sol740

I'm not sure if any human being on this planet can truly grasp timelessness(discounting the underdeveloped, otherwise handicapped, or very young). The idea is simple enough to say of course, conceptualize even, but grasp? That could be semantics though. I will always argue that freewill and an omnipotent deity that is privy to your entire existence, on the scale of every thought and action, without fail, is a contradiction of cosmic proportions. It simply fails, unless one changes the definition of either variable. If you have a million possible futures and God knows all one million, every waking second of each, yet he does not know which you will surely choose, he is not all-powerful/all-knowing. If he does know without fail, and you will take this course or otherwise unravel the definition of "God" in this instance, then you do not choose. You play out as designed. So whose definition are we talking about now ?

I suppose I'm the unlucky contrary, I have been continously harassed by the police for tint on both of my previous vehicles. Which is largely why the z06 is still stock tint. Since I also tend to carry concealed, I think I prefer to give as few reasons possible for an undesirable LEO encounter. Though I still refuse to have a front plate. So I'm a dirty hypocrite and should rock limo.

Ill give a shot, but it feels awfully early for a gritty reboot. Whatever, Emma Stone.

I'll try and come at this thinking as a rational human being first, parent 2nd, and lastly an agent of compromise. Rationally, she has no chance of being a cheerleader. She simply lacks the default required physical equipment to perform, and compete in the manner expected. As a parent, if my daughter had dreamed of being a cheerleader as a little girl, and I had been telling her she could do whatever she set her mind to, despite her handicap, it would be heartbreaking to explain otherwise. Of course a decent person would suck it up, explain realistic expectation, and not call the lawyers. Lastly the school could probably give her a menial position on the team, say 'Lead Spirit Cheerleader', under the expectation that she would be excluded certain functions. That is probably no more cheerleader than limbless mascot, but could have been enough to make someone who had a rough start, happy. Or maybe not, not sure if they tried something similar or not.

Nice pickup!

My TW cable is still directly connectable. Who knows for how long though.

It's not 3.8% of your home sale. Even if the tax affects you, cause you make over 200k a year, it only applies to the profit over the threshold. Not the entire sale. The above is not an endorsement of the plan, but can we at least call it what it is.

I tried to semi-steer the thread away from a specifically biblical frame of reference to avoid such a discussion(hence the PM), then I got sucked in . However I will say you sort of set the precedent for some degree of scientific discussion by originally including a question about the pseudoscientific practice of so-called Intelligent Design.

Irreducible complexity is contradictory. I brought that up in my first post, you even quoted it. You can't apply it to evolution, then not apply it to god. Surely god is more complex than bacteria. Also the flaggellum argument has been mostly discounted, as most of it's "parts" appear to occur independantly, and as such appear to follow evolution. Not that I'm a strict evolutionist. Also making arguments against something is not proof of something else.

Ouch.

I didn't think this was suppose to devolve into a specifically Bible oriented discussion. Correct ? Perhaps we should should steer back into more ambiguous territory. I knew exactly what you meant. It is severely questioned.

It is "too questioned".

It is completely, and totally questioned. Just not by believers. For instance the Bible speaks of the Jews being slaves to the Egyptians. The Exodus, is a major showcase for gods power, and goodness to his followers. However in Egyptian history, there is no mention of the Exodus, or plagues, or anything else in the bible. Believe what you will, but please don't say it goes unquestioned. Lots of people believing something does not make it true. Lots of people believe in Islam, and Buddhism.

Yes, it is the "untrumpable" card. Oh, and I completely agree. Just an example.

Pete and muthafuckin Pete !

That's not a moth ! THIS IS A MOTH !!! http://application.denofgeek.com/pics/film/list/sidekicks/1.jpg

If having faith is what you choose to do, then I wish you well(as we are in a weird way, actually in agreement). The problems begin when the "faithful" subject the "faithless" to persecutions based on nothing but their cosmic intuitions. The victims of 9/11 come to mind.

I personally believe religion serves several functions, but these stick out to me. 1. As a comfort to the possibility of the end of one's conscious being, a thought so alien to most of us, that it alone can create a motivational fear-drive within us to maintain answers, logical or otherwise. This fear is compounded by the individual's roots in this earth.(family, purpose, power) 2. Religion is a self-prescribed knowledge that was perfected into a control tool, and a business, long before we as human beings were intelligent enough to thoughtfully test the natural, or seemingly unnatural occurrences around us. With that I will try to answer the OP's questions to the best of my ability, within the constrains of my own fallible nature. God is such a subjective word, that it/he/she/them may exist in one form or another, and it would be foolish of me to say I know anything for certain. Do I personally believe in a God ? No. At least not in the way we are taught from an early age (generally dependent on what part of the world a person in born/raised in). I do not believe one can "prove" a god/deity/spirit exists as by most definitions, the entity in question is said to exist outside of our ability to test. However what I can prove over and over is mankind's ability to continuously fuck up, even the most basic of instructions(ever played 'phone' in grade school). Logically my inability to trust other men as a general whole, has subdued my likelihood of accepting an answer postulated either spiritually, or scientifically. I haven't got a fucking clue, and if more people were willing to accept, that they themselves, have about as much a fucking clue as myself, we'd all be better off. True live and let live, which is a pipe-dream in and of itself. Not if one hypothesizes a scientific answer to the question. Most of the so-called "evidence" for intelligent design can be traced back to an unscientific references, bias, methods, etc. I would prefer to be told it was pure faith and one's personal belief. Any irreducible complexity argument becomes an exercise in contradiction to one's own theory. This falls back to my "man sucks" argument, which I hate to keep beating that dead horse but ... oh well, batter up. God allows evil to exist because theology must prescribe a reason for evil existing. That sounds like a shitty answer, but I believe it comes back to a question of free will. Free will, at least as it pertains to the Christian god, is a cornerstone tenet, as to be truly saved one must willingly choose to accept god as their savior and sincerely repent their sins. This illusion of freedom(which if there is a god that knows what you're going to do no matter what, and he is infallible, then it is an illusion) has built within it an allowance for "evil", or socially amoral acts(mans inherent sinfulness, imperfectness), which serves itself by redirecting one to the implied answer. At all times please remember ... that I'm probably, totally wrong.

I took a swing at it. http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k21/sol740/1911poly-1.jpg

Nice! Never shot an xd/m but I've heard all good.

I came.

That's pretty tits. Dare I say ... want.

RB26 or 4G63.

We were just in there talking about how much your car sucks. Tim was ruthless.

Sick.