The date of their writing is disputed, and you're assuming a historic account is inaccurate merely because it was written after the event? You can't assume they made it up, you can certaintly think that, but you can't assume it.
Most calendar EOD prophecies have very little to nothing to do with our current calendar. Campings is based on solar and lunar movements, not the calendar itself. The mayan thing is about the Mayan calendar, which I'm fairly confident wasn't butchered by Caesar.
Now, that certainly doesn't give them any credibility, but let's at least not mock them beyond the extremely deserving amount:-)
"I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
You should probably read the section before that. At the beginning of the chapter, Jesus said in reference to the temple that not one stone would be left on another. The disciples then asked him when these things would happen, and he proceeded into a rather lengthy explanation with one "rabbit trail" into the end times to address/correct the idea that Jews thought the end of the world would come when the temple was destroyed. He then wrapped it up by answering their initial question of when the prophecy about the temple would come to pass. The structure of the passage makes a lot of sense when you think of the flow of a conversation. People tend to not really look at the surrounding text when talking about this verse and instead take it out of the context of the conversation, a dangerous practice albeit a common one on both sides.
FYI, destruction of the temple was around 70 A.D. Within the timing of the current generation prophecy.
That argument never works. The people who originally found out were not informed by their own post, so it stands to reason that someone else can definitely figure it out as well.
I agree with you, I'm just saying if apple does something drastic, the labels may respond in like. Whereas google has no ties with them right now (at least that I'm aware of, maybe I'm wrong).
The vote on Joint Resolution 114 was taken on October 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23, and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133.
Yeah, you're right, no-one supported that. Especially not an overwhelming 75% of the Senate and two-thirds of the House. I believe public opinion polls hovered around 70-80% as well. Don't be daft, 20/20 hindsight isnt a particularly special gift.
The patent is essentially over a mapping of architecture and content of a document in XML. It describes using a mapping scheme to map the two together thus separating them from being stored solely in the document.
It's essentially a patent that describes nothing whatsoever beyond storing information about a document performing a particular form of hashing. Shouldn't be a patent.
He asked them to provide him with background on the politicians and a methodology to get them to support the war. This guy did less than McDonalds does to sell a big mac, and the guy who "blew the whistle" has an overinflated view of his "skills and training".
You know from experience how creationists behave?
Wow, what a ridiculous generalization. You accept something as a rule because you have no experience outside of it.
I've had multiple conversations about creationism online, and I can't think of any where it's been a single post. Your assumption has no standing, and that's what your argument is at best, an assumption.
Have you taken the course? Is that really the requirement?
You're assuming that they post and never return to the site but the course requirement is ambiguously worded, which in my experience generally means the professor gives more distinction in class.
How do you know the professor doesn't mean 10 consecutive posts in a thread?
Disclaimer: Christian Electrical Engineering Student
I would like to point out that "RichardDawkins.net" is definitely presenting one side of this story, and anyone who takes a brief look at the site can tell which side that is.
This is a philosophy course they're referencing and if you look at the tests you'll notice that the questions are just like any philosophy course. They ask you to explain/argue both sides of an issue (one of the test questions even says argue against ID).
Speaking as a student, this is actually a brilliant form of instruction. What better way to make you understand and can use the material you've been taught then to have you defend it against people who will purposely be attacking it vehemently. This course is titled Intelligent Design so I would expect students to learn enough about it to defend it on some level. Why take the course if you're not going to learn the reasoning behind the subject matter.
Also, to everyone who has said that students shouldn't be given an assignment that makes them present/defend a viewpoint outside of their own. Try taking an english class sometime with a christian viewpoint. The stuff they require you to read and write about definitely does NOT fall within my viewpoint most of the time.
I'm guessing with the largest population and such there must have been more than one case of severe WoW addiction. If the entire WoW community there is actually surviving 6 weeks of seperation this may be an interesting rejection of the concept of gaming addiction.
Checks and balances was a great concept, but unfortunately it hasn't worked out that well.
