“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#593174 Sep 18, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet it it written in every Holy Bible ever printed.
John 3:16&17
For God so loved the world that He gave his only Son, So that everyone who believed in him will not perish but have eternal life.
God did sent His son into the world not to condemn it but to save it.
Since the beginning, man has been trying to destroy the scriptures every since. With verses you used here.
God lied that miserable backstabber, yet he could give his only son.
John 3:18
There is no judgment awaiting those who trust him, But those who do not trust him have already been judged for not believing in the Only Son of God.
John 3:19
Their judgment is based on this fact The light from heaven came into the world but they loved the darkness more than the light for their actions were evil.
Much like the words God lied that miserable backstabber.
The Gospel of John is proven fraud and forgery. It is full of proven errors, fabrications and outright lies.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#593175 Sep 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It's possible. I have been known, once I think, to make a mistake.
<quoted text>
I don't have any issues whatsoever with people who have different backgrounds than I do. I couldn't do what you do well. I'd have to take instruction from you, and lots of practice.
What I take issue with is people making false claims to knowledge they don't possess, as if they have some right to speak authoritatively on subjects they know nothing about. Only the truly ignorant can make such claims - I cringe when Hitchens misrepresents how our ancestors lived. I cringe when Dawkins misrepresents how evolution applies to human behavior. I cringe when Serah derides entire scientific fields as "naive" or when you claim that "no one" can pick up a bone and know what species it belonged to or what function it had.
All of those examples, each and every one, the speakers are overstepping their knowledge boundaries and making claims that they cannot know are true or false. I can make a claim about evolution and human behavior with some authority - I can't make a claim about basically every other aspect of life with authority.
If I told you how houses should be built, ignored whatever you were telling me, and then insulted you because you didn't agree with my fundamentally ignorant position, I can't imagine you'd think deeply on my words. You wouldn't search for meaning where none exists - you'd call the ignorance out. And why wouldn't you? You'd have every right, you earned that right through your dedication.
In fact, it was your claim about bones that led me to know that you could easily understand them. I thought to myself "I can pick up a hominin bone and, if I know its date, can tell what species it is." Then I thought "why can I do this?" And the answer had to do with how and why bones work - load bearing structures. Then I thought "RR works in load bearing structures. I bet he can do bones just as easily."
I wasn't planning to post anything.

But I decided I want to tell you something.

RR also calls people "monkeys" because of their skin color, among other things.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#593176 Sep 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I can not identify with Paul at all.
I am not a murderer of innocent people.
I never embezzled from a church.
I am not a con artist.
I am not an outright fraud.
I don't constantly lie.
I do not claim to have higher authority than God.
I do not claim to be better than Jesus.
All things Paul admits to in his own letters.
It does explain why so many Christians are liars, thieves and murderers though.
Perhaps when you listen to Jesus instead of Paul you may understand a what I write here and why I do it.
I think you just opened your own door but I not about to try to close it.
I am a silly lil woman ya know. I just let afew other posters explain it to you and sit and watch.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#593177 Sep 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, impressed.
You should read Thomas Khun. You often approach what he writes in "The structure of scientific revolutions."
Lemme ask you this (and I probably won't respond til tomorrow, it's gettin to my bedtime); aside from the mathematical and scientific definitions of DNA, what is our knowledge about it good for?
Ability to:

- map out genetic diseases with objective accuracy (if you have Huntington's we can tell you how old you will be when you develop the disease)
- eventually address and remove genetic diseases from humanity
- map out how malaria works in mosquitoes and our cells in such detail that we can develop drugs that target their very machinery (and the same with any disease; HIV, too)

in fact, the above point cannot be overstated. Knowledge of genetics gives us the power to understand in minute detail how any disease functions and work toward real elimination - not just treatment.

- modify the genomes of species such that we alter them to our benefit (i.e., gmo crops - yes, some people may be upset with this)
- demonstrably prove that race doesn't exist so that we can deny government that power of discrimination
- objectively demonstrate phylogenetic relationships between species
- dispel silly and dangerous myths associated with disease like stigma against disease sufferers, religious blaming the victim (it's sin, so it's your fault), and lay bare diseases such as cancer, diabetes, red hair, etc.

(red hair was just a joke!)

- work toward youth extension and, ultimately, life extension

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#593178 Sep 18, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't planning to post anything.
But I decided I want to tell you something.
RR also calls people "monkeys" because of their skin color, among other things.
In a post I wrote him, I altered his words such that they read "Hiding, you yellow monkey." If that is what you are referring to, then that was on me and not him.

