As St. Paul said, the Law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.
He looks like the TROLOLO guy.
FU Jim. And the Ped0 Panda you rode in on.
He looks like a he's got a six-year-old boy under the table...
IIRC, the real quote was
"Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into
Pig Tate's
stomach! Wild!"
Sharon Tate was the pregnant woman killed in the Charles Manson murders who died pleading for the life of her baby. (At the time of her death, she was married to Roman Polanski.)
But they merely referred to her as a Pig.
Yes, that Charles Manson.
What's a 13-year-old kid doing with a gun?
- Did he pass his Federal background check?
- Was it an AR-15 like the Dems always want to ban?
Problem you run into there is supposed constancy of the molecular clock. A beneficial change which promotes enhanced survival relative to one particular environmental change, cannot occur until the proper mutation happens. And the proper mutation can't happen, until or unless any old mutation at all happens. It is easy to come up with scenarios where the rate of environmental change far outstrips the rate of random genetic changes to keep up at all: even assuming for the nonce that by some Las Vegas luck, for that species, at that particular environmental era, it hits the jackpot on a dozen slot machines in a row and ALL of the mutations happen to be the exact ones needed to handle that particular environmental modification. But that has to happen every single time over and over, or that species dies out.
...and that says NOTHING about the prediliction of baby critters of all species to get eaten by predators of another species, or get pushed out of the nest by a stronger sibling, or get COVID, or what have you.
"Friends & Family Plan" but mostly family.
You're acting as though it's arbitrary.
What's odd, is the atheists always trot out that line "tortured forever" which is the exact opposite of the message.
Just remember -- God is not too proud to turn down last-minute "fire-insuance" conversions. You know, if you're dying, nobody else is gonna care in 20 minutes or a week, 'Look at that doofus, he believed in God".
And if you're wrong about the conversion and there is no God, you haven't lost anything, because you're dead and don't exist anymore.
It's a free trial offer, no risk to you. By your own premises.
...and in three posts, you've abandoned any pretense to reason or intellect.
Understand this. He is a God of Mercy beyond all else.
Think of the crucifixion. When betrayed by one of his closest friends, and sentenced to death by torture under an occupying military power, after conviction by a Kangaroo court, the first words were,
"Father Forgive Them For they know not what they do."
And he said to someone lawfully condemned to death hanging next to Him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" -- the original deathbed, fire-insurance conversion, and God did not turn it down.
Remember that.
(rolls eyes into next county).
That's not factually correct. The closest I can come to explaining your error, is an old TV commercial.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imv0g-4cycw
The highly abbreviated summary goes like this.
Medieval scholars realized that God is rational, and infer the Universe is rational, and that we can (hopefully) find more of the Mind of the Maker, by investigating his handiwork, the natural Universe.
Along the way, various intellectual precepts and rules are developed; Occam's razor, null hypothesis, empiricism (experiment, a HUGE improvement over the slavish aherence-to-authority practiced by the Greeks and Romans, as well as an antidote to the sophistry of "Achilles can never catch the turtle" --> which if they but knew it, was a great approach to the concept of limits, infinite series, and therefore calculus. But I digress), changing one variable at a time, control groups, and so forth.
Over time, they decided to eliminate interference by the supernatural for a couple of reasons. One, they could not (literally) control for it; two, to allow for the active interference of the supernatural would mean they could not apply "uniformity of causes". So the exclusion of the supernatural was a convenience, not a "scientificall proven" experimental result.
The other point, which seems to go in one ear and out the other, is that the supernatural is not used as an explanation. Nor was it ever, by monotheists; not in the way you are trying to say. The issue here is that there are two meanings of the word because: one of them is cause and effect --> my foot is broken BECAUSE I dropped a bowling ball on it. The other is grounds/consequence: these two triangles are congruent BECAUSE they fulfill the conditions of the side-angle-side geometric theorem.
When the monotheists said "God did it" they were referring to grounds-consequent. God has established and ordained, that such-and-such follows from the other. The experiementalists were looking for cause-and-effect, that is, mechanism. The search for mechanism, leads to a similar type of category error as above with "uniformity of causes in a closed system" -- since we know the mechanism by which this occurred,there is no need to invent a fanciful 'God' to explain things we don't know: the "god of the gaps" error.
But the obeisance to God, is not a stopgap explanation by savages, but a reminder that he is the ultimate Creator and root cause, the "unmoved mover". The only logical alternative to a final cause, is infinite regression ("turtles all the way down.") It is not scientifc: but that is not a slur, or discrediting, because it is one level deeper than physics: it is metaphysics.
But to deal with that, you'd have to go back to Aristotle and then Thomas Aquinas.
The scientific deBOOONKERs and gnu atheists love to use evolution as necessarily including and encompassing abiogenesis as a disproof of the Bible and therefore Christiantity.
Abiogenesis is a crock. But it's too detailed to get into in a short post.
(I have a doctorate in molecular physics, so don't try the proof by intimidation crap on me, I don't have time for bullshit.)
