AlexCrowley

Urm. So: The reason the Bible is written by God is because the prophecies are so convincing. Especially the ones about Jesus the Messiah Ok.... Was anyone really surprised that the bits fortelling the future of the Messiah in the first book magically match up with the second book being about the Messiah!? Seriously, it would be far more miraculous if the NT stated "Well, there was this Jesus guy who was saying some cool stuff til he was nailed to a tree, and lo the Messiah was Nigel, who worked in accounting." (must have been removed from the bible at the same time they removed all references to dinosaurs*) And lo, I was converted. I never saw the whole Nigel thing coming, ever. Ergo God exists. I'd imagine that if the prophecies said "And lo, In the year of the fruitbat, in the City of the bulldog one shall step forth as the son of God. He will wear the trinity crown and he shall belch often after ingesting the glowing flesh of cows and rats wrapped in bread, and his name shall be Derek" and a few thousand years later a London kid named Derek belches after finishing a BigMac on his way back from the gym in an Adidas logo tee shirt, then we probably have a messiah - someone would make up some crap about The Year of the Fruitbat meaning whatever the timeframe it happened in was that year. If the prophesies are so convincing I have a one word question: Judaism? The other fun thing about books of prophesies is that if they're inaccurate you can just say "You just wait and see!" On a long enough timeline any prophecy will come true. It's basic statistics - the same argument used for the S in MAPS ('statistically the chances of these books being written this way is infitesimally small so its a fact!' 'A human eye evolving?!?!? BAH the chances of that happening are infitesimally small!' And a head explodes.) Lets not even go into the lack of hard information available regarding Jesus actually fulfilling prophecy - you know, like using unquestioned historical materials outside of the Bible. The Romans kept a lot of records. When I (or one of my wrestling fans) write my biography you can be damn sure I'll be from the bloodline of Frank Zappa and Jimi Hendrix, a legendary skydiver who disproved the "theory" of gravity, and had more money and a larger penis than Gravitymaster *Redacted excerpt discovered by renowned theologist Professor Bill Hicks circa 1994, published first in his lecture Revelations " And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big f***** lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend. And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat families and their fat dollar bills. And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. " TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Fair enough, although I don't find the book overly consistent except in a larger sense. It's something that I'd love for someone to explain. I realize that the majority of Xtians dont discount evolution, I just wonder about those that do:) Actually yes I did, how funny you should ask. Did you skydive this weekend? TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Batman has way more books and way more authors over only 50 years and like the bible he goes through minor character changes (dark and vengeful, to the peaceful intellectual, back to dark and vengeful). Why is statistical probability considered proof the Bible is accurate but when you try to talk evolution Xtians get all pissy and talk about it being statistically impossible. WTF? TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy/ "In the United States, training in homeopathy is offered through diploma programs, certificate programs, short courses, and correspondence courses. Also, homeopathic training is part of medical education in naturopathy.e Most homeopathy in the United States is practiced along with another health care practice for which the practitioner is licensed, such as conventional medicine, naturopathy, chiropractic, dentistry, acupuncture, or veterinary medicine (homeopathy is used to treat animals). Laws about what is required to practice homeopathy vary among states. Three states (Connecticut, Arizona, and Nevada) license medical doctors specifically for homeopathy. " So, very little regulation, very little standardized training (except by coincidence). In addition, independent research into homeopathy has produced contradictory results leaving the door open to further study. In the UK a well known debunker of homeopathy just finished some research that showed that one of the basic claims of homeopathy: water memory, did appear to exist. This is in direct conflict with previous studies which showed no such phenomena existed. http://www.valleyskeptic.com/homeoa~1.htm James Randi who doesnt believe in anything whatsoever. (I love skeptics). However, this page has a great deal of links to many pages discussing homeopathy. I really like Quackwatch for it's content (linked off the page). Lots of great info. I think homeopathy needs far more investigation to clear up the contradictions and i would imagine some form of standards and regulations might be useful if it ever wants to gain credibility. If you could point me at the research I'd like to take a look at it. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I wish I had the chance, I was looking forward to it - there's a picture in one of the books (Skydivers handbook?). My first 13 jumps were 182 and 206, then they closed down. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Because if he created the world in 7 days then he's obviously as interested in a unified world time clock as everyone else. creation = 7 days (inc lunch). Flood = 40 days and nights. Time in the desert = 40 days and nights. Resurrection = 3 days. Woah additional confusion: 1 God day = 1000 human years (2Peter 3 8 But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. - Uh oh creationists, kinda blows out the 6000 year thing) God has the whole day/night thing - wasnt quite as solid on the whole 30 day month thing, but it took a Londoner to break that down into solid hours and minutes rather than simply how long it took a candle to burn down, God thought it an awesome idea and decreed London the center of the universe. As everyone knows. It's the same reason that the universe orbits the Earth, stupid! TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Douglass is an opinionated gentleman, unfortunately he's also been wrong on several other things. I suffer from a chronic form of a disease Dr Douglass states does not exist (even though it's been recognized for over 100 years), even in the face of mountains of physical evidence and a constantly growing body of publicly available peer reviewed published research he maintains a position of 'they're all lying and its a conspiracy by drug companies to make more money'. I, and many people like me, are unable to function without treatments and medications available for my 'fantasy' condition. His statistical analysis is woefully inaccurate, his level of knowledge of available research out of date by decades, his undertanding of the conditions history non-existent. Reading his work briefly I do like his approach on philosophical issues, I think his grasp of medical and scientific information is sorely lacking. Asparthame, Rather than hoping you'll spend the 2 - 4 hours of research I went through when trying to find out the truth I'll point you here: http://doesaspartamekill.iwarp.com http://www.aspartametruth.freeservers.com/ Both these sites link to a great amount of the research quoted and puts it into context (the mice research paper included). In fact, a cursory moment of critical thinking with access to Google will bring up a great deal of scientific information on Aspartame and the misinformation out there. As stated, anyone with an open mind can review the information presented above and draw their own conclusions. As someone who ingests large amounts of diet sodas you can be damn sure I investigated it thoroughly after an initial kneejerk reaction of 'ARGH Im GONNA DIE!' was followed by 'ummm this isnt really logical' and 'I'll have another diet soda please'. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

