Meet The Press Roundtable To Feature Christian Broadcasting Network Blogger
Meet The Press Roundtable To Feature Christian Broadcasting Network Blogger
ThinkProgress has learned that this Sunday’s edition of NBC’s Meet the Press will include a journalist roundtable featuring David Brody, a blogger and news correspondent for the Christian Broadcasting Network. CBN was founded in 1961 by religious right leader Pat Robertson.
NBC analyst Chuck Todd is also booked for the segment, ThinkProgress learned, and other journalists are likely to be added. The problem is not Brody’s appearance on the program per se, but rather that Meet the Press has an established record of featuring more conservative journalists than progressive journalists during its roundtables.
As Media Matters documented in its report, “If It’s Sunday, It’s Still Conservative“:
While overall most journalist guests were centrist or nonpartisan — either centrist columnists like David Broder or neutral reporters for major news organizations — those that had an identifiable ideology were far more likely to be conservative. […]
[D]uring this two-year period, conservatives outnumbered progressives [on Meet the Press] 35 to 25. The other two shows conduct weekly roundtables that consistently favor conservatives.
We’ll be watching to see if a progressive is booked to balance Brody.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Oi! Someone get me his phone number…
June 27th, 2007 at 4:41 pmAre you on crack? In an atmosphere were Joe Klein is considered liberal?
June 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pm“We’ll be watching to see if a progressive is booked to balance Brody.”
Um, no. Why are we waiting for the answer when we already know what it will be?
June 27th, 2007 at 4:49 pmPress the Meat.
June 27th, 2007 at 4:51 pmDamn liberal media!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 4:53 pmA progressive, from like, the DLC?
June 27th, 2007 at 4:53 pm“Are you on crack”
No I’m not a Repuke
I don’t do hard drugs like them.
Repukes are sailing the river Denial.
June 27th, 2007 at 4:55 pmWow! I’d like to compare man meat with him.
June 27th, 2007 at 4:55 pmTP RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY ALERT!
ALERT!
ALERT!
ALERT!
June 27th, 2007 at 4:56 pm[E] Overload signal [E]
June 27th, 2007 at 4:57 pmHey Tim Russert…
If Brody is qualified to appear on Meet the Press, then so am I.
As the Internet’s Chronicle of Media Decay, I think I can bring a unique voice to your program - one that is rarely represented and much needed.
I expect to receive my invitation for an upcoming broadcast as soon as it can be scheduled. Send it to me c/o News Corpse.
Either book me ASAP or stop booking hacks like Brody who have even less credibility than the proverbial bloggers in pajamas.
June 27th, 2007 at 4:58 pmTP RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY ALERT!
ALERT!
ALERT!
ALERT!
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
This is all part of the Islamo-Stalinist agenda… look at the “popularity” thread below.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:00 pmI’ve never noticed meet the press to be conservative.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:00 pmTalk about what’s become irrelevant in our country…that would be Tim (PICK UP THE PHONE) Russert. YAWN
More of that liberal bias we hear so much about. Uh huh.
Tom3, I love the Press the Meat. Awesome!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:00 pmOoh, more bright and shiny things!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:02 pmThat contradicts Russert’s proclaimation that it’s not his job to do investigative journalism unless there is an “opposition party”.
There is something wrong with Russert.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:03 pmWe’ll be watching to see if a progressive is booked to balance Brody.
don’t hold your breath…
June 27th, 2007 at 5:04 pmWhen TP expects someone on-air to “balance” brody, I suppose they advocate a full-BLOWN Muslim to join the roundtable.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:06 pmCT V_1,
“TP RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY ALERT!”
Would you feel the same way if the post said:
“Meet The Press Roundtable To Feature Zeus Broadcasting Network Blogger”
June 27th, 2007 at 5:06 pmDoes anyone who really follows the news, specifically the Libby trial, actually believe that Tim Russert or the producers of MTP have any credibility left? Seriously, the corporations just want more ad dollars and I’m sure they have noticed a shift post Libby trial and are looking to replace their old discriminating viewership. The conservative movement has given up anyway. They now admit that political expediency trumps principle when it comes to retaining power, plain and simple. So more pork for every Chrisitan tribe!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:07 pmCT V_1,
“When TP expects someone on-air to “balance†brody, I suppose they advocate a full-BLOWN Muslim to join the roundtable.”
Or perhaps they are looking for someone who doesn’t use superstition to decide on policy.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:08 pm“Meet The Press Roundtable To Feature Zeus Broadcasting Network Bloggerâ€
Comment by Crump’s Brother — June 27, 2007 @ 5:06 pm
I would, as a matter of fact, I sacrifice to Zeus regularly.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:08 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
When you say the “popularity thread,” Mr. PiP, do you mean the Bush/Putin thread?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:11 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
When you say the “popularity thread,†Mr. PiP, do you mean the Bush/Putin thread?
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Indeed I do, it proves that The Joker was right, and that TP has an Islamo-Stalinist agenda!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:13 pmOnce the “fairness doctrine” comes back, it will be amusing to see TP have to provide equal Pro-Conservative points of view on each topic. I mean, you can’t be demanding we only hold radio to this. TV and all internet sites that are political would need to be held to the same.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:13 pmComment by Crump’s Brother
How about not even bringing up the religious affiliation?
“those that had an identifiable ideology were far more likely to be conservative. […]”
I don’t believe that. Muslamoids have an “identifiable” (whatever that means) religion, yet they would probably vote overwhelmingly democratic.