For the flood, the problem is that you are examining it solely from a naturalistic point of view (no supernatural, "uniformity of causes in a closed system"). This is not a cheap appeal to deux ex machina as a desperate expedient, because the interaction of God is baked right in, and is in fact the driving element behind everything, rather than (as a naturalist might see it) a "get out of jail free card" so you don't have to explain anything. It's not "where did all the f***ing water come from, we'll invent a God to explain it, "why are there rainbows, let's invent a God to explain it" but the participants are used to an active monotheistic God intervening in human affairs (Abram to Abraham, Sodom / Gomorrah, Joseph / Passover) and the flood is one more (earlier) instance of such, to them.
The ones who use gods/demons as a substitute for systematic empirical study / hypothesis / test / record / refine, are the polytheists, read up on the Greek and Roman deities; and the idea of a rational Universe following from a rational God, and the idea, "Hey! We can make use of this!" is from the late medieval period.
As far as other records, why should they be accepted over the Biblical account -- that is, it seems any time there is any archaeological finding, many groups have an overt bias towards attempting to eliminate / discredit anything which comports with Biblical accounts first; which has only recently begun to turn around even in, say, Biblical studies themselves.
But for the sake of argument, you do have other surviving legends of some sort of a great flood (Gilgamesh); the best candidate for a historical (coining a phrase) "super-duper flood beyond a single tsunami or river valley" might be the breaking of the Black Sea Ice Dam. As far as the people involved were concerned (no satellite imagery, no autobahns or Interstate Highways, no iPhones and internet) "everything" was pretty much wiped out.
But the reason I don't dismiss it entirely as pure mythology, is, it seems like WAY too much fuss for WAY too little explanation. "God put the bow in the clouds as a sign" -- I was never that concerned over rainbows. And the other odd little thing, is, reading Genesis, way before Noah, it mentioned that in the Garden of Eden, it didn't rain, but a mist came up and watered the face of the ground; in other words, it isn't (like an arbitrary myth would have), it always rained but God magically added rainbows after the flood; rather, rainbows were held to be contemporaneous with the first rain. A subtle touch of consistency one would not expect of Bronze Age yada yada... Certainly not dispositive, but something to make one raise an eyebrow and go, "That's odd..."
2005 beats the daylights out of 1984, doesn't it, troll-boi?
That's how it's presented by those who wish to destroy Christianity.
cough changes in observed allele frequencies in a population cough cough does not treat of abiogenesis cough
Smarter than you™
Anything the Left Opposes. Get it?
Hey Alex,
Now do Ruby Ridge and Waco (Brand Davidians).
...And the arrest of Roger Stone. ...and the beating of those arrested and held for peacefully protesting at the Capitol in January.
Link to original source, please?
So when will Ben & Jerry's be moving their headquarters from lily-white Vermont to Brooklyn Center, MN, or Detroit MI?
Wrong area. Frogtown is near Midway, between Minneapolis and St. Paul along University Avenue. Three O'Clock with Minneapolis at the center of the clock.
Brooklyn Center is at 10:30 or 11:00. (North-Northwest)
That's around 10 miles North-North-West of downtown Minneapolis
The looting area (yellow) is Shingle Creek Parkway; I've actually driven through there a few times, but only on the main freeway (Hwy 100, which has no traffic lights).
I tend to doubt it.
Check the number of amino acids that goes into a spike protein, and compare that to the number of amino acids in a typical prion. Very different.
What might (and I've seen an article or two suggesting this) is that the spike proteins (which every knows and admits, gain entrance to the cell through the ACE2 receptor), might, with the mRNA vaccination, not open up the cell and go in like the virus does, but just semi-bond with the ACE2 site.
That's like ringing the doorbell on the affected cell, so to speak. The receptor, when bound to, causes the cell to put out a whole bunch of inflammatory signaling proteins.
And then, if the mRNA does make it into the cell, it'll cause a cell to pump out a bunch more of the mRNA, which then acts like an avalanche.
The other scary thing is that researchers at Harvard and MIT put out a paper saying that they found genetic sequences from the mRNA, in the DNA of people who got the vaccine (this can happen if there are other viruses hanging around which have and enzyme called reverse transcriptase, which does copy RNA sequences into DNA).
...and they found fragments of viral material in brain cells, inside the blood-brain barrier; but unlike other viruses which make it through the blood-brain barrier, they didn't find a metric sh*t-ton of white blood cells trying to clean things up.
This virus is a little f*cker.
I'm thinking that "Now Open" sign above the door of that one emptied-out store, should be changed to "Not Anymore!"
This article overstated the case, for some rather technical reasons.
Closest way of saying it, is that
the mRNA vaccine only codes for the one spike protein of the virus, so it cannot (by being truncated wrong to go into / out of the nucleus) affect any of the other cell's proteins; and second, the way the mRNA vaccines work, the mRNA for the viral spike protein goes to the ribosomes, not the nucleus, so the types of errors Sloan-Kettering was suggesting for other proteins, wouldn't happen (cause the mRNA for the spike protein doesn't get edited).
Well done.