Large Scale Central

Record temperatures

General Discussion
#201

Ric,
I will accept any criticism of my religion as it is without doubt true. They are one of the richest organisations in the world, pay no taxes, have art treasures that a museum would give an arm and a leg for, have abused children, supported the escape of Nazi war criminals out of Germany to South America, right up until around 1958 and now one of their senior bishops even denies that the Holocaust ever happened. He disputes the claim that gas chambers were used to exterminate Jews. Anything more that you can think of, no doubt they have done it. All this in the name of God. No wonder some are cynical when it comes to matters of faith.

 Look to scientology.  Their founder, Ron Hubbard has admitted that the basis of the religion are alien beings dumped in volcanoes on earth and when the volcanoes have erupted,  alien particles have mingled with human flesh.  Look to the cult religions that mass exterminate their own followers.  How can one not be cynical when god is thrust in our faces by door to door salesmen,  much as one would sell a vacuum cleaner?  Religion is treated as a commodity,  to sell and trade.  As with any sale,  one should always read the fine print.
#202
Tim Brien said:
Ric, I will accept any criticism of my religion as it is without doubt true. They are one of the richest organisations in the world, pay no taxes, have art treasures that a museum would give an arm and a leg for, have abused children, supported the escape of Nazi war criminals out of Germany to South America, right up until around 1958 and now one of their senior bishops even denies that the Holocaust ever happened. He disputes the claim that gas chambers were used to exterminate Jews. Anything more that you can think of, no doubt they have done it. All this in the name of God. No wonder some are cynical when it comes to matters of faith. 
 Look to scientology.  Their founder, Ron Hubbard has admitted that the basis of the religion are alien beings dumped in volcanoes on earth and when the volcanoes have erupted,  alien particles have mingled with human flesh.  Look to the cult religions that mass exterminate their own followers.  How can one not be cynical when god is thrust in our faces by door to door salesmen,  much as one would sell a vacuum cleaner?  Religion is treated as a commodity,  to sell and trade.  As with any sale,  one should always read the fine print.</blockquote>

And how do these sins differ from any other society? Since there are murderers and child rapists in your town, can I assume you are also an evil person since you are from the same town?

Stereotyping people and exposing the worst traits of a group isn’t a mature way to look at life.

#203

Uh, oh. Time to return to record temperatures (the topic title) or even volcanic activity in Alaska. I note that I am returning to Alaska in two days–volcano permitting–where winter is firmly entrenched. Fortunately, March is a transitional month. Typically by mid-March the water begins to start running off the roofs as the ice and snow finally begin to melt for good–and that IS a good thing ! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am really getting tired of winter by now. Amen to that?

#204

Amen to that Ron.
I have a taste of spring now…70 degrees.
Lovin it =D
Ralph

#205

Ric, you were not being slammed for your faith. Everyone on this planet is welcome to, and entitled to their own superstitions. However, they are not entitled to inflict them on me and they are not entitled to confused questionable belief with hard scientific truth. The next thing, we’ll have Ralph trying to convince us that when the walls of Jericho fell, the sun stopped in the sky. (You want to argue? Check out any 6th grade science text on gravity, centrifugal motion and COMMON SENSE! You dispute those basic science principles, Ralph? In that case, throw away the keyboard, monitor and computer you are reading this on as they are obviously the work of the Devil) [Oh sorry…the Devil has retired and gone back to his ranch in Texas…]
As I stated in my earlier post, trying to reason with people of closed minds and dogmatic views is like trying to stop paint drying by coaxing it, that is, it’s a process of futility.I just need to tell ya, fellas, that you’re in for a hell of a surprise when you don’t open your eyes after your heart stops beating. Been there. There ain’t no light at the end of tunnel, and you have no awareness of there even being a tunnel.
End of statement