If religion won’t dominate or be any part of the discussion on Sunday’s debate, it’s pure bigotry and it’s utterly pointless to bring up religion here.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:15 pmTwo wrongs don’t make a right, TP!
Superstitionists holding court, how useful.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:15 pmWell Roger…it seems the fairness doctrine is back, because you are free to make any comments you want.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
This “progressive” label is absolutely nothing different from the usual totalitarian breeding ground name, the Democratic party. It’s only used for tax-exemption purposes, it seems. Reagan gave the dummycrats such a hard beating they had to change their name. The Republicans have their “libertarian” side-party, yet I don’t care for that.
Good for calling them out for what they are: Islamo-Stalinists!
Keep at it, PiP!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:20 pmDick Cheney controls Tim Russert. That’s why it’s called Meet the Pimp.
-GSD
June 27th, 2007 at 5:21 pmComment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
Allow me to paraphrase your comment;
blah blah blah dummycrats, blah blah, move along, nothing to see here - boring blah blah.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:22 pmIt must be Troll Welfare Check Day. They are al lover the place.
-GSD
June 27th, 2007 at 5:22 pmCT or Mr P,
Define Islamo-Stalinists.
Thank you.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:23 pmall over, not al lover!
-GSD
June 27th, 2007 at 5:23 pmwhy would the show about the press put someone on from a fictitious news organization, on a show about people that are supposed to report news, yet for this show they make it, yet by being on it neither understand it, or are a part of it? I would rather use crazy glue on my sphincter than watch retarded humans wearing empty suits talk about how important it is that the candidate smells correctly.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:23 pmI know I won’t be watching since the 1970’s.
Good for calling them out for what they are: Islamo-Stalinists!
Keep at it, PiP!
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
I shall heed your words, wise friend.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:24 pmCT or Mr P,
Define Islamo-Stalinists.
Thank you.
Comment by Zooey — June 27, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
A synthesis of Islamo and Stalinist ideology.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:25 pmthe fly-man
June 27th, 2007 at 5:26 pmThis is why I canceled cable TV.
The only news I can trust is from: Thom Hartman, Randi Rodes - others on AAR, sometimes Ed Shultz, always from Ray Taliaferro and Bernie Ward on kgo.
I shall heed your words, wise friend.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
HAHHAHHANHAHJAHH OMG That’s f’in funny.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:27 pmIslamo-Stalinist is a stupid oxymoron. Islamists believe that the word of God, as presented in the Koran, is a law unto itself. Stalin didn’t believe in God, and ran a Secular dictatorship.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:27 pmComment by Namtillaku
Ready to debate, nuncle?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:28 pmDefine Islamo-Stalinists.
Thank you.
Comment by Zooey
Hey, Zoo, you crossed the line. You ask for a definition to a troll. You never do that. It is like feeding Gizmo after midnight. :D
June 27th, 2007 at 5:28 pmA synthesis of Islamo and Stalinist ideology.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
No shit, Sherlock.
Describe the actions and ideology of such person.
Name one actual person subscribing to this pholosophy.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:30 pmIslamo-Stalinist is a stupid oxymoron. Islamists believe that the word of God, as presented in the Koran, is a law unto itself. Stalin didn’t believe in God, and ran a Secular dictatorship.
Comment by Badger — June 27, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
You’re blind!!!
You have been brain-washed!!!
Your Muslim masters don’t want you to know the truth.
Islamo-Stalinists have taken aspects of both ideologies and combined them into one!!!
Bush… 911… Oil… Iran… Saudi Arabia… Cheney… Conspiracy!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:30 pmGotta go choke down some gay man-meat. I’m salivating like Pavlov’s dog thinking about Jeff Gannon right now!
Back soon.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:30 pmReady to debate, nuncle?
Comment by CT V_1
Huh? The person labeling others Islamo-Stalinists wanting to debate???? Must have been a black out.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pmComment by Namtillaku
My comments apparently ruined your cute world. Can I fax you a dearest letter of apology? I’d try to fit some chocolate-kisses, but 10MB is the limit.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pmGood for calling them out for what they are: Islamo-Stalinists!
Keep at it, PiP!
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
I shall heed your words, wise friend.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
You are both so full of crap your eyeballs are brown.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pm#40 Then why again are many TP lefties so pro Stalin?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pmA synthesis of Islamo and Stalinist ideology.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
Brilliant, Cicerus!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:32 pmComment by Juan C
Could you fax me a fajita? I heard you’ve got creative food down there.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:32 pmThen why again are many TP lefties so pro Stalin?
Comment by Roger_Roger
Name one, punky brewster.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:33 pmYo CT,
June 27th, 2007 at 5:33 pmMeet me at the corner bath house. I need the massage “with release” from that cute Brazilian stud!
Comment by Wayne
Could you be related to ‘Not Canadian.’
June 27th, 2007 at 5:34 pmMy comments apparently ruined your cute world. Can I fax you a dearest letter of apology? I’d try to fit some chocolate-kisses, but 10MB is the limit.
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
Ruined!? Are you kidding me? I get quite a bit of enjoyment from your inane posts.
Thanks!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:35 pmName one, punky brewster.
Comment by Juan C — June 27, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
The name-jacker is clearly scared because we know too much about the Islamo-Stalinists!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 5:35 pmCT V_1,
“Muslamoids” - Talk about bigotry.
There is a point to bringing up the religion here. Many in this country feel left out of the political dialogue because they do not subscribe to any of the big religions. When was the last time a known atheist was invited on a MSM Sunday talk show to discuss policy? Imagine what the uproar would be from the Christian community if this did happen. But the same shows make a huge deal out of bringing on Christian leaders all the time. You guys are always screaming about how the ‘liberal media’ wont balance out for you, shouldn’t you be pushing for a balance here as well?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:35 pmI heard you’ve got creative food down there.
Comment by CT V_1
Just becuz you dont know how to spell it, doesnt mean, it is creative, Deliverance Banjo Boy.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:36 pm#40 Then why again are many TP lefties so pro Stalin?
Comment by Roger_Roger
June 27th, 2007 at 5:36 pmcorrection: TP lefties are pro constitution. We the People… read the preamble.
Roger_Roger,
“Then why again are many TP lefties so pro Stalin?”
Name one.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:36 pm“I’ve never noticed meet the press to be conservative.
Comment by ricky”
Are you kidding me. A show run by the biggest and baddest of Bush’s poodles Tim Russert. What do you think it is? Do you think that MTP is liberal?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:36 pmWhy is Rachel and her/his troll friends hogging the threads again?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:37 pmThis is fun.
Hey, CT how are those “intelligent nations” doing? I bet you got that all by yourself, right, Hillbilly boy?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:38 pmWhy is Rachel and her/his troll friends hogging the threads again?
Comment by unbelievable
Because their lives are unfulfilled and only get excitement at the news of dead civilians?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:39 pmHELL NO WAYNE!
I only engage in one-on-one, personal attacks, when I’m in the mood.
Those to Neocon boot-lickers simply come here to play games, name jack, post under numerous names, arguing or congratulating each other. It’s really distracting, nauseating, AND 100% AGAINST THE T.O.U. agreement, which TP seems to not give ONE SH*T ABOUT.
I’ve pleaded for site registration.
Unless you enjoy bickering with complete f*cking morons, try Dailykos.com. It’s totally free of immature games like the flunky college pukes play with you, ADULTS, here on TP.
Thank GOD I’ve got a life, a family, and career to keep me fulfilled, unlike some of you poor, sorry souls around here…
June 27th, 2007 at 5:39 pmCould you be related to ‘Not Canadian.’
Comment by CT V_1
not even.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:40 pmCould you really be a moron?
Don’t answer, we already know.
Roger …I have NEVER seen a pro Stalin comment by ANYONE on this blog! Stalin didn’t Believe in EVOLUTION. His Science advisor was against Darwin’s theories. Because of this , a LOT of Drug resistant germs were created in Stalins prison camps. If they can’t evolve into drug resistant forms, why be carefull with the Antibiotic regimines??? Idiots.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:41 pmDavid Brody did a better and fairer piece on the Lieberman-Ned Lamont race than any other mainstream journalist last July. So much better in fact we were shocked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHmzdKz1wes
June 27th, 2007 at 5:42 pmComment by Juan C
Mexico is a piece of crap nation, so they can’t be so intelligent. They keep coming here to the intelligent nation, don’t they? You can’t even be bothered to create jobs and do something with our $20 billion per year. That currency could be returned to us.
You must feel so manly (or mexican) calling me out on an argument you’ve already lost. I mean, you’re living the loss, aren’t you?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:44 pmBecause their lives are unfulfilled and only get excitement at the news of dead civilians?
Comment by Juan C — June 27, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
True… :D Though I was wondering why they haven’t been banned. It’s obvious that they are not here to contribute, treat the threads like IM, and are probably getting paid to do so… Fine if Rachel and Santo want to be buddies, but why do we have to watch? Ick…
June 27th, 2007 at 5:44 pmHELL NO WAYNE!
Comment by Not Canadian
Read it again, I didn’t post that C(razy)T(roll) V_1 did, dude.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:45 pmComment by Crump’s Brother
TP has no business bashing Christianity. Again, two wrongs don’t make a right.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:46 pmComment by Namtillaku
You’re not a very good actor. Well, fake intellectuals aren’t known for their acting abilities, regardless.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:48 pmTP has no business bashing Christianity. Again, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
We all have a duty to bash superstitious thought, whatever form it takes, Christianity is simply the most prevalent.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:49 pmComment by unbelievable
You been thuggin’ fo’ da dauraytion of da dai?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:49 pmTP has no business bashing Christianity. Again, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
Yes they do - it’s called the First Amendment. Don’t like it? Then piss off. No one but the other schizophrenic trolls likes you - so why don’t you get together and leave us out of it.
In fact, I’m going to bash Christianity extra hard every time you guys try to ruin a thread.
Here goes:
Jesus was a douche bag. And I have proof…
June 27th, 2007 at 5:50 pmYou must feel so manly (or mexican) calling me out on an argument you’ve already lost. I mean, you’re living the loss, aren’t you?
Comment by CT V_1
So Im a mexican?? Hahahaha. Nice try.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:51 pmYou must feel so manly (or mexican) calling me out on an argument you’ve already lost. I mean, you’re living the loss, aren’t you?
Comment by CT V_1
You would do well to apologize now.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:51 pmCT, no need to be offensive to Juan.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:52 pmSchizophrenia and Personal Revelations
by Mark Smith
I believe that schizophrenia is a better and simpler explanation for all the people- past and present- who have claimed that Biblegod spoke to them. Occum’s Razor demands the simplest explanation, and this explains the “revelations” of the Apostle Paul, the Apostle Peter, and religious fanatics a lot better than that the omnipotent ruler of the entire universe took the time to come down here and chit chat with these fanatics.
Like the Blues Brothers, the Apostle Paul believed he was on a “mission from God” (Acts 26:19) because of a “vision” he saw. Before you laugh at this, Michael Abram, the man who stabbed ex-Beatle George Harrison, also “thought he was mission from God” when he did so (Orange County Register, 7/5/02, p. News 21). It turns out that this man was a paranoid schizophrenic. Schizophrenics see visions, hear voices, and regularly talk to Biblegod (or so they think). This would explain the visions and voices mentioned in the Bible. Mental illness, and not “The Lord God Almighty Omnipotent Ruler of The Universe” is behind all of the hallucinations.
http://www.jcnot4me.com/ Items/ Misc%20Topics/ schizophrenia_and_personal_revelations.htm
June 27th, 2007 at 5:53 pmLet’s get this thread bach on topic:
The Pro-Muslim agenda of the Islamo-Stalinist Left.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:53 pmErratum: post #81) first line should read -
“Let’s get this thread back on topic”
We can listen to Bach while we discuss though.l
June 27th, 2007 at 5:54 pmComment by Zooey
Actually, my response is sound. I won’t apologize for responding to a bigot.
Your request for an apology on the grounds of buddy-ism is denied.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:55 pmSlighty off-topic:
Brody, most likely, is a closet homosexual.
DISCUSS.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:56 pmWhat Would Jesus Do?
Advocate child abuse and murder amongst many other cruelties.
Christians are always claiming, “he’s the lambâ€, “our saviorâ€, “the king of peaceâ€, “the embodiment of loveâ€, amongst the many other names they associate with a loving, merciful nature. Jesus a nice guy? Not in my book. Nor in any other person’s who is capable of compassion and rationality. Let’s examine who the hell the Jesus character really is. These verses will show not only is Jesus’ “loving†nature a joke but so are the Christians who worship him. Jesus’ real mission to come to earth:
Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has “come not to send peace, but a sword.†Matthew 10:34
Jesus says, “Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace on earth! No, rather a sword lf you love your father, mother, sister, brother, more than me, you are not worthy of being mine. “The real beauty of this verse is that Jesus demands people truly love him more then they love their own family. I ask you how can we love someone that we can not see or interact with? Love is an emotion pertaining to physical existence not to faithful ideologies, yet God threatens you with Death just because your love for your mother maybe stronger than your love for him. Matthew 10:34
Families will be torn apart because of Jesus. “Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.” Matthew 10:21
Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. Matthew 5:17
Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn’t care for his preaching. Matthew 11:20
Jesus, whose clothes are dipped in blood, has a sharp sword sticking out of his mouth. Thus attired, he treads the winepress of the wrath of God. (The winepress is the actual press that humans shall be put into so that we may be ground up.) Revelations 19:13-15
The beast and the false prophet are cast alive into a lake of fire. The rest of us the unchosen will be killed with the sword of Jesus. “An all the fowls were filled with their flesh.†Revelations 19:20-21
Jesus says he is the only way to salvation yet he purposely disillusions us so that we will go to hell:
Jesus explains that the reason he speaks in parables is so that no one will understand him, “lest . . . they . . . should understand . . . and should be converted, and I should heal them.†Matthew 13:10-15
Jesus explains why he speaks in parables to confuse people so they will go to hell. Mark 4:11-12
Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.†Matthew 15:4-7
Abandon your wife and children for Jesus and he’ll give your a big reward. Jesus asks that his followers abandon their children to follow him. To leave your child is abuse, it’s called neglect, pure and simple. Matthew 19:29
Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark 7:9
Jesus says that those who have been less fortunate in this life will have it even worse in the life to come. Mark 4:25
Jesus sends the devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off a cliff and be drowned in the sea. Clearly Jesus could have simply sent the devils out, yet he chose instead to place them into pigs and kill them. This is called animal abuse. Mark 5:12-13
Jesus kills a fig tree for not bearing figs, even though it was out of season. Jesus must not be as smart as Christians would have us believe, for he was retarded enough to do something this silly. You’d think the son of god (god incarnate) would know that trees don’t bear fruit in dry season. Mark 11:13
Luke 12:47 Jesus okays beating slaves.
http://www.evilbible.com/what_would_jesus_do.htm
June 27th, 2007 at 5:56 pmComment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
Don’t you see that by you denying the existence of the Xtian god, you are still asserting a religious belief?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:58 pmMexico is a piece of crap nation, so they can’t be so intelligent. They keep coming here to the intelligent nation, don’t they?
Comment by CT V_1
Im gonna go really, really slow… if people go to your country, it is because you are holding wealth.
Ok? Are you with me, intelligent nation guy?
Now, how you came up with so much wealth? mmmm…hard work? Yes. From Americans? mmmm…no.
Slaves worked for US for hundreds of years without payment, pretty much what China is doing. Chinese, black and european poor immigrants built your railways, your buildings, your cities, your infrastructure. Did they get payed well? HARDLY.
One thing is missing. Resources. Where did you get your resources from?? mmm…let me think. Oh, OTHER COUNTRIES!!! Yes!!! Ask the United Fruit how much have they ripped from Central America, ask your corporations how much copper they extracted from Chile, how much minerals and organic products they have extracted from Brazil, Peru and Columbia. Oh, Texas was a Mexican state…yes, you stole Mexico´s oil.
Oh, and now you complain why illegal immigrants get into your country? Well, dont complain when all begins to crumble down.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:59 pmActually, my response is sound. I won’t apologize for responding to a bigot.
Your request for an apology on the grounds of buddy-ism is denied.
Comment by CT V_1
I’m sorry for you.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:00 pmChristian hypocrisy knows know bounds:
“Judge not, that ye be not judgedâ€
–Matthew 7:1
“Judge not, and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven†Luke 6:37
Go ahead hypocrites and judge away…
June 27th, 2007 at 6:00 pmAtheism is a rejection of religion. To call it a religion shows how retarded you are.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:02 pmYou would do well to apologize now.
Comment by Zooey
Apoligizing is an act of bravery. It takes courage to do that, to aknowledge the mistake and to comfront the other part with humility. Some does and some doesnt. Thats life.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:02 pmCan we come to an agreement about religion?
Religious people — believe what you want to believe.
Atheist people — don’t believe in anything.
Neither party should push their belief or lack thereof onto other people.
Thank you.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:03 pmDon’t you see that by you denying the existence of the Xtian god, you are still asserting a religious belief?
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
And how by your convoluted logic can you prove that?
June 27th, 2007 at 6:03 pmAtheism is a rejection of religion. To call it a religion shows how retarded you are.
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Atheism is a rejection of God, not religion.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:03 pmI usually love fiction, but the Bible is SO BOOOORING…
and full of the same sh*t the “islamo-facist” fearing crowd point to in the Koran.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:04 pmApoligizing is an act of bravery. It takes courage to do that, to aknowledge the mistake and to comfront the other part with humility. Some does and some doesnt. Thats life.
Comment by Juan C
Yes, it’s life, sadly enough.
That’s why I didn’t demand that he apologize.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:05 pmCT V_1,
“TP has no business bashing Christianity. Again, two wrongs don’t make a right.”
My point was in that you bash someone who called for a certain policy on the principle that Zues told them it was right. We all need to bash people who use absurd fairy tales to back up their policy ideas. Religion is the one area of discourse that opur society has decided is off limits. SCREW THAT!!
We can bash people for their political beliefs, but not their religious ones. (Oh that right, you guys are fine with that as long as we are only bashing Muslims) I simply refuse not to call a spade a spade. If your kneel down and pretend that a cracker is actually the flesh of Jesus (nevermind the obvious the cannibalistic problems inherent in this philosophy) I’m gonna call you a whack job and suggest that you need therapy.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:05 pmAtheism is a rejection of God, not religion.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
No, it’s the absence of belief in any god, literally. And that is NOT religion.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:05 pmComment by Wayne — June 27, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
See:
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
June 27th, 2007 at 6:06 pmOh, and now you complain why illegal immigrants get into your country? Well, dont complain when all begins to crumble down.
Comment by Juan C
That’s why we want them deported, so that it doesn’t crumble down. Our WWII veterans brought this nation to be the developed nation it is today. It doesn’t matter who laid some tracks, that’s not relevant.
You wish bad things upon this country, your inane views should be suppressed. You are trying to answer questions today with the events from hundreds of years ago, which doesn’t (and shouldn’t) work. It’s not the best solution. A socialist “revenge” scheme is fla
June 27th, 2007 at 6:06 pmOh, Texas was a Mexican state…yes, you stole Mexico´s oil.
Comment by Juan C
Texans revolted and Texas won, then became a separate country before ever joining the Union.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:07 pmJust saying……
No, it’s the absence of belief in any god, literally. And that is NOT religion.
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
Call it what you want buddy, it doesn’t change the fact that you are acting like a religious nut.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:07 pmDon’t bother. They know very well that their panels are biased against liberals and dems, and they DON’T CARE WHAT YOU SAY OR THINK ABOUT IT. They are corporatist whores.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:07 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES,
You too are an atheist!
I’m guessing some of us just choose to believe in one less god than you do.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:08 pmI usually love fiction, but the Bible is SO BOOOORING…
If they tried to make the bible into a movie, it would have a triple X rating for all the violence, rape, and nudity…
and full of the same sh*t the “islamo-facist†fearing crowd point to in the Koran.
Comment by Not Canadian — June 27, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
Christian = hypocrite most of the time.
You can’t call yourself a Christain unless you follow the bible, so that excludes about 90% of them. They are just pretending to be Christian out of fear. But anyone who thinks they are fooling an ‘omniscient’ god is a fool. LOL
June 27th, 2007 at 6:08 pmComment by Juan C
I submit. I can admit that it wasn’t a proper posting, it was a bigoted one. Juan, I’m sorry. If you can, please ignore my previous postings, they don’t deserve or merit a response.
Zooey, PiP, others, I become too heated. I apologize as well.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:09 pmComment by Crump’s Brother — June 27, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
I am agnostic.
Atheists claim to know more than is humanly possible.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
look in dictionary, Moron
June 27th, 2007 at 6:11 pmAtheism is the state of being without theistic beliefs
Call it what you want buddy, it doesn’t change the fact that you are acting like a religious nut.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
The only religious nuts around here are you and Santo/Rachel…
And I’m not your buddy.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:12 pmAtheism is the state of being without theistic beliefs
Comment by Wayne — June 27, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Wayne you’re an idiot.
“theos” is Greek for God, not religion.
Please, son, control yourself.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:13 pmAnd I’m not your buddy.
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
Sure y’ ar’, we’re all buddies, buddy!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:13 pmAtheists claim to know more than is humanly possible.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Maybe to you because you aren’t bright enough… But there is much proof that a god is unnecessary, and in nature, that which isn’t necessary becomes extinct. Why do you think 93% of scientists are Atheists? Hmmm? Because the god hypothesis has failed.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:14 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES,
“Atheists claim to know more than is humanly possible.”
Atheist claim stupidity or ignorance where there is no evidence to support a good conclusion. Religion does not do this. They try to fill in all scientific gaps of knowledge with God. Then inevitably, science proves them wrong again.
Atheist demand evidence and reason, believers don’t need or demand any of that. Faith is their get out of jail free card when they run out of reason.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:14 pmComment by Crump’s Brother — June 27, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
You’re thinking of agnostics, like me.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:16 pmY’all need to get your terminology right.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:17 pmYou’re thinking of agnostics, like me.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
No, Agnostics claim that man cannot know either way. That’s the lazy and safe approach you’re taking… Because we can know. Just like we know that there isn’t a Santa Claus, a tooth fairy or gremlins under your bed…
June 27th, 2007 at 6:19 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES,
There are differing degrees of agnosticism. I would agree that I too am technically agnostic. But if we put agnosticism on a scale of one to ten - one being a dyed in the wool faith head, and ten being a dyed in the wool atheist, I’d consider myself a nine. I come to this conclusion because I see no good evidence for being anywhere on the other side of this scale.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:20 pmJesus was a douche bag. And I have proof…
Comment by unbelievable
——————————————————–
This person claims to be a teacher.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:20 pmWhat else is in that edumakated trash bin?
PRIMVS INTER PARES,
Further, thoe that believers have the burden of proof. It is not up to science to disprove anything.
If you believe that there is an omnipotent being in the sky that created all reality, and that he/she/it listens to and sometimes answers your wishes, then that is a scientific hypothesis that deserves some evidence to back up the claim. Without eveidence, I should liken the hypothesis to that of Bertran Russell’s teapot quandary. I’ll let you look it up.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:22 pmIf you can, please ignore my previous postings, they don’t deserve or merit a response.
Comment by CT V_1
I didnt find anyone particularly offensive. The nationalistic issue is not very important for me, so Im ok. Hope I havent offended you.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:22 pmTexans revolted and Texas won, then became a separate country before ever joining the Union.
Just saying……
Comment by Wayne
Yes, there were many factors. I agree. But come on, La Mesilla also revolted?
June 27th, 2007 at 6:23 pmNo, Agnostics claim that man cannot know either way. That’s the lazy and safe approach you’re taking… Because we can know. Just like we know that there isn’t a Santa Claus, a tooth fairy or gremlins under your bed…
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
So you claim that you KNOW that there is NO GOD.
That is a metaphysical statement, with which you have no proof. Hence, you make your assertion based on belief, or as a Xtian would say… FAITH.
Yes you, unbelievable, are religious.
I come to this conclusion because I see no good evidence for being anywhere on the other side of this scale.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — June 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
There is no way to know any of that stuff, so I, as an agnostic, admit just that. That I do not know.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:24 pmZooey, PiP, others, I become too heated. I apologize as well.
Comment by CT V_1
Thank you, CT.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:25 pmWhere did the space for the universe come from?
June 27th, 2007 at 6:25 pmWhere did matter come from?
Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
How did matter get so perfectly organized?
Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
When, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?
When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)
Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?
Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?
When, where, why, and how did:
Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?)
Single-celled animals evolve?
Fish change to amphibians?
Amphibians change to reptiles?
Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!)
How did the intermediate forms live?
When, where, why, how, and from what did:
Whales evolve?
Sea horses evolve?
Bats evolve?
Eyes evolve?
Ears evolve?
Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?
Which evolved first (how, and how long; did it work without the others)?
The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?
The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
The immune system or the need for it?
There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?
How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?
When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.
*How did photosynthesis evolve?
*How did thought evolve?
*How did flowering plants evolve, and from that?
*What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?
What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
*Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?
*What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen as becoming human?
*Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?
\
\
Please answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Wayne you’re an idiot.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
Says someone that can’t read adictionary, LMAO
June 27th, 2007 at 6:25 pmJuan, I don’t want to flip and repeat these statements again. I do feel pretty bad about it now, and I hope you don’t see my apology as being flimsy. It must be the way I interpret history, but it doesn’t give me the right to bigotry. Again, I really am sorry.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmComment by Crump’s Brother — June 27, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
Don’t talk to me about Russell, son. Or I’ll start calling everyone who believes in an “external world” a religious fanatic!!!
I’ll go Moritz Schlick on you suckers!!!!!!!!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmPlease answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Comment by Flaco
Please cite your cut & paste, or it is plagarism.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmComment by Zooey
Zooey, I’m not perfect, but I’m glad you can accept that.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:28 pmReligion is acting according to the way you believe GOD wants you to act. 10 commandments for example. Atheism is acting without taking God or God’s wishes into consideration. Religious people BELIEVE in God , and don’t require proof. Proof of God’s existence or non existence hasn’t been convincing enough to get all the world’s people on the same page.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:28 pmI’ll agree that the old testament is full of horrible things and would get an R rating if people actually read it.
Says someone that can’t read adictionary, LMAO
Comment by Wayne — June 27, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
Wayne, you’re dismissed.
Go read the PNAC.
JOOOOS… Oil… Bush… Cheney… Conspiracy!!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:28 pmI have strong google fu too.
8
June 27th, 2007 at 6:29 pmPlease answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Comment by Flaco
Easy: An old, caring guy did it in 7 days. ;)
June 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pmFlaco; so your answer to all those questions is … God?
how nice. all summed up nicely, isn’t it? Almost as if it were easier than looking for answers to those questions. Now you can go back to watching tv and buying gas for your SUV.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pmZooey, I’m not perfect, but I’m glad you can accept that.
Comment by CT V_1
No one is perfect, CT. We can only try to right our mistakes, and you have done that by apologizing sincerely to Juan.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pmComment by Badger — June 27, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
So you’re limiting “religion” to those that believe in the god of Abraham?
Interesting.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:31 pmAgain, I really am sorry.
Comment by CT V_1
Dont, at least, for my part. I have nothing to complain about your posts. For real. However, class act from your part.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:31 pmEasy: An old, caring guy did it in 7 days. ;)
Comment by Juan C
Juan you receive an F.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:32 pmSo you claim that you KNOW that there is NO GOD.
No god? Depends on your definition. But of traditional gods including the Christain god, yes, they cannot exist, because they are impossible. I’d explain it to you, but clearly you lack the ability to comprehend.
That is a metaphysical statement, with which you have no proof. Hence, you make your assertion based on belief, or as a Xtian would say… FAITH.
No, it’s based on a lack of proof - the exact opposite. I don’t do faith.
Yes you, unbelievable, are religious.
Only to people with single digit IQs…
There is no way to know any of that stuff, so I, as an agnostic, admit just that. That I do not know.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 27, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
Fine YOU don’t know, but that doesn’t mean you can speak for everyone else.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:34 pmComment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Preach It!!! Sister!!!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:36 pmJuan and Zooey, you’re both a class act. Pretty much, you’re both taken for granted here at TP. I think you both get the point, however, so I’ll move onto another thread.
Thanks to the both of you!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:37 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
PiP, you’re hilarious!
June 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pmSo you’re limiting “religion†to those that believe in the god of Abraham?
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
No I’m Not. Religious Hindus light incense because they believe the GODS want them to.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pmPlease answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Comment by Flaco — June 27, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
Read Cosmos by Carl Sagan, Atheist Universe by David Mills, and The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins. They answer all of these questions you’ve plagerized and more.
The reality is that because you cannot fathom billions and billions of years of anything, much less infinity, you think that it isn’t plausible. The problem with your premise it that it’s not about you. You’re a fraction of a second in an eternal realm of mass-energy that can neither be CREATED nor destroyed… Billions of years of a universe evolving, and all you get to experience is a few decades in the middle of it, and think that it’s somehow all about you… LOL. You crazy Christians are so silly.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:39 pmJesus was a douche bag. And I have proof…
Comment by unbelievable
——————————————————–
This person claims to be a teacher.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:39 pmWhat else is in that edumakated trash bin?
unbelievable you get an F too.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:40 pmPiP, you’re hilarious!
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 6:38 pm
Thanks CT.
I’m glad that you apologized, but I think it is time we let these religious nut balls play with themselves.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:40 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
Good. I’m moving onto the top thread.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmYou crazy athiest are so silly.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmPlease answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Comment by Flaccido
You want someone to encapsulate a library full of books in a form that you would be able to understand? Ha ha.
Go read (or have someone read to you) Richard Dawkins’ book, The Blind Watchmaker. It’s faintly possible that you might be able to understand that a natural failure to comprehend the span of time involved can interfere with our acceptance that, yes, natural selection really can explain all those complex organisms.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmOK,
Who’s messing with Juan and Zooey?
:/
June 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmI think you both get the point, however, so I’ll move onto another thread.
Comment by CT V_1 — June 27, 2007 @ 6:37 pm
Mission Accomplished here…
Unfortunately, he’ll just ruin another one…
June 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmyes, natural selection really can explain all those complex organisms.
in your limited mind yes
June 27th, 2007 at 6:44 pm…might be able to understand that a natural failure to comprehend the span of time involved can interfere with our acceptance …
Care to prove your span of time theory?
June 27th, 2007 at 6:46 pmI’m convinced that homo sapiens sapiens will one day be the common ancestor to a species of more intelligent human beings known as homo sapiens progressives, and to another species of sh!t flinging sightless wide-ass-monkeys known as homo sapiens flaco…
June 27th, 2007 at 6:47 pmMission Accomplished here…
Unfortunately, he’ll just ruin another one…
Comment by unbelievable
I give CT points for recognizing his mistake and doing what he could to make it right.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:48 pmWho’s messing with Juan and Zooey?
:/
Comment by trueblue
:-)
June 27th, 2007 at 6:49 pmI’m convinced that homo sapiens sapiens will one day be the common ancestor to a species of more intelligent human beings known as homo sapiens progressives, and to another species of sh!t flinging sightless wide-ass-monkeys known as homo sapiens flaco…
Comment by unbelievable
Ur a teacher right?
June 27th, 2007 at 6:50 pmFLACO,
(a)rabs
(c)onspire
(e)vil
is on the thread above.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:50 pmCool thanks
June 27th, 2007 at 6:51 pmI give CT points for recognizing his mistake and doing what he could to make it right.
Comment by Zooey — June 27, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Why I didn’t give him a hard time about that.
Just gets annoying when those two ruin every single thread with their pointless dialog. I believe in free speech, but if I were Faiz, I’d give them both a long time out until they promised to behave… Not my call, but I have no problems calling them on their behavior.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:52 pmUr a teacher right?
Comment by Flaco — June 27, 2007 @ 6:50 pm
The only people I know who use ‘Ur’ to mean ‘You are’ are teenagers… IS this how low the GOP has sunk to get trolls to post here? Sheesh…
June 27th, 2007 at 6:54 pmWhy I didn’t give him a hard time about that.
Just gets annoying when those two ruin every single thread with their pointless dialog. I believe in free speech, but if I were Faiz, I’d give them both a long time out until they promised to behave… Not my call, but I have no problems calling them on their behavior.
Comment by unbelievable
I wasn’t saying you had said anything about that. I simply said I give him credit for showing some maturity. We’ve had worse around here, and both CT and Mr P have learned since being here. Frankly, I’d rather have them exposed to us than rabid wingnuts.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:58 pmComment by Zooey — June 27, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Flaco… he is part of the family too, right?
June 27th, 2007 at 7:01 pmHe is SO buff!
June 27th, 2007 at 7:01 pm***BEEP BEEP***David Brody is kinda cute …..has got that ‘twinkle’ ***
June 27th, 2007 at 7:04 pmGOOD GOD.
WHAT A QUEEN BRODY IS!
June 27th, 2007 at 7:06 pmFlaco… he is part of the family too, right?
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
Why not?
He can be your special project, Mr P. Make us proud!
June 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pmI is a red-headed step-child
June 27th, 2007 at 7:08 pmNah, you’re cool Flaco.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:11 pmI like the way you handled “a.c.e.”
gaydar working anyone?
June 27th, 2007 at 7:12 pmI’m convinced that homo sapiens sapiens will one day be the common ancestor to a species of more intelligent human beings known as homo sapiens progressives, and to another species of sh!t flinging sightless wide-ass-monkeys known as homo sapiens flaco…
Comment by unbelievable — June 27, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
BAWAHAHHAAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHA HO ho ……
:P
whew…. forgive me… that was the funniest thing I’ve read in here in a long time.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:15 pmRemember when the “Librul” media’s excuse for this partisan discrepancy was that the Repubs were in control of all 3 branches of Government so there is more Repub guests?
June 27th, 2007 at 7:16 pmWhat’s their excuse now, since the Democrats control both Houses of Congress?
That would make a great movie.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:17 pmWhat’s their excuse now, since the Democrats control both Houses of Congress?
Comment by OxyCon — June 27, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Yea, by an ultra slim majority, not enough to override a veto or ratify an impeachment ruling.
Maybe you shouild have paid better attention in Social Studies, huh?
June 27th, 2007 at 7:18 pmThey’ll have that majority shortly of course, as elections come up, but of course by then they won’t need. it. Not with a democrat (or indpendent) President in the White House.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:21 pmThis is all part of the Islamo-Stalinist agenda… look at the “popularity†thread below.
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
I invented that term yesterday, boy.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:22 pmPlease answer all questions completely to the best of your limited knowledge
Comment by Flaco — June 27, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
Read Cosmos by Carl Sagan, Atheist Universe by David Mills, and The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins. They answer all of these questions you’ve plagerized and more.
——————————————————————————————
They answer nothing with psuedo-science and outdated darwin theory
——————————————————————————————
The reality is that because you cannot fathom billions and billions of years of anything, much less infinity, you think that it isn’t plausible. The problem with your premise it that it’s not about you. You’re a fraction of a second in an eternal realm of mass-energy that can neither be CREATED nor destroyed… Billions of years of a universe evolving, and all you get to experience is a few decades in the middle of it, and think that it’s somehow all about you… LOL. You crazy Christians are so silly.
Comment by unbelievably gullible plausible but not provable.
——————————————————————————————
Absent a credible mechanism, the transformation of a fish into a human being is nearly as miraculous as the creation of man from the dust of the earth.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:33 pmFlaco, we came from the dust of stars, get it straight.
Religion is to provide answers to the unanswerable.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:39 pm“Absent a credible mechanism, the transformation of a fish into a human being is nearly as miraculous as the creation of man from the dust of the earth”
June 27th, 2007 at 7:40 pmJeez Flaco, have you Crustians never seen “The Incredible Mr. Limpet” starring Don Notts.
#124
No one care to answer one, two questions?
Come on science majors .
(You’re a fraction of a second in an eternal realm of mass-energy that can neither be CREATED nor destroyed) ?
Incomplete?
Where did you get this?
References?
unbelievable Where is your work?
June 27th, 2007 at 7:43 pmYou get an F because you did not show your proof.
Jeez Flaco, have you Crustians never seen “The Incredible Mr. Limpet†starring Don Notts.
Comment by Flaco The Clown
——————————————————-
Great movie!
June 27th, 2007 at 7:44 pmI saw The Ghost and Mr. Chicken too.
Let’s just settle this; David Brody is Ca..Yute! and I’d ‘Have Him’ on my round table any day oooogahhh
June 27th, 2007 at 7:45 pmFlaco is from the Me generation. All about him.
June 27th, 2007 at 7:45 pmWow! cool thread tonite- all kinds of excitement. Glad to see that CT_V1 has realized that one can be welcome anywhere, and free to participate in the dialogue; all it takes is a moment to sense the mood of the room before jumping in.
Jake?