niolosoiale

A need Fack You on nuke energy. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/nuclear-faq.html

With the rising cost of oil and increased demand for it by other countries, governments and their people should be looking at what they can do to break the chains of reliance on the day before yesterday's primary energy source. We cannot grow stagnant when it comes to innovating ways to power our economy. So what should we do? What are the risks of nuke energy compared to the benefits? Which do you favor and why do you favor it? Personally, I favor nuke-tech advancement. I think we should build several new plants and begin pouring funding into fusion development. I consider the advent of viable fusion reactors to be the ultimate goal for the energy requirements of mankind. It's safe and very clean. But it needs R&D to reach the levels of efficiency it theoretically holds. I imagine on the side we could also integrate solar energy farms starting now as a short term, quick fix. But I still believe we need more nuke plants here in the US. It's safe, manageable, and relatively cheap.

Ah, thank you for enlightening me, sick parrot. But your answer raises more questions. Such as, isn't it kind of mean-spirited to impose the label of 'sinner' on someone due to an accident of their birth, something over which they had no control, something which did not involve abusing the free will that good ole God so kindly bestowed upon us? Pretty good gig God's got there. If you are a sinner, your only hope of salvation is to fawn all over him, sing is praises and stick him to the top of the pile your entire life (and don't forget that collection plate to make his houses look prettier). But then he doesn't give you the option not to be a sinner. How is that fair? Parrot mode "Who are we to question what is fair and what is not? As sinners, we are not capable of determining these things. Only the just and true God can judge right from wrong. This is why we put our faith in him and his sacrifice that we will be able to stand before him at the hour of judgement, and be found favorable in his sight. Should God allow any man regardless of his faith into heaven? Surely not, as that would make having faith in him pointless. And nothing God does is pointless." Ok anyway... I've addressed a few concerns of yours in another thread. But to recap, it is absurd to think that god, creating man the way man was created, would punish the creation eternally, for having a temporary failure (which God expected) which was the result of being the way he was created. If you are born a failure, how can you be expected to do anything but fail? It doesn't make sense for god to be able to forgive you of all these other failures (murder, rape, theft, idolatry, etc) and not forgive you of the failure to have faith in something you couldn't even experience. That is one of my stronger logical arguments against the christian religion. (Christians, no need to tell me about how I can't use logic as I understand it to explain and debate the nature of god. Just ignore me)

I can't prove to you god doesn't exist but I can logically prove (with biblical backing) that you do not have 100% certainty that god does exist. In the "I'm a christian and proud of it" thread I made reference to the fact that god requires people to put their faith in him. If he requires that people have faith for salvation, then that rules out the ability of people to actually experience god in a way that their brain can affirm as god actually existing. For your brain, which contains all of your knowledge, memories, thoughts, etc... the concept of god is an abstract reason for the things you don't already know or understand. But it is only a concept. You cannot truthfully tell me or anyone else that you have felt god with your fingers, seen him with your eyes, heard him with your ears, smelled him with your nose, or tasted him with your tongue. These senses are the things your brain uses to validate something as existing. If you can't touch, taste, smell, see, or hear it, you can only speculate about it's existence. Other people can tell you that THEY have, but that is only their word of mouth, and you don't know what their true intentions are. So you're still speculating. Simplifying what I'm trying to say, if you could experience god in a way that would give you 100% certainty that he exists, you wouldn't need faith. But god requires that you have faith (this is biblical). If you know something exists it doesnt matter whether you have faith or not, but clearly in the case of salvation, it does matter. You, as a person, do not KNOW with 100% certainty that he does exist, likewise others do not know that he doesn't. But the evidence supporting existence is lacking. You can't use the supposed word of god to prove god. Fact is the bible was written by many men and certain people's accounts of the same events do not correspond with each other or go against foundational doctrinal principles, as a result they are not included in the bible. There needs to be a evidence which is undeniable to any man that it is from god. Of course that is not possible as if it was undeniable, then the need for faith would be nullified. The concept of god has changed your life (heaven and hell being your primary factors of motivation for having faith in the concept you believe in) but that doesn't mean the bible is right,, that god exists, or that heaven and hell don't. The concepts themselves are strong enough emotionally and mentally to motivate someone to have faith, IF they choose to ignore logic and reasoning. Of course humans are logical and rational animals (part of what makes us human) and as a result that smidgen of doubt that I KNOW you have about whether what you believe is a sham or not, will never go away. Thus you must persist in having faith. Faith lets you ignore the doubt which can only be erased through physical experience.

