Posts by 'Stein

The average wage in the UK is £133,333 / $267K ??

Heh with that said though, it's worth mentioning that things over there are much more expensive.

(I don't have data, but can any Brits back me up on this?)

Haha yea. Where are ya going again? (you're a seinor, right?)

oops..:(...**thought..sorry my brain crosswired...(then again that might be perpetual)

ps my use of bud is perfectly legittamite..:P.....or hwo ever you spell legit.....etc...o.0..

Lemeur,

Please use correct correct capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. No one can understand what you are saying.

Thanks.

Well as of now my undergrad will be a double major: bio & mol bio.

Medicine> To tell ya the truth, I really have no clue, but resarch medicine has always caught my eye. :icon_biggrin:

But ya, Duke's a lot closer for me (I'm from Knoxville), and cost....let's just say I'll be working my ass off while in college. :icon_wink:

Medicine for me as well. :)

Except, Duke's my college of choice.

I can definitely see that.

Shaun of the dead is excellent!

Yea, it's really awful. After big school-related traumas, copycats try to follow on the wave. A classic example is all of the school shootings that occured after Columbine.

JBennet>

Agreed. I'll be 18 when voting day comes along, so I'll actually have to follow elections this year. :)

Obama seems like a guy who hasn't been corrupted by politics yet (like Hillary & the rest of them). Who knows though, it may be all show.

Rashakil brings up good points, methinks.

Christina, I will ask you this. If every student at VT carried a gun, would 33 of them have been gunned down?

Good choice of college by the way!

(I'm living in Knoxville now). :icon_biggrin:

I would second the MegaUpload site. It works very well.

I havn't tried this, but have you tried changing the keyboard back to English when using Word2004/Dreamweaver?

Heh I'm not so sure that PC dominates in all of the above.

How about the 'superior picture/video editing' (or something like that)?

Carbon dating itself is inaccurate to the point where you can determine something within 30 years (wiki). However, using other radioactive decay systems, different levels of accuracy and time can be achieved.

Heh sorry, I just get angry at times, and don't like yelling at people..

The Google guys are British, but they grew up in America.

I don't think so. One is Russian-born, and the other is from Michigan

What's even cooler is that we also have a member here who's Wiccan. :)

Heh easier way to get a coke on the new machines:

http://www.break.com/index/how_to_get_a_free_coke.html

Sturm, I'd advise looking at the first 5-10 pages of this thread.

*walks back out*

I thought Dani was Jewish as well, but I'm not positive about that.

I myself go with the nuke-lee-ur, but I think we're wrong.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nuclear

/ˈnukliər, ˈnyu- or, by metathesis, -kyələr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[noo-klee-er, nyoo- or, by metathesis, -kyuh-ler

*Looks at calendar, sees AD only a couple years late.*

:)

Guys, I give up.

We all know that nobody's stance on anything will change a smudgeon, as shown by everybody's very last post. Everyone is using the same old ignorances, criticizing others who don't agree with their own beliefs, and simply bashing other religions needlessly.

WHY? Why does it matter what someone else believes? Why do we need to so vehemeously defend our own beliefs? Why does it matter what somebody else thinks of you?

This argument is going in circles, with nobody changing.

It was stupid of me to even partake in any of this, I'm sorry.

Buddha is interesting and much of Eastern thought mirrors Christian teachings of humility and compassion but it is not comparable beyond the window-dressings of possible outward similarities prescribed by the Leftist intellectual agnostic\atheists who hope to deride the salvation of the Christian Messiah.

Buddha was not divine and shall forever remain an exotic footnote of a religion without merit or true influence that encourages idol worship and pagan-like activities.

Matty

Matty

First, I shall ask: who came first, Buddha, or Jesus?

From the answer to that, we find that Christianity mirrors Eastern thought, not the other way around.

And no, I wouldn't consider myself "a Leftist intellectual agnostic/athiest who hope to deride the salvation of the Christian Messiah." Rather, I'm simply opening another outlook.

Buddha was not divine

According to who? You? Christianity? Simply because you don't believe in the idea does not mean it isn't true. I myself have no affiliation to Buddhism of any kind, but I'm just trying to present another outlook on it all.

religion without merit or true influence that encourages idol worship and pagan-like activities.

Again, ignorance.

First off, I want to state I am not correcting.

With that said, self-sacrifice for the betterment of others is not a unique image.

