Noog Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Maybe I'm missing something. I don't get it. If he's the smartest man in the world then why did he grab the backpack? Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 The point is, the 'smartest man in the world' isn't really that smart. Quote
-Ryan Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Lol, I didn't get it. xD Edit: OH WAIT A MINUTE I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE @First post on this page. Yes CAV, yes I am. Quote
CAV of Gang Green Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Ok then. Well I'm anything but religious. I'm scientific. Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I'm scientific too. *Takes sciency notes on the universe and everything else* Quote
CAV of Gang Green Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Yes, but I actually want an occupation in the field of science. So I need to know even MORE. Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Oh, you mean 42, and all that stuff? Quote
CAV of Gang Green Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 No. Look at my previous usernames, and you'll see. Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 An Astronomer, a New Yorker... what else? Quote
Unstream Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 You guys make it sound like religion and science can't go hand-in-hand. Anyway, the whole thing about the world's smartest person is extremely subjective. There are a ton of contenders, and Stephen Hawkings is only one of them. There's people like Dr. Grigori Perelman, who's solved math problems nobody else could, and Marilyn vos Savant, who has the highest recorded IQ. In fact, Hawkings even stated that he felt embarrassed by the fact that he was called the smartest man in the world. Quote
Divya Bean Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I doubt that there is a smartest person in the world because (I know this sounds cheesy) but there are a lot of different kinds of smart, as in different subjects not physical, musical, etc. There might possibly be a person who is the best at math or a person who is the best at science...but only possibly. Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I know you guys are trying to debate, but everybody knows the smartest person is: Me Quote
Tyler. Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I am religious, but I don't let these things worry me Quote
-Ryan Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 Now that the whole religion and science topic is going, i'm curious abou what everyone's opinions on 2012 are. Quote
jumpingbeans Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I really don't have an opinion. I don't care either way (well, actually, I'd care if the wolrd ended, but you know what I mean) Quote
CAV of Gang Green Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 An Astronomer, a New Yorker... what else? I already am a New Yorker. So I want to be an Astronomer. Quote
Unstream Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I don't think there's any real evidence backing up the claim. The Aztec or Mayan or whatever calendar they say predicts the end of the world came up with the date first, so it doesn't count as evidence. Quote
Wembly Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 The year 2012: Y2K's younger sibling that was jealous of all the attention Y2K got so is now trying to prove its relevance. It will not. It will fall into the annals of infamous failure. Quote
Divya Bean Posted October 23, 2010 Posted October 23, 2010 I dont think that there is any evidence to back up the end of the world in 2012. I (kinda) understand the world ending in 2000, because the dates in computers would be 01/01/00 which would be something in binary which could cause all of the computers to crash... Thats what my Tech Ed teacher told me. Quote
Spritzie Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 The year 2012: Y2K's younger sibling that was jealous of all the attention Y2K got so is now trying to prove its relevance. It will not. It will fall into the annals of infamous failure. I love this! Your reply has been quoted. It was awesome. :D I agree with you. Quote
Wembly Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Haha, I'm glad you enjoyed it too because I was wondering if I found myself entirely too amusing once again. Quote
Spritzie Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 No, not at all. I loved it. It was the perfect explanation for it. :laughingsmiley: Quote
CAV of Gang Green Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 The year 2012: Y2K's younger sibling that was jealous of all the attention Y2K got so is now trying to prove its relevance. It will not. It will fall into the annals of infamous failure. That's a nice and thoughtful statement. But I find 2012 as Y2K's distant cousin. While Y2K (2000) wanted to destroy technology, 2012 wants to end a calender and make everything just go poof. Quote
Guest Drr Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Whoa what happened?! I'm so confused. Who recognizes me? :whistle: Quote
antiaircraft Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 *waves* Hiya! :) I'm rather amused at the amount of hype that can be generated over a simple, easily (if not simply) fixed bug in date systems. Heck, most UNIX-like systems are using 64-bit date storage already, so we won't even have the 2038 problem to bother about soon enough. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.