a belief in God.
>
You are simply arguing the definition of atheist, agnostic, and non-theist.
I would assert you are strictly correct, however so many have come to use
the definition of atheist as a person who *believes* in the non existence of
God, that some like Richard Dawkins prefer the term non-theist for those who
don't believe either way. Personally I think even arguing the definitions is
a waste of time, most of those who don't believe don't care. Seems more
people called themselves "Jedi" on the last census than atheist, agnostic or
non-theist. Not even sure who their "god" is, (wonder if they are?) since
"the force" is supposedly only a collective energy of humans and aliens.
Still it probably beats scientology! :-)
Trevor.
In alt.atheism Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
> but skeptics can't?
Yeah, ok, so there's a vaguely face-like feature in the middle of the cloud.
So what? The human mind has evolved over millions of years to be really good
at "seeing faces", so much so that we see them where they aren't.
I also sometimes see bunny rabbits in the clouds. What does playing a 5 year
old's game of cloud gazing have to do with the price of tea in china, Coop?
--
__ _ | Anyone who has a library and a garden wants for nothing.
(_ |_) | --Cicero
__)|_) |
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:52:07 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com>:
>How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
>but skeptics can't?
>
>http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
>
>http://pro1og.com/SKULL.jpg
>
>http://pro1og.com/BOW-DITCH.jpg
Your camera can recognize nothing; it's merely a recorder of
photons. Your imagination, on the other hand, seems able to
"recognize" anything, whether real or not.
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 21:18:56 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com>:
>On Aug 10, 1:37*pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>> On 10/08/2012 1:26 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>> > On Aug 10, 1:22 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>> >> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>> >>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>
>> >> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>> >> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>>
>> >> Sylvia.
>>
>> > the words BLINK DETECTED on the LCD screen.
>>
>> The camera clearly has a crude algorithm designed to detect faces -
>> crude because it needs to be fast, and false positives are not a real
>> problem. But this means that it will find faces where human brains can
>> readily see that there is none.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>but you all claim my cloud photos don't *resemble* faces, or anything
>at all.
That may be due to the fact that, unlike you, we have more
intelligence and discrimination than a camera.
<snip>
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:03:07 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com>:
>On Aug 10, 3:14*pm, Fred Nurk <frednurk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>> >Sylvia Else wrote:
>> >> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>> >>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>
>> >> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>> >> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>>
>> >Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
>>
>> Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
>
>Do you perverts mind keeping your filth out of my religion group
>crossposts??
If you desire this, stop crossposting to the religious
groups; the responsibility for anything posted in response
is ultimately yours since *you* selected the groups.
>Newsgroups: aus.tv, sci.skeptic, alt.astrology, alt.bible, alt.atheism
>
>NOTE: THE TOPIC
>http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Aug 10, 3:14 pm, Fred Nurk <frednurk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>>>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>>> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>>>> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>>> Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
>> Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
>
> Do you perverts mind keeping your filth out of my religion group
> crossposts??
>
>
Keep your religious crossposts to yourself and I'll think about it
On Aug 11, 12:08*am, sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
> In alt.atheism Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>
> > but skeptics can't?
>
> Yeah, ok, so there's a vaguely face-like feature in the middle of the cloud.
> So what? *The human mind has evolved over millions of years to be really good
> at "seeing faces", so much so that we see them where they aren't.
>
> I also sometimes see bunny rabbits in the clouds. *What does playing a 5 year
> old's game of cloud gazing have to do with the price of tea in china, Coop?
>
let's say the PK INDEX is a supernatural measure of 'entities' present
in the clouds.
On a normal day, say you spend 10 minutes checking out the sky and
take 1 photo.
That photo will have a PK reading of 1.
i.e. you might 1 in 3 times spot a vague ink spot type of image.
On a good day, you might score a 3!
Now if your typical daily PK INDEX was the size of this TWINKI..
This cloud photo would have a TWINKI the size of the ROCKHAMPTON SEQEB
POWER BUILDING!
http://pro1og.com/DOG.jpg
http://pro1og.com/HAND.png
http://pro1og.com/ORACLE.jpg
http://pro1og.com/chopper1.jpg
http://pro1og.com/oracle-genie.jpg
http://pro1og.com/GhostBusters-Building.jpg
HERC
KINGS BEACH
QUEENSLAND
In article <rZudnfun8_1A9bjNnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
George <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
>
> Graham Cooper wrote:
> > On Aug 10, 3:14 pm, Fred Nurk <frednurk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
> >>> Sylvia Else wrote:
> >>>> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> >>>>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
> >>>> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
> >>>> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
> >>> Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
> >> Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
> >
> > Do you perverts mind keeping your filth out of my religion group
> > crossposts??
> >
> >
> Keep your religious crossposts to yourself and I'll think about it
:-)
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:03:07 -0700 (PDT), Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 10, 3:14*pm, Fred Nurk <frednurk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:55:33 +1200, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>> >Sylvia Else wrote:
>> >> On 10/08/2012 12:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>> >>> How come my camera can recognize faces in the clouds
>>
>> >> What evidence is there that your camera recognises anything? I presume
>> >> you point the camera, and you press the button to take a picture.
>>
>> >Herc has this -wee- problem with reality
>>
>> Whenever he tries to use his brain, he wees.....
>
>Do you perverts mind keeping your filth out of my religion group
>crossposts??
Yes. We do mind. Now take your crossposted crap and shove it
back up your ass.
>Newsgroups: aus.tv, sci.skeptic, alt.astrology, alt.bible, alt.atheism
>
>NOTE: THE TOPIC
>http://pro1og.com/BLINK-DETECTED.jpg
>
>The Son Of God
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote