And you're for Handgun Regulation? How do you suppose to keep people off your lawn if you are unarmed? You see, you claim to be against one thing, not realizing it is required to do the thing you do want.
Of course, when I do show up on your lawn, and throw a party, you are helpless to stop me, as I set my sights upon your house, wife and daughters (assuming your are a male).
And who is gonna protect you from abusive police powers, legal system run amok, and legislatures who write all sorts of nanny laws? Or perhaps you agree with the police state, crappy legal system and all the nanny laws.
You do realize that the Police State is required to maintain enforce the nanny laws, right???
Democrat = Socialist Republican = Socialist but slower implementation Green = Socialist, with an environmental twist Peace and Freedom = Socialist
Everyone seems to be all for bigger government, just on their terms. How about we limit governments power, all the way down the line, and make people live with their bad choices?
You realize, that they are doing exactly that. Except that they are often being blown up for the effort without the real ability to shoot back. Right? You knew that. RIGHT??
Oh, you didn't see it on CBSNBCABCCNNFOX so it must not be true.
Sounds like all of Pop Music and most movies these days. Since the latest greatest movies are remakes and I, II, III, IV, V versions of the same theme.
It is time to trademark all the things about you that make yourself unique. Then, they cannot buy or sell your info without your expressed permission, which you don't do,
My identity is not for sale, thank you very much. My personal details, aren't for sale, thank you very much.
Reminds me of that auction scene in Groundhog Day, where that one guy was being auctioned off and nobody wanted to bid, and finally was sold for two bits.
It was the eve of first day of Unleavened bread, a Sabbath, just not the weekly one. He was in the grave three days, three nights, Friday Evening to Sunday morning cannot be "Three days and Three nights" by any measure.
Mat 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
For a detailed versions that doesn't conform to nominal churchianity version see...
Good for you. I'm sure you're okay, I can assure you I won't, since I'm 6'5" and all TORSO (above the waist). My inseam is only 33", where most people my size are closer to 36-37", which means I'm a good 4 or 5 inches less head room.
I hate (okay, too strong, but you know what I mean) the smug people that think that just because it works for them, it should work for everyone else.
"Now if only they put half of that outrage into their domestic problems with child prostitution"
Depending on who "they" are that you speak of, "they" may not consume YouTube as much as the other thing. Lots of Politicians claim outrage at the very thing they participate in, so only give half hearted effort to "clean up".
Except that Evolution cannot explain certain unchanging species, because the reality is, if Evolution is true, then these species would HAVE to have changed, substantially.
Evolution cannot explain LACK of change in a SEA of change, because Evolution requires change, and the LACK thereof is very hard to explain. Of course Evolution doesn't really address lack of change, because it cannot, it just marks it as an "exception". Enough "exceptions" and the theory becomes less likely.
Another exception is the Cambrian (and Pre Cambrian) explosion.
"The question of how so many immense changes occurred in such a short time is one that stirs scientists. Why did many fundamentally different body plans evolve so early and in such profusion? Some point to the increase in oxygen that began around 700 million years ago, providing fuel for movement and the evolution of more complex body structures. Others propose that an extinction of life just before the Cambrian opened up ecological roles, or "adaptive space," that the new forms exploited. External, ecological factors like these were undoubtedly important in creating the opportunity for the Cambrian explosion to occur. "
So, here we have circular logic of Evolution. To prove evolution, they assume evolution. They cannot explain this "explosion" in fauna via normal evolutionary models, so they make a huge bunch of assumptions(guesses), all of which presuppose evolution.
Of course, there is no other explanation that evolutionists accept for it. Again, another "exception", whereby the theory doesn't explain the explosion, without first accepting the theory. Slow steady changes doesn't explain it, so they modify the theory to include periods of rapid changes without any facts to actually support two types of evolution (fast, slow).
"Scientists have also long been puzzled by its abruptness, and the apparent lack of obvious predecessors to the Cambrian fauna. Three questions in particular are of importance currently: I) is the "explosion" real?; II) what does it tell us about the origin and possible evolution of animals? and III) what were its causes?"
To claim that all creationists are ignorant (not knowing the facts) is a huge lie. I was once a Evolutionist, until I started reading the SCIENCE behind it. I once blindly accepted it as "Fact" until I read example after example of exceptions and holes in the "fossil record". And there are plenty of them.
"Two groups of animals are considered as a separate species if they can't successfully interbreed."
Actually, this is false statement, and typical of Evolutionists. A lion and tiger are separate species, and yet, there are clear examples of them breeding. Same with Horses and Donkeys (Mule). How about Wolf and Dog?
So, your first statement is a lie or a deliberate misstatement of fact. And they call us creationists ignorant. Sheesh
You see, ignorance has little or nothing to do with Evolution and Creationism. Both sides can have ignorant people, as you just proved.
