Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

now iwas going to be nice.. but since you called me a liar... up yours limey

At 8/16/08 04:32 AM, Brick-top wrote:

At 8/15/08 10:12 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote:

Okay to start with Theories are things that are ALREADY proven.

Hang on, you're talking to man who studies physics, but we're talking about biology. Totally seperate my man.

I honestly do not think this conversation occured. Because that man would know a fact is observational a theory is an explaination of those facts. So in definition terms a theory isn't a fact at all.

Also, your friend says a theorem is a base. More like a foundation to a theory. So the theorem isn't proven, the theory is.

Just ask your friend: Is evolution proven.

Then you'll get your answer.

We show you definitions, refute everything you say and yet despite all of this you still think you're right.

1) theories are not proven. im looking at the scientific method right now and you're pulling that part out of your ass.
2) you can say it didn't occur but im gonna have a wealth of questions for my imaginary friend today.
3) now he's degree is in a scientific field, meaning in order to get his degree he needed to take required classes in other scientific fields, plus you're taught the same principles regardless.
4) No the theorem is the proven priciple on which the theory is based... so still a theory.
5) cause your explanations are quite frankly spin... the fact you have to redifine theory for yourself to make it real is funny. and the fact you used mathematical theory as an example makes me laugh.

now time for a quote from Dr. Menton of Brown University:
"evolution is not observable, repeatable, or refutable and thus does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory. Evolution must be accepted with faith by its believers, many of whom deny the existence, or at least the power, of the Creator. Similarly, the Biblical account of creation is not observable, repeatable or refutable by man. Special creation is accepted with faith by those who believe that the Bible is the revelation of an omnipotent and omniscient Creator whose Word is more reliable than the speculations of men. Both evolution and creation, however, can be compared for their compatibility with what we do observe of the facts of nature. In the months ahead, we will see that creation by intelligent design is a vastly more reasonable explanation for the origin of the complexity we see in living things than is evolution by mere chance and the intrinsic properties of nature. "

At 7/30/08 09:56 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 7/30/08 09:51 PM, Earfetish wrote: Did you even read any of the rebuttals? Ever heard of the 'law of gravity'?

Of course you have, but you've not heard of Einstein's 'Law' of Relativity, despite that being well tested.

So bricktops argument seemed valid. i play music and we have Music Theory. so i went about trying to find an answer. well as it turns out there's a physics major where i work (actually he started work a few days after my post in the thread). So i found his major and asked him today, and here's the conversation:
Sam(me): So andy, there are Theorems, and theories. theorems being things like the theory or relativity, and theories are things yet to be proven... Is the theory of evolution a theorem or a theory?
Andy: evolution is a theory, theorems are sort of a base, you can't have a theory without a theorem... but just because a theory has theorems does not make it fact.
So the "rebuttlals" weren't worth a damn.... sorry guys. but it pays to pay attention to Physical Science classes. BTW Yes scientists would've rubbed it our collective faces... the atheist ones anyhow.

At 8/10/08 03:23 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

At 8/10/08 10:54 AM, uhnoesanoob wrote: Hate to say it, but stories like these DO tell you how a person is going to do his job. Edwards covered up a major scandel in his personal life for the sake of politics, so it IS highly likely that if president he would cover up similar scandels as well. Private life and Public service ARE tied together, because it is the same person doing both of them. What he does in one can tell us what he'll do in the other.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

hate to tell you but once you are in the public eye, no you have no private life... you may not think so but i dare you walk into the spotlight and cheat on your significant other. if you are to devote your to political work, keep yourself clean... or do a better job covering up.
And yes the more stable your personal life is the better your chances in the business world are.

So bless a douche bag who cheated on his wife who has cancer.... and who probably is still cheating on her... rather not

oil bubble burst!

To brick-top and thisissam... why is it not considered a law yet?????????? Now im not scientist but im pretty sure that evolution falls under the purview of yet-to-be-proven scientific theory and not a mathematical formula 'theory'. Now here's the real reason it's still a theory... because it has failed to pass every step of the scientific method. OMG SAY IT AINT SO!!!! yeah its so. if it had been proven law those of us in the church woulda had our noses rubbed in it big time, and it never happened. this is also the reason that intelligent design is still in contention with evolution.
To review, not a LAW 200+ years as a THEORY.