#206
Phil Creer said:
trying to reason with people of closed minds and dogmatic views is like trying to stop paint drying by coaxing it, that is, it's a process of futility.
Seems to apply both ways.
#207
Ralph Berg said:
If one believes in evolution, then one must also except the possibility that man could have lived much longer at one point in history. Maybe at one point long life was required for the survival of the species. Man's numbers may have been few. Maybe as man overpopulated the Earth, shorter life span became necessary for survival. Where is it written that life span always increases during the course of evolution? There are hundreds of reasons it may have been possible for man to live 900 or 1000 years at one point in our history. Disease could have been intoduced into the world and shortened mans life span. The Sun could be much stronger now shortening man's lifespan. I can go on and on. You all seem to use the same false logic........ That the bible is wrong, so there is no God. If the Bible is wrong, the logical conclusion would be that the religions using the Bible are wrong. You all seem to have gone from A to D, without giving thought to B or C. Ralph
"If one believes in evolution, then one must also except the possibility that man could have lived much longer at one point in history." And if you believe that man could have lived much longer at one point in history then one must accept (note spelling correction) the possibility of evolution. "Maybe as man overpopulated the Earth, shorter life span became necessary for survival." During the black plague in Europe, approximately 80% of all humans perished. Did their descendants live longer? Um.....no. "Maybe as man overpopulated ....." What happened to 'be fruitful and multiply....' ? Did the Almighty Being screw up and not foresee (isn't that what omniscient means?) the gross explosion of the human population we are currently suffering from? "Where is it written that life span always increases during the course of evolution?" Where is it written that it doesn't? In the same references that attribute such long life to Old Testament characters it indicates that a man was old by the age of 45. "Be fruitful and multiply" sayeth the Lord. Isn't it interesting that we humans have the only females that actually live long enough to experience menopause? EVERY other female mammal on this planet is fertile until the day it dies, including from extreme old age. In other words, we humans are -at early middle age- outliving our necessity to be still breathing because we are out of the gene pool. "There are hundreds of reasons it may have been possible for man to live 900 or 1000 years at one point in our history." At the risk of descending to your level of argument (I won't call it debate because 'debate' involves a degree of rationality on BOTH sides....), let me do what you have done in the correspondence above.... Name some of these reasons. With valid explanations, not 'maybe's', not 'because's', not because it it 'written' in a known-to-be-flawed holy book... Name some of these reasons. "I can go on and on." Me too. Shall I? "The Sun could be much stronger now shortening man's lifespan." The Sun is, in fact, somewhat weaker than it was and will continue to decline in output as the millenia advance. This has to be a good thing for mankind as it reduces the effect of solar radiation on us which is currently being exacerbated (look it up!) by the holes in the ozone layer caused by (OH! Fuck! There it is again!) Global warming! "You all seem to have gone from A to D, without giving thought to B or C." A to D.......Anno to Domini? B,C? Bullshit and Crap! "Disease could have been intoduced into the world and shortened mans life span." The word is 'introduced' but that's irrelevant right now... At NO time in the history of mankind have we had greater power over sickness, at no time have we had stronger technology to combat life-threatening conditions, at no time have we had control over natural threats such as we do now. And are we living to great age? No. Why? (Pay attention here, I am, after all, a doctor and know these things....) cells have an inbuilt use-by date. You can replace, you can heal, you can inoculate but you can't live past your allotted span.That allotted span isn't allocated by a Divine Being but rather by the plain basic chemistry of your cells. They wear out. Flat statement.

Ric, this is not a diatribe against Christianity. Do a Google. Out of the huge number of humans who identify themselves as being of the Christian faith, over 70% are Roman Catholic. The Vatican acknowledges evolution and puts it down to one of the tools your Almighty used. The Anglicans (your Episcopalians) acknowledge the same thing. Uniting Church (comprising Methodist, Presbyterian etc), ditto. Lutheran? Them too.
Who doesn’t? Them folks who kiss snakes and talk in tongues and in general, makes fools of the rest of the Western population who show some common sense.

#208
David Hill said:
Phil Creer said:
trying to reason with people of closed minds and dogmatic views is like trying to stop paint drying by coaxing it, that is, it's a process of futility.
Seems to apply both ways.
David, you can make me kneel down and acknowledge anything you want if you can -rationally and scientifically- show me that it's true. Until then, I stand by what I said and refute what you replied.
#209
Phil Creer said:
David Hill said:
Phil Creer said:
trying to reason with people of closed minds and dogmatic views is like trying to stop paint drying by coaxing it, that is, it's a process of futility.
Seems to apply both ways.
David, you can make me kneel down and acknowledge anything you want if you can -rationally and scientifically- show me that it's true. Until then, I stand by what I said and refute what you replied.
At the risk of feeding into your sarcastic closed-mindedness, I will repeat a theory I wrote earlier on the long lifespans as recorded in Genesis.

In Genesis, it states that the Earth was covered in a mist, not clear skies or cloudy skies as we see today. I guess it was sort of a heavy fog 24/7 which was enough to water the plants. The mist was said to engulf the earth which could mean it was a layer of great depth.

Assuming (don’t give me the childish ass-u-me joke) a heavy water vapor/ cloud/mist engulfed the whole Earth, the Sun’s radiation would surely be filtered enough to prevent many of the diseases we know are attributable to UV rays and possibly more. It wasn’t recorded that until then that lifespans quickly decreased to 70 years old.

This account of “the mist” would also square with the account of The Great Flood recorded in Genesis and in most other ancient texts around the world. The Flood would have been the first time it rained and thus “God’s promise sign of the rainbow” would only then be possible.