"However, all the facts point to this not being the case."
All the facts you as you believe them. Just because you don't accept facts outside the realm of your senses doesn't make them false. Once upon a time, white men didn't believe in the existence of gorillas, even though there was experiential evidence from outside the realm of white man's experience.
Eventually, they experienced the gorilla for themselves, and believed. Same will happen with the Creator.
Religion cannot build an airplane, and science cannot explain a Creator. They are mutually exclusive. Because some one believes in one, doesn't mean they can't believe in the other, even if you don't understand this.
"Evolution can not be wrong. It's not a theory - it's just a plain fact."
Once upon a time, it was a fact that gorillas couldn't possibly exist. We know better today.
No, Evolution is a theory, because it CANNOT be SCIENTIFICALLY TESTED. Nobody has created a new species in a lab. They have changed one species, often dramatically, but it remains what it was beforehand. Nobody has taken a Bacteria, and made it into a Amoeba, and nobody has taken a virus, and turned it into a bacteria.
It cannot be tested, scientifically, so it remains a theory. Much like most of Quantum Physics is theory, and not likely to be testable anytime soon.
It is this kind of crap that should piss off every scientist. It is this kind of crap that I resent being shoved down to our children, theories as fact. It is no more fact than the FSM is.
Slashdot Mirror
Socialist = BIGGER government
All of the parties I listed (And most of the ones I didn't), are for some form or another of a BIGGER government.
"Keep your party off my lawn!"
And you're for Handgun Regulation? How do you suppose to keep people off your lawn if you are unarmed? You see, you claim to be against one thing, not realizing it is required to do the thing you do want.
Of course, when I do show up on your lawn, and throw a party, you are helpless to stop me, as I set my sights upon your house, wife and daughters (assuming your are a male).
And who is gonna protect you from abusive police powers, legal system run amok, and legislatures who write all sorts of nanny laws? Or perhaps you agree with the police state, crappy legal system and all the nanny laws.
You do realize that the Police State is required to maintain enforce the nanny laws, right???
Democrat = Socialist
Republican = Socialist but slower implementation
Green = Socialist, with an environmental twist
Peace and Freedom = Socialist
Everyone seems to be all for bigger government, just on their terms. How about we limit governments power, all the way down the line, and make people live with their bad choices?
Why isn't this tagged "itsatrap"???
You realize, that they are doing exactly that. Except that they are often being blown up for the effort without the real ability to shoot back. Right? You knew that. RIGHT??
Oh, you didn't see it on CBSNBCABCCNNFOX so it must not be true.
You're not suggesting congress is doing its job, are you?
There are third party candidates? Since when???
Handcuff the soldiers and complain when they're getting the asses kicked. Typical Peaceniks.
Want victory in Iraq? Uncuff the soldiers and let them kill people and break things.
"but are otherwise 99 percent similar.""
Sounds like all of Pop Music and most movies these days. Since the latest greatest movies are remakes and I, II, III, IV, V versions of the same theme.
Damn you! I just wasted 15 min at KittenWar. And I hate cats! LOL
If you're gonna spoof a saying at least have it make sense.
"The Oily Board gets Warm" (not hot)
It is time to trademark all the things about you that make yourself unique. Then, they cannot buy or sell your info without your expressed permission, which you don't do,
My identity is not for sale, thank you very much. My personal details, aren't for sale, thank you very much.
Reminds me of that auction scene in Groundhog Day, where that one guy was being auctioned off and nobody wanted to bid, and finally was sold for two bits.
I thought the radical Environmentalist wanted 5.5 - 6.0 billion people removed from the face of the earth.
http://www.thegeorgiaguidestones.com/Message.htm
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
It was the eve of first day of Unleavened bread, a Sabbath, just not the weekly one. He was in the grave three days, three nights, Friday Evening to Sunday morning cannot be "Three days and Three nights" by any measure.
...
y /3days3nights.html
l
Mat 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
For a detailed versions that doesn't conform to nominal churchianity version see
http://ad2004.com/prophecytruths/Articles/Prophec
http://focusonjerusalem.com/thedayJesusdied.html
http://www.geocities.com/bc1in2k/Death_Res_JC.htm
And it wasn't really a Friday either.
Good for you. I'm sure you're okay, I can assure you I won't, since I'm 6'5" and all TORSO (above the waist). My inseam is only 33", where most people my size are closer to 36-37", which means I'm a good 4 or 5 inches less head room.
I hate (okay, too strong, but you know what I mean) the smug people that think that just because it works for them, it should work for everyone else.