Am I reading this right? If someone's great great great great great great great grandfather was born out of wedlock, they are wasting a great deal of energy by believing in God because they ain't gettting into heaven anyhow? Bummer. That's one mean, unforgiving motherfucker of a deity to choose Here let me append that for you. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord [unless you have faith in the Lord and believe he sent his only son to die on the cross to cover your sins in His blood that you may be made righteous in His sight. Don't forget to repent, the offering plate is over there.] Deuteronomy 21:1 Don't you see how merciful god is? All you have to do is accept his salvation, freely offered to any who will take it. Do this and you will be spared the condemnation which awaits us ALL! See you didn't read it correctly (Sometimes I think it's pretty sick to parrot the things I do not believe. Wouldn't you agree?)

The world may not be ending on 6/6/6, but I will definitely be doing some hell-raising. Of course, I'll probably be way to drunk to remember. No better way to spend your 21st birthday.

Someone had to discern which written works were genuine and which were either not or questionable and put the whole thing together. There's nothing suspicious about that. The criteria for inclusion into the canon is: 1. Apostolic authority 2. Age of text 3. Orthodoxy 4. Widespread acceptance I don't know what conspiracy theory you're trying to spread but I'm assuming you're speaking of the gnostic texts. Just because it was deemed that they didn't meet the above criteria does not invalidate the ones which were included. Validation cannot be internal. Validation must come from an external reference. The Bible must agree with objective and unbiased external references to be considered true. If you have even one item which is not credible according to a source which meets these requirements, the entire book is to be looked at accordingly. Frankly, the mere existence of the "gnostic texts" provides the discrepencies you would look for to point out internal and external credibility concerns. But regardless, the bible must be validated by external points of reference, not interal. I can make a spreadsheet that tells me 2 + 3 = 10. In the context of the spreadsheet, I would be correct in saying 2 + 3 = 10. But when I verify it with actual math, I would find my spreadsheets credibility to be lacking. This is why no one really cares whether or not the bible is consistent/contradictory with itself or not. It's a matter of if its consistent/contradictory with a previously proven credible external reference. Tell this to a christian however, and he'll tell you the devil was responsible. For instance have a christian explain the story of Horus hich parallels the story of Jesus by about 98%. (the other 2% being questions of divinity and salvation, christians can go ahead and stop reading here) The story of Horus pre-dates the story of Jesus by several hundred if not a couple thousand years. That makes the story of Jesus look like trans-ethnic plagiarism. But of course the only viable refutation against the story of Horus by christians I've heard is that Satan MUST have been responsible for the story of Horus as part of his plan to discredit Jesus. :rolleyes: Linkage for Horus/Jesus parallels... http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

Homeland Security has confirmed this to be true. They have creditable information obtain through a top secret covert clergy infiltration operation. After deciphering years of compiled information, they have concluded that 9/9/9 was as good of a date as any. The recommended course of action for the civilian population is to stock up on plenty of water and dry goods (enough to last an eternity), plastic sheeting and duct tape to cover windows and doors (for no reason other than it sounds good) and batteries. Homeland Security will broadcast hourly reports throughout the end of the world to advise you on what to do. Don't forget a lifetime supply of tinfoil.

Just make sure you eat a few servings of fruit each day. Gotta at least get SOME sugar. Moderation is always better than fasting/binging.

I wouldn't say I'm a big sap, but honestly, one of the major things about skydiving that appeals to me is the sense of community. While there are deviants in every crowd, even from the outside the whole group appears to be very tight-knit. I'm sure it's different for a lot of people but I'm equally sure there are some out there that wouldn't enjoy the sport as much if it didn't have the social dynamic it has. I openly admit I look forward to going out to the DZ for the first time, getting on the plane for the first time, making my first jump, all the firsts. But even moreso, I look forward to participating in an activity where the comradery is as prevalent as it appears to be. I just flat out hate doing shit alone. Who else are you gonna share the experiences with who can have anywhere near the level of appreciation for those experiences, outside of someone who's been there? I just think about the question I heard back in late elementary school. "If you could have the one thing you wanted more than anything else, but you couldn't tell anyone about it. Would it be worth that?"

