tso-d_chris

I agree.

Jewish extremists pose a threat to the world. Christian extremists pose a threat to the world. Islam terrorists pose a threat to the world. In fairness, I'm not terribly concerned with fundamentalists from Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism or Hinduism.

While I agree that in and of itself using Google does not make one an expert, You will be hard pressed to find a superior research tool. Sure, it requires some critical thought to be able to filter out the BS, but I know of no other tool that allows such quick access to as much relevant information. (Actually, my favorite is http://scholar.google.com, which searches peer reviewed journals.)

I failed to clarify the reason for my inquiry. The Kabbalistic interpretation of Genesis (specifically Creation) is significantly different from the Christian interpretation. I am curious as to why the newer version is given credibility, while the older, more traditional interpretations (which are far more similar to most other religions of the world) are given less credibility. As a long time student of religion, I am curious as to how this is justified.

I don't mean to be disrespectful. I have studied different religions for many years. I am curious what gives the KJV's Old Testament more credibility than the Torah, upon which it is based, and which significantly predates the KJV.

I have to respectfully disagree that Islam extremists pose a greater risk to the world than "extremists" from other religions. Perhaps it can be argued that their tactics are more desperate, but their ideology is not in and of itself any more dangerous.

"Bowling" won an Academy Award for Best Documentary.

The same can be said of all fundamentalists, from Islam and Christianity. The danger comes from the fundamentalists, not the religions.

Some high school students are capable of critical, independent thought. Others are not. The same goes for advanced degree holders.

Wasn't that "Bowling for Columbine?" That was more objective, IMHO.

If you knew more heroin users, you would likely know more recovering addicts. I know recovering addicts from many drugs, some legal, others not.

Any higher likelihood of dependency with herion versus alcohol is likely due to the fact that there is nearly zero education in the US for using narcotics recreationally in a responsible manner. Again, that is a result of the War on Drugs, and not the drugs themslves. Once again, nearly all the detrimental effects you refer to are due to the War on Drugs, and not the drugs. If there is no need to steal to get a fix, whether that fix be caffeine, nicotine, herion, cocaine, methamphetamine, then addicts are able to lead responsible, productive lives. Look at all the people you know that cannot get through the day without their caffeine or cigarettes. Do you think they would all be able to continue being productive in life if coffee and cigarettes were suddenly illegal because they can be harmful to users? I understand your point, I just disagree with your placement of blame. We have the substance abuse problems that we have due primarily to the fact that we have already tried to legislate a "responsible" lifestyle. How would you feel if gear delers stopped selling any canopies smaller than 250 square feet, just because we are "sure" that they are safer, and it allows skydivers with families to reduce their risk? Of course it wouldn't work; we'd go back to having low-pull contests on every load.

If I understand the argument correctly, the complaint is that the prisoners are not accorded the status of captured enemy combatants, with rights guaranteed by the Geneva Convention, and are simultaneously denied the status of civilian, with the right to due process guaranteed by the Constitution.

I've seen both, and they are both biased, over the top and full of half truths. Neither is objective or credible.

Forgive me for saying, but that is a very Taoist attitude to have. For Great Deals on Gear

Here's a few questions you could ask yourself if you believe the evolutionary theory. I use to waste a lot of breath on these arguments because it's a area of high interest and I've studied it much.Quote You will find the answer to many of these questions in a college level General Biology class.

Whether you drink to get a very slight buzz, or you drink to get shitfaced, falldown, sloppy, can't even remember your own name for a day and a half drunk, it is still a high that you are seeking, just like the smack addict. I suppose some people take a single drink a day for the circulatory system, but some people use heroin because of pain. You either missed my point or ignored it. Outside of locking me up the gov't currently has no mechanism to keep me, as a hypothetical dangerous skydiver, out of the sky. Either the DZO does it or no one does.

Should we not also recognize the difference between the effects of the drug and the effects of the drug laws? Addicts to steal due to the limited supply and high cost, not because of the drug itself. What if that irresponsibly acting person holds a high public office and is responsible to the people? Is it still a good thing to speak out against the irresponsible actions?

Heroin is an extreme example of a drug. Still, it is a fair comparison. Alchol may be legal, but few drugs are uglier when abused. What legal mechanism would be used? Dangerous skydivers are alowed to jump in the US all the time, without gov't intervention.

Check here. Please define theory for clarification. I don't think our definitions match.

Now that's an old school slogan. I remember seeing those trailers when I was too young to be in school. AFIK they have long been taken out of service. For Great Deals on Gear

There are multiple studies with essentially the same findings. DuPont, Eli Lilly, and a Congress behind closed doors for three days in 1937, just after Henry Ford received national magazine press (Popular Mechanics?) for "growing a car from the soil." Just a guess... For Great Deals on Gear

All BB is about is speaking up about a jumper's habits. It also can have the benefit of offering a warning to other skydivers that a jumper amongst them may pose a danger to others and/or themselves. Is it sick and morbid? Yes. But that does not make it bad. It adds to the shock value, which is exactly the point. The game is a way for jumpers to collectively say, "Dude, you're not ten feet tall and bullet proof. If you keep acting like it, you're gonna die, or worse yet, take someone else out. Stop it." For Great Deals on Gear

Reading this thread makes me feel like there are many new jumpers who would let a friend die just to avoid hurting their feelings or pride. Once you have to start taking off your shoes and borrowing your friends' hands in order to count all of your friends that have died needlessly in this sport, your views might change. Sure, it's morbid humor. But considering that skydiving is perhaps the ultimate expression of freedom, Bounce Bingo seems far more appropriate than grounding a jumper. This is especially at a DZ like the Ranch, where that freedom is valued over most everything else. For Great Deals on Gear

Make love, not war! For Great Deals on Gear