For heaven's sake dont say that to the English, they still have this Britain rules the world mindset. ;) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Wow weird. Just as I was talking on another thread about the dangers of Google and here we are on the Aspartame kick again. When this circulated several years ago it was resoundingly rejected and debunked wholesale by independent research (the research quoted in your info above is actually taken out of context if you read the entire paper), and the FDA/governments of Canada, UK, France and several other countries. Canda's study was interseting in that it followed several thousand people over many years. Somewhere around here I have something I wrote that collected all the research, but anyone can easily find it all online. It all started with one email talking about the dangers. If I find it and anyones interested I'll PM it to whomever wants it. It's all available through Google if you have spare couple of hours to read through everything at some point. This is almost as funny as the anti-Splenda stuff - which is where poeple start arguing about its chemical structure being chlorine and a carcinogen. Bad science drives me nuts. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

According to April's Parachutist, US fatalities broke down as follows: 14% students 5% A License 10% B License 14% C License 57% D License 2004 total fatalities: 21 10 year average annual total: 33 The article also notes that in 2004 there were no deaths related to tandem, static line, IAD or AFF jumps - either student or tandem. I have always heard that the average is around 1 fatality per 100,000 jumps. (33 fatality average over 3,000,000 estimated jumps in the US per year) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

That is awesome. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I guess that's where I disagree. I've seen papers on ID completely debunked based on science. ID tries to ignore it's creationist roots by using science (or psuedoscience) to explain itself. Maybe I'm still missing something but from my reading of the ID papers available it would appear that they try to say things like 'this eye could not form by chance bacause X Y Z, therefor a creator must have had a hand in it'. The biologist (with a slightly better than high school understanding) can argue (and has in the debunking papers) 'you misunderstand X Y Z, evolution answers them'. Creationists use god. Intelligent Design tries to subvert available scientific data to fit with their Creator-led, chance cant do it, model. Please correct me if Im wrong, cos right now I'm totally confused :) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Thanks Jack, solid link. The Kuro5hin link earlier was pretty good from my recollection. also in response to Kelp: I dont think a scientist needs to defend itself from ID. While there are some intelligent comments being made there were also (when I first commented on it) some 'wow, you crazy god guys suck, everyone knows evolution is real' type posts, which seemed hypocritcal. Following through the thread it stopped the interesting comments on ID and evolution and became a 'god is cool/science rocks!' over simplification. But if science is all knowing and all you need to intelligently discuss a complex theory is high school biology then I'll be teaching freeflying next weekend. I guess I'll bow out here, Im either unable to make my point clearly or in error. Feel free to PM me to continue,esp if you can point out my mistake :) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I'm in total agreement with you. My comments were in response to certain posters attitudes towards science and ID, and it sorta snowballed from there. Unintentional thread hijack. My apologies. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