At 7/30/08 04:37 AM, Brick-top wrote:

I'd rather enjoy you to attempting to disprove Evolution. I believe I told you that you'd win many nobel prizes and be the most famous man in the world. Yet people have attempted it, and they've all failed. Why have they failed? Because they refuse to observe the evidence.

Hold it right there. I noticed you left out the fact that it's still called the THEORY of evolution. which can only mean that all these smart men and women who've observed the "evidence" still can't prove it. "oh we can observe the fossil record" bull shit. species and sub-species die out at an amazing rate. So when we supposedly find a new link in the evolutionary chain who's to say it just wasn't a contemporary of another animal that just died out? The fact is they can't because they weren't there to observe it. I've said before-scientists can't speak for the existence of every creature alive today, why are they the authority on what existed yesterday?
So to re-cap it's not just evolution, it's the THEORY of evolution. So what you're saying is people have failed repeatedly to try and disprove what so far can't be proven? I love how you criticize anyone who has faith in a higher power for believing and having no proof, and yet you do no different. "oh i bring facts" a lot of good it does you cause you still can't get past the THEORY part. Can your facts explain why it's still a THEORY? Hell to avoid the word you simply dropped it, now without the word THEORY in front of it evolution and your arguements can be made to look valid. Now without that word, it gives your post the tone of stern rebuke, like a teacher scolding a student . Too bad you couldnt accomplish that without omitting six letters.
Evolution, 200+ years of theory status... who's up for 200 more!

At 7/28/08 07:07 PM, stranger14 wrote: I think it's funny how sex is the way humanity lives on but many people think movies that contain sexual content are way more inappropriate then movies containing mass amounts of violence. Sex and violence are essentially opposites. one promotes survival while the other promotes death.

It's because sex in film and entertainment is used in an hedonistic fashion often without any real impact on the story-save a few stories where a love child comes about or the sex results in some sort of tension between characters, which then it becomes an integral part of the story. However violence in entertainment is a must. Go back and read old literature and violence has always been there, and was always more important than the veiled sex scenes. Also there are so many more places in stories for violence than there is sex. I'll finish with this though, both have been a staple in entertainment for centuries, quite frankly they're both needed-from a story telling standpoint.
However if were talking about sex in the paris hilton, lindsay lohan, and miley cyrus... than yeah we could do with less of that.

At 7/28/08 12:12 PM, poxpower wrote:
Because they actually do it IN MODERN COUNTRIES.

They do this shit in Europe.
Ok?
That's fucking sickening, and the "moderate" ones DON'T SAY A FUCKING WORD and they come crying when we say they're a bunch of insane violent pigs.

Fuck THEM.

They also do it in the US... BTW pox that deserved a fist bump. right on

How about next time we talk about the 'other' big cash cow... the war on poverty

At 7/11/08 10:52 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: Also, I can watch a cloud moving across the sky to realize that evolution is real.

Because everything flows from one thing into the next thing.

A mountain becomes a hill becomes a valley. The continents shift. The weather changes.

At this point the thought that species change as well is mere common sense.

No that's a cycle of nature, erosion and whatnot.... you confuse the natural cycles world with evolution. Everything is too ordered to be random, the planet is in just the right spot, the moon is just right, we have dust... human eyes... music... these things are too structured to be an accident. Patterns and structure come from order, not chaos

Ten years for more oil??? Maybe ten years ago we would have to wait that long but we've made some decent improvements in drilling technologies and techniques. C'mon people, the planet is 2/3 water, just because we're more hard pressed to find oil in the ground doesn't mean there isn't more in the ocean. Plus the evidence of abiotic oil is mounting so you can doom and gloom all you want but less and less people are buying into this shit

At 7/12/08 06:46 AM, Alphabit wrote: That's unacceptable, he should have been promoted for his courage.

Promoted for going outside the chain of command??? No way in hell. The more i read from other service members the more i know he could've easily solved this through the chain of command. I remember a line from a cartoon "you're behaving like spoiled children.. i say you behave like spoiled adults, and settle this in court." So instead of doing the right thing, the mother fucker decides to sue.... how grown up. Anyone notice how close "i'm going to sue" sounds to "i'm telling on you"? i guess some kids never leave the playground

At 7/11/08 11:19 AM, LazyDrunk wrote:

Wouldn't that indicate what God could be jealous of is what it means to be human? To have free will, or to be mortal, or something grander than merely jealousy? Deeper into the question, maybe you could find something more interesting.. maybe inferring God is therefore immortal, bound by some sort of immutable rules, that envies something we small humans could possibly possess, if even more only a short period of time, like dominion.

