BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ... Full Story

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#160999 Jun 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Because VoteVets implies they represent military vets when they do not! Only about 5% of their members are military vets! Do you want to guess what percentage of TEA Partiers are military vets yet they do not claim to represent military vets!!!
Read more at http://www.topix.com/forum/who/barack-obama/T... text>
I admit that I am computer challenged but if I can do it, you can two. Ever hear of Wikipedia?
"In February 2007, a VoteVets.org spokesman told the The Washington Post that the group had 20,000 members, including 1,000 veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan'."
Okay, let's do the math. If you have 20,000 of anything but only 1,000 of them are purple while the rest are pink, what percentage is purple?
Yes, the founder is a veteran of the war in Iraq but their major goal has nothing to do with veterans but by pushing the progressive agenda!
The rest are - what? Got a clue how many veterans there are who are not Iraq and Afghanistan vets? Hey Rouge, are you an Iraq or Afghanistan vet? So if you were a member you wouldn't count as a vet? Really?

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161000 Jun 24, 2013
American Lady wrote:
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2)
All that cutting and pasting...so little information.

Of coarse an APOLOGETICS website will try to claim Einstein.

Your god and the god Einstein spoke of are two very different things. Einsteins god was the elegant simplicity of the cosmos. You don't talk to him, there is no such thing as sin, and the thought of a personal relationship is laughable. To him god lived in mathematics and conceptual physics.

"God does not play dice" was a figure of speech.(He turned out to be wrong)

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954

Einstein actually made it very clear once and for all that any association between him and a religious god is simply...a lie.

Einstein continuously was quoted without source to be a "man of god" he did his best to put a stop to this.

"It was, of course, a LIE what you read about my religious convictions, a LIE which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

- Albert Einstein,(1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side
You Cut and paste lies according to the man himself.

Einsteins problem with the word atheist is the same one most atheist have. We don't have a word to describe our non-belief in Santa, or the Easter bunny...or the boogeyman.

Anti-theist better describes the state of mind.

Newton was a believer outwardly...he knew what happened to scientist that tore down the model that mythology laid out. He also invoked a "god of the gaps" filler for incomplete theories. What it boils down to is that Newton knew how close he would be to getting burned at the stake.

Once his real beliefs surfaced he was labeled a heretic.

http://www.isaac-newton.org/heretic.pdf

This is going to be difficult to describe to someone who doesn't have referance to hi-caliber mathematics.

Newton had created a mathematics that could explain how the solar system worked. Gravity...inertia...velocity for each object in the solar system.

It was not complete...for example... it didn't take into account the planets pulling on each other. And his answer was "God fixes it every once in a while."

What this meant was that Newton had reached as far as he could stretch. And in essence...gave up.(Enter God)

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161001 Jun 24, 2013
Sir Isaac Newton's work represents some of the greatest contributions to science ever made by an individual. Most notably, Newton derived the Law of Universal Gravitation, invented the branch of mathematics called Calculus, and performed experiments investigating the nature of light and color. He also was scholar of the Bible and devoted much time to its study.

Sir Isaac had an accomplished artisan fashion for him a small scale model of our solar system which was to be put in a room in Newton's home when completed. The assignment was finished and installed on a large table. The workman had done a very commendable job, simulating not only the various sizes of the planets and their relative proximities, but also so constructing the model that everything rotated and orbited when a crank was turned. It was an interesting, even fascinating work, as you can image, particularly to anyone schooled in the sciences.

A scientist friend of Newton's came by for a visit. Seeing the model, he was naturally intrigued, and proceeded to examine it with undisguised admiration for the high quality of the workmanship.

"Oh My! What an exquisite thing this is!" Newton's friend exclaimed. "Who made it?"

Paying little attention to him, Sir Isaac answered, "Nobody."

Stopping his inspection, the visitor turned and said, "Oh? Evidently you did not understand my question. I asked who made this?"

Newton, enjoying himself immensely no doubt, replied in a still more serious tone, "Nobody. What you see just happened to assume the form it now has."

"You must think I am a fool!" the visitor retorted heatedly, "Of course somebody made it, and he is a genius, and I would like to know who he is."