If you're referring to him calling blacks monkeys or Asians monkeys other than me, well, I haven't seen that and it would cause me to think much less of him.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#593179 Sep 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Let's go ask cheetahs "do you feel it the next day? Do you have a kink in your back?"
:)
You may want to ask a different cheetah than this one

http://m.youtube.com/watch...

:)

“Romans 8:1.”

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#593180 Sep 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not an outright fraud.
I don't constantly lie.
Hmm, you claim to be a "purfesir" yet are posting in here all day when all the other "purfesirs" in the world are teaching.

That makes you a fraud.
_______

And as far as constantly lying goes. Your posts speak for themselves. You lie more then you tell the truth "purfesir", and everyone in here knows it.
_______

Not to mention the number of irony meters you break on a hourly basis in here deadbeat. Like you just did with the above post.

Hillarious!!!

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#593181 Sep 18, 2013
Red Apples wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm, you claim to be a "purfesir" yet are posting in here all day...
Please keep on proving that Christianity is nothing but a Satanic cult of liars and scumbags.

Remember to have an open casket, John. I am counting on you.

Sorry your life sucks. Maybe if you weren't so evil God would have loved you.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#593182 Sep 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't sweat the spelling comments. They're a red herring. Let them rot in the sun.
What would you know of the sun, when you wonder around in darkness for the most part. If it not fishy your not interested.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#593183 Sep 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you believe that the brain areas we stimulate in cats to produce rage are not the same brain areas involved in rage in their daily lives?
What's the disconnect here?
What exactly would you do to cause rage in a controlled environment in which to measure it?

And there is no disconnect if you agree that unless someone is hooked up to a machine in a controlled setting being manipulated with unnatural stimuli so an EKG can show what areas of the brain are responding and the test subject has honestly conveyed his emotion that there is no way to measure these emotions naturally.

You can't simply observe behavior and have any accurate way to quantify emotion. The scenario you suggested wouldn't have practical application or relevance IMO. What's the point of measuring an emotion deliberately manipulated? You already know its rage and know the worse you treat the test subject the worse the rage will be.

But just give one examine in how someone could accurately induce rage out of a test subject in which to try to monitor and measure their reaction. I have a feeling any example will show why this type of study wouldn't be that useful. It certainly wouldn't be ethical. And it wouldn't be measuring a naturally occurring situation and a persons natural response to it.

Perhaps bring cooped up and manipulated to feel rage is going to ensure an inaccurate measurement because the test subject is already pissed before even introducing the element to solicit the rage response?

But what round be done to the subject in a study like this so rage could be measured?

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#593184 Sep 18, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
In a post I wrote him, I altered his words such that they read "Hiding, you yellow monkey." If that is what you are referring to, then that was on me and not him.
If you're referring to him calling blacks monkeys or Asians monkeys other than me, well, I haven't seen that and it would cause me to think much less of him.
That's what he did.

Ask him.

“Romans 8:1.”

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#593185 Sep 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
You said a friend of yours beat her husband with a fry pan. Quite a disgusting behavior.
She should hook up with RR, they could be happy abusing each other.
Lets talk about the disgusting behavior you showed and continue to show your daughter deadbeat.

You've been abusing her for her entire life. You abandoned her. You ran out on her like the coward deadbeat you are. You turned your back on her and thought only of yourself showing her just exactly what a loser deadbeat you are.

Thank God she was smart enough tell you she wanted nothing else to do with you once she grew up. Telling you to get out and stay out of her life.

So go on and tell others about their disgusting behavior deadbeat (like you have any room to talk). Because your disgusting behavior has been exposed many many times in here "purfesir".

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#593186 Sep 18, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't planning to post anything.
But I decided I want to tell you something.
.
You should have went with your first instinct:)

And you wanna know how I know you are a fraud and feigning moral outrage, most likely to get the attention off someone else?

Because you are bringing up things RR said months or years ago that you have known about for months or years. Suddenly now old posts have you in an uncontrollable giddy fit?

Why didn't your strenuous moral objections and offense manifest itself a year ago when the comments were first made?

Why have you had plenty of civil conversations with him between the time of the comments and just recently?

Nah, you aren't really offended Mr I would defend child molesters without inquiring as to their guilt, you got a different agenda

Carrion

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#593187 Sep 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
The Gospel of John is proven fraud and forgery. It is full of proven errors, fabrications and outright lies.
No Ben if a writing does not fit your thinking or is a part of your agenda you place a label on it as wrong, fake, errors, fabrication or any other excuse you can find. In short all you offer is a opinion. Life for you must be filled with excuses.
The Bible is what it is and not you or any of mankind can change that. Good grief they tried for generation after generation with very lil understanding what so ever. Your only one in the masses is all.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#593188 Sep 18, 2013
Red Apples wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm, you claim to be a "purfesir" yet are posting in here all day when all the other "purfesirs" in the world are teaching.
That makes you a fraud.
_______
And as far as constantly lying goes. Your posts speak for themselves. You lie more then you tell the truth "purfesir", and everyone in here knows it.
_______
Not to mention the number of irony meters you break on a hourly basis in here deadbeat. Like you just did with the above post.
Hillarious!!!
Hey what did the Tigers do?