What we've seen is that in the past few decades there has been a ridiculous increase in lawsuits as well as those lawsuits being elevated to higher courts through appeals. This has resulted in a shift of power towards the judicial branch of government.
No, they can't "create" laws or sign them into effect, but with our most important cases (constitutional/Supreme Court) now being decided on what judges deem to be the "spirit of the law" it is ridiculous to think that the legislators hold the power in this system.
Ironically enough, the word of law and the concept of precedence are used most in our lowest courts, with our highest courts being based more and more off of subjective factors. The inconsistency in rulings has long been an indicator of this. If there is room to move around and interpret within the law, then the one who truly controls it is the one who is deciding how it is interpreted.
Let's not be foolish, the judicial branch runs this country. The only real control the other branches have over them now is that the executive branch selects WHO gets to sit on the panel and run the country.
Repatriate just means to send back to their country of origin. It doesn't mean that they were citizens of the U.S.
Geez people, patriot doesn't mean American.
What you're talking about really seems like they're going to be conducting some sort of study involving you guys. At least, I sure as heck would if I was going to have the oppurtunity to put 600 people to sea for 4 months. I'm betting that what you do (and how well you do in the classes) is going to be monitored much more than you seem to think, and if this internet thing is part of their rules, it would be a good idea to stick with it. I could be wrong, I just can't see a university letting a chance like that for their psych/soc department going to waste. If I was a professor in either of those departments I'd be all over this program like white on bread.
Slashdot Mirror
The date of their writing is disputed, and you're assuming a historic account is inaccurate merely because it was written after the event? You can't assume they made it up, you can certaintly think that, but you can't assume it.
Most calendar EOD prophecies have very little to nothing to do with our current calendar. Campings is based on solar and lunar movements, not the calendar itself. The mayan thing is about the Mayan calendar, which I'm fairly confident wasn't butchered by Caesar. Now, that certainly doesn't give them any credibility, but let's at least not mock them beyond the extremely deserving amount :-)
Unrelated note: For some reason, I mis-read the slashdot headline as "What To Do When the Raptors Come?" what do you do when the raptors come?
meteors worked last time...
You should probably read the section before that. At the beginning of the chapter, Jesus said in reference to the temple that not one stone would be left on another. The disciples then asked him when these things would happen, and he proceeded into a rather lengthy explanation with one "rabbit trail" into the end times to address/correct the idea that Jews thought the end of the world would come when the temple was destroyed. He then wrapped it up by answering their initial question of when the prophecy about the temple would come to pass. The structure of the passage makes a lot of sense when you think of the flow of a conversation. People tend to not really look at the surrounding text when talking about this verse and instead take it out of the context of the conversation, a dangerous practice albeit a common one on both sides.
FYI, destruction of the temple was around 70 A.D. Within the timing of the current generation prophecy.
That argument never works. The people who originally found out were not informed by their own post, so it stands to reason that someone else can definitely figure it out as well.
I agree with you, I'm just saying if apple does something drastic, the labels may respond in like. Whereas google has no ties with them right now (at least that I'm aware of, maybe I'm wrong).
The label companies have leverage on apple though, they pull out of iTunes and chaos ensues.
The vote on Joint Resolution 114 was taken on October 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23, and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133. Yeah, you're right, no-one supported that. Especially not an overwhelming 75% of the Senate and two-thirds of the House. I believe public opinion polls hovered around 70-80% as well. Don't be daft, 20/20 hindsight isnt a particularly special gift.
The patent is essentially over a mapping of architecture and content of a document in XML. It describes using a mapping scheme to map the two together thus separating them from being stored solely in the document. It's essentially a patent that describes nothing whatsoever beyond storing information about a document performing a particular form of hashing. Shouldn't be a patent.
He asked them to provide him with background on the politicians and a methodology to get them to support the war. This guy did less than McDonalds does to sell a big mac, and the guy who "blew the whistle" has an overinflated view of his "skills and training".