Newton then spoke to his friend in a polite yet firm way: "This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#161002 Jun 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Blondie, I just pointed out where you were incorrect. You used the word requirment, not I. The rest of your post is gibberish.
She was not incorrect. LRS is clueless. If it is necessary to show a BC that was sent to momma in order to prove facts of birth to a paranoid schizophrenic, then it is a requirement imposed by the nutball. However, schizophrenics typically cannot draw rational inferences. This is a case in point.
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Rational readers will notice that although LRS has CLAIMED "it is much more than speculation," LRS has not cited a single fact.
"Yep, blonde."
Not that my hair color matters, but the willingness to call a brunette a blonde is typical of birther LIARS.
It is like them saying "the Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya" (she didn't, she said repeatedly that he was born in HAWAII, and she is not a blonde either) or them saying "Obama's lawyer admitted that the birth certificate was forged" (she didn't, and I admit I do not know her hair color). The governor of Hawaii (who is bald, but his beard is gray) did not say that he could not find the birth certificate either.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#161003 Jun 24, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right. It is 5%. Kudos.
But, the fact remains that its founder is a veteran of Iraq, as is the actual president. It is a fact that this grouping is pro-military. One does not have to be anti-military to object to the Afghan and Iraqi wars, quite the opposite. The other 19,000 members can surely not be anti-military either and don't forget, if the Dems had started those wars, VoteVets would still have objected to them, and they'd be branded Republican sympathisers. In Vietnam, you will recall, the 1st war veterazn protesters were against LBJ and his democrats and thereafter against Nixon and his republicans (though Nixon had more, which is normal, the war was dragging on). Try to put a party badge on those vets
Overwhelmingly anti-war protesters are Liberals. In 1968 who protested at the Democrat National Convention in Shitcago?

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161004 Jun 24, 2013
VoteVets org wrote:
<quoted text>
Richard Dawkins is an imbecile.
He thinks the Orangutan was not in Africa.
He doesn't realize that millions and millions of years ago all the continents were grouped together.
It is just speculation on Dawkins part.
Gods word makes just as much sense, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
P.S. I am ready for the return fire for calling your hero an imbecile. LOL
Dawkins certainly is not an imbecile. That seems apparent enough.

Nor, is he my hero.

I am into astrophysics...biology isn't really an interest of mine at all.

I do find it hard to believe that Dawkins could make such assertions with zero evidence and none of the scientific community took the opportunity to prove him wrong.(That is what we do)

No return fire.

I do know that Dawkins believes that humans have been around 250,000 years. Millions and millions of years ago when the land masses were more grouped is completely out of context.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161005 Jun 24, 2013
VoteVets org wrote:
<quoted text>
The Tigris–Euphrates rivers are not in Missouri.
Those are facts VV...
They have no biz being anywhere near religion.

I mean...come on.
They have a book.
They claim it is the inspired word of god.
It is the handbook of how to live morally in God's eyes.
If you refuse this information, you spend eternity in hell.
Lots of Morons agree with them...errr, Mormons.
The book says Missouri.

Maybe those rivers were in Missouri at one time? But the continental shift....oh nvm.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

So..VV?

What is your problem with the Mormons?

They have everything you guys have.

Please explain why the Mormons are nuts.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161006 Jun 24, 2013
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are facts VV...
They have no biz being anywhere near religion.
I mean...come on.
They have a book.
They claim it is the inspired word of god.
It is the handbook of how to live morally in God's eyes.
If you refuse this information, you spend eternity in hell.
Lots of Morons agree with them...errr, Mormons.
The book says Missouri.
Maybe those rivers were in Missouri at one time? But the continental shift....oh nvm.
(Sorry, couldn't resist)
So..VV?
What is your problem with the Mormons?
They have everything you guys have.
Please explain why the Mormons are nuts.
While you give it a think...know that the Mormons consider you guys to be large caliber idiots.

Christianity is an abomination.(according to the mormons)

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#161007 Jun 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
But you know better than I, right? LMAO! sillyfart
Obviously

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#161008 Jun 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Overwhelmingly anti-war protesters are Liberals. In 1968 who protested at the Democrat National Convention in Shitcago?
Were There were riots at the convention, guess you missed that. What about the "National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam " that was seriously roughed up by police? And correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Gordon Lightfoot wrote and sang a song about the Dem party 1968 convention riots.

Chicago's the third or fourth biggest city in the United States, a main cog as one could call it, and you call it "Shitcago?" (Rogue tm reg'd). Over 3 million fellow American "Sh*ts?"

