THOTH

gurgen - I must disagree - LOtRs was a masterful movie. And though I do take issue with some interpretations and choices made vis a vis the original books - overall I think Jackson did a fine job of it.

Oh and gevo - the folowing assertion was unamously approved by the US Senate in 1797: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

Also a must - (mature audiences only...even a discalimer to such on the page folks Ok...after all its the bible were talking about... http://www.postfun.com/pfp/NC-17Bible.html

Anoushik - nice post. And gevo - i don't believe in gods and i don't do these terrible things...and I know of many instances in history when terrible things have been done in the NAME of Christianity - Crusades, inquisition, many many more... (not to mention all that old testament stuff)...yeah your god basically really sucks...and you too Sasun - your is the god of losers...what can I say...for what you are saying is that some higher being felt that it was necessary for my family to be killed horribly and all our people slain...and I'm not about to let the Turks off so easily - as you imply - that they were just carrying out gods will...etc And BTW - the founding fathers of the US were by and large not Christian - at least not at all as you would accept such - they were deists. Yeah check out the links: http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/founders.htm http://www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html And be sure to check out the site - the Miss Poppy page link also has a nice bit on Christianity and homosexuals...

You gals have it all wrong...you are mixing the poker and the pokee! Bye the way I'm in line (and I do hate needles)...

LOL Yeah Sip - lost some weight since I seen you last. thanks for sharing BTW.

Yes - I am aware of these issues...but you are discussing science... And regardless - the varitations are not such to throw out the basic prmiss of approximate dates for such. And there are other methiods opf course - for going back further in tie - yes perhaps approximates - but good enouch...(to prove well beyond...choke...6000 years...)

Well anyone who soes not believe in evolution clearly does not believe in science its pretty simple...

gevo27 - Ok - admit it - you do not believe in Science or Scientific method(s)...this post (evolutionists...LOL) and your link to the absurd - Godsaid - man said site - prove that you are not at all a person of the 21st century...let alone the 20th or 19th even...yeah - Dinosaurs were just lizards who ate alot and breathed clean air...the only reason why they ever died at all was if they happened to wonder to far and fell of the edge of the earth...LOL ...measurement of the radiocarbon content of an organic sample will provide an accurate determination of the sample's age if it is assumed that (1) the production of radiocarbon by cosmic rays has remained essentially constant long enough to establish a steady state in the 14C/12C ratio in the atmosphere, (2) there has been a complete and rapid mixing of radiocarbon throughout the various carbon reservoirs, (3) the carbon isotope ratio in the sample has not been altered except by radiocarbon decay, and (4) the total amount of carbon in any reservoir has not been altered. In addition, the half-life of radiocarbon must be known with sufficient accuracy, and it must be possible to measure natural levels of radiocarbon to appropriate levels of accuracy and precision.

No problem friend...

No - rates are based soley on accident claims by segment of populace...so you figure it out...

bigot n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own or Main Entry: big·ot Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t Function: noun Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot Date: 1661 : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices - big·ot·ed /-g&-t&d/ adjective - big·ot·ed·ly adverb not offended to be called such? Really?

No you seem more like in your 90's...stuck in old ways and thinking like a buffudled old man...LOL And funny - why are insurance rates for women lower then men in general? Do you know something that the underwriteds dont? There are meny possible definitions for good and bad - when it comes to driving (and other things)...again who are you to be judgemental - and what good is generalizing? And I'm sure I know many women who are much better drivers then you - by any definition....

LOL - "Laughing out Loud" - something in fact I do quite a lot of (unlike certain negative sourpusses we know) - most scincerely...

Its your expressed views that I comment on - though it did not escape me the parrallels (of the book) with you - no wonder you reacted so crossly - the only way you basically know how anyway..old and bitter (and unchanging) as you are...LOL And please - don't talk to us about sex - a subject that indeed you know nothing about!

