The meaning of life: 21 + 21 = 42 There you go, now don't ya all feel silly - it's that simple. ^_^ ;) :p Seriously though...hmm. I think the question shouldn't be "What is the meaning in life," but: What is my meaning in life? What meaning can I find? What meaning can I "give" others (i.e. How can i help others help themselves, and grow)? Personally, I think my meaning - or purpose - is to help others. Lately, while I love art fromt he top of my head to the
AldericJourdain
Congrats dude! :D
Hmm, interesting and all too familiar. >_> Anyways, how you doing? ~Alderic
[quote]Ha, chuckling from ear to ear..... I'm with you on having threads crossed...seems there are 3 or 4 going on this topic.... It's coming up on summer corn...that'd be better than crow![/quote] Indeed, there are many, and yes, corn would be much better than crow.
[quote]Creationists are horribly ignorant. The simple answer is that they do not KNOW all those people, they do not know anything about evolution, they do not know anything about biology. If they knew about Gregor Mendel they would be attacking him too, probably...[/quote] Unfortunately you're right in that it comes down to one word: Ignorance. *sighs* What's also humorous, is that Darwin's theory is not THE theory...it's one of many.
[quote]OOPS! Yeah, thanks, fixing it now.[/quote] No problem. I am a bit of a spelling/grammer nazi. LOL. ~Alderic
Double Post
[quote]n case you didn't know, dogs and little sisters can give consent. Sisters old enough to give consent? Icky, unless its two sisters (to each other, not me) AND me; but none of my business as long as I don't have to foot the bill for their deformed children with my taxes.[/quote] Can't give consent you mean, right? Children and animals cannot give legal consent.
I, er, fourth (rw?) the sentiment. Thank you all!
[quote]Darwin's theory does not know of a difference between "microevolution" and "macroevolution", of course. The so-called difference is an invention (lie) made up by stupid Creationists.[/quote] Something If interesting is why some Christians jump on the bandwagon to bash Darwinism, which, while it is a significant concept and all, is outdated and subsequent research has furthered the understanding on the topic.They're still stuck on it, when really...Darwanism (in my view and from
[quote]First, there isn't anything Bible orientated or religious in this article. [/quote] The credibility of the source is paramount, and the source here...loses credibility. [quote]Good one! [/quote] Haha, thanks. I was going to mention Elizabeth Tayler and mexican food, but felt the one I used instead was much more apt. [quote]Second, Instead of complaining about the messenger, refute the message if
[quote]That's just it. It is a great piece of literature. Of course I believe, as do countless others that there's more than meets the eye here and consider it to be more than just a book, but I believe it could be taught objectively very easily. A great portion of Jewish history is wound up in the OT and maybe if people understood this history there would be less hatred for them and a deeper appreciation for all they've been thru over the centuries. I mean think abo
>_ D'oh, my bad; I got my threads crossed. Time to eat crow. ~A
[quote]We should have never freed the black slaves either. Clearly such actions inevitably lead to freedom for dogs (and sisters) as well. It's a slippery slope.[/quote] Sarcasm? I hope so...
Again Lula, you're using a RELIGOUS based site to prove science. It's like using Richard Dawkins to sell bibles. >_> Not to mention that your argument is a straw fallacy.
Lula, that site is Bible oriented; that would be like asking a traditional jew what his favorite pork product was.
[quote]Beats me, as I said my lifestyle and eating habits haven't changed.[/quote] Hmm, interesting.
[quote]Evidently you know something I don't.....I'm waiting to be enlightened. How and what from exactly did man "evolve"?[/quote] Lets add to this: "In the natural sciences , abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how groups of living things change over time." <p
[quote]The question asked was should the Holy Book be taught in school?[/quote] You're probably going to end up having to pick up your jaw after it drops: I say yes; however, as a literary analysis topic and/or philosophy subject. Setting aside what I believe about the subject mattter and source thereof; I believe that the bible is a great piece of literature and has some virtues in the matter of philosophy. That being said, I reiterate my belief that the Bibl
Psst, what've you been doing anyways? Mind giving me a few hints? Heh, I've been working on losing weight for some time now and unfortunately I'm not quite where I want to be. >_> Good luck with everything. ~Alderic
[quote]47 million years? Can you prove this? Can they? But I'll bet you're buying this hook, line and sinker.[/quote] Can you, factually, without a doubt and without the use of a book (i.e. Say some archaeologists dig up Noah's Ark) - prove yourself? The same science that you push against when it comes to Evolution and other things, is the same science and process that you use to prove your point. Yet, I've yet to hear you acknowledge any sort of agenda for that science.
[quote]Killed any babies today?[/quote] Come on Mod, seriously?
[quote]God says so and the evidence to back up that claim comes from God's own word in Genesis 2....God should know cause He was there. and infinitely so.....................[/quote] Great, so we get to proove it by....*sighs* Oi vey...not going there...
[quote]Rush Limbaugh Jr. here. A professional polarizer. This article is more proof that Conservatives are uptight, superstitious, gullible, naive, intolerant, imbecilic assholes. I despise you, everyone like you and everything you stand for. And damn proud of it.[/quote] [e digicons]:rofl:[/e] As AD said: [quote]Yep, looks like your in line for Mr. Unifier of the year? Pot meet Kettle?[/quote] Heh
[quote](And who says Adam and Eve were married?)[/quote] Good point; Haha, that would be...cruelly ironic. [quote]Well partly because I'm not sure that your first statement is true but I haven't chewed it over enough to make an argument yet. It makes some basic assumptions about rights that are really fundamentally sociological/cultural issues as opposed to rights. After all what is a 'right' [/quote] Well...Natural ri