Tower Of Babel . . .Posted 11 years Ago

At 12/12/2010 12:19:50 AM, the-good-teacher wrote:

John 14:26 The Father sends the Holy Spirit, in the Name of Jesus.
1 Peter 1:2, Elect by the Father, sanctified by the Holy Spirit, and sprinkled by the blood of Jesus.
Time is a three in one entity.

1. Future. Relates to the Father, the planner and the plan.

2. Present. The only visible manifestation of time. Relates to the Son.

3. Past. We should learn a lot from it. What would we know without it? Relates to our teacher, the Holy Spirit.

Website this was taken from: http://www.biblefood.com...
Why not work a little harder? 1 Peter is not even addressing this issue and the translations we have do not even say this (unless you "literally" change it to suit your needs; typical). Why are some Christians really bad at quoting the Bible?
Forums Home > Religion

Petition to free HatPosted 11 years Ago

I freed hat a while back
http://www.debate.org...
Forums Home > Debate.org

Dose anyone belive Adam and Eve....Posted 11 years Ago

Some groups of Christians do believe Adam and Eve were real people and lived some 6,000 or so years ago, but they choose a selective reading of the Bible in order to establish this story; the phrase "literal reading" has little meaning anymore when dealing with Biblical claims.

Second, the issue of inbreeding is remedied by showing that God did not command folks to stop having sex with siblings until well after Adam/Eve and Noah's family. Apparently, the genetic defects started at that point. Before then mom, dad, aunts, etc. were prospective partners.

One matter we need to be careful with is calling these Christians "fundamentalists". That term as a different meaning than commonly applied in the secular world and many of the groups fall under evangelicals. Whatever they call themselves, the only honest position for these individuals is to believe that all of this stuff is accurate history, but God worked a miracle to make life and history appear to be something else entirely. If these people did not mess with science, many of us would not be concerned with them.

Also, Glenn Beck is a Mormon, I believe, so he should not be getting too cozy with the religious right as they do not like "his kind".
Forums Home > Religion

Earth Is Too Small . . .Posted 11 years Ago

Look Robot,
I am a huge Asimov fan, but that is not really the subject here. I offered to debate the subject so you can put your full ideas forward and let DDO see them. You keep linking sci fi books and some really great work addressing space travel, and I would love to see humanity live on celestial bodies, but I don't think it is a plausible solution to any current problems. Better ideas are available and seem more plausible. If you wish to substantiate your claims then I wish to see those substantiations backed with some good research. As much as I want psychohistory to be real, it isn't right now and does not seem likely in the near future, this is my point on space colonization. We have better options.
Forums Home > Science

Earth Is Too Small . . .Posted 11 years Ago

Robot,
You are talking to a lot of people who would love to colonize other areas of the universe. The problems are numerous though, and other options are currently available that would handle an overpopulation problem. We can all agree that overpopulation occurs when a species outgrows its food source.We know this happens and we know it has happened countless times; it is part and parcel of natural section and, more fully, evolution. Many on this thread agree on that point.

The problem is this: You have not shown the earth is overpopulated overall. Some areas, yes, but the earth as a whole can withstand a lot more people if we are smart about it. I read the article you listed but I could not find more of the source materials and we do not have a means to mine much in space yet, get people there with any reliability yet, nor inhabit an artificial zone on the moon or Mars yet. We can't travel too far either.

I agree all these things are possible in the future, but can we not use more of our planet's space (Ocean homes, anyone)? How much of our limited resources will be used to create these atmospheres on other celestial objects?

I have tons of points on this. Do you want to debate this issue? I should have time for one more as my opponent quit on one, and I have done the research on the other.
RESOLVED: The Earth is too small to sustain the human population; therefore, we need to colonize space to continue as a species.
I will make it up if you want and you can mess around with the resolution or whatever. Let me know.
Forums Home > Science

Earth Is Too Small . . .Posted 11 years Ago

At 12/4/2010 8:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 12/4/2010 7:59:55 PM, sherlockmethod wrote:
Why not examine more reasonable solutions such as inhabiting the more remote zones on earth?

Still not enough resources to run such a vastly growing population of humans space fits our needs the best . . .

Even if this is true, space will not provide those resources. We have, as of yet, found a planet that could grow the resources we need and we have not yet found a way to travel very far into space. I think looking at increasing our productivity here and using the space still available would be more reasonable.
Forums Home > Science

Earth Is Too Small . . .Posted 11 years Ago

Why not examine more reasonable solutions such as inhabiting the more remote zones on earth?
Forums Home > Science

NASA and AstrobiologyPosted 11 years Ago

http://www.nasa.gov...

This just happened and it is pretty cool stuff. An organism was found in mono lake that can thrive and reproduce using arsenic. "The microorganism substitutes arsenic for phosphorus in its cell components."
Forums Home > Science

Genetic EngineeringPosted 11 years Ago

At 12/1/2010 10:11:22 PM, annhasle wrote:
Is anyone here opposed to the use of genetic engineering for humans, based upon the lack of consideration for the "consent of future generations"?

If interested or confused by what I mean, read the following abstract:
http://jetpress.org...

I don't think this is the subject of the thread. Robot put forth a notion that is not substantiated in science. I don't know where he gets his information, but we do not know how to do what he proposes, nor do I think his experiment is worthwhile. I am familiar with this paper, but it misses the subject of the thread.
Forums Home > Science

Kittehs and evolutionPosted 11 years Ago

I admit that he talks too fast, but this video is great. AronRa gives a great description of kittehs and does a fantastic job. I recommend this one. Great video. http://www.youtube.com...
Forums Home > Science

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.