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161009 Jun 24, 2013
Who cares if vote vets has one single member who had ever fired a shot in combat?

They all signed the same papers you did...right?

They were all shipped to where they were needed...right?

My father was stationed in Germany during Vietnam ...does it make him less of a veteran in your eyes?

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#161010 Jun 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
From Wiki: In a December 2004 interview with American journalist Bill Moyers, Dawkins said that "among the things that science does know, evolution is about as certain as anything we know." When Moyers questioned him on the use of the word theory, Dawkins stated that "evolution has been observed. It's just that it hasn't been observed while it's happening." He added that "it is rather like a detective coming on a murder after the scene... the detective hasn't actually seen the murder take place, of course. But what you do see is a massive clue... Huge quantities of circumstantial evidence. It might as well be spelled out in words of English."
Dawkins has ardently opposed the inclusion of intelligent design in science education, describing it as "not a scientific argument at all, but a religious one". He has been referred to in the media as "Darwin's Rottweiler", a reference to English biologist T. H. Huxley, who was known as "Darwin's Bulldog" for his advocacy of Charles Darwin's evolutionary ideas. He has been a strong critic of the British organisation Truth in Science, which promotes the teaching of creationism in state schools, and he plans through the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science to subsidise schools with the delivery of books, DVDs, and pamphlets that counteract their (Truth in Science's) work, which Dawkins has described as an "educational scandal".
"When Moyers questioned him on the use of the word theory ...."

Yeah right, and the kinetic theory of gasses is "just a theory."

And the Krebs' Cycle is "just a theory".

And the Embden-Meyerhoff pathway is just a theory.

Beta-oxidation is just a theory.

Chemiosmotic generation of ATP is just a theory.

Atomic theory is "just a theory."

Quantum mechanics is "just a theory".

Electromagnetic theory is but mere theory.

Molecular orbital theory is "just a theroy".

HOMO-LUMO theory in stereoelectronic effects is "just a theory".

Evolution is "just a theory".

IGNORANCE IS PATHETIC.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#161011 Jun 24, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
She was not incorrect. LRS is clueless. If it is necessary to show a BC that was sent to momma in order to prove facts of birth to a paranoid schizophrenic, then it is a requirement imposed by the nutball. However, schizophrenics typically cannot draw rational inferences. This is a case in point.
<quoted text>
Are you an idiot? I never said it was a requirement! DAB

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#161012 Jun 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you an idiot? I never said it was a requirement! DAB
When did I directly quote the paranoid schizophrenic as saying "it is a requirement"?

Read slowly, MORON. "If it is necessary to show a BC that was sent to momma in order to prove facts of birth to a paranoid schizophrenic, then it is a requirement imposed by the nutball."

If LRS would like to dispute the correctness of that statement he is welcome to try.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
She was not incorrect. LRS is clueless. If it is necessary to show a BC that was sent to momma in order to prove facts of birth to a paranoid schizophrenic, then it is a requirement imposed by the nutball. However, schizophrenics typically cannot draw rational inferences. This is a case in point.
<quoted text>
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#161013 Jun 24, 2013
This is from Ellen's post:
Justice LRS said:

"Show me the post where I said it was required. Obumbler has a document created in cyberspace. It never had a paper form."

"Justice LRSA said: " See, if Obumbler had his original it would be proof. "

Now, real slow for the DAB, do you SEE the word "requirement"? No, you do not. You're dismissed.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161014 Jun 24, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
"When Moyers questioned him on the use of the word theory ...."
Yeah right, and the kinetic theory of gasses is "just a theory."
And the Krebs' Cycle is "just a theory".
And the Embden-Meyerhoff pathway is just a theory.
Beta-oxidation is just a theory.
Chemiosmotic generation of ATP is just a theory.
Atomic theory is "just a theory."
Quantum mechanics is "just a theory".
Electromagnetic theory is but mere theory.
Molecular orbital theory is "just a theroy".
HOMO-LUMO theory in stereoelectronic effects is "just a theory".
Evolution is "just a theory".
IGNORANCE IS PATHETIC.
Insane... is it not. They want to try and belittle an idea because it uses the word "Theory". Like it is a "Maybe".

Anyone who has even a basic knowledge of science knows the difference between a scientific theory and a layman's use of the word.

But since we seem to be in the company of those who clearly don't understand the difference...