After several months of 'hrmmm urmmm argh' when thinking about getting these done I realized I was no longer concerned about getting them done. Maybe because I've been reading up on things to find that many jumpers learnt while deploying well under 3500'. So I did them both 5500, 3500. I really enjoyed them. No long ride to altitude while spending 90% of that time worrying about a freefall dive flow. Out and fly around. Learnt a good lesson about digital altimeters that I'd suspected but had been told I was wrong ("No dude, these digital alti's are accurate to 10'"). Yup, exit at 3300, deployed 2 seconds later at 3300.........yeah.uh no. Overall I really think I'll be spending some more time doing these for a number of reasons. I guess I'm posting because I wanted to tell someone that it was fun, and to let those who are currently nervous about them that they shouldnt be feared. So, 8 jumps, my RW requirements and some packing skills and finally I may get my A. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

In Boston I've heard it referred to as DWA (Driving while Asian). There are two models that fit the stereotype. Major: Small asian female between 20 - 60 in HUGE SUV, usually whatever Ford has thats largest at the time. It is so common that I wonder if its a status thing in the Asian community ........perhaps I should mention that the town I just moved out from had a large asian community so seeing asians drive SUVs may be more common for me than others. Minor: Rice burner cars, souped up (by souped up I mean 'is in black or red and with a HUGE aluminium rear spoiler), on something like a Toyota corolla. end of the day its still a small car that runs just like my unsouped up toyota corolla. This stereotype drives like a speed demon on I95 in rush hour traffic. - I dont see this one much, my wife pointed this one out. Lenny Bruce broke open standup in the 1950 and was arrested numerous times for indecency. He did a legendry bit on racism that is still ripped off today. He would open the bit with "Any N*****s in the house tonight?", after the predictable gasps of horror (Lenny performed for the hip liberals of the day, John Stewart WISHES he was Lenny) he would ask "how about wops? we got any wops here?", as the bit built up he'd become an auctioneer, raising the stakes until everyone in the audience was tagged with a derogatory racial slur, and were laughing their asses off. Lenny's point? Words are strange things that only have power if you hide them away. A lot of his stuff was years ahead of its time and truly groundbreaking. Chapelle seems to mine some of that same vein of material for comparison, whereas Lenny dealt with race, politics, sex and current events - pretty much whatever came to mind. Eep. Rambling. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

And now, from the 'missed the point' file: I think the point of the thread was regarding the media and how it presents information to viewers rather than Islam. Theres been many recent threads that discuss the topics you've bought up here, do a search and you'll find each point discussed to death. I'm not trying to be an asshole but your comments seem to fit in with the previously stated : It's easier to create a partisan argument by oversimplifying a complex issue and let people have knee-jerk emotional reaction to it rather than take the time to inform and present the information in a way that allows for complexity and takes more than 10 seconds and a text crawl to summarize. With regards to a peaceful Jihad: www.answering-christianity.com/peaceful_jihad.htm Pretty easy to argue that this is simply one interpretation, but Christianity also has its pacifists and its blood thirsty warmongers. I like to believe that the loud psycho god squad is the minority with moderate, peace loving christians silently sit and weep. Olympics, Oklahoma, 9/11. All on american soil. All terrorist attacks. All different motivations. Could focusing merely on Islam as our bogeyman also be an oversimplification? Our society needs its enemies, it's bogeymen - generally we like a primary international and primary domestic. In recent years: Communists, Saddam, Islam. liberal protestors (hippies), homosexuals (Aids) inner city crack users, pitbulls, outcast teenagers/shooters, homosexuals (marriage). The media generates it's own when it gets bored. Anyone can think of many more generalizations that have become self sustaining media frenzies. Bill Hicks, a standup comedian, used to do a bit about Aids infected, crack addicted, maneating pitbulls and Ted turner needing to get laid. Each had its headlines, its over simplifications and its villification of a subsection of local and international society. Through generalization and cliche we waded through life and death issues by over simplifying complex and difficult situations, generating a media frenzy of hype and half truths. At it's worst it led to the creation of panicked and ill-thought laws that a confused and fearful public welcomed with open arms, yet offered no real protections while demonizing a minority (certain parts of the Patriot Act, the recent anti-pornography law). At its least malignant, it merely tarred sections of a population somewhat unfairly. Rather than hijack the thread I'd be happy to let you yell at me in a PM Remember, if it bleeds it leads. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Yup, but they did it without thumbs, which made writing very difficult. There is a theory I just made up which explains that dinosaurs used a tonal language similar to very bad haiku, which - in a Jeff Goldblum inspired moment of chaos theory - led to both their extinction and the proliferation of really crappy english haiku in the late 1990s AD. You see, as humans evolve and gain greater refinement your genetics take a step back to your lizard cerebellum - and crappy haiku is released. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I realize thats true for you, others and myself. That is not true for those who believe in ID over evolution. While I believe in evolution I'm always open to hearing a coherent argument. Again, I understand what you're saying but 'my science is better than your god' lacks a lot. Like i said, mindlessly quoting high school science is akin to mindlessly quoting biblical passages in my mind. I didnt say it was flawed, why does being open to debate a subject == having faith in God and ID? (of which neither are true for me) I'm simply interested to hear the argument. Basically I do not believe that every adherent to ID or Creationism is backwards or blinded simply by faith. I am interested more in why those with a strong scientific background and solid education still believe in those things. That goes far beyond misunderstanding what 'Theory' means, and the best ones will use physical data to try and argue their point (see post regarding rocks cooling for an example). Urm, actually I'm blessed with an ability to retain pretty much everything I read that's of interest. I know about Google, it's been the crux of my argument today. My problem with the scientists on this subject is the amount of scoffing and lack of reasoned argument. The God of Science is no more powerful than the God of Xtians when invoked without true comprehension of the subject at hand. Sure, high school biology says 'A', but as I've said time and time again today: with 15 jumps should I be teaching people how to skydive? I've read lots of books about it and I retain 95% of what I read, according to your argument (and others who I've tried to explain this concept to) my book smarts == mastery of the information rather than simply being able to repeat pertinent information without the critical faculty to accurately criticize and evaluate it. I believe that you dont require a PhD to reject creationism and accept evolution, but I do believe you'd better have a very solid background in biology if you're going to argue beyond quoting scientific scripture at non-believers. Or is my point still being totally lost? Simplified: you reject Xtian points of view for their ignorance and the fact that 'then god did this' is not an explanation. Then others say 'it's Darwinism', how many in this argument could summarize Origin of the The Species, or discuss the various animals that Darwin uses to provide examples? What areas of the initial theory have been modified. What is neo-darwinism? Without understanding those points the 'science' side is no better than the Bible thumpers (those that merely quote scripture rather than provide their own perspectives). I'm going back to laughing and pointing, it was so much easier and fewer people misunderstood what I was trying to say. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