Take, for instance, Buddha, who achieved Nirvana, but withheld himself from entering, so that he could help others reach it.

if anyone disputes the existance of Jesus then they must also disbelieve the existance of all dead people. Afterall, if you can't see them then they did not exist

"I see dead people." :)

(Sixth Sense)

...i gotta go to bed, but I'll answer the questions tmr.

Team Colleague> Basically, you're a retired mod. :)

ohhic.. are there many catholics in tennesse? I live in probably one of the most conservative, christian cities of the entire u.s.! We were even number one under the google trend search "Christian" for a little bit.

jw.. what are your views of the afterlife?

Haha I think your city wins. Knoxville, TN doesn't have the largest Catholic population, but that is changing somewhat with the influx of immigrants...

Afterlife> the truth is, I'm not really sure. What I will say, however, is that my belief does not follow Catholicism in this aspect.

There is no true universal moral law, as is logical. Humans act in their own self-interest; however, society has created moral law.. If society collapsed, say errupted in complete anarchy.. people would care nothing of each other, only of their own primitive needs of survival...

But, I do believe people should have some morals to relate to.. Christianity is a great religion in establishing strong morals..

I hope this is what you mean by 'Universal Moral Law':cool:

Here's an example. Rape is considered morally wrong in virtually every human society (ranging from city life to remote tribes). However, rape isn't looked down upon in the animal category, and actually can have the advantage in natural selection (due to an increased passing of its allelles).

"and I know just as much, if not more about god then all of you."

I wouldn't say THAT...as I myself attended Catholic school longer then you. My guess is that Christina knows what she's talking about as well, and Duki too.

(17)

Oh, and Josh, just to spur up some rational debate, what's your view of Universal Moral Law?

sorry, just aggitated... everything that is said, including from you, a post is made from him trying to prove it wrong or unlikely... =/

what was that about open mindedness?

Christina & Duki-

Sorry, methinks I overreaced, not you guys. ;)

-No, not everything from me is defending 1 side. Just look at the earlier part of the discussion, when I bashed Chrstiana and Josh pretty heavily.

Josh- I wouldnt really consider it 1v3. Mabe 1v2 with me as the centrist. :)

ok... they didn't pray... other people prayed for them... read the post before replying plz... how would they not be aware that they were praying??

says nothing about one half being religious and the other not being...

Calm down dude, I didn't catch it the first time either.

Thanks for that question... I have always wondered about that. But what I truly and sincerely believe is that first off, it is our duty to send missionaries over to remote countries where there is no word of a God or anything else to try and teach them. Second, I believe that God's mercy, grace, and love is measureless.... I do not think He would condemn them to hell. It wasn't their fault they didn't hear the truth. But in the end, God will decide.

"God will decide"

Couldn've said it better myself. :)

But yea, that was the major question that really turned me off frm religion for awhile.

Duki> I acutually remember that study! I thought the outcome was that there was a slightly higher rate of survival among those that prayed. However, the difference was so small that statistical tests proved it random chance. (looking for the results now, though.)

You're right, a process not yet discovered could have coincidentally cured someone of cancer the same week she was prayed for. ;)

I will assume that was meant in sarcasm, but I think it's true with no sarcasm present. ;)

While I have no data, I'm sure that the vast majority of cancer patients are religious, and pray on a daily, if not weekly, basis.

No, lol. We meaning the people who choose to follow Christ.

:)

Slightly off topic, but I'm somewhat curious about your point of view on something.

If only those people that know Christ can be saved, then what happens to those individuals who never get the chance to know Him. For example, let's use a remote Amazonian tribe. If they're never exposed to Him, and never have the opportunity to learn about Him, are they comdemned to eteral doom?

(Sorry, I like debating. ;))

well, my lie has cured cancer... has your truth done that yet?

True statements, there have been instances when cancer has receded without a known cause. However, the key word in this is "known." For all we know, it's due to process not yet discovered. Or, it could be very much due to God.

Evolution has actually been critical in understanding HIV/AIDS.

At least we have hope after death.

"We" being all humans? ;)

why is this unlikely, but not in the single case of the human evolving from what would seem to be a ludacris species or organism at one point? How is human evolution from one species more likely than that of another; why is it not considered extremely unlikely now?

Well, truthfully, every mutation that develops into a new species is extremely unlikey. When a mutation occurs, there is an extremely high chance that the organism will die. However, this very small probability that survive slowly differ and differ.

"evolving from what would seem to be a ludacris species or organism at one point?"

I personally wouldn't call it ludacris. Fact states that the Rhesus Monkey (our closest living relative, from what I recall) and Homo sapiens (us) are ~98% the same, according to DNA evidence.