Since The Flood eliminated all human life but for Noah and his family,once they scattered the story of The Flood with them. We know today that if a group of people are isolated in a region, they will develop similar adaptations, darker skin tones, higher cheek bones, etc.

Admittedly it requires faith to believe these accounts, but no more so than to scientifically prove then likelihood of evolution, something from nothing, chance formation of a living cell that divides and feeds on nothing.

Charlie Tuna to Sponge Bob ; Hey Chuck, you ever walk out on to the shore?

SB; No why do you ask?

CT; I am thinking I’ll try it.

SB; You won’t be able to breathe and there’s nothing to eat.

CT; I still want to try.

SB; Why?

CT; Because it’s there.

#210

"Charlie Tuna to Sponge Bob ; Hey Chuck, you ever walk out on to the shore?

SB; No why do you ask?

CT; I am thinking I’ll try it.

SB; You won’t be able to breathe and there’s nothing to eat.

CT; I still want to try.

SB; Why?

CT; Because it’s there."
I think that just summed up the intellectual level of your whole diatribe

#211

"At the risk of feeding into your sarcastic closed-mindedness, I will repeat a theory I wrote earlier on the long lifespans as recorded in Genesis.

In Genesis, it states that the Earth was covered in a mist, not clear skies or cloudy skies as we see today. I guess it was sort of a heavy fog 24/7 which was enough to water the plants. The mist was said to engulf the earth which could mean it was a layer of great depth.

Assuming (don’t give me the childish ass-u-me joke) a heavy water vapor/ cloud/mist engulfed the whole Earth, the Sun’s radiation would surely be filtered enough to prevent many of the diseases we know are attributable to UV rays and possibly more. It wasn’t recorded that until then that lifespans quickly decreased to 70 years old.

This account of “the mist” would also square with the account of The Great Flood recorded in Genesis and in most other ancient texts around the world. The Flood would have been the first time it rained and thus “God’s promise sign of the rainbow” would only then be possible.

Since The Flood eliminated all human life but for Noah and his family,once they scattered the story of The Flood with them. We know today that if a group of people are isolated in a region, they will develop similar adaptations, darker skin tones, higher cheek bones, etc.

Admittedly it requires faith to believe these accounts, but no more so than to scientifically prove then likelihood of evolution, something from nothing, chance formation of a living cell that divides and feeds on nothing."
"I guess it was sort of a heavy fog "
I guess it wasn’t. Whose guess is right? I guess you don’t know.
"In Genesis, it states that the Earth was covered in a mist, "
Reference, please
“The mist was said to engulf the earth which could mean it was a layer of great depth.”
…was said… …could mean…
"the account of The Great Flood recorded in Genesis and in most other ancient texts around the world. "
2 or 3 texts, yes, particularly those based on emigrants from the Middle East (yes, I am prepared to justify that statement with references…) but not ‘most’.
“Since The Flood eliminated all human life but for Noah and his family…”
Oh dear. This is where we come to a parting of the ways. The Flood eliminated all human life? On what evidence? (Please don’t ONLY quote this flawed book that has been mentioned above, I need demonstrable facts. Oh…no demonstrable facts? We’re back to faith alone? Then I have faith that I’ll win the Lotto tonight and can buy Illinois and get the Governator re-instated…)
“Admittedly it requires faith to believe these accounts, but no more so than to scientifically prove then likelihood of evolution, something from nothing, chance formation of a living cell that divides and feeds on nothing…”
Son, ‘chance formation of a living cell’, I gather that you’ve never seen anyone die in screaming agony from rampant cancer in their tissues which is ‘chance formation of a living cell’.
“It requires faith to believe these accounts,”
Yup. Requires faith to hope that meteorites won’t fall on my house and kids. Requires faith to believe that my government really has my interests at heart. I can’t give you evidence that meteorites won’t fall on my house. I can’t give you evidence that the government really has my interests at heart (although, let’s not go there…), but I CAN give you evidence of survival of the fittest, of changes from generation to generation (you ever wondered why your grandkids are taller than you are? Another topic, for which I have voluminous data.)
“something from nothing, chance formation of a living cell that divides and feeds on nothing”
No chance involved, pure mathematics. It’s been done, not once but myriad times. Do a Google. Given the right chemicals (present in the early planet environment) the right temperature (present in the early planet environment), the right sunlight (present in the early planet environment), the right electrolysis…via lightning…(present in the early planet environment)… this experiment has been performed often in biology labs world-wide (again, do a Google, I’m arguing against ignorance here, I’m not your librarian!) …basic cells, which are the building blocks of life have been created using only the above ingredients. OK, now you’re gonna jump in and lean on " the building blocks of life “. Not a problem. You give me " the building blocks of life” & a couple million years or so… of which there is HARD SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE!

#212

You believe your religion (evolution, humanism), I’ll believe mine (Christianity). 'Nuff said.