Last I heard they were down 3-0

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#593189 Sep 18, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>What exactly would you do to cause rage in a controlled environment in which to measure it?
And there is no disconnect if you agree that unless someone is hooked up to a machine in a controlled setting being manipulated with unnatural stimuli so an EKG can show what areas of the brain are responding and the test subject has honestly conveyed his emotion that there is no way to measure these emotions naturally.
You can't simply observe behavior and have any accurate way to quantify emotion. The scenario you suggested wouldn't have practical application or relevance IMO. What's the point of measuring an emotion deliberately manipulated? You already know its rage and know the worse you treat the test subject the worse the rage will be.
But just give one examine in how someone could accurately induce rage out of a test subject in which to try to monitor and measure their reaction. I have a feeling any example will show why this type of study wouldn't be that useful. It certainly wouldn't be ethical. And it wouldn't be measuring a naturally occurring situation and a persons natural response to it.
Perhaps bring cooped up and manipulated to feel rage is going to ensure an inaccurate measurement because the test subject is already pissed before even introducing the element to solicit the rage response?
But what round be done to the subject in a study like this so rage could be measured?
You seem to be under the illusion that the rage produced by animals in nature differs from the rage produced under experimental conditions.

For that to be true, you'd have to postulate two entirely different neural pathways: one that is normal and one that evolved for researchers to access. That doesn't make sense.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#593190 Sep 18, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
But just give one examine in how someone could accurately induce rage out of a test subject in which to try to monitor and measure their reaction. I have a feeling any example will show why this type of study wouldn't be that useful. It certainly wouldn't be ethical. And it wouldn't be measuring a naturally occurring situation and a persons natural response to it.
I already explained where in the brain it is, how it can be manipulated, posted papers to neuroscience studies on the brain areas and neuraltransmitters involved, and how a tumor did the exact same thing to Charles Whitman (in real life, outside the lab).

I'm not sure evidence makes any difference to how you are choosing to understand what I write.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#593191 Sep 18, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
You should have went with your first instinct:)
And you wanna know how I know you are a fraud and feigning moral outrage, most likely to get the attention off someone else?
Because you are bringing up things RR said months or years ago that you have known about for months or years. Suddenly now old posts have you in an uncontrollable giddy fit?
Why didn't your strenuous moral objections and offense manifest itself a year ago when the comments were first made?
Why have you had plenty of civil conversations with him between the time of the comments and just recently?
Nah, you aren't really offended Mr I would defend child molesters without inquiring as to their guilt, you got a different agenda
Carrion
Not so.

RR called black people monkeys very recently.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#593192 Sep 18, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>It would still require honest feedback from the participant and would be extremely limited as far as what situations could be recreated in a controlled environment. Under a less than ethical study could we manipulate the brain with certain stimuli to see what areas are effected during what emotions? Sure. Would it even show levels? Probably. Would this have any practical real life application? No
I mean if the question is, can we measure rage and love?
And the answer is either NO
Or
Well if we created a controlled environment during an unethical setting with limited things we can test and manipulated the brain we can measure emotions to a certain degree in unnatural situations
I personally would go with "NO"
Just seems like some pretty elaborate scenario can always be concocted to answer a question differently. Although maybe the easiest thing to do would be just change the question to "can they be measured naturally through observable behavior" and to that the answer would be "NO"
That answer would be yes. Psychiatrists have been manipulating my brain with different chemicals for years. I don't find it unethical.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#593193 Sep 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care if they disagree with me.
I'm right.
If challenge any Christian to biblically defend ANYTHING in Leviticus that applies to ANY Christian.
And I'd win that challenge.
Thanks for your opinion.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 min Neville Thompson 269,040
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 4 min RiccardoFire 39,664
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 6 min lightbeamrider 97,909
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 21 min AN NFL FAN 121,339
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 22 min ChristineM 810,352
If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 30 min JesusIsResurrection 967
angka toto malaysia di jamin tembus (Aug '14) 37 min hermawan 6
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Mar '14) 47 min perfect massage r... 206
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr truth 574,347
Sleeping with mother (Oct '13) 11 hr Jon 19
More from around the web