Vapymid

That's exactly what's clear. I was not arguing with BTG, I just wanted to clarify his position. This was useful because if one side in the argument can always invoke an overriding and infallible authority to invalidate any or all of the opposing side's arguments - there is really no point in continuing the argument... Regards

I do not trust either side - this Ukrainian investigation so far is very superficial and looks like it is designed to at least temporarily brush the subject aside. It is all based on videos which clearly show a police sniper retreating with his unit. However, even BBC run an interview with one of the Maidan protesters who was actually wounded by sniper fire. He said it was not clear where exactly the fire was coming from but it was from one of the buildings. Earlier, also on BBC, they showed a clip of their own reporter taking cover from sniper fire where they actually identified the building and the window where the fire was coming from. I have not seen anything about that in the Ukrainian investigation yet. The CEO of one of the companies I worked for once told me - "whatever you do, don't ever try to stand between a firm's partners. Even if you will manage to set one against the other, in the end they will use you, then discard you and will still remain partners". Ukraine and Russia are partners since centuries ago (were the same people actually). Ukraine and the EU or the US are not. Trying to stand between them will not work. The EU may be able to achieve a split of the country and then annex the Western regions to, say, Poland eventually. What benefits that will bring to anybody - I don't know. It is going to be worth it? I doubt it. Time will tell. Regards

kmY60we2L7o Slow yourself down? Unlikely, with a song like that... Regards

I don't know, maybe it's a misconception on my part but I feel that all our culture is pervaded by implication that sex (or rather sexual desire) is a manifestation of the original sin. Equating virginity with innocence, kids being OK if watching Rambo but them seeing a pair of tits flashing on TV destroys the innocence etc... But how can you do that without interpreting? Yes, it's very quantum mechanical - he had a superposition of all possible states ready to collapse to any of them... But what I meant was the whole thing seems to be a plan to send the mankind out of the cosy Eden to learn by ourselves, grow up, eventually find a way past the sleeping cherubs and the force shield, have a reunion with God and share a beer or two with him while discussing plans for creating a new Universe... This is my preferred interpretation. Ah! The Mighty Whatsitists are nothing but a heretical sect! But I will redouble my ketchup sacrifices to placate He Whose Name Is Well Known, praised be His Noodly Appendages. Regards

I don't see anything that prevents a Christian from being a scientist (not that it was easy in the past - just try to convince the then Church that the Earth is not the centre of the Universe and see what happens...), however, being a literalist would seriously limit the number of scientific disciplines one can pursue, basically - scratch cosmology, astronomy, geology, biology, organic chemistry off the list straight away... Regards

This was my preferred line of thinking too... Still is, but more like wishful line of thinking Regards

zNiZSppBMus Take your life back... Regards

That sounds just like the story of England national football team captaincy a couple of years back! But, seriously, I have a couple of big issues with Genesis or rather its literal interpretation: 1: God said to A & E: “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” Yet, he let them roam around like rosy idiots without knowing anything and even unable to tell good from evil - how could they rule over anything if they knew bugger all? 2. "Be fruitful" can only mean making a beast of two backs and having lots of babies. Yet, sex is what the religions equate to sin - how did that come about? When God told A & E out for eating his apple - did he say anything about sex? I couldn't find it anywhere... Not how I read it. Not like buddies, more like a village idiot who is supposed to do all the dirty work without realising he is being exploited. After all, it is when God has kicked A & E sorry asses out of Eden that he said - “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” However, to be fair, the Lord God did make garments of skin for Adam and his wife and did cloth them before they left. Which makes me think he wasn't *that* upset about the whole Tree of Knowledge affair and maybe he had that planned all along... Regards, P.S. Excuse me for the light-hearted tone of my post. I hope I don't sound too irreverent, given the subject involved - if I offended anyone, I apologise, please let me know...

Ah, all that quantum physics is making my brain's wave function collapse... Bell's theorem does not falsify superdeterminism, though. And there are many interpretations of quantum theories which may mean that the apparent paradoxes can be resolved when a new, better, interpretation is found... I personally like Bohm's interpretation because this may mean FTL travel and comms in not-so-distant future! Regards

OK, clear. One thing that I don't understand then is why all the fuss with sciences then? I mean if the overriding supremacy of the book is accepted as absolute, wouldn't then any attempt to find corroborating evidence signify a weakness of convictions? Especially, if the methods used for finding and providing such evidence obviously don't withstand the scientific scrutiny? One just needs to say "all your facts to the contrary are illusions" and get on with their lives... Regards