#213

Not a matter of belief, David. A matter of fact. I could believe the Moon is made of green cheese. Ain’t gonna make it so.
BTW, Christianity is NOT opposed to evolution, just certain minor sects of so-called Christianity, those minor sects distinguished by their lack of rationality. It is a FACT that mainstream Christian groups accept evolution as truth, as just another facet of your Supreme Being’s plan. Deny that? OK, Deny 90%+ of the world’s professing Christians. That leaves you where?
Fuck it. Let’s not go there

#214

Phil you are wrong, if 90% of christians believe in some form of evolution, they are not true christians who believe that the Bible is Gods infallible word. The Bible is very clear on who started this world.

Tom Huisenga

#215

The Vatican claims Darwin’s theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Also worth a (rational read: http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerrant.htm

Roman Catholic Church: Pope Pius XII released an encyclical in 1950 titled “Humani Generis.” It “considered the doctrine of ‘evolutionism’ as a serious hypothesis, worthy of a more deeply studied investigation and reflection on a par with the opposite hypothesis.” 4 The encyclical states in part:
“For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that…research and discussions, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter…However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church…” 5

The Second Vatican Council stated that the Bible is inerrant (free of any error) in those texts that contain religious truth that have been revealed for personal salvation. However, the implication is that the Bible is not necessarily free from error elsewhere - for example where it discusses scientific matters.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_denom1.htm

In 1996, Pope John Paul II spoke at the annual meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which has been called "the Church’s ‘scientific senate’ ". 6,7 He said, in part:

“Today, more than a half century after this [‘Humani Generis’] encyclical, new knowledge leads us to recognize in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis. … The convergence, neither sought nor induced, of results of work done independently one from the other, constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory [of evolution].” 8
And while we’re on the subject:
http://mag.christis.org.uk/issues/38/evolution.html

#216
tom huisenga said:
Phil you are wrong, if 90% of christians believe in some form of evolution, they are not true christians who believe that the Bible is Gods infallible word. The Bible is very clear on who started this world.

Tom Huisenga


Ah Tom,
where did you lose your (supposedly God-given) sense?
The Bible has more errors than ever emitted from George W’s mouth, and that’s just in the first 5 chapters. You want to debate this? I can and will prove everything I state which- if you are basing your rebuttals on the King James or later versions -you cannot.
Where do you want to start?
Contradictions in the so-called infallible scriptures?
I’m ready when you are.

#217

There is no, none, nada, kein, non, zero proof to support the theory of evolution, no matter how loudly you claim there is, or how insulting your remarks. Which is why it is called a theory.

The Vatican/the Pope is one man and thankfully he is not God. He is the head of the Catholic church, not Christianity.

#218
David Hill said:
There is no, none, nada, kein, non, zero proof to support the theory of evolution, no matter how loudly you claim there is, or how insulting your remarks. Which is why it is called a theory.

The Vatican/the Pope is one man and thankfully he is not God. He is the head of the Catholic church, not Christianity.


I guess all those fossils, the carbon dating and any of the other modern scientific methods are strictly figments of the imagination? There is one thing that I have always “admired” in people of very strong faith, all and everything can be destilled down to one simple “Fact”: god is responsible for everything!

Man is not responsible, all things are pre-ordained, one can’t change destiny!

#219
Phil Creer said:
Ric, you were not being slammed for your faith. Everyone on this planet is welcome to, and entitled to their own superstitions. However, they are not entitled to inflict them on me and they are not entitled to confused questionable belief with hard scientific truth. The next thing, we'll have Ralph trying to convince us that when the walls of Jericho fell, the sun stopped in the sky. (You want to argue? Check out any 6th grade science text on gravity, centrifugal motion and COMMON SENSE! You dispute those basic science principles, Ralph? In that case, throw away the keyboard, monitor and computer you are reading this on as they are obviously the work of the Devil) [Oh sorry...the Devil has retired and gone back to his ranch in Texas....] As I stated in my earlier post, trying to reason with people of closed minds and dogmatic views is like trying to stop paint drying by coaxing it, that is, it's a process of futility.I just need to tell ya, fellas, that you're in for a hell of a surprise when you don't open your eyes after your heart stops beating. Been there. There ain't no light at the end of tunnel, and you have no awareness of there even being a tunnel. End of statement
Back atcha, pal!
#220

Phil, you call yourself a physician, and yet you allow you patient do die in screaming agony from rampant cancer (your words, not mine) when there are readily available, inexpensive medicines that will alleviate that pain and allow your patient to slip peacefully into whatever waits.

That is not the mark of a caring physician, that is the mark of a barbarian.

Perhaps if you read the Bible with the open mind that you claim to have, you might be able to find some compassion for you patients.