Are you bucking for a visit from the Secret Service? Does anyone know why the blade tips are wider than the rest of the blade shaft down to the hub? I don't think I've ever seen helicopter blades like that before. Has to do with reducing turbulence at the tip thus reducing vibration throughout the entire blade. This has been another episode of useless information I learned from TV.

10/10, but I used process of elimination on the median, average, mode, standard deviation one.

Just found out that a certain individual plans to make their first jump ever during the boogie that weekend. How could one pass up a 14k tandem for the same price?

When it comes to the toilet seat wars people should just learn to do things like this. Men, put the toilet seat up when you go, leave it up. This prevents sprinkles on the lid for which the women in your household should be thankful. Women, put the toilet seat down, leave it down. Men get no benefit for you leaving the seat down outside of not having to put it down when its time to drop a load off. This makes you, as a woman, the winner. Of course if you consider having to put the seat down more of a task than having to clean it up prior to using it, then disregard this and resume your life of perpetual conflict. Fact is, women should just be happy a man lifts the seat up prior to going instead of leaving it down, using the toilet, and not cleaning up. Now if only I could teach my parents to flush the toilet when you use it. Seems they believe in the "If it's yellow, let it mellow" philosophy which I despise.

Hehehe... mine is just fine. I think I got it after most of that hoopla...... There was new hoopla outside of the horsepower rating problem. Engines lost oil pressure during turning. Within the last year I think that has been a recall. BTW, to the OP, if you get an extended warranty, do not buy it unless you're getting a $50 deductible (or less) per visit. If they tell ya $2k for this one at $100 deductible, tell them, $50 deductible or you're not buying. The profit margin on extended warranties is high. But if you plan on keeping the car as long as your extended warranty terms, it can pay off. Even BMW's break.

Did you get a new engine for your RX8 yet? Or was yours a lucky one? Either way, working at a dealership, I would say don't expect to drive off feeling like you stole it from under the dealer. We're not in the business to lose money and while we do occassionally let cars go for less than cost, they are often cars that we're just happy to get rid of because they are a hard sell (too many miles, unattractive in general). Just get the price down to something your willing to pay, make the financing terms as short as possible to protect your money even more. Also don't buy any unnecessary crap (dent warranty, road hazard, blah blah blah) they'll sell ya in F&I except for maybe an extended warranty if you can get a nice deductible (make sure it's per visit, not concern) and a nice price. F&I is where they like to stick it to you. The bulk of the profit is in the F&I office.

By your logic, everyone who posts a picture of their ass should get pictures e-mailed to them of you showing your ass. Or whatever body parts you feel worthwhile.

Since I'm posting from work and I can't actually get to the picture to download it, here is my ass pic. Note that you can view other pictures I've posted in the folder. Also note that there is no rhyme or reason to any of the pictures, since I use that folder as storage for posts I make on www.okaygood.com. As such, there are some pretty horrible pictures in there. http://www.imagedump.com/index.cgi?pick=get&tp=345569 BTW Bobbi, I win! In the folder there is a funny penis pic! But I warn anyone, I am not exactly "packing."

Hahaha! You post pictures of YOUR baby-makin parts then we'll talk about the easy way out. Cause once you've done that, everything else is 2nd/3rd rate.

If I hadn't already posted funny pictures of my genitalia on other boards, I would consider this a challenge. It's lonely at the top, what can I say.

Oklahoma. You at least stop here . Will Rogers is a major airport.

True story here. Senior year of high school, sitting in the first class of the day. A girl that sat right in front of me was part of the greater network of the more elite cliques in the school. She's telling this story about how her and a few other friends went to eat pizza the previous friday or whatever day Catholic people can't eat meat except for fish. When deciding what kinds of pizza to get one of them obviously points out that she is Catholic and cannot eat meat products that day. This other girl, who I will point out was in the top 10% of our graduating class of 600 (amazingly), goes up to her and says "You can have pepperoni pizza right? It's made of vegetables." And it wasn't that she was joking either. She was dead serious. 18 years old, and ya still don't know that pepperoni is a meat product. Gees.

Because in the years I've spent using Peter Pan, I've never had a problem with torn bread as a result of peanut butter that was not creamy enough. I think the girl must have had some really old peanut butter or something. Spreads like butter for me. *rim shot* Go figure.

Quotemost of the name brand PB has sugar and added oils. Don't know why, they just do.reply] 3 words. It. Tastes. Better. At least the majority things so.

You're right! Let's connect them into one ultra mega thread about boobies, beer, and peanut butter. I think you're on to something here.