Then, in addition to Lenin's postulate that simultaneously with the seats of government, the revolutionary forces must take under control the post office, the telegraph, bridges and the police stations, I strongly recommend to arrest and intern all lawyers the moment you take over the power - because they will be you main deadly enemy... Regards

I see, this must be because of a belief that the Bible should be interpreted literally and not metaphorically... For myself, I came to a conclusion that the Bible is an attempt to record the first memories of humanity as a species - things like the loss of paradise would then be the hazy reminiscences of humans stopping being apes (you know, like realising the existence of the arrow of time and responsibility of working today to ensure one's future, unlike animals who live and die today and for whom no future exists beyond the next meal). Similar to individual's first memories, which are incomplete and equally hazy. This all to me is quite distinct from the question of whether or not God exists, which is in the philosophical realm and is complex enough by itself to not need to be further confused by literal interpretations of a book, especially when they are contradicted by observed facts. Regards

If we could limit the discussion to only reasons why this question is so important from the religious/theological perspective, then I would very much like to hear your view on that. Regards

Is the situation really that bad in the US? My revolutionary theory is a bit rusty but I remember that Lenin stated that any revolution requires that a) the ruled classes were no longer willing to be ruled in the old way, b) the ruling classes not able to continue ruling in the old ways and c) the political activity of the masses was high enough to ensure sufficient following of the revolutionary leaders. Later, he also added that to have a general support of the armed forces is also required, for obvious practical reasons. Does all that really exist in the US now? Also, if there were to be a revolution - what would be changed? The personalities of the people in charge or the structure of government institutions? What will be the power base of the new revolutionary government? Regards

I wouldn't want to go into discussing the merits of evolution v ID arguments here as the entire Internet is not big enough for it. However, I just wanted to say that it always puzzled me why would anyone think that, if you postulate that God exists in the first place, the concept of God who has to micro-manage each species, always tweaking and re-writing the DNA by hand and issuing firmware updates and upgrades a-la Microsoft patch Tuesdays, is somehow superior to that of God who simply set up the whole Universe at its inception so as to evolve human beings without requiring any further intervention on his part... Clearly, the latter God is a better engineer and, if I wanted to consider myself as having been made in his image, is a better role model than the former, fussier and fiddlier God. This is just my personal attitude to that whole debate. Regards

I agree. Regards

6CudI-RIzcg Regards

From Wiki: Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître, (French: [ʒɔʁʒə ləmɛtʁ] ( listen); 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Roman Catholic priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Université catholique de Louvain.[1] He was the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the Universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble.[2][3] He was also the first to derive what is now known as Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[4][5][6][7] Lemaître also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom or the "Cosmic Egg".[8] Sorry, sending this from a tablet, so apologies for lack of formatting... Regards

Given that it's a fact ( ) that the theory of the Big Bang was first proposed by a Catholic priest, I fear that you may have fallen victim to some ideological brainwashing here... Regards

My point is - by all means, dream of a revolution, just don't count on it leading a utopia, free from corruption and benevolently led by wise statesmen ruling according to popular assent... Regards

We'll figure that out after we remove the corrupt individuals and administrations that are currently in control... That's what voting is for. The problem with this is that those who do the initial ridding are not usually keen on submitting themselves to a voting process. You rarely find revolutionaries who do the revolution and then kindly step aside for someone else to become the top dog... Regards

I'm probably showing my naivety here but I thought the Big Bang was pretty uncontroversial by this stage? It is a theory which have, so far, most closely and consistently explained the known facts about the Universe - things like the distribution of elements, CMB, visible structure of the Universe, red shift diagram etc. As far as religion is concerned - again, AFAIK the Bible just says that "in the beginning there was light", which seems quite consistent with the Big Bang. So, unless one tries to intentionally disregard all observable facts about our Universe and postulate that it only exists for 5k years or so or that the Earth is flat or something, there is nothing in the Big Bang theory that would require abandoning one's religious beliefs... Of course, if someone will come up with an alternative theory that matches the facts even better, or some new facts will totally contravene the existing theory - then the Big Bang will have to be revised but it hasn't happened yet. Regards

Camel returning to their classic sound here... gNmDOKNHIb4 PB6KOW9lUbc Rhythmically written in the metre of a walking camel... Regards

I think Vorts are all the same and have some kind of telepathic hive consciousness. "We remember the Freeman. We are coterminous. There is no distance between us. No false veils of time or space may intervene." Regards

I don't think it can. All it does is replaces one form of corruption with another, which, in time, transforms into the first kind anyway. That said, sometime violence is the only viable option for a society to take if it were to survive. Regards