Total posts: 4,363
That claim may sound critical, but a cis-gender male who thinks female is, still biologically male. Thinking does not change bone structure, muscle mass, or natural endurance, and taking hormones for the differential effect does not make a complete change. Therefore a trans-to-female is overly male in these factors over females, making "her" abilities advantageous over cis-females, on balance. There is a significant push for trans-to-females who currently compete as cis-females. I looked, but could not find any data on trans-to-males competing with cis-males; a research failure I find curious.
Nevertheless, why don't trans simply compete among themselves, just as the traditional separation of male/female sports? I've seen a graphic representation of trans, adding a third spike on a circle, which, curiously, makes use of the traditional male/female patterns, but combined. Why not originate a completely different symbolic representations? Either this fairly distinguishes trans as separate genders, or it doesn't.
Created:
Posted in:
One green energy proponent, Kammie Harris, thought she told a joke at Annapolis last Friday, talking to graduates in electrical engineering how they were going to produce energy with wind and solar, and even combat power by the same. Then she quipped, "do you think a marine would rather have batteries in her backpack, or a rolled-up solar panel?" Nobody laughed but Kammie.
Nope, not just a bad joke, but a useless joke. That's the difference between actual electrical engineers and a life-log politician. The latter think they know everything, knowing, in actuality, nothing but convincing people to vote for them. Why would that marine be walking with a backpack, during the day, with a solar panel rolled-up in it? What's she going to do, take the collector out at night? Gracious, what a dummie. Kamie, not the marine. The marine would have seen through that futile exercise, but Kammie has never hauled around a solar panel in her life, day or night.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Okay, all good, then.
Unrelated question re: your avatar, a glass of water. I have a theory about such: I try to be optimistic. I don't care if a glass of water is full, half-full, or whatever. I'll drink it. I just cannot pass up a drinking fountain. You?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@Bones
Sorry, you are 71 years, 8 months, 3 weeks and 2 days happy? I, unlike you,
Is your 'social life' dedicated to internet scoping? Seems you know more of me than is revealed on my DArt profile, and that is dangerous ground, my friend. I suggest you back off. This is a website of exchange of ideas, not personal investigation.
Ragnar, make note, please.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
You may be to old to understand, but there's something called shortening words.
So, I'll give you a short word: map.
Look at virtually any map of the world. How is the portion of the North American Continent that is the U.S. named? America? Nope, because the continent is a greater land mass than the United States, the name of the map of what you claim. The full name of teh country is the United States of America; we are a smaller portion of the large whole that is North America. Not to mention, as reminded before, the object of your topis is NOT America, but the U.S., specifically. Ignore it if you will, but it was your short words.
Then observe the map that Columbus probably used in the voyage of 1492, and likely the following three voyages. That map was produced in 12491 by a cartographer named Henricus Martellus. Look it up. Is there an "America" named on that map? No.
The observe a amp that Columbus had no access to; it was produced in 1507, the year following Chris' death. It does have a land mass on it called "America," but is completely incorrect, having n o relation to the actual landmasses that are North and South American continents, and there is no recognition of what wold be come the U.S.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I'm not sure I was clear. I do not support flat earth theory
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Seems to me, on that basis [with which I agree] that achieving escape velocity from a flat earth would be so easy to accomplish, we likely could have achieved it with a hot air balloon, because it might be possible even without propulsion, an absolute necessity with a spherical Earth, even of a smaller size.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Just a suggestion:
If you're really that interested in a justified answer, look at the issue from Fruit_Inspector's perspective and find your own justification. Play devil's advocate, so to speak. If you cannot argue a point in your opponent's favor, what are you doing here?
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
Seems to me, by a read, that his brothers did that. Why blame God, since God allows free agency, even to be evil.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
To be art, sacred or profane (I mean sacred in a secular sense, too), I believe the would be artist must express ingenuity. By that, I mean that any fool can dip a hand into a pigment and slap that hand on a cave wall. But, the guy who put his hand on the wall and spat the pigment from his mouth onto the wall, making the negative space shape of his hand, that guy was innovative. That’s art.
