did steven bradbury deserve the gold?
was he really the fastest?
the silver medal winner was from seattle.
I saw him on telly; he said he was hanging round the back hoping maybe he'd get a bronze if someone fell, and then bang bang bang, gold!
I thought, until then, they should have re-run it. But if he is so honest, he deserves the medal. He knew if was blind luck and was happy it was blind luck.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
were the ancient civilisations far more technologically advanced than previously has been given credit for?
did they possess advanced weaponry systems?
do the scriptures back this up?.
Plutonium has a half life of around 25,000 years, I think... so any major nuclear detonation would show up using a classroom geiger counter. Sad but true, harsh but fair. Oh, I suppose they could have been neutron bombs or death rays...
While the skeletons have been carbon-dated to 2500 BC, we must keep in mind that carbon-dating involves measuring the amount of radiation left. When atomic explosions are involved, that makes then seem much younger.If the bomb produced the same isotopes as are being measured. IF.
People in the vicinity of a nuclear blast are blown to pieces by a pressure wave/debris, or reduced to their component molecules by heating, or carbonised by heating, or all three in very quick succesion. No pillars of salt have ever been recorded being produced by a nuclear explosion. Salt pillars are common-place in the area.
A 1-cm cubic crystal couldTHEORETICALLY
store 125 gigabytes, or as much as eight Pentium III processorsI thought memory stored information and processors... processed it..! Yes, there is the FSB, or is it a BSB, of 125kb, or maybe 256kb, on a CPU, but that means you would need at least 488,000 PIII's, but using them for memory storage, as pointed out, is silly; about a thousand 128Meg DIMM's would be a better way of expressing it...
"Beware those who don't know what they are talking about"
Third Book of Abaddon, Chapter 4, Verse 18
Maybe when we develop such technology (according to Moore's law, it will probably be by 2020), we will be able to access what they put on their crystal computers.Maybe, if it's possible to store information in crystals, if information was ever stored in those crystals, and if we ever can backwards engineer the process, but it's a tad more involved than walking around the local New Age shop plugging crystals into your Palm XII and is based on the assumption that this happened.
The only way touching an object can kill a person is if electricity is flowing through it.Ignoring the typical assumption that a fairy story happened, what about contact poisons, coincidental heart-attack/anuerism, psychiosomatic self-willed death (as suffered by people who believe witch doctors can kill them through voodoo), so assumptive and wrong anyway...
Blood type O is characteristic of the native races of the Americas (the Bororo, Mayans and Incas are all virtually 100% group O, and the Navajos are 73% group O), the Canarian Guanches of the Basques of France and Spain, the Scandinavians, the Celts of the British Isles and the Atlantic coasts of France, as well as certain peoples of Polynesia and Indonesia. All these areas have ancient megalithic structures. The Atlanteans would have had to have blood type O, as do 60% of Caucasians in the United States. So at least some Atlanteans were Caucasian.Oh, what a sentence, the way it leads you to an assertion it has no proof for... the statement "So at least some Atlanteans were Caucasian" is hidden amongst scientific data, giving it credability, even though it is just an assumption about a race that may have never existed.
It is being discovered that there were Caucasians in many of the ancient civilizations. (Click here for evidence.)Hahahahaha... someone forgot to edit "(Click here for evidence.)" out when they cut and pasted without credit... oh, it's from the web site Mark posted at the top, so that's okay...
While racists will say that it's because Caucasians are the master race and brought civilization to the other races, I would say it's because many Atlanteans were Caucasian. Mesopotamia started shortly after the Ice Age ended, and is said to be the cradle of civilization. Guess who founded it?"shortly after the Ice Age ended"... yeah, like thousands of years afterwards...
Isn't it funny how there isn't ONE piece of good evidence for all this? Oh, howabout the Crystal Skulls? These beautiful life-size skulls carved from crystal that were meant to be relics of old civilisations who must have had high technology to make them so well? That turned out to be fakes with perfectly ordinary tool marks on them, if you bothered to look closely enough.
Of course, no evidence doesn't mean it didn't happen... it just means it can't be proved to of happened... some of the evidence is interesting, but it really doesn't add up to proof...