LOL. It's faster than saying professional wrestling :) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

It is taught as theory, utilizing the scientific definition of theory, rather than the layman's. But I think it's valid to point out that not everyone who believes in ID misunderstands the scientific meaning of Theory, just an awful lot of them. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

That's awesome! TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

woah there buddy, relax. The use of the word 'You' in the 'equal timers' leads me to believe that perhaps you didnt read my posts clearly enough. 1. I am not religious, certainly not Christian, although I have a background in both. 2. I was trying to illustrate the dangers of learning by rote rather than what i consider real knowledge. Yes, Newtonian physics works at a certain scale! EXACTLY MY POINT! Then you move to the next level and learn the exceptions to those rules. I am sorry for generalizing my wording but you still knew exactly what I meant, which is that gain information in stages. And my only point in all of this is simply one of: This scientific discussion, to be something which will educate, inform and perhaps lead somewhere other than god/anti-god would be better served if it was argued by people with indepth knowledge of the subject rather than a high school level of knowledge. You are responding to a post regarding the nature and role of knowledge vs data, NOT a discourse on the validity of ID and evolution. Just in case you thought I was arguing for or against either (although I did let slip that I thought evolution made most sense). On ID vs Evolution, I recall a really intense and interesting thread elsewhere regarding magma heat, gaseous deposits in rock strata as evidence of the 7 day creation myth, which was then rebutted with an awesome response regarding physical properties of rock and the method in which it cools from a PhD theoretical chemist. THAT is the level of information in which I am interested, and that is a level of information that I would assume is not on the tips of any high schoolers biology level brain. And that is EXACTLY what I am refering to regarding knowledge. Each party was able to use their knowledge to go beyond parroting and actually talk about the physical science behind each of their viewpoints. something which this thread has been lacking. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Umm -- keep it clean, OK? No getting nasty fetish stuff on it, and you shouldn't paint it with latex to make it look sexier Wendy W. Really? Urm would water based lubricants help minimize any chance of bag lock.......or should I just go get a towel? TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Excuse my language, but what the fuck are you talking about? My point wasnt that this administration is evil or that Clinton's was good (in fact it was fucking horrible for totally different reasons). My point was that the press that I have read has been almost totally PRO military. I dont care about the politicians on the subject or Id write a diatribe on that. I find your constant attacks and completely alien viewpoint, and the manner with which you present your ideas to be quite grating and adhering to the rules of the forum often means that expressing myself fully is quite difficult. Lets do the mature thing and just ignore each other and let things remain civil. Please note, the total lack of sarcasm, barbs or veiled insults. We've already discovered that you and I are unable to interact civilly or intelligently, so lets not push things to their inevitable conclusion. plus GMs dick is still bigger than everyone elses TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.