birdlike

You and I are in serious agreement about all of that. Well said.

I firmly believe that the only reason so many sects of Christianity have abandoned bible literalism is because in an age of intelligence, reason, and questioning, THEY WOULD LOOK RIDICULOUS trying to hold onto literal interpretations of the bible. So now, to save face, they mumble, "Oh, uh, sure, uh, yeah, um, it was never meant to be taken literally! Of course not! Heh, don't be silly!" If there weren't so many intelligent, articulate detractors in the world, free (despite the church's best efforts) to contradict the church, the religious people would all still be saying that the bible is to be taken literally. Who do you think you're kidding? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

If God made mankind in the very same state, originally, in which we now exist (per Creationism), and evolution is bunk, WHY THE FUCK DO MEN HAVE NIPPLES?! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

See, I already said that I believe it is perfectly fair to believe that life also took root in far-flung parts of the universe. Don't make an issue of debate out of that: it's not one. But here you say, "Sure, there isn't any evidence yet" (of life beyond our planet) -- BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THESE LOONIES ARE CLAIMING TO HAVE. In fact, some of them claim to have PROOF. Unless you're engaging in Socratic Debate, I have already agreed with you, and you with me. We both agree that life could have begun, evolved, and advanced on other planets. Hell, for all I know, there could be colonies of life forms that drift through space like plankton, never even living on planets! Wouldn't that be cool? Maybe they propel themselves with some sort of thrust-producing chemical reaction, kind of like a Bombardier Beetle... or that big flying turtle with the rocket-butt from the Godzilla movies. Once again--you and I are not in disagreement about that. But that realization is a long way away from stating unequivocally that we believe there definitely ARE alien life-forms, and that they're already HERE, and that the government is KEEPING them from us. That steps out into the realm of "loonie." And the more the proof is found lacking as time goes by, the loonier the true-believers appear. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

None of them are the worlds only empire and none of them have morons trying to explain that empires are forces of benevolent wonder. Oh, because the U.S. is the world's LAST empire, you want to act as though we're the ONLY empire that's ever BEEN. Wow, that is some true contortionist thinking. It's too late to address the U.K. WHEN it WAS a destructive, world-eating empire. Same with Spain. Christ, same with Rome. Same with the Soviet Union. So we'll just pile on the U.S., even though the U.S. is nothing like an empire. Nothing. I guess those other countries are just lucky they stopped being empires soon enough to escape this latter day, revisionist, absurd indignation and condemnation. How conveniently you ignore the not-so distant past in which England slaughtered Africans and Indians, or the Soviets slaughtered tens of millions of their own people (if you count STARVING THEM TO DEATH as "slaughter," which I DO). That's debatable, but you'd be debating at a disadvantage, to be sure. Do I sound uneducated or otherwise "dumb"? Our onlookers should take note of who was first to resort to character attacks after abandoning idea-based and fact-base argument. (Hint: it was the America-hater. ) Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

So you believe we would be paying more for gas if the US had stayed out of the Middle East? Maybe if you didn't consume the amount of oil you do (you being the USA) then we would all be paying less than $1/gal still. Then France, England and the rest of the world would still be driving cars that get 4x the MPG than American cars. When was the last time England paid less than $1 a gallon, friend? You really going to lay all the economic woes of Europe at the feet of America? I also believe that the world would be far worse off if the U.S. had not at least attempted to keep the peace (or at least keep a general watch on things) in the Middle East. That part of the world is absolutely fucking PSYCHO. Is there any denying that? It is the world's WELLSPRING of psycho-ness. Besides, without the U.S. in the Middle East, we surely would have all watched a second Holocaust as the Israelis were subsumed by those who loathe them, who surround them on all sides, who simply will not live in peace with them. Would you be comfortable being a party to genocide through your inaction? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Maybe I'm confused. I thought that the Second World War was begun by parties other than the United States. I thought that the United States was pretty much the factor that enabled the world to defeat Hitler's plans. I thought that it was well-settled that lives were saved by the A-bombing of Japan, and I am inclined to agree that those TRULY imperialistic zealots brought our response down upon themselves! When you fight an enemy that will not surrender under the circumstances that make ordinary enemies surrender, you have no choice but to bring them to the brink of utter annihilation to make them see what their options really are. You have a lot of damned gall calling our bombing of Japan "murder" after what Japan and Germany were all about doing the whole war long. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Sort of like Saddam Hussein going years flouting international law and U.N. resolutions and sanctions, while the rest of the effete, pussy-ass world just let him keep doing it and kept redrawing the "line in the sand" farther back? That kind of telling the world to f*** off? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Yeah, you go on believing that Arab nations are just bubbling cauldrons of democracy waiting to happen, were it not for our American meddling! That's the best joke I'll hear all year! Are you for real? Arab nations would be going democratic if not for U.S. activity?! Holy shit, that's funny! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Yeah the people of the world are stupid -- you win birdlike. Dr. Lecter, I wonder if you can turn that high-powered condemnation on other countries of the world. Did the English, French, Spanish and Dutch not FUCK UP lots of foreign countries, themselves? The really screwed up thing is the way people like you want to point that kind of finger at the U.S., while at the same time failing to do two things: 1) Realize that we are not alone in the kind of meddling you condemn 2) Comprehend the state the world would have been in had the U.S. not done much of what it's done historically. I find it particularly funny that the U.S. is to blame because Haitians act like savage animals to each other and simply cannot and will not live peacefully. Yeah, that's our fault! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I don't have answers to questions about "the real motivation for invading Iraq," etc. But I do want to point out that the rest of the world has been quietly very content to benefit from the U.S. putting itself in a position to be regarded as the arrogant, brash, imperialist bad-guy. When Britain and France are paying $20 a gallon for gasoline, we'll see how nasty and arrogant and selfish the U.S. was for trying to keep the Middle East stable all these miserable years when no one else gave a fuck about doing so. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Despite over a pound of metal in them, and the fact that the ammunition cartridges are unavoidably metal, too. Thanks for that reminder. But no, it's the NRA that's pushing the lies. Suuuure. *P.S. that anti-gun lie about the Glocks is actually traced to an article from Jan. 13, 1985 in The Washington Post by columnist Jack Anderson. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock Read down the page at the header " 'Plastic pistol' myths." The important thing to know and remember is that no such undetectable "plastic pistol" exists, yet the anti-gun left still runs on at the mouth about it! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

