Sounds great! I'd imagine whoever can do this and indeed does it should get paid.

Hey those are really nice. I like the reflection on the porcelein.

Stupid question but... How do you find out which version of Vray you have? And how do you update it?

Chill guys! This will make you laugh
http://www.hopelessgeek.com/2008/10/10/careful-america

Similar reaction over here.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/12/uselections2008-sarahpalin

That would be super! Sketchrino!

Whats that?

@rickw said:

It occured to me that the way I am saying things may be confusing to some. So here's a story that I hope illustrates things:

A man went outside after a rainstorm and saw that the streets were wet. A few days later, as he was walking, he saw a wet street and decided, "it must have rained here," and he walked on home. Because he was out walking, he missed the news report that a water main had broken near where he was walking, causing streets to be wet.

He saw the evidence (the street was wet), and the evidence was accommodated by his theory (it had rained). However, the evidence was also accommodated by alternate causes (badly adjusted irrigation system, leaky water truck, a broken water main, melting ice or snow, someone washing their car, etc.), one of which happened to be the actual situation.

The point is, the available evidence is accommodated by more than one theory. That being the case, the evidence (as it is) cannot be said to prove one or the other.

I agree sure but my point was the alternative you posited are based on previous experience of the person which can be independently shared by any number of individuals who experienced rain before encountering this event. It doesn't in anyway make God more likely.

Vray should be able to scale to as many CPU as you can throw at it.

Thats beautiful. I love the softness of it. Dawn?

Hey thats great!

Thanks for the help!

While on the topic check out this Swedish film called All Things Fair.

Hi Mr S

Thanks for the prompt reply. I couldn't find it on their new website thats why I was asking. Don't worry about it if you are unsure of the legality. I don't want to get you into trouble.

@cheffey said:

Nice process though the step before the escalator is a bit odd.
@chango
Polished concrete has very nice reflections. Though typically it's the floor that's polished.

Yes ofcourse! DOH!

Can you post a link to Material Studio? Thanks

@rickw said:

@chango70 said:

How does polyphyletic evolution undermine that there is no need for intelligent creator/creators?

Polyphyletic evolution asserts many different biogenesis events that led to the different types (kingdoms, phyla, classes, orders, families) with microevolution providing the variety within the families. This is more in line with creation (God created many different types that all had the capacity for variety within their kind) than is monophyletic evolution, the main difference being the origins of the initial life forms. But since neither polyphyletic nor monophyletic evolution deal with the origins of life, just what happened after life arose, there is still a need for an explanation of the origins of life - something too complex, in my view, to not have been intentional and designed.

@unknownuser said:

According to standard evolutionary theory, all organisms derive from a single ancestral species. Darwin's famous book is noted for having only one illustration — the familiar monophyletic evolutionary tree, showing all living organisms linked to a single ancestor. The structure of this tree shows diversity first increasing at low taxonomic categories, eventually building to diversity at higher taxonomic categories. Evolutionarily speaking, this pattern seems inevitable — small changes add up, eventually producing new species, then new genera, families, orders, etc. Unfortunately for the theory, this description is the opposite of the actual pattern in the rocks. The greatest morphological differences appear in the lower Phanerozoic rocks, while the rest of the fossil record consists largely of variations of familiar themes.

@unknownuser said:

Do I believe there are more than 8 notes in a scale. Yes I do. But within the set of parameters as defined by the 8 notes there seem to be endless compositions...so one could be fooled into looking/listening no further.

Being a musician, I appreciate a music analogy. Given there are 8 notes in a standard major scale, I understand how you might think that being stuck in one key would be a "static condition" despite the seemingly "endless compositions" - and yet, DNA has only 4 elements. Is that not itself, then, a static condition? And yet whole symphonies of species are written with those four elements.

There are 12 notes in a chromatic scale in western music. A major scale uses 8 of those 12 in a particular interval pattern. A natural minor scale also uses 8 of 12, but 3 are different, and there is a different interval pattern. A harmonic minor likewise uses 8 of 12, but 3 are different from the major, and one is different from the natural minor. Then there's the melodic minor scale, which has only one note different from a major scale when ascending, and is the same as the natural minor scale when descending. A chromatic scale uses all 12 notes. Then there are modal scales, but that's just too much...

The point? Good question! The point is that (traditionally) a composer selects one key as the basis of a composition, and structures the composition based on the type of music being written and on the style (baroque, classical, romantic, etc). For example, a rondo has a different structure than a sonata or minuet. A symphony is distinct from a concerto, an opera, or a cantata. The styles (or "periods", thinking historically) are like higher orders, the composers and types are like lower orders, and the individual works are like the various species - they can be grouped by like parameters.

Baroque : Bach : Concertos : Brandenburg #3 in G Major
Baroque : Bach : Toccatas & Fugues : d minor
Classical : Mozart : Symphonies : #40 in G minor
Romantic : Brahms : Symphonies : #1 in c minor

Granted, it's not a perfect analogy (keys are independent of types and styles, though the 12 tones are constant throughout western music from the late Renaissance to the late 19th century), but it is fun.

Anyway, need to get back to Windowizer...

Morlecular natural selection fully incorporates Polyphyletic evolution as it can create independent chances of organic molecules from inorganics ones. It doesn't prove anything Rick. Gene-centric natural selection can also incorporate Polyphyletic evolution. I still don't understand why that would mean God. Care to elaborate?

How does polyphyletic evolution undermine that there is no need for intelligent creator/creators?

Selfish Gene is good place to start. It outlines a 'gene-centric' mode of Natural Selection driven evolution that appears to be wholely rational and without the need of 'intelligent - creator/creators'. People confuse evolution and Natural Selection quite often. Evolution as understood by things changing (adapt) overtime is one thing. Evolutionary theory of Natural Selection is a specific theory regarding how evolution may take place on its own (I.e. without the need of devine interference). Evolution meaning change is easily grasped by most, Natural Selection unfortunately isn't.

Whenever I talk to relgious people about evolution. I get the feeling they just didn't pay enough attention to grasp the finer points of Natural Selection.

@paris said:

I wonder what will happen to Alaska over the next 8 years if Obama wins and Palin continues to govern.
As far as the argument 'only intelligent' people should be allowed to vote, well, my question is: Who gets to determine who falls within the 'intelligent voter' parameter?

Why Mensa ofcourse!

@mike lucey said:

Good read! (and funny) I don't know the ins and outs but
got a bit fright when I watched Sarah and Joe debating.

I asked myself a THE simple question, which one would
I like to see stepping into the Boss's shoes should the
need arise. It was Joe! Maybe Sarah could handle this
in 10 years time after she learns more about the World
but not within the next 4 years under pressure. IMHO she
is just not qualified at the moment to do VP job

Mike

But thats the point of the article. She doesn't need to know about the world! Her appeal is purely on the level of the subconscious 'I am one of you'! This in fact makes a convincing point why some people shouldn't get the vote. Just think for a minute, someone who doesn't know anything about World Agendas and Global politics is going to be affecting YOUR corner of the world for the next five years!? How is that democratic accountability?