Yes - I supose...as certainly I know of such in practice...so why not...again - I do not oppose such for two consenting adults...i can't decide for them..sure its odd - it is tome..but it might be jst the thing for someone else - who knows... And Stormy - yes i would also support the concept of th Saudi being married to his wives as I fully support the concepts of plogamy and such - even with a gal haveing many husbands...of course our legal framework sdoesn't support such - and for it to change there must be some imputis - some demand...lacking that it won't happen...

yet I dispute your claim as well Domino - so i say that you are wrong - and there we are...it is all a meaningles argument anyway. And please go back to my forst pst here where i have offered up several definitions of religion - none of which can supprt Atheism as a religion...I mean who di I tithe to anyway and such?

I also have provided definitions. Again they offer opinions. And fgunny the first guy talks of when someone is unsure of their belief - or thinks that there muight be othe rpiossibilities - then that is not belief....well I have always said that I am open to the possibility of some undeternmined//unspecified overarching cosmological force(s)...or that in fact perhaps there is something guiding or what have you - (so perhaps I am more truly agnotsitc)..but anyway -- I feel pretty confident that there is no God - certaionly no God as others believe - i find the whole concept to be quite absurd...still this in no way means that i have crafted a religion from such...

Again Domino - so you do not believe in Atheism - then this is yoru relifgion -- it goes on and on forever - its a meaningless exercise in semantics. But it is notr a religion. I have offered up a number of definitions of religion. And when you talk belief - I mena - I bleieve that a red car is indeed not black. So have I now joined the religion of non belief in red cars being black?

Domino - thats all fine and dandy - and i don't really give a rats ass per say - in regards to the religiosu aspects - but the legal aspects - thats different. And first of all - we are talking two consenting adults here. They have decided to live as one together - to love and cherish and all that stuff...well this to me is marraige - this is what it is all about - religious mumbo jumbo aside...so if it is a marraige then lets call it such - and certianly the legal ramifications should be identical.

Domino - very nice arguments by these guys - quite enjoyable - but no one has proven to me that Atheism is a religion. They never really define what is a religon - they just say that it is so 9or that they believe it to be so)..and i, well, reject this...so is the rejection of Atheism a religon? Which religion is it?

My how diplomatic of you Stormy - and how unlike you in response to this typical piggish type of rant. Do you really accept that women have no creativity or immagination? That they cant be serious and light hearted at the same time - etc etc? I certainly don't and I find such claims appauling - and not at all real world - based on my experience and observations. And you accept that these are the reasons that most "great literature, and music, and poetry" has mainly been produced by men. I guess thats why men are most represented as race car drivers, politicians and in every other career field or endevor as well - wome are just INFERIOR - face it! And as for this climber story - are we supposing that this lady should be expected to climb cliffs without ropes into her 90s? Well - of course not - everyone (well every normal person) goes through phases in their lives. You do things when you are young and when you get older you move on to other things (like maintaining a houshold and having a family)...so what is wrong with that? - these are nornmal things...I mean just why did they get married? It is this guy who perhaps has refused to grow up - who can think of nothing else worthwhile in his life but climbing a rock. Who is so narrow in his interests that he can only pursue such - at the expense of any kind of normal personal relationship. In fact it is her who should have dumped him - as he obviously wasn't really ready to commit himself to another person - to give of himself - and treat this other person with love and respect...but of course many (men mostly) never learn this - do they...they continue on with their pursuits and by the time they realize there might be more to life they have never learned how to give and how to really live (outside of soem very narrow and uncahnging defintion of such) - and they are certainly no good for anyone else...and then they wonder why they are all old and bitter...

I think that it is a big exercise in semantics that gets us no where. It is clear to me that Atheisim in not a religion adn does not specify any specific beliefs. It is a rejection of some imposed upon soltuion - the idea of a creative mind - that we might at all comprhend and be beholden too - etc etc. If it is a belief - it is only the belief that others have it wrong. It is certainly not a religion.

Yeah Domino - I mena why do blacks need to attend our (white) schools? They can have their own - yeah - thats the ticket...and they can cal them whatever they like..but they just can't ahve what we've got - no - no way - its just for us....

OK - I can agree with you on this one. Perhaps I should have more refrred to codifying such....