So if we can determine an approximate date at which the popular conception of "aliens" came into being--in fiction--does that not strike a devastating blow to claims that we are really are being visited by beings that--ooh, strange coincidence--look just like the fictional creation would have us think they look? I mean, are we supposed to believe that although aliens have been visiting us since ancient times, helping the Egyptians build the pyramids, or the Mayans configure their calendar, no one ever made a drawing that showed them to look like the bulb-headed bug-eyed little green men until Wells' did? Or are we supposed to believe that more than one super-intelligent, interstellar alien race has visited us, some who look like little green men, and others like ... well, like whatever the ancients drew to depict their alien visitors? Talk about long odds -- not one, but two or more alien races managing to cross interstellar gulfs to visit us? Or are we supposed to believe that we happen to live at the time when aliens just arrived, mere decades ago, and we are the first few generations to see them and that's why there are no ancient drawings of the ones the yokels are seeing in the backwater towns? Do you see why skeptics have such an easy time not believing, yet? This stuff is child-like. I firmly believe that it is born of the "I want to believe (because real reality is just so dull and boring and never really changes much and my life is full of nothing but drudgery)" mindset. That's why these myths and groups and conventions in the desert spring up. People see how mundane real life is, and they are desperate for the entertainment--and yes, the hope--that "aliens from space" represent. Their intellects are weak, their imaginations simple, and this is what they come up with. It's all they have, I guess. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Patronizing, or condescending? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I don't get around to reading much nonfiction, but I may have to pick this one up. It sounds like it's right up my alley. It's a weird coincidence, but just a few days ago I was pondering the subject of kids being raised to be religious, and thinking that it was a disgusting thing. Yes, a disgusting thing. It warps kids, like Chinese foot-binding distorts Chinese women's feet. Kids will absorb and adopt whatever religion that the parents put before them (and force them to learn about). If Child X is raised by Christians, he will be taught Christian doctrine and then when he's about 12 or 13 years old he will be able to stand on his own and tell others that Christianity is the way, and Christ died on the cross for man's sins, etc. But if Child X had been orphaned at 6 months old, then adopted and raised by Chinese Buddhists, do you think he would reach age 13 and be telling people--and believing--that Christ dies on the cross for man's sins? Of course not. This pretty much proves to me that the child is a blank slate, and it is unfair to boost the enrollment of any given religion by simply indoctrinating children from birth. It's an illegitimate way to get believers to adhere to a faith. A child who believes in a given religion because he was taught it from birth through adolescence is not proof that he really believes it; it's all he's known. Now, if an adult was brought up through childhood with NO religion, and then as an adult checks them all out and then goes with a certain one and becomes an adherent, that's a much more legitimate choice. In fact, the other way is not a choice at all--clearly. I must close by saying that I feel that anyone who chooses to believe any religion is ... well, I won't seek to insult here, so I'll just say "is making a mistake." Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Can't say I've thought, read, or written deeply on the subject. I just am kind of going by the sense I have that the left is not about strength; tends to leap on the "America's a bunch of arrogant S.O.B.s" bandwagon; blames us for the world's ills and ignores the widespread good we do; falsely claims, in screeds that sound like communist propaganda, that America is imperialist and is seeking to dominate the world, when nothing could be further from the truth. Most Americans are perfectly content to have our country over here, and have other countries everywhere else continue to exist and do their own sovereign thing, as long as we can enjoy a prosperous, enjoyable lifestyle just like anyone else wants. The idea that we have a domination desire is laughable. If we did, wouldn't we have at least some of our elected leaders avowing a policy of "go everywhere, take everything"? A policy that would state that since we beat Iraq's military, we own Iraq's territory? Who is saying that? No one that I can think of. But the world calls us the bad guys. Even as they are blown up on their subways by the true bad guys, they think of us and call us the bad guys, the bullies. Anyway, I'm rambling. Why do I think that the left owns the doctrine of yielding moral authority? Because it shows up in their rhetoric all over the place, and when the left controls the military, they downsize it as though having a powerful one is not worthy as a deterrent or a protection. (Thank you so much, Bill Clinton, you base-closing, enlistment-cutting fuckwad.) Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You're telling me that we have verified things like cave drawings, ancient scrolls, etc. in which ancient man proves that the same "little green men" that we depict in shows like "Taken" are what they were encountering in the way-back-when? Funny, I have never seen such proof trotted out. It certainly is not mainstream in the way the famous pictures of Bigfoot or Nessie are. Surely if there were honest-to-goodness ancient scrolls depicting the bulb-headed aliens with bug-eyes, they would be ICONIC in the UFO culture right now. As it stands, it really appears to me that the alien physiology that "everyone knows" was popularized ONLY AFTER movies came up with the design. Prove to me that this type of rendering existed prior to oh, about 1930, ok? I obviously cannot prove a negative and prove that such images don't exist; that's why I'm asking you to bring to me any proof that such images go way back into human history. I don't think they do. I think that what "everyone knows" about aliens is just so much schlocky pop-culture mind candy designed to entertain people who dislike the fact that life, pretty much, is ordinary and boring. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Nice pics. Only problem is the USA can only print so much worthless money to pay for these aircraft. I think China actually owns them. Well, if they ever come to repossess them, and they are met with soldiers at the gates of the airbase with rifles pointed at them, perhaps they can stick flowers into the barrels of those rifles and peace-love-happines will win them back the planes they "own." Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

