|
Author
|
Topic: Roy Moore, Alabama Chief Idiot back in the news yet again.
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
Message 10 of 313 (749948)
02-10-2015 3:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by AZPaul3
02-10-2015 12:47 PM
|
|
No it isn't. We still have homos and lezzies and we're making them legal. God's wrath will be upon us all. He will make storms and higher beer prices and he will make you lose your car keys. We have sinned and we must lose our keys! That's not the worst of it. This new gay marriage is making me have to rethink my marriage. How can I look my wife in the back of her head when two gay men could be doing the same thing as a married couple? I'm not saying we will get divorced but the thought of gays having the same licence to be together as us cheapens our heterosexual love for each other. Somehow. Edited by Larni, : No reason given.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 02-10-2015 12:47 PM | | AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 151 of 313 (750213)
02-12-2015 9:02 AM
|
Reply to: Message 136 by Faith
02-11-2015 8:27 PM
|
|
Re: The jokes just keep coming
As I said, YOU can't tell, you have to trust someone who knows, such as me. Why did you not say this when you first came to EvC? It would have saved you a lot of time trying to persuade people that you are right through discussion.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 136 by Faith, posted 02-11-2015 8:27 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 198 of 313 (751574)
03-04-2015 7:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 167 by AZPaul3
03-03-2015 9:00 AM
|
|
Re: Ignorance in extremes
Seems anything you right wingnut Christians don't like is Nazi. And often, simultaneously communism.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 167 by AZPaul3, posted 03-03-2015 9:00 AM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 200 by AZPaul3, posted 03-04-2015 7:49 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 231 of 313 (751668)
03-04-2015 6:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 199 by Faith
03-04-2015 7:48 AM
|
|
Not just America: people have equal rights to marriage in the UK as well. My mum (who is a gay) will most likely be getting married, soon. I do like weddings.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 199 by Faith, posted 03-04-2015 7:48 AM | | Faith has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 256 of 313 (751719)
03-05-2015 1:50 AM
|
Reply to: Message 235 by subbie
03-04-2015 6:43 PM
|
|
Never thought of that. That would be just charming!
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 235 by subbie, posted 03-04-2015 6:43 PM | | subbie has seen this message but not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 257 of 313 (751720)
03-05-2015 1:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 242 by Faith
03-04-2015 11:22 PM
|
|
You've been shown that this is incorrect. The Greeks and Romans were at it for ages. You appear to express selective attention.
I only "damage my case" by the term because you all refuse to get the point. Every one, I am sure, gets your point. I do. But no body else here agrees with it. We understand your religious objection but do not hold the same objection. Why this is the case varies from poster to poster. I (and others) don't beleive in the the supernatural, others don't take the bible literally. Please don't confuse disagreeing with not understanding. All the best. Edited by Larni, : A lot.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 242 by Faith, posted 03-04-2015 11:22 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 258 by Faith, posted 03-05-2015 1:59 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 284 of 313 (751805)
03-06-2015 6:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 276 by Faith
03-05-2015 9:57 PM
|
|
No, marriage did not change over the last two millennia at all, Not so. Until 1993 it was impossible to be convicted of rape of one's wife in some American states; it was not a crime. That's a huge difference. Married rape enthusiast must have been very annoyed in how their marriage was changed by the damn gov'ment. All the best.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 276 by Faith, posted 03-05-2015 9:57 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 285 by Faith, posted 03-06-2015 6:32 AM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 286 of 313 (751807)
03-06-2015 6:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 285 by Faith
03-06-2015 6:32 AM
|
|
When you say that marriage has not change in 2000 years you cannot then say "apart from that" every time somebody shows you that you are wrong to say that. All the best.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 285 by Faith, posted 03-06-2015 6:32 AM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 287 by Faith, posted 03-06-2015 6:47 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 306 of 313 (751862)
03-06-2015 3:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 301 by Faith
03-06-2015 2:26 PM
|
|
So what if it does? Will the sky fall in?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 301 by Faith, posted 03-06-2015 2:26 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 308 by Faith, posted 03-06-2015 3:18 PM | | Larni has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2