I dont think he'd be jealous of something he created. It's more like when you love someone, and they something else in return it makes you jealous.

At 7/7/08 11:19 AM, Christopherr wrote: If Saddam had the resources to fund an enrichment problem, he would have definitely built nuclear bombs.

The guy was an egomaniac, so when he couldn't get real WMDs, he pretended he had them. Fooled every intelligence agency in the world, too.

Don't throw the spies under the bus. I'll believe the spies over weapons inspectors any day

At 7/11/08 12:11 AM, callofdutyfreak wrote: i got that idea after skimming through a contract at the recruiters office

Not quite the right idea. civilians respect the uniform you wear and so should you. it's a code of conduct you must follow to show respect for your station. also it's a way to keep integrity in the unit

At 7/10/08 11:00 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 7/10/08 10:50 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote:

At 7/10/08 10:49 PM, hrb5711 wrote:

read the post. He didn't get discharged! He was removed from Iraq early, that's it! He is still on active duty. damn....

and still getting active duty pay.

Lol my bad.

That guy must be pretty patriotic to get angry because he was removed from iraq, but still getting paid...

i'm thinking that him bringing up the lawsuit caused quite a stir in his unit so he was removed as to not compromise the integrity of the unit.

At 7/10/08 10:49 PM, hrb5711 wrote:

read the post. He didn't get discharged! He was removed from Iraq early, that's it! He is still on active duty. damn....

and still getting active duty pay.

found this on another forum. the writer is a former marine and currently a police man.

I guess you just don't get it about never, ever, jumping the chain of command. What he should have done is request mass all the way up the chain of command until he was satisfied with the outcome.

FYI, "requesting mass" is an option afforded to all service members in which he starts at the level above him with a request to discuss a grievance or an issue he may be having in the unit. It continues up the chain of command to the commanding general if need be, until a final determination is made. This option was put in place to handle situations just like this. Service members are taught about it from day 1. That's how it's done Mac. This is how a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine handles things. You don't, ever, file a freakin lawsuit. According to your story, he did nothing of the sort. This Maj Welborn is not his commanding officer. And not giving the commanding officer the opportunity to resolve the situation, and going outside the command and filing a lawsuit is a huge violation of the code.

And in my opinion, if he were half a man, he would have stood up to Major Welborn, and any other individual "harassing" him, engaged them in a debate and stood up for what he believes like a man. What is so hard for you to understand about that? I mean, clearly you get that notion. You stand up for what you believe (or don't believe) all the time. You don't go out and file lawsuits.

I've had to stand up to superior officers before. I was being threatened with disciplinary action for refusing to take an optional shot that had not been approved by the FDA. The directive from the commanding general in regards to the shot clearly stated it was not mandatory, specifically because it had not yet been approved. I saw no need for the shot, refused to take it, and was threatened, in front of 14 other Marines who also refused to take the shot. I asked the warrant officer in question to join me outside in the hallway and I let him know, very sternly that I was not intimidated by his attempts to coerce me into an optional shot, and if he continued his coercion, we would both be standing before the commanding officer, and talking it out. He backed off, problem solved, and my career did not suffer one bit because of it.

That's how you handle it. You don't jump the chain of command and file a freakin lawsuit. You just don't.

At 7/10/08 06:43 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 7/10/08 02:36 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote: Something is missing from this story.

I know some priests who have never molested young boys.
Therefore, no priests have ever molested young boys.

not quite what i'm saying. i read the story and something seems missing. he didnt speak out about the war, he's a model soldier. there are enough beaurocrats in the military to keep this from happening. also he could bring this up through channels. something is missing

At 7/7/08 04:38 PM, hrb5711 wrote:
Ahem. We thought he smuggled them out, but that was false. He didn't have the capability to produce nuclear weapons, it was obvious he was trying though.

Isreal destroy one of his nuclear facilities while it was under construction. He may not have been equiped with nuclear weapons, but he plenty of other nasty stuff in his utility belt

My older brother is in the Coast Gaurd, he knows several atheists and it has never hampered their career. I know several atheists in several services and it has never hampered their career. Something is missing from this story.

At 7/9/08 11:24 PM, drDAK wrote:
And my mother's family is Catholic, by the way. I have experience first hand in the field of both religions. Thus, I am knowledgeable in these religions.

Catholics don't read the bible. this made me laugh

"i have made man in oir own image" this will include emotions as well. humans become angry, God becomes angry (how many passages in the bible are about God being angered?) we become jealous, God becomes jealous "for the lord our God is a jealous God."

If God is like us, meaning he does get jelous, we're all screwed.

how is that a bad thing? You're screwed anyway

If there is a God, which I'm pretty sure there's not, he would have infinite patience and understanding. The last thing a "God" would be is jelous. A human God? Haha, any one human running everything would constitute corruption and something would bound to be fucked up.

Jealousy is an emotion, it doesn't constitute corruption. if you were to invent emotion wouldn't you be required to know what it is? The fact that we are made in his image, means that we have parts of the essence of God. We are not like God clearly, but we are given these little pieces (the entire human emotional range) of God's total personality. The fact that we are a corrupt creature simply perverts the gifts we've been given.

Clearly put, God cannot be jelous because that would make him imperfect.

That wasn't clearly put at all. Here's a tip I give people such as yourself. Actually read the religious text before you try and debate it. it makes for a better argument on your part. And reading anti-christian sites doesn't count as studying the text. actually pick up a bible, or read it on a commentary free site. if you have questions on where something is i can tell you, PM me. i'm not telling you to believe, i'm giving you a chance to beef up your arguments.

At 7/9/08 11:19 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 7/9/08 10:54 PM, Memorize wrote: "True religion is caring the needy and sick. And supporting the fatherless children and widow"

Book of James - Bible.

Yes. Such "superstitious truths".

"I am the Lord your God, you shall have no other gods before me"

First Commandment - Bible

Sounds like brainwashing to me.

So let me get this straight. you have a girlfriend who says "you will not cheat on me" thats brainwashing. Or you have a girlfriend who says "get rid of your blowup dolls" (false idols) thats brainwashing? Same concept.
"i have made man in oir own image" this will include emotions as well. humans become angry, God becomes angry (how many passages in the bible are about God being angered?) we become jealous, God becomes jealous "for the lord our God is a jealous God."

At 7/7/08 10:34 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 7/7/08 10:27 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote: drDAK, point out a change for the better and i'll tell you if it's worth it. it has to have been done before, it has to have been successful, and it has to have brought prosperity. it's not a lack of logic, it's really high standards

Did you notice that the US became a superpower in a mere 200 years and it took china a thousand? what makes America successful is what makes us unique. when you start screwing with that (like we have been doing in the last couple of decades) is when an overal decline starts to occur (like the kind you mentioned earlier).

You are limiting the future to the past. New ideas are what makes humans so incredibly gifted. We can sketch ideas and put them to work. I'm not saying we throw ideas out there that have no logic behind them, but that we look for good options... whether that be what other successful countries are doing or something that we came up with by ourselves.

What happens when China, Russia, and the EU become Superpowers and we're still sticking to the same ol' same ol' until we are so stagnant that our country withers away from the international scene?

The reason china and russia, and the EU are they way they are is because they switched to marxist ideals and systems.

drDAK, point out a change for the better and i'll tell you if it's worth it. it has to have been done before, it has to have been successful, and it has to have brought prosperity. it's not a lack of logic, it's really high standards

ok... "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"
I have never been opposed to change if it were proven to be for the better. unfortunately socialism has never been successful when applied. Whereas conservatism is a tried and true method, and consistantly wins in the arena of ideals. I dont believe any goverment program can improve life, it has what i call the 'anti-midas touch' (with the exception of a few facets of goverment) anything goverment touches goes south. i.e. American education, postal service ect.

At 6/16/08 02:37 PM, Elfer wrote:
There is no way to tell what the person's intent is when they pick up the bait. That's why intentionally placing it and waiting for someone to come along, then shooting them is not a reasonable way to target insurgents.

Have any of you thought that maybe it's a little more complex then: leave weapons, and wait.
maybe, just maybe there's a little mis-information going in there. like maybe we have a mole that says, "hey there's a shipment of weapons from iran. they just drop it off and and we take a few guys and pick it up." duh.