"How is human evolution from one species more likely than that of another;"

Well it all really depends on the amount of shared genes. How much do you know about genetics? I ask this simply to find a place to begin an explanation.

hah i better stop myself be4 I go off on some tangent talking about how illogical it is to have a single creator that is both omnipotent and who created a world in which free will exists... infinity is not really, nothing is immortal.

Hehe, well as most philosophers agree, logic cannot describe a divine being. So yes, it would be 'illogical" ;)

And I'm pretty sure infinity does exist.

you would rather believe we came from a single organism than a loving creator?

Would you rather believe that you lived in paradise, or in hell? Simply because you believe in something does not simply make it true.

And secondly, why can't you believe in both? I know I sure do.

so in that case, everything has the potential to eventually evolve into a human... is that what you are trying to convey?

Well, not exactly. For one, realize that the human species is not the best-adapted to our enviroment. In fact, our body is still quite geared toward a tetrapod (walking on 4 legs).

Secondly, it is important to differentiate between 'anything' and 'a population'. A single animal cannot undergo evolution. Rather, evolution occurs on a population-scale. A population evolves, while an organism alone does not.

With that said, yes, it is hypothetically possible that every other species will evolve to the human species, but is extremely unlikely.

Chrtistina

I apologize, I didn't make it clear enough. ;)

The Catholic Church teaches that it's ok to believe that we as humans evolved from bacteria. Also, it's ok to believe that life wasn't sparked by God. However, under Catholic teaching, we need to believe that God created everything.

>Your opnion: I live in the South now, and I know many, many people that hold that same viewpoint. :)

(edit for grammar)

:o My apologies.

I still hold the belief though, that theories can still be proven false in certain cases.

I just don't like believing in something that says humans evolved from monkeys. But hey, that's my opinion, right?

So I have a question for you, if you are a Christian but you believe in evolution, what are your beliefs? Does that mean you don't believe in Creationism?

I acutally don't like believing that we evolved from monkeys either, but this is our opinion. :)

Question> Before Pope John Paul II, he released a long statement promoting a new belief of God's Creation. According to the Pope, it is still OK to believe in evolution, as long as one still believes that the Universe itself was created by God (which I myself believe).

"But just because you study something that might or might not be true... or if you observe something..."

For all we know, the Bible is completely false. Under your reasoning, why isn't the Bible false, and the Quar'an (alternate spelling: Koran), or the Vedas (Hindu holy book) true?

"
That's not what I was trying to explain...."

I apologise.

"You seem intelligent enough, so I just ask you to be open minded. I was once catholic, so I know where you're coming from."

Haha why thank you. I myself have also doutbted the presece of God, and havn't always been a devout Catholic.

Open minded> I try my best. For the longest time, my beliefs have actually mirrored what your's appear to be. I'm simply asking both sides in this to keep personal beliefs to a minimum, and have a concise discussion, rather then a banter foddy. ;)

Hm.. I have never heard of this 'Born-Einstein Condensate", but gravity is a scientific law, so I doubt there is anything that is contrary to it. Most theories have been proven true in scientific experiments, but are not yet laws b/c there have not been enough tests to know for sure. But come on, most scientists to believe in evolution. And it is possible to believe in evolution and be a christian

Wiki: "If a system is at such a low temperature that it is in the lowest energy state, it is no longer possible for it to reduce its energy, not even by friction. Without friction, the fluid will easily overcome gravity because of adhesion between the fluid and the container wall, and it will take up the most favorable position, all around the container."

There is no such thing as a scientific law.

"But come on, most scientists to believe in evolution."

Indeed, and I believe in evolution as well, but that doesn't make it simply true. Most people didn't believe in Einstein's Theory of Relativity when it was first introduced, but that doesn't make it incorrect.

"And it is possible to believe in evolution and be a christian"

Indeed. I am both a devout Roman Catholic and a believer in evolution.

The Bible is meant to be proven... why else was it written?

The Bible is meant to guide us through our daily lives. As a Roman Catholic, I'm taught that the Bible is only part of becoming closer to God (the other two parts are Prayer and community service). (From my religion) the Bible wasn't written to be proven (true or false; rather, it's a tool to get us closer to God.

Now yes, I know that you're probably not Catholic, but I'm simply stating my viewpoint.

Charles Darwin did.

I hate to break it to you, but he did not.

Natural Selection (Darwin never actually uses the word "evolution", FTW) was based upon many different observations and other essays written around those times.

If you'd like, feel free to ask and I will discuss the influences of natural selection.