What I personally find interesting is traces of cocaine found in mummies. Unless this is due to contamination, this is clear evidence of New World-Old World trade, when they supposedly didn;t know of each other existence
(bits added)
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
is there no hope for truly understanding the universe?.
if a person believes that we were created by a supreme being who is in control of and fully understands the universe, he may reason that we were created with the ability to also understand the universe.. but if we are not created and have just evolved as part of a natural prosses why should we asume that our brain should have any grasp on a true understanding of things.. how can we know that our brains just are not in tune or cannot grasp any of the fundementaly important concepts that case this universe to exist?.
maybe in trying to understand the universe we are just tying ourselves up in knot trying to know the unknowable?
Interesting point, but not one I agree with.
You are speculating at the possible limits to human understanding of a non-god Universe, when we do not seem to have reached them. Everyone who has even thought for a moment that there is a big wall or limit of knowledge or ability gets proved wrong.
In England the Astronomer Royal went on the record as saying space travel was 'absolute bunk'. Sputnik went up within five years.
In the early 19th C, some people speculated that train travel above a certain speed would suffocate the passengers by means of air pressure.
So, although it might happen, and although I doubt there are that many people who will every be able to chat informally about M-Theory, or know what they are talking about when they speak of 11 dimensional space, we ain't there yet.
Conversely, you argue that in a god-Universe, some may argue that we would be given the ability to comprehend that Universe. This is actually the opposite from what many religonists do when they hit a problem with their beliefs; it's our fault for not understanding it, as we are imperfect mortals who should not dare question their conception of a god. I find ineffability to be an unconvincing arguement, personally speaking, and would agree if we are a product of god, he would make sure we got it, so am more inclined to agree with your second point, although as an atheist(ish) it's an imaginary point.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
i just found out my father died today...he had a heart attack in the middle of the night.
he was 63, one month shy of his 64th birthday.
my 1/2 brother, age 19, who has been living with him trying to get off drugs, found him in his bed.
Sorry to hear of your loss Puffs; comforting thoughts going your way now:::::::::: 8-(
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
the following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
Oh no, it's different viewpoints;
1/ The girls were having a good old natter (actually about that whore Rebecca, who does she think she is?) when they got to the tomb and found the stone rolled back. This is how Mark heard it.
2/ If they had not been gossiping they would have noticed the earthquake (Matthew loved earthquakes, and given the technology would have been the Director of the first horror movie "Zombie Proclaimers of the Kingdom"), and the angel rolling the stone, and the angel sat on the stone. This is how Matthew re-wrote, er, was inspired, er, made-up, oh what ever, how he did his bit. Sort of like a remake "Just like Mark, but longer with geneology and earthquakes and zombies!"
One can see why Paul was so down on women; they do not have the same minds as men. Fortunately Matthew, even though he wasn't there, managed to notice the things they missed from excessive flapping of the gums.
Praise the Board!
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
anewperson; so, which one is right, huh, huh, huh, go on, tell me, I gotta know, huh, huh? Are YOU right... wow, I am soooooooooooooooooooooooo lucky meeting someone with light. Have you got the spotlight, like that Abba song? Super Trooper? Or whatever. Have you got a certificate from god? Whatabout Shelby, you more or less right than her? Or Larguy? Huh? Is he more right than you? Or, aChristian? he says he's right, so, is he, or are you, or is it like, everybody is right? What about Zorastians, or Animists, or B'hai, or Muslims, or Seikhs? Are they right? Quakers, they're pretty innofensive, are they right?
Straining the gnat and swallowing the camel, anewperson ignores the whole point and tries to defend the indefensable. 'Good' is just a suit of clothes it puts on people it agrees with.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
the norwegian newspaper vg, reports: iraqi general nizar al-khazraji was the man behind the butchering of 180,000 iraqi kurds in 1988. he was one of saddam's faithful generals.
he later had to flee iraq and is living on a secret address in denmark.
he is under investigation by the danish police.. ---------------------------------------------------.
I love this talk of the US 'withdrawing'... like, where to?
This is the twenty-first century; isolationalism does not work, proven fact.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
does looks really matter in love?
would you go out with someone who was not physically attractive if he/she had a big heart on the inside, a great personality, lot's of things in common with, etc...i guess i'm asking what's more important to you the person on the exterior or who he/she really is underneath?.
lara
Oh, looks do matter, no doubt. I was particulary tortured by a girl I knew - quite smart, funny, fancied the pants off me... but she was 4'6", homely, and shaped like a Weeble (seriously).
I would normally have had a bit of a fling, but... couldn't... and felt guilty, as it was because of how she looked.
I personally don't think that makes me a bad person... well, no badder than I am anyway
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
the norwegian newspaper vg, reports: iraqi general nizar al-khazraji was the man behind the butchering of 180,000 iraqi kurds in 1988. he was one of saddam's faithful generals.
he later had to flee iraq and is living on a secret address in denmark.
he is under investigation by the danish police.. ---------------------------------------------------.
Ah, this would be the 'we won the war and we give lots of money away, so don't point out when we are being stupid/shortsighted/ignorant/monocultric/hypocritical you ingrateful Europeans' arguement.
*YAWN*
It's called freedom of speech, dummy, something that the US loves, although their love of it surprisingly decreases when it's pointed at them. Hmmm...
The minute someone says, 'oh, why are the American's doing this, isn't it gonna 'cause problems', it seems as if many Americans start humming "Hail to the Chief" and complaining that the questions are being asked RATHER THAN ANSWERING THE GOD DAMN QUESTIONS.
Sorry if that spoils your knee-jerk nationalistic response, feel free to actaully engage in the debate, or if it is easier, just carry-on complaining about us naughty Europeans not worshipping Uncle Sam 24-7 out of gratitude.
The point is, America does things it would complain about if they were done to it.
Yes, it's a world power, the only world power now, and as such, it has a position of responsibility. I know it is tough, but if a country sets itself up as a world policeman (and I think it is often great that America does that, don;t get me wrong), then funnily enough, people apply higher standards to it.
Remember, your Declaration of Independance was founded on the fact that they American colonialists objected to the impositon of power over them without them having a say. Essentially, those that critisize the US are complaining about not having a say in the way that the power America has is being exercised.
So, I think American's should engage their brains when they do not see fawning gratitude and ask themselves... why?
Just saying 'I know we are not perfect' is not only a statement of the bleedin' onbivous, it is ducking the issue.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
i don't believe in re-inventing the wheel.
arguments about atheism, chronology, trinity, evolution can go on forever.. i like to bring up positions that are unpopular on this forum because most of the people here have given up their examination of certain issues assuming that they have "now" got the real truth.. the lack of critical thinking that is the cause of involvement in off-beat religions can lead to gullibility in other areas.
the stupid knee-jerk accusations i got when i attacked the molestation issue is typical.
proplog; So, are you saying that the Unification Church is no more inherantly damaging (damaging as in forcing followers to a level of conformity by a variety of means that leads to diadvantage or alienisation from society, friends and family) to its adherants (due to it beliefs, its expectations of its followers, and its organisational structure) than, oooo, Universal Unitarians? Are you saying the Church of Jim Jones is (was, there's a hint) no more inherantly damaging to its adherants than, say, being a Quaker?
If you are saying there is no difference in the amount of damage done to the adherants of the above cited examples, then I don't think I even need provide examples to show that you are wrong, as everyone will be able to see that.
If you admit there is a difference in the amount of damage done to the adherants of the above cited examples, then it follows that it is useful having a set of discriptors that allow one asses how inherantly damaging or undamaging a system of belief is, and the organised pursual of that belief is to an adherant.
If you admit there is a difference in the amount of damage done to the adherants of the above cited examples, then maybe it is handy to have easy terms of reference, like 'cult', 'sect' and 'denomination', to use when you talk about them. Just like you can talk about reptiles, insects or birds; easy terms of reference that are more wieldy than 'Heterostatic chordates capabale of flight, covered in adapted scales, believed to be descended from dinosaurs'.
You are very good at speculating on Steve Hussan's motives.
What are yours? Or are you a white knight unblemished by ulterior motivations?
And do stop with making up arguements that you can refute;
"Cult" is an ambiguous word. So to say that any religion is a cultNote how this is an attack on something that does not happen, or if it does, if the meaning of the disputed word is questioned, normally results in the terms of reference being defined, so is not a true problem and certainly no fallacy. You are therefore making up an arguement to refute to lend yourself credability. Oooo, moral high-ground!
would be fallacious if a person fails to specify what they mean by
"cult".
You wouldn't be an active Witness would you? Or maybe a inactive apologetic Witness? I don't suppose that could result in your attempts to deny the existence of damaging religious movements?
Haven't I already had a discussion with you regarding the fact that discriptors of cult activity are spectrums and not tick boxes, shades of gray, not black or white?
You wanna play semantics and silly buggers, raise your game, it's not working.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