I am going to help out.

PAY ATTENTION as this will help you not sound like an idiot if you ever find yourselves in a light hearted debate with someone you happen to meet.

Here's the definition of a layman's theory:

1. a. Systematically organized knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, esp. a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena. b. Such knowledge or such a system distinguished from experiment or practice. 2. Abstract reasoning: speculation. 3. An assumption or guess based on limited knowledge or information: hypothesis.

Here's the definition of a scientific theory:

A scientific theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

There's a qualitive difference between the two. Evolution is considered to be a scientific theory. When scientists call evolution a theory, they are referring to the latter definition.
==========

Gravity is a THEORY TOO!.. but you don't see creationist jumping out of windows to prove this is just a guess.

After researching buoyancy, I develop a hypothesis.

My hypothesis states that soap will float and iron will sink.

So, I gather 1000 bars of each and hit my pool.

I test my hypothesis by chucking the bars in one by one.

I record my results.

If necessary...I re-write or redefine my hypothesis.

I re-test.

I publish my results.

Another scientist thinks I am full of shit or just likes the experiment and repeats my experiment...and on and on.

Not until my hypothesis is tested and retested over and over by a large group of scientist and the results are accepted across the scientific community may I dare tag my hypothesis with the word theory.

If even 1 person now better understands the difference between the two...I didn't waste my time.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#161015 Jun 24, 2013
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I directly quote the paranoid schizophrenic as saying "it is a requirement"?
Read slowly, MORON. "If it is necessary to show a BC that was sent to momma in order to prove facts of birth to a paranoid schizophrenic, then it is a requirement imposed by the nutball."
If LRS would like to dispute the correctness of that statement he is welcome to try.
<quoted text>
I never said you claimed that! I didn't say you quoted anything from anyone. If you're going to jump into another conversaition, at least know what the hell the OTHER two talking about. Is your nickname Igor?
Grand Birther

Cleveland, OH

#161016 Jun 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Overwhelmingly anti-war protesters are Liberals. In 1968 who protested at the Democrat National Convention in Shitcago?
Rogue Moron is pro-war because he's a violent birfoon.

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#161017 Jun 24, 2013
I think it is important to understand that Darwin was not science's "golden boy".

His findings pissed off and even offended a lot of other scientist.

Who naturally tested and retested his findings with direct motivation to humiliate him.

I have gone over this before. However, I don't think It was absorbed.

Scientist are not some chummy club who get together to congratulate each other for pulling the wool over the eyes of the general public.

We are sharks. We would like nothing better than to prove ANYTHING. The only thing more satisfying is to DISPROVE somebody else.

What I am saying is that literally THOUSANDS of well qualified biologist and chemist did and are doing the best they can to cut down evolution.

They just could not get it done...and it isn't like they missed a window of opportunity. They are to this very day trying, and so far, failing.

Darwin's Theory stands because it is nearly bulletproof.

==========

Off topic...

This whole misunderstanding that science is a "we got each other's back" community has given rise to one of my very favorite things.

The science troll.

You know the guy....

You can find him in evolution threads and big bang threads pretty much everywhere.

The guy that is prepared to show you through formulai that he can disprove gravity...or evolution (explain the human eye...LMAO!)...or they have bested Hawking.

Imagine the generosity of these people. They have Earth shattering revalations in science.

Instead of claiming their nobel prizes and all that grant cash...

they are sharing this information with me.

I will never tire of it.
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#161018 Jun 24, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>If Barack Hussein Obama were born on the steps of The White House, I still wouldn't vote for him and he would still be the worst resident of The White House since television was invented. No matter what you think,he is still the son of a Kenyan citizen. His father was never a citizen of the United States,not even for one day. Obama's father was never an immigrant to the United States,never had allegiance to the United States and was not a descendent of pre-Civil War slavery in the United States. Barack Obama has deceived you from the very beginning. Every time he relates himself to the struggle of pre Civil War citizens he is lying.
I never vote. They are all the same.
Obama achieved his dream of becoming President.
Let him enjoy it. It is just for fun.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min Tony Rome 1,115,147
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 10 min Frijoles 69,521
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 17 min Earthling-1 47,008
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 3 hr D-U-H 50,041
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 4 hr Mandela 68,560
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr RACE 98,345
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 6 hr RACE 639

Chicago Jobs

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]