America relinquishes moral leadership and weakens itself at the behest of the left. If anyone wants to know why the world is more at risk of a nuclear-armed terrorist cell, you need not look to pin blame on conservatives, who believe in a strong military and maintenance of our fighting ability, our espionage programs, our intelligence programs, and the spending necessary to keep them up and running. The left, on the other hand, deliberately weakens all of these things -- why they feel that doing so is necessary is open to discussion. But it is, historically, the left that has left this void of moral leadership and fortitude that makes the world vulnerable to the psychos (more than it would have to be). Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I believe that if we are going to survive as a species, and "take our destiny among the stars" or any other dreamy shit like that, we are going to have to mature beyond the superstitious belief in any sort of a god. The only thing is, we won't be able to do that by "abolishing" it. We should have learned by now that we have never been able to actually and effectively eliminate the target of elimination, and we never will. No, we will have to try to persuade people to be reasonable and rational and give up these silly beliefs of their own volition. But I think that human nature--the way we are put together--will not allow us to reach that point. We have innate fear, and an innate drive to hate what is different or unfamiliar. Those things will not allow us to cooperate in the ways that would be necessary to really rise above our trials and go forward to enlightenment. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

At least, nothing else makes any damned sense. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

The ANTI'S are the ones saying that THEY'RE at a disadvantage because WE'RE dishonest? Holy fuckin' shit are they delusional. That's just proof of their INSANITY, man. WHO were the ones trying to confuse the public into believing that the Assault Weapons Ban in '94 was going to save us from MACHINE GUN CRIMES? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

RIGHT ON! What, the anti's haven't pulled dishonest shit on gun-rights advocates? Michael Moore did not buy himself a Life NRA membership to attempt to get on the board of directors? Didn't the Soros bunch come up with "AHSA" (American Hunters and Shooters Association), a FRAUD, FAKE "pro-gun" organization that was created to try to fragment gun owners into those who support the 2nd Amendment, and those who think we need to "compromise" with "common-sense, reasonable restrictions"? If the anti's could get their zealots into high-up NRA positions, you know they would. I bet the reason they haven't is that their true-believers are shrill whackos who would never get past the NRA's vestibule. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Nonsense. I have one over at the office that we pulled off an alien spaceship that I'm &$*&^(*%*©ç¥√¬¥∑ç∫¬NO CARRIER Thank god someone was able to make me laugh here tonight. Thanks! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

That's too bad. Though not surprising given we're on like a 20 year timetable to even go back to the moon.... This would really be an exciting project for humanity to get behind. Yeah. So would "not destroying ourselves." I'd say we need to do one before the other. Can you guess the order? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire