Minnesota United Methodist approve gay rights resolution

[Eightball]

Originally Posted by Dr Grump
Atomic structure is only orderly because we have been taught it is. Maybe it isn't that orderly and needs to be in a certain combination to work.

So your telling all of science that Atomic structure defies the organized, and predictable, common law of physics......and is totally random and unpredictable..........Thats your defense or rebutt?

It's interesting in my early years of Qualitative Analysis in College Chemisty, that if it weren't for the predictability of those little rascals called atoms and how their various orbits join and did-join with other elements and could be predicted via Calculus/Algebra, is all hog wash.

More and more physicists are coming to the conclusion that the earth's tenous position in our galaxy....i.e. it's relative position to the sun/moon, the sun's size and age, earth's speed of rotation, wobble, mass, size, it's location in respect to both the planets, and the nearest stars, has all contributed to an incredible mishmash of complex elements that spawned a habital planet. Astro Physicists have tried to calculate the odds of all the proper elements coming together from every source, that make this a habitable terrestrial ball, and the best computers can only give results of such bad odds that it exceeds the human comprehesion.

Parameter

Probability that feature will fall in the required range for physical life.

local abundance and distribution of dark matter 0.1
relative abundances of different exotic mass particles 0.01decay rates of different exotic mass particles 0.05
density of quasars 0.1
density of giant galaxies in the early universe 0.1
galaxy cluster size 0.1
galaxy cluster density 0.1
galaxy cluster location 0.1
galaxy size 0.1
galaxy type 0.1
galaxy mass distribution 0.2
size of galactic central bulge 0.2
galaxy location 0.1
variability of local dwarf galaxy absorption rate 0.1
quantity of galactic dust 0.1
giant star density in galaxy 0.1
frequency of gamma ray bursts in galaxy 0.05
star location relative to galactic center 0.2
star distance from corotation circle of galaxy 0.005
ratio of inner dark halo mass to stellar mass for galaxy 0.1
star distance from closest spiral arm 0.1
z-axis extremes of star’s orbit 0.02
proximity of solar nebula to a normal type I supernova eruption 0.01
timing of solar nebula formation relative to a normal type I supernova eruption 0.01
proximity of solar nebula to a type II supernova eruption 0.01
timing of solar nebula formation relative to type II supernova eruption 0.01
timing of hypernovae eruptions 0.2
number of hypernovae eruptions 0.1
masses of stars that become hypernovae 0.1
flux of cosmic ray protons 0.1
variability of cosmic ray proton flux 0.1
gas dispersal rate by companion stars, shock waves, and molecular cloud expansion in the Sun’s birthing star cluster 0.1
number of stars in birthing cluster 0.01
star formation rate in parent star vicinity during history of that star 0.1
variation in star formation rate in parent star vicinity during history of that star 0.1
birth date of the star-planetary system 0.01
number of stars in system 0.7
number and timing of close encounters by nearby stars 0.01
proximity of close stellar encounters 0.1
masses of close stellar encounters 0.1
density of brown dwarfs 0.1
distance from nearest black hole 0.2
absorption rate of planets and planetismals by parent star 0.1
star age 0.4
star metallicity 0.05
ratio of 40K, 235,238U, 232Th to iron in star-planetary system 0.02
star orbital eccentricity 0.1
star mass 0.001
star luminosity change relative to speciation types & rates 0.00001
star color 0.4
star rotation rate 0.3
rate of change in star rotation rate 0.3
star magnetic field 0.1
star magnetic field variability 0.1
stellar wind strength and variability 0.1
short period variation in parent star diameter 0.1
star’s carbon to oxygen ratio 0.01
star’s space velocity relative to Local Standard of Rest 0.05star’s short term luminosity variability 0.05
star’s long term luminosity variability 0.05
amplitude and duration of star spot cycle 0.1
number & timing of solar system encounters with interstellar gas clouds and cloudlets 0.1
galactic tidal forces on planetary system 0.2
H3+ production 0.1
supernovae rates & locations 0.01
white dwarf binary types, rates, & locations 0.01
structure of comet cloud surrounding planetary system 0.3
planetary distance from star 0.001
inclination of planetary orbit 0.5
axis tilt of planet 0.3
rate of change of axial tilt 0.01
period and size of axis tilt variation 0.1
planetary rotation period 0.1
rate of change in planetary rotation period 0.05
planetary revolution period 0.2
planetary orbit eccentricity 0.3
rate of change of planetary orbital eccentricity 0.1
rate of change of planetary inclination 0.5
period and size of eccentricity variation 0.1
period and size of inclination variation 0.1
precession in planet’s rotation 0.3
rate of change in planet’s precession 0.3
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon abundance in solar nebula 0.1
number of moons 0.2
mass and distance of moon 0.01
surface gravity (escape velocity) 0.001
tidal force from sun and moon 0.1
magnetic field 0.01
rate of change & character of change in magnetic field 0.1
albedo (planet reflectivity) 0.1
density 0.1
density of interstellar and interplanetary dust particles in vicinity of life-support planet 0.3
reducing strength of planet’s primordial mantle 0.3
thickness of crust 0.01
timing of birth of continent formation 0.1
oceans-to-continents ratio 0.2
rate of change in oceans to continents ratio 0.1
global distribution of continents 0.3
frequency, timing, & extent of ice ages 0.1
frequency, timing, & extent of global snowball events 0.1
silicate dust annealing by nebular shocks 0.02
asteroidal & cometary collision rate 0.1
change in asteroidal & cometary collision rates 0.1
rate of change in asteroidal & cometary collision rates 0.1
mass of body colliding with primordial Earth 0.002
timing of body colliding with primordial Earth 0.05
location of body’s collision with primordial Earth 0.05
position & mass of Jupiter relative to Earth 0.01
major planet eccentricities 0.05
major planet orbital instabilities 0.05
drift and rate of drift in major planet distances 0.05
number & distribution of planets 0.001
distance of gas giant planets from mean motion resonances 0.02
orbital separation distances among inner planets 0.01
mass of Neptune 0.1
total mass of Kuiper Belt asteroids 0.1
mass distribution of Kuiper Belt asteroids 0.2
average rainfall precipitation 0.01
variation and timing of average rainfall precipitation 0.01
atmospheric transparency 0.01
atmospheric pressure 0.01
atmospheric viscosity 0.1
atmospheric electric discharge rate 0.01
atmospheric temperature gradient 0.01
carbon dioxide level in atmosphere 0.01
rates of change in carbon dioxide levels in atmosphere throughout the planet’s history 0.001
rates of change in water vapor levels in atmosphere throughout the planet’s history 0.01
rate of change in methane level in early atmosphere 0.01
oxygen quantity in atmosphere 0.01
nitrogen quantity in atmosphere 0.01
carbon monoxide quantity in atmosphere 0.1
chlorine quantity in atmosphere 0.1
aerosol particle density emitted from forests 0.05
cobalt quantity in crust 0.1
arsenic quantity in crust 0.1
copper quantity in crust 0.1
boron quantity in crust 0.1
cadmium quantity in crust 0.1
calcium quantity in crust 0.4
fluorine quantity in crust 0.1
iodine quantity in crust 0.1
magnesium in crust 0.4
manganese quantity in crust 0.1
nickel quantity in crust 0.1
phosphorus quantity in crust 0.1
potassium quantity in crust 0.4
tin quantity in crust 0.1
zinc quantity in crust 0.1
molybdenum quantity in crust 0.05
vanadium quantity in crust 0.1
chromium quantity in crust 0.1
selenium quantity in crust 0.1
iron quantity in oceans 0.1
tropospheric ozone quantity 0.01
stratospheric ozone quantity 0.01
mesospheric ozone quantity 0.01
water vapor level in atmosphere 0.01
oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere 0.1
quantity of greenhouse gases in atmosphere 0.01
rate of change in greenhouse gases in atmosphere 0.01
poleward heat transport in atmosphere by mid-latitude storms 0.2
quantity of forest & grass fires 0.01
quantity of sea salt aerosols in troposphere 0.1
soil mineralization 0.1
quantity of anaeorbic bacteria in the oceans 0.01
quantity of aerobic bacteria in the oceans 0.01
quantity of anaerobic nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the early oceans 0.01
quantity, variety, and timing of sulfate-reducing bacteria 0.00001
quantity of geobacteraceae 0.01
quantity of aerobic photoheterotrophic bacteria 0.01
quantity of decomposer bacteria in soil 0.01
quantity of mycorrhizal fungi in soil 0.01
quantity of nitrifying microbes in soil 0.01
quantity & timing of vascular plant introductions 0.001
quantity, timing, & placement of carbonate-producing animals 0.00001
quantity, timing, & placement of methanogens 0.00001
phosphorus and iron absorption by banded iron formations 0.01
quantity of soil sulfur 0.1
ratio of electrically conducting inner core radius to radius of the adjacent turbulent fluid shell 0.2
ratio of core to shell (see above) magnetic diffusivity 0.2
magnetic Reynold’s number of the shell (see above) 0.2
elasticity of iron in the inner core 0.2
electromagnetic Maxwell shear stresses in the inner core 0.2
core precession frequency for planet 0.1
rate of interior heat loss for planet 0.1
quantity of sulfur in the planet’s core 0.1
quantity of silicon in the planet’s core 0.1
quantity of water at subduction zones in the crust 0.01
quantity of high pressure ice in subducting crustal slabs 0.1
hydration rate of subducted minerals 0.1
water absorption capacity of planet’s lower mantle 0.1
tectonic activity 0.05
rate of decline in tectonic activity 0.1
volcanic activity 0.1
rate of decline in volcanic activity 0.1
location of volcanic eruptions 0.1
continental relief 0.1
viscosity at Earth core boundaries 0.01
viscosity of lithosphere 0.2
thickness of mid-mantle boundary 0.1
rate of sedimentary loading at crustal subduction zones 0.1
biomass to comet infall ratio 0.01
regularity of cometary infall 0.1
number, intensity, and location of hurricanes 0.02
intensity of primordial cosmic superwinds 0.05
number of smoking quasars 0.05
formation of large terrestrial planet in the presence of two or more gas giant planets 0.1
orbital stability of large terrestrial planet in the presence of two or more gas giant planets 0.01
total mass of Oort Cloud objects 0.2
mass distribution of Oort Cloud objects 0.2
air turbulence in troposphere 0.1
quantity of sulfate aerosols in troposphere 0.1
quantity of actinide bioreducing bacteria 0.01
quantity of phytoplankton 0.001
hydrothermal alteration of ancient oceanic basalts 0.01
quantity of iodocarbon-emitting marine organisms 0.01
location of dislocation creep relative to diffusion creep in and near the crust-mantle boundary (determines mantle convection dynamics) 0.1
size of oxygen sinks in the planet’s crust 0.2
size of oxygen sinks in the planet’s mantle 0.2
mantle plume production 0.1
number and mass of planets in system suffering significant drift 0.2
mass of the galaxy’s central black hole 0.3
timing of the growth of the galaxy’s central black hole 0.5
rate of in-spiraling gas into galaxy’s central black hole during life epoch 0.05
distance from nearest giant galaxy 0.5
distance from nearest Seyfert galaxy 0.9
amount of mass loss by star in its youth 0.1
rate of mass loss of star in its youth 0.3
rate of mass loss by star during its middle age 0.3
quantity of magnetars (proto-neutron stars with very strong magnetic fields) produced during galaxy’s history 0.05
variation in coverage of star’s surface by faculae 0.5
ratio of galaxy’s dark halo mass to its baryonic mass 0.2
ratio of galaxy’s dark halo mass to its dark halo core mass 0.2
galaxy cluster formation rate 0.1
proximity of supernovae and hypernovae throughout history of planet and planetary system 0.1
tidal heating from neighboring galaxies 0.5
tidal heating from dark galactic and galaxy cluster halos 0.5
intensity and duration of galactic winds 0.3
density of dwarf galaxies in vicinity of home galaxy 0.1
amount of photoevaporation during planetary formation from parent star and other nearby stars 0.2
orbital inclinations of companion planets in system 0.1
variation of orbital inclinations of companion planets 0.2
inclinations and eccentricities of nearby terrestrial planets 0.3
in-spiral rate of stars into black holes within parent galaxy 0.7
strength of magnetocentrifugally launched wind of parent star during its protostar era 0.2
degree to which the atmospheric composition of the planet departs from thermodynamic equilibrium 0.01
delivery rate of volatiles to planet from asteroid-comet belts during epoch of planet formation 0.1
amount of outward migration of Neptune 0.1
amount of outward migration of Uranus 0.1
Q-value (rigidity) of planet during its early history 0.2
variation in Q-value of planet during its early history 0.3
injection efficiency of shock wave material from nearby supernovae into collapsing molecular cloud that forms star and planetary system 0.1
number of giant galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number of large galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number of dwarf galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number and sizes of planets and planetesimals consumed by star 0.3
distance of galaxy’s corotation circle from center of galaxy 0.1
rate of diffusion of heavy elements from galactic center out to the galaxy’s corotation circle 0.2
outward migration of star relative to galactic center 0.3
degree to which exotic matter self interacts 0.01
migration of planet during its formation in the protoplanetary disk 0.1
viscosity gradient in protoplanetary disk 0.1
variations in star’s diameter 0.1
average quantity of gas infused into the universe’s first star clusters 0.1
frequency of late impacts by large asteroids and comets 0.1
level of supersonic turbulence in the infant universe 0.05
number and sizes of intergalactic hydrogen gas clouds in galaxy’s vicinity 0.1
average longevity of intergalactic hydrogen gas clouds in galaxy’s vicinity 0.2
minimization of chloromethane production by rotting plants and fungi that are exposed to the atmosphere (life’s survival demands very efficient burial mechanisms and relatively low temperatures) ..01
avoidance of apsidal phase locking in the orbits of planets in the planetary system 0.03
number density of the first metal-free stars to form in the universe 0.02
epoch during which the first metal-free stars form in cosmic history 0.1
level of spot production on star’s surface 0.2
variability of spot production on star’s surface 0.2
size of the carbon sink in the deep mantle of the planet 0.05
average circumstellar medium density for white dwarf red giant pairs 0.2
number densities of metal-poor and extremely metal-poor galaxies 0.1
rate of growth of central spheroid for the galaxy 0.05
amount of gas infalling into the central core of the galaxy 0.1
level of cooling of gas infalling into the central core of the galaxy 0.1
ratio of dual water molecules, (H2O)2, to single water molecules, H 2O, in the troposphere 0.03
heavy element abundance in the intracluster medium for the early universe 0.1
quantity of volatiles on and in Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone 0.001
rate of infall of intergalactic gas into emerging and growing galaxies during first five billion years of cosmic history 0.1
pressure of the intra-galaxy-cluster medium 0.1
proximity of solar nebula to a type I supernova whose core underwent significant gravitational collapse before carbon deflagration 0.01
timing of solar nebula formation relative to a type I supernova whose core underwent significant gravitational collapse before carbon deflagrataion 0.01
sizes of largest cosmic structures in the universe 0.01
level of spiral substructure in spiral galaxy 0.2
mass of outer gas giant planet relative to inner gas giant planet 0.05
Kozai oscillation level in planetary system 0.7
triggering of El Nino events by explosive volcanic eruptions 0.1
time window between the peak of kerogen production and the appearance of intelligent life 0.1
time window between the production of cisterns in the planet’s crust that can effectively collect and store petroleum and natural gas and the appearance of intelligent life 0.1
reduction of Kuiper Belt mass during planetary system’s early history 0.1
efficiency of stellar mass loss during final stages of stellar burning 0.3
efficiency of flows of silicate melt, hypersaline hydrothermal fluids, and hydrothermal vapors in the upper crust 0.2
supernova eruption rate when galaxy is young 0.2
range of rotation rates for stars are on the verge of becoming supernovae 0.2
quantity of dust formed in the ejecta of Population III supernovae 0.1
chemical composition of dust ejected by Population III stars 0.3
time in cosmic history when the merging of galaxies peaks 0.2
efficiency of ocean pumps that return nutrients to ocean surfaces 0.1
sulfur and sulfate content of oceans 0.3
density of extragalactic intruder stars in solar neighborhood 0.4
density of dust-exporting stars in solar neighborhood 0.3
average rate of increase in galaxy sizes 0.1
change in average rate of increase in galaxy sizes throughout cosmic history 0.1
proximity of solar nebula to asymptotic giant branch stars 0.05
timing of solar nebula formation relative to its close approach to asymptotic giant branch stars 0.05
orientation of continents relative to prevailing winds 0.3
quantity and proximity of gamma-ray burst events relative to emerging solar nebula 0.01
proximity of superbubbles to planetary system during life epoch of life-support planet 0.03
proximity of strong ultraviolet emitting stars to planetary system during life epoch of life-support planet 0.02
number, mass, and distance from star of gas giant planets in addition to planets of the mass and distance of Jupiter and Saturn 0.01
quantity and proximity of galactic gamma-ray burst events relative to time window for intelligent life 0.1
infall of buckminsterfullerenes from interplanetary and interstellar space upon surface of planet 0.3
quantity of silicic acid in the oceans 0.1
heat flow through the planet’s mantle from radiometric decay in planet’s core 0.002
water absorption by planet’s mantle 0.01
timing of star formation peak for the universe 0.2
timing of star formation peak for the galaxy 0.2
*
Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters ≈ 10 to the -388 power
dependency factors estimate ≈ 10 to the -96 power

longevity requirements estimate ≈ 10 to the 14th power

Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters ≈ 10 to the -304 power
Maximum possible number of life support bodies in universe ≈ 10 to the 22nd power

Thus, less than 1 chance in 10 to the 282 power(million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion) exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles.

References supporting the above data results on a following page:

 

[Dr Grump]

So your telling all of science that Atomic structure defies the organized, and predictable, common law of physics......and is totally random and unpredictable..........Thats your defense or rebutt?

It's interesting in my early years of Qualitative Analysis in College Chemisty, that if it weren't for the predictability of those little rascals called atoms and how their various orbits join and did-join with other elements and could be predicted via Calculus/Algebra, is all hog wash.

More and more physicists are coming to the conclusion that the earth's tenous position in our galaxy....i.e. it's relative position to the sun/moon, the sun's size and age, earth's speed of rotation, wobble, mass, size, it's location in respect to both the planets, and the nearest stars, has all contributed to an incredible mishmash of complex elements that spawned a habital planet. Astro Physicists have tried to calculate the odds of all the proper elements coming together from every source, that make this a habitable terrestrial ball, and the best computers can only give results of such bad odds that it exceeds the human comprehesion.

hhhmmmm. Re your first paragraph. I'm trying to get across what I mean, but am finding it difficult using this medium. Let's put it this way, I don't think it is random or predictable, but at one time scientists probably thought it was, and until certain laws of physics and chemistry were put in place by academics and agreed upon by their peers, it might have seemed random. Does that make sense? I hope so, else I dunno how to explain it.

As for your last paragraph, you bring up an interesting point. See, to me, if anything that backs up my spin on it. Quite a few scientists believe the number of Earth-type planets in our galaxy and universe are a lot less than some would believe, and to me it is directly due to the randomness of the distances between planets and their stars. You see this randomness as a sign that some higher being must be at work to put us in such a position. I call it nothing but pure luck due to our star spitting out this lump of rock a certain distance from its rotation.

BTW, I ain't a physicist or a chemist, so it is interesting to read your insights. Cheers

 

[Dr Grump]

Holy heck, that is one mother of an edit and I'll not even pretend to understand it...however I would suggest that all the varients in the equation would have to be fact for the solution to be true? IOW, is what you posted a theory or a fact?

 

[Eightball]

Holy heck, that is one mother of an edit and I'll not even pretend to understand it...however I would suggest that all the varients in the equation would have to be fact for the solution to be true? IOW, is what you posted a theory or a fact?

This page has all the references.......
and the data.

Basically the heading of the odds or probability of life happening on earth.

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design_evidences/200404_probabilities_for_life_on_earth.shtml

Now before you jump the gun and say, "bias"...this Astro physicist is a Christian.........This Guy........started out as an agnostic.......and his resulting work as an Astro Physicist pushed him to conclusions that in turn pushed him to the Christian faith. He was one very big skeptic of an intelligence behind anything created.

 

[Dr Grump]

This page has all the references.......
and the data.

Basically the heading of the odds or probability of life happening on earth.

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design_evidences/200404_probabilities_for_life_on_earth.shtml

Now before you jump the gun and say, "bias"...this Astro physicist is a Christian.........This Guy........started out as an agnostic.......and his resulting work as an Astro Physicist pushed him to conclusions that in turn pushed him to the Christian faith. He was one very big skeptic of an intelligence behind anything created.

Yeah, well it is a big bias. And I have no idea with regard to the quoted documents, which parts they are talking about without looking into all 240 cited bits of research. But, interesting nonetheless...

 

[Eightball]

hhhmmmm. Re your first paragraph. I'm trying to get across what I mean, but am finding it difficult using this medium. Let's put it this way, I don't think it is random or predictable, but at one time scientists probably thought it was, and until certain laws of physics and chemistry were put in place by academics and agreed upon by their peers, it might have seemed random. Does that make sense? I hope so, else I dunno how to explain it.

As for your last paragraph, you bring up an interesting point. See, to me, if anything that backs up my spin on it. Quite a few scientists believe the number of Earth-type planets in our galaxy and universe are a lot less than some would believe, and to me it is directly due to the randomness of the distances between planets and their stars. You see this randomness as a sign that some higher being must be at work to put us in such a position. I call it nothing but pure luck due to our star spitting out this lump of rock a certain distance from its rotation.

BTW, I ain't a physicist or a chemist, so it is interesting to read your insights. Cheers

This alleged randomness is too coincidental to be ingored as just randomness. To many elements in this equation that contributed to a perfect environment for Carbon based life. If just one single element in this alleged random equation is of by one tittle, earth would not support Carbon based life, and or probably any type of life.

When odds are this extreme and incredible.....I start to wonder.......I come from a very scientific background/education. I'm not a skeptic, but a realist.

 

[Eightball]

Yeah, well it is a big bias. And I have no idea with regard to the quoted documents, which parts they are talking about without looking into all 240 cited bits of research. But, interesting nonetheless...

Side Note: By the way, Dr. Hugh Ross isn't too popular with many in the biblical community as he claims to be an Old earth Christian. He believes that the bible supports a several billion year old earth, not a 10-12 thousand year old earth. I totally agree with him, and am also not part of a majority. Those seven days of creation are not necessarily days in Hebrew, but can mean epics..........or much longer spans of time.

So the fact that the above Astro Physicist.....being a major skeptic was moved to believe that these odds were unsurmountable in natural terms, doesn't mean anything?

These odds actually calculate out to the realm of "impossible" to happen in scientific terms, yet you choose to accept random clashing of atoms in primordial soup over 3.3 billion years and ending up with the complexity of the human species as more feasible.

Well, odds have been run on the likelihood of just random chance in primordial soup 3.3 billion years ago making enough successful combinations of atoms into complex organic molecules that inevitably cooperated together to form man, and computers totally disagree with a 3.3 billion year time line. In other words........it would take much, much more time to end up with complex organisms than a paltry 3.3 billion years. It's way too short. The universe itself is considered to be 12-15 billions years old, and that isn't even enough time to raise a complex organism from primordia soup. Very Bad odds.

 

[MissileMan]

Side Note: By the way, Dr. Hugh Ross isn't too popular with many in the biblical community as he claims to be an Old earth Christian. He believes that the bible supports a several billion year old earth, not a 10-12 thousand year old earth. I totally agree with him, and am also not part of a majority. Those seven days of creation are not necessarily days in Hebrew, but can mean epics..........or much longer spans of time.

So the fact that the above Astro Physicist.....being a major skeptic was moved to believe that these odds were unsurmountable in natural terms, doesn't mean anything?

These odds actually calculate out to the realm of "impossible" to happen in scientific terms, yet you choose to accept random clashing of atoms in primordial soup over 3.3 billion years and ending up with the complexity of the human species as more feasible.

Well, odds have been run on the likelihood of just random chance in primordial soup 3.3 billion years ago making enough successful combinations of atoms into complex organic molecules that inevitably cooperated together to form man, and computers totally disagree with a 3.3 billion year time line. In other words........it would take much, much more time to end up with complex organisms than a paltry 3.3 billion years. It's way too short. The universe itself is considered to be 12-15 billions years old, and that isn't even enough time to raise a complex organism from primordia soup. Very Bad odds.

This, of course, is assuming that this scientist isn't totally full of shit. A greater portion of his list is pure conjecture. In other words, his calculated probability is worthless. What he calculated was the likelihood of an exact duplicate of the planet earth existing in the universe.:wank:

 

[Eightball]

This, of course, is assuming that this scientist isn't totally full of shit. A greater portion of his list is pure conjecture. In other words, his calculated probability is worthless. What he calculated was the likelihood of an exact duplicate of the planet earth existing in the universe::

Right on partner: That likelihood is the "corker" of the dilemma.

There are so many factors that had to be so perfectly arranged for planet earth to be a hospitable place for life, it's mind boggling, and has to make a person wonder.

Hey, guys........I fought intelligent design for years......I just couldn't accept anything but science as my "god". It contained all the answers or would in time find all answers.

Side Note: That little Jacking-off fellow really lowered the respect/level of our interaction in this discussion. I would never use that icon under any circumstances, as it seems to be a affront to cordial discussion on this interesting topic.

 

[MissileMan]

There are so many factors that had to be so perfectly arranged for planet earth to be a hospitable place for life

While this is true, I question the veracity of your scientist's list. How can he possibly know that every item on that list was required for the formation of life on earth? An item's existence here on Earth in no way automatically makes it a prerequisite for life on Earth or anywhere else.

Side Note: That little Jacking-off fellow really lowered the respect/level of our interaction in this discussion. I would never use that icon under any circumstances, as it seems to be a affront to cordial discussion on this interesting topic.

The wanker was intended to represent the scientist, it wasn't aimed at you.

 

[Eightball]

While this is true, I question the veracity of your scientist's list. How can he possibly know that every item on that list was required for the formation of life on earth? An item's existence here on Earth in no way automatically makes it a prerequisite for life on Earth or anywhere else.



The wanker was intended to represent the scientist, it wasn't aimed at you.

I doubt Dr. Hugh Ross would convey a similar salute to you, as I have personally met this man on two occassions and found him to be of the utmost respect in the scientific community. He carries himself with humility and respect for others with divergent views from his own.

As my moniker at the bottom conveys......I only post what I'm willing to respectfully say face to face with any individual on this forum or any other forum.

I can't even begin to amass in my life all the accolades and awards that Dr. Hugh Ross has received as a rusult of his pains-taking research and studies. He is imminently respected both in the secular and religious community.

 

[MissileMan]

I doubt Dr. Hugh Ross would convey a similar salute to you, as I have personally met this man on two occassions and found him to be of the utmost respect in the scientific community. He carries himself with humility and respect for others with divergent views from his own.

As my moniker at the bottom conveys......I only post what I'm willing to respectfully say face to face with any individual on this forum or any other forum.

I can't even begin to amass in my life all the accolades and awards that Dr. Hugh Ross has received as a rusult of his pains-taking research and studies. He is imminently respected both in the secular and religious community.

Uh huh...and how many fellow scientists agree with his assessment of the probabilities of life on other planets?

 

[Joz]

United Methodists approve gay rights

A quote from Dr. Dobson's book, Marriage Under Fire, page 25,
" The United Methodist Church, after three years of bitter debate and wrangling, decided on May 4, 2004, to affirm both their opposition to homosexuality and their ban on ordaining non-celebate homosexuals." Article by Peter Smith, Courier Journal.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Most organized churches of any denomination and size have been infiltrated by illuminati agents. These very churches will assist them in persecuting any christian who remains "closeminded".

The test I would use is the dispensationalist test. Ask bluntly "Do jews need jesus for salvation?" IF they hedge at all, or ask why you're asking such a "divisive" question, just walk away. Get your stuff and go.

 

[5stringJeff]

Most organized churches of any denomination and size have been infiltrated by illuminati agents. These very churches will assist them in persecuting any christian who remains "closeminded".

The test I would use is the dispensationalist test. Ask bluntly "Do jews need jesus for salvation?" IF they hedge at all, or ask why you're asking such a "divisive" question, just walk away. Get your stuff and go.

I see you've progressed to joining Jew paranoia with Illuminati paranoia. You've really got to stop believing everything you read online.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I see you've progressed to joining Jew paranoia with Illuminati paranoia. You've really got to stop believing everything you read online.

The occultism of the illuminati has always been linked with occultism of the kabbalah in the talmud. You really need to get informed.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Check out the origins of the star of david.

http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/starof.htm

The hexagram was brought to the Jewish people by Solomon when he turned to witchcraft and idolatry after his marriage to Pharaoh's daughter in 922B.C. It became known as the Seal of Solomon in Egyptian magic and witchcraft. David had absolutely nothing to do with the hexagram and that star most certainly did not, in any way, represent God's people. Solomon gave himself up to satanic worship and built altars to Aashtroeth and Moloch (Saturn).

The hexagram faded from Jewish usage for 2,600 years. Then in the 1800’s, in Germany, it was adopted by Mayer Rothchild to mark his house. The six pointed star was used as the Rothchild coat of arms. It is difficult to pin down the date at which the six pointed hexagram star became known as the so-called Star of David. In fact the earliest Jewish application of the symbol outside the Rothchild banking and financial empire is 1873. That was the year that the Magen David was adopted as a Jewish device by the American Jewish Publication Society. It is not even mentioned in the rabbinic literature searches. Other than that fact, no one seems to know when or how the Occult or Satanic star, became the Star of David. What should a Christian or observant Jew have to do with this symbol, NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING. Keep the symbol out of your house. The evidence is overwhelming that it is a cursed symbol which may give demonic ground or license.

 

[Eightball]

A quote from Dr. Dobson's book, Marriage Under Fire, page 25,
" The United Methodist Church, after three years of bitter debate and wrangling, decided on May 4, 2004, to affirm both their opposition to homosexuality and their ban on ordaining non-celebate homosexuals." Article by Peter Smith, Courier Journal.

Knowing that Dr. Dobson is a very credible source, this is an interesting change by that denomination in a short 2 year time span.

If there was bitter wrangling going on back in 2004, then maybe the tide of change to approving the Gay Agenda was getting stronger, but not quite there, yet.
.......
The Methodist and Episcopalian denomination have been closely tied together in the United States.

My father lost both his parents in the 1920's(Spanish Flu) in Southern California and was placed in what what was called an Episcopalian-Methodist orphanage.

With that said, I think most know that the Episcopalian denomination is further down the road of acceptance of unbiblical doctrine in the realm of allowing publically avowed homosexuals to be acceptable in church, spiritual leadership positions.

It appears that the Methodist denomination is on that dangerous slippery slope towards the "wide" un-incumbered" highway, of selective bible interpretation too.
.......

Concerning the Illumnati, Freemasonry, Shriners, Rosicrusianist, etc.:
I will agree that their philosophys espoused in their organizations are very unbiblical and actually qualify them for the "cult" status. Never the less it's done very covertly in their teachings as to not raise any "red flags" with Christian members.

The part that I think is overlooked is that most members of these organizations do not, or are not aware that they are being anti-biblical. In fact many Christians have joined the Freemasons, not realizing that the tenents of the organization has it roots in the occult. Albert Pike, who wrote, "The Morals and Dogmas of Freemasonry" was a very staunch pro-slavery Southerner, and a member of the KKK. He, Pike, and his book, is often held up as one of Freemasonry's great pieces of literature.

My father was a 32 degree Freemason, having gone through all the Chair positions of his Scottish Rite Lodge......and ending up in the final position of Worshipful Master. It wasn't until years later as my father attended a bible church with me, that he slowly severed his ties with the Lodge. He never did a formal severing, but he gradually drifted away from attending lodge meetings, and his philosophical views gradually started to change from a New Age approach of life, and return to his original roots as a Christian. My father was a converted Christian in his early teen years, but without suitable discipleship(nurturing-encouragement) in the Christian faith, he gradually drifted into cultic interests such as Christian Science ala Mary Baker Eddy, and thence onward into Freemasonry. My father never saw Freemasonary as a defined religion, but only as a fraternal organization that groomed men into better civic stature and maturity. That was the mantra that was projected/taught to initiates. Fortunately, or unfortunately, my father never became a 33 degree Freemason. The teachings of the 33 degree are the real "eye opener" yet by that time most Masons are all ready indoctrinated to the extent that they believe that all that is taught by the Lodge is gospel. All is also taught and re-inforced with hideous oaths that keep the Mason in a position of obedients too.

For those Freemasons who have just taken the initial oaths(Apprentices), and our avowed Christians, just let me make this very blunt. The 33 degree reveals that Lucifer is the true God, or great architect of the universe. Albert Pike's, Morals and Dogmas, hints and hits openly at this revelation. What most Masonic apologists do with this revelation is state that Pike or any other famous, revered Mason does not speak for the body. It's their own thoughts, and interpretations. Basically, Masons are free to accept or disapprove. Sadly, the 33 degree has been revealed publically by Freemasons that have reneged their membership in the lodge. Of course as is the case with any Christian cult, or non Christian cult, the organization will disavow or discredit these folks that leave their organizations. In some cases they are shunned publically, and also punished privately. Many Christian preachers who have bravely set out to purge their membership of Masons who held church positions such as deacons and elders, have paid dearly for their efforts. Many preachers have been escorted out of their communities, literally on the "rail", others in more subtle but painful ways(public slander, and shunning of the community). Their families were threatened, they were shunned by the community, as the Masonic influence is especially strong in towns in the Southern states. Many high political, judicial, positions are held by Freemasons. It is encouraged by the Lodge. It is also encouraged by the Lodge for their Christian leaning members to seek out positions of leadership within their Christian denominations too.

The famous pastor Charles Finney who founded Oberlin College and was a strong Lutheran, actually was a Freemason, and finally came to a point in his life where he disavowed his ties with the lodge as he came under personal conviction of his participation in the lodge and his desire to biblically sound in doctrine in his ministerial leadership. He wrote at least one book where he revealed a lot of the secret ceremonies of the lodge. He didn't do it out of hatred, but out of a love and passion to open the eyes of Lodge members who were true Christians and were been duped into thinking that the Lodge was innocent, and just a men's fraternal organization.

Lodge membership in the 1800's did indeed drop off drastically, as many denominations purged their leadership rolls of Freemasons. They were welcome to be members still in some denominations and not in others. Bottom line, the Freemason did not have the credentials to be leading the "flock" so to speak.

To this day, you would be surprised at how many preachers/ministers in the Protestant, and evangelical wings of the Christian church are Freemasons, or Shriners. Most churches hesitate to confront these folks, as its the repercussions against the person blowing the whistle can be quite severe.

Most or many preachers in the Christian church are basically ignorant, or take an Ostriche's approach(sticking head in a hole and staying non-commital) rather than confront the issue of Goats being in their flock of sheep. Most see the Freemasonry membership question as a non-issue. Fearing a loss of membership as a result of adhereing to pure biblical mandates, resulting in confronting the Freemasonry issue, these pastors/ministers in some ways "prostitute" themselves to the threats of rejection.

Again, many Freemasons are born-again Christians, but haven't dilligently studied the foundation(bible) of their own system of belief to realize the covert, anti-biblical nature of Freemasonry. The early degrees are quite innocent in nature, and do not reveal who the true God of Freemasonry is...... There are, however many warning flags that present themselves to the early or novice/apprentice Freemason. Most notable are the oaths taken to not reveal the contents of each degree that they receive. These oaths are crude, bloody, warnings of death via the cutting of their throats from ear to ear.(I know, its hard to believe, but its documented. Its no secret.)

Side Note: Very similar warning oaths are also administered in the Mormon Temple to advanced members of the LDS. Not a surprise as their founder, prophet, Joseph Smith Jr. was a Freemason. In fact secret hand shakes, as well as the wearing of ceremonial aprons is all from Masonic ritual.

Probably one notable, great pull of Christians to Masonry is that King Solomon is purported to be their founder. No archeologolocial evidence reveals this at all . In fact Freemasonry as it is practiced nowadays goes back to France(no surprise) and is dated in the 1700's.

Interestingly, Voltaire's influence on the world started in France around that time too. We know what great contributions Voltaire gave to the world don't we.

 

[jillian]

Knowing that Dr. Dobson is a very credible source

The guy who thinks Spongebob Squarepants is gay??? Credible???

:rotflmao:

 

[Joz]

The guy who thinks Spongebob Squarepants is gay??? Credible???

:rotflmao:

Controversy
....However, SpongeBob's popularity magnified the intensity of the controversy.

Notably, SpongeBob's somewhat feminine characteristics and his close friendship with Patrick led some viewers to the conclusion that he was gay. Around the beginning of the third season, SpongeBob and Patrick were frequently depicted holding hands. In the 2002 episode "Rock-a-Bye Bivalve", SpongeBob and Patrick adopt a baby scallop, furthering the rumors because of the implications that the two made major life decisions together, as a couple would. The episode also contains some subtle sexual jokes:

* When SpongeBob and Patrick are playing with the scallop in a musical montage, they are seen cycling with the scallop past two fish, a male and a female. The couple appears to be very confused and is shown with a thought bubble over their heads, containing the equation Sponge + Starfish = Scallop?.
* When it's time for bed, the camera angles suggest that SpongeBob and Patrick are getting into the same bed, but then the camera pulls away to reveal that the two are, in fact, sleeping on different layers of the same bed and not on the same mattress (SpongeBob's bed consists of 3 mattresses). SpongeBob is on the top and Patrick is on the middle, where SpongeBob then squishes Patrick by letting his fall on Patrick.
* At the end of the episode, the scallop flies away and SpongeBob and Patrick reminisce about the fun times they had with the scallop. Patrick then suggests, "Let's have another", and SpongeBob seems to be in shock. Then the screen fades to black and the episode ends.

This episode was never aired in Russia, Japan, France, Poland, Romania and Italy, because it was thought to show a homosexual-like couple, although it has been distributed in those countries via pirated DVDs......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpongeBob_SquarePants#Controversy