Really? Maybe spell-check should have been used on TFA.
You know from experience how creationists behave? Wow, what a ridiculous generalization. You accept something as a rule because you have no experience outside of it.
I've had multiple conversations about creationism online, and I can't think of any where it's been a single post. Your assumption has no standing, and that's what your argument is at best, an assumption.
Have you taken the course? Is that really the requirement?
You're assuming that they post and never return to the site but the course requirement is ambiguously worded, which in my experience generally means the professor gives more distinction in class.
How do you know the professor doesn't mean 10 consecutive posts in a thread?
Disclaimer: Christian Electrical Engineering Student
I would like to point out that "RichardDawkins.net" is definitely presenting one side of this story, and anyone who takes a brief look at the site can tell which side that is. This is a philosophy course they're referencing and if you look at the tests you'll notice that the questions are just like any philosophy course. They ask you to explain/argue both sides of an issue (one of the test questions even says argue against ID).
Speaking as a student, this is actually a brilliant form of instruction. What better way to make you understand and can use the material you've been taught then to have you defend it against people who will purposely be attacking it vehemently. This course is titled Intelligent Design so I would expect students to learn enough about it to defend it on some level. Why take the course if you're not going to learn the reasoning behind the subject matter.
Also, to everyone who has said that students shouldn't be given an assignment that makes them present/defend a viewpoint outside of their own. Try taking an english class sometime with a christian viewpoint. The stuff they require you to read and write about definitely does NOT fall within my viewpoint most of the time.
I'm guessing with the largest population and such there must have been more than one case of severe WoW addiction. If the entire WoW community there is actually surviving 6 weeks of seperation this may be an interesting rejection of the concept of gaming addiction.
Sunlight is not yellowish
Sunlight also contains a whole lot of radiation. Personally, the last thing I want is a miniaturized sun in my lamp.
Checks and balances was a great concept, but unfortunately it hasn't worked out that well.
What we've seen is that in the past few decades there has been a ridiculous increase in lawsuits as well as those lawsuits being elevated to higher courts through appeals. This has resulted in a shift of power towards the judicial branch of government.
No, they can't "create" laws or sign them into effect, but with our most important cases (constitutional/Supreme Court) now being decided on what judges deem to be the "spirit of the law" it is ridiculous to think that the legislators hold the power in this system.
Ironically enough, the word of law and the concept of precedence are used most in our lowest courts, with our highest courts being based more and more off of subjective factors. The inconsistency in rulings has long been an indicator of this. If there is room to move around and interpret within the law, then the one who truly controls it is the one who is deciding how it is interpreted.
Let's not be foolish, the judicial branch runs this country. The only real control the other branches have over them now is that the executive branch selects WHO gets to sit on the panel and run the country.
I didn't realize that what I did outside was private.
Three stories in one summary?!? I just don't know what to respond to...brain melting...AAIIIIIGH!
Repatriate just means to send back to their country of origin. It doesn't mean that they were citizens of the U.S. Geez people, patriot doesn't mean American.
There are some really hot alien chicks outside our galaxy who tend to leave their blinds open when they change.
With enough butter, anything can taste okay. The best part is their texture though. Nice and silky.
What you're talking about really seems like they're going to be conducting some sort of study involving you guys. At least, I sure as heck would if I was going to have the oppurtunity to put 600 people to sea for 4 months. I'm betting that what you do (and how well you do in the classes) is going to be monitored much more than you seem to think, and if this internet thing is part of their rules, it would be a good idea to stick with it. I could be wrong, I just can't see a university letting a chance like that for their psych/soc department going to waste. If I was a professor in either of those departments I'd be all over this program like white on bread.
But every sci-fi show and book ever made promised me a bio-dome! Man, can't even trust science fiction anymore.
What games could you play on a screen that small?
pixel tetris, micro mario brothers, racing games where the only car choices you have are pt cruisers, VW bugs, and electric cars.