"Now if only they put half of that outrage into their domestic problems with child prostitution"
Depending on who "they" are that you speak of, "they" may not consume YouTube as much as the other thing. Lots of Politicians claim outrage at the very thing they participate in, so only give half hearted effort to "clean up".
so, your definition fits the theory you're trying to prove. How convenient. Circular, but convenient.
It is funny how Environmentalists call all sorts of animals "different species" when in reality they are not, just to get "endangered" label attached.
Oh, that is a different classification? So, on the one hand, they are the "same" on the other hand they are "Different".
Call me back when Evolutionists and Environmentalists can agree on a common definition that can be applied to both.
"towards smaller 1300cc or smaller cars."
I'm 6'5" and I don't fit in your "smaller 1300cc OR SMALLER" car, unless it is a motor cycle, which isn't really car, and is impractical for a family.
Except that Evolution cannot explain certain unchanging species, because the reality is, if Evolution is true, then these species would HAVE to have changed, substantially.
7 0124-sharks-photo.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth
Evolution cannot explain LACK of change in a SEA of change, because Evolution requires change, and the LACK thereof is very hard to explain. Of course Evolution doesn't really address lack of change, because it cannot, it just marks it as an "exception". Enough "exceptions" and the theory becomes less likely.
Another exception is the Cambrian (and Pre Cambrian) explosion.
"The question of how so many immense changes occurred in such a short time is one that stirs scientists. Why did many fundamentally different body plans evolve so early and in such profusion? Some point to the increase in oxygen that began around 700 million years ago, providing fuel for movement and the evolution of more complex body structures. Others propose that an extinction of life just before the Cambrian opened up ecological roles, or "adaptive space," that the new forms exploited. External, ecological factors like these were undoubtedly important in creating the opportunity for the Cambrian explosion to occur. "
So, here we have circular logic of Evolution. To prove evolution, they assume evolution. They cannot explain this "explosion" in fauna via normal evolutionary models, so they make a huge bunch of assumptions(guesses), all of which presuppose evolution.
Of course, there is no other explanation that evolutionists accept for it. Again, another "exception", whereby the theory doesn't explain the explosion, without first accepting the theory. Slow steady changes doesn't explain it, so they modify the theory to include periods of rapid changes without any facts to actually support two types of evolution (fast, slow).
"Scientists have also long been puzzled by its abruptness, and the apparent lack of obvious predecessors to the Cambrian fauna. Three questions in particular are of importance currently: I) is the "explosion" real?; II) what does it tell us about the origin and possible evolution of animals? and III) what were its causes?"
To claim that all creationists are ignorant (not knowing the facts) is a huge lie. I was once a Evolutionist, until I started reading the SCIENCE behind it. I once blindly accepted it as "Fact" until I read example after example of exceptions and holes in the "fossil record". And there are plenty of them.
"Two groups of animals are considered as a separate species if they can't successfully interbreed."
Actually, this is false statement, and typical of Evolutionists. A lion and tiger are separate species, and yet, there are clear examples of them breeding. Same with Horses and Donkeys (Mule). How about Wolf and Dog?
So, your first statement is a lie or a deliberate misstatement of fact. And they call us creationists ignorant. Sheesh
You see, ignorance has little or nothing to do with Evolution and Creationism. Both sides can have ignorant people, as you just proved.
"However, all the facts point to this not being the case."
All the facts you as you believe them. Just because you don't accept facts outside the realm of your senses doesn't make them false. Once upon a time, white men didn't believe in the existence of gorillas, even though there was experiential evidence from outside the realm of white man's experience.
Eventually, they experienced the gorilla for themselves, and believed. Same will happen with the Creator.
"When religion builds an airplane,"
... http://www.adherents.com/people/pw/Wright_Brothers .html
Religion cannot build an airplane, and science cannot explain a Creator. They are mutually exclusive. Because some one believes in one, doesn't mean they can't believe in the other, even if you don't understand this.
And, just so you realize this: From
Orville and Wilbur Wright: The Wright Brothers were the sons of a minister for the United Brethren Church. So much for ignorant fundamentalists.
"Evolution can not be wrong. It's not a theory - it's just a plain fact."
Once upon a time, it was a fact that gorillas couldn't possibly exist. We know better today.
No, Evolution is a theory, because it CANNOT be SCIENTIFICALLY TESTED. Nobody has created a new species in a lab. They have changed one species, often dramatically, but it remains what it was beforehand. Nobody has taken a Bacteria, and made it into a Amoeba, and nobody has taken a virus, and turned it into a bacteria.
It cannot be tested, scientifically, so it remains a theory. Much like most of Quantum Physics is theory, and not likely to be testable anytime soon.
It is this kind of crap that should piss off every scientist. It is this kind of crap that I resent being shoved down to our children, theories as fact. It is no more fact than the FSM is.