Created:
Posted in:
@Stephen
As if I am unable to wear someone else’s shoes for a moment just to demonstrate that what is not thought to be true can be true, after all. It takes compassion to be empathetic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
You ignore the custom of the day of grown children taking in their aged parents for their continued care. Normally, Jesus would have performed that service for his beloved mother, but was, at the time, uniquely indisposed, so he was asking John to stand in for him to perform that traditional service, and advising his mother of same. By using familial reference, he was merely identifying the relationship, though artificial, was still important. See commandment #5
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
The nature of the beast (life) being as it is, having children takes care of itself. Some things don’t need analysis beyond that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nevets
It’s already covered by the several other subjects listed, by our own designation of “history of xxx”. One can easily reference a history of Sports, for example, in the Sports topic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
@Benjamin
You're both arguing on two sides of the climate issue as if there is one ideal climate we ought to try to achieve. Is there but one, for the whole Earth? No. But, Benjamin is correct; we're only guessing that any given level of CO2 in the atmosphere is catastrophic. We certainly had more CO2 in the atmosphere when our placental mammalian ancestors 140M years ago seemed to survive with physiological systems virtually identical to ours. Why did they survive? Because we should not strip Darwin of his primary contribution to science: adaptability.
Created:
Posted in:
@ Stephen
I'll take Jarius' words on the opinion of his daughter's death, as he says it outright. I'll accept that he checked.
As for Lazarus, you suddenly dismiss the ability for Jesus to apply metaphor. Strip him of it completely. Fine; your prerogative. But consider that Jesus is preparing the sisters and others witnessing the event that Lazarus, though dead a few days [he's begun to stink, yeah?] by priesthood power, and by faith, he can be raised from the dead as though just asleep; a concept completely foreign to the people, and Stephen.
Reading the Bible is important, but understanding is vital. Read with that intent, my friend. Reading with contempt will just make you angry.
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
Making certain your agenda holds, with a feature of argument not present in your #1. Who bloody cares if service is rendered as a favor to whom? You didn't in #1. Raised now purely as agenda. Too bad I don't approach holy writ in that fashion, but, to each their own.
Created:
Posted in:
Your first source:
Truth was, he was in the Bahamas.
The list of the United States [your topic] does not include the Bahamas
Your second source:
your third source: first voyage
Columbus sailed from island to island in what we now know as the Caribbean,
third source, second voyage
He found the Hispaniola settlement destroyed
settlement from firs voyage, not what is now U.S.
third source, third voyage
visited Trinidad and the South American mainland before returning to the ill-fated Hispaniola settlement,
still not the U.S.
third source, fourth voyage
This time, Columbus made it all the way to Panama
still not the U.S. Last voyage of Columbus. Yes, he set foot on islands and mainland of the Americas, the Continents, but not evewr on sovereign U.S. soil. Face it bud, you set the topic on the United States, specifically, not the Americas. We are the United States of America, but the U.S. does not comprise the total land mass of the two continents, and not even the total of one continent. A knowledge of history would teach you that. Skipped that day?
AS for my age, it demonstrates that you skim poorly. and that is apparently how you read, or I would not need to correct your research. I am clearly not the second-most active forum member. More skimming.
Created:
Posted in:
@ RM
Every single disciple and person Jesus used his power on to cure was male, correct?
No. Not correct.
The daughter of a synagogue leader, raised from the dead. The woman, caught in adultery, thought to be the Magdalene. Also, Mary Magdalene was possessed of 7 demons. The woman who touched his robe and was healed. Joanna, the wife of Herod's house manager. The crippled daughter of a man named Abraham. Peter's mother-in-law, healed of a severe fever. A woman's daughter who was healed of a bleeding disorder. Read the book.
But what any of this has to do with sexuality is the linkage of an agenda. How do you know that the marriage at Cana, since it was Jesus' mother, who, otherwise, has no real business acting for the the man who's wine was depleted, asked Jesus for help. It might have been for Jesus, the bridegroom? No, we don't know, but is your conjecture any more credible?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
The miscommunication, my friend, is between you and your advising sock puppet. In a syllogism, each of your propositions must be true for the conclusion to be true. You don't just strings sentences together and expect the result to be any logical conclusion.
Your P1 is false. Columbus never set foot in America, i.e. The United States of America, your original proposal and still your stated topic: "I actually own the U.S."
Your P2 is false. Since Columbus never set foot in what is now the sovereign U.S., he has no claim on it.
You P3, coincidentally, is true, but its singular truth is not sufficient to yield the logic you seek.
Your Ci, also coincidentally, is true, but not because of any basis in your propositions. In fact, it combats your P1.
Your logic, Bones, is utterly flawed. I wonder if you even own the property you occupy. Do you own your car, or does the bank?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
If consistency of elements is what's important to you, tell me how much of the water you drink daily is truly natural out of the tap? Let's not spit hairs
Relative to the Priesthood I hold, it is not a matter of what I consider. I am an ordained High Priest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
Bread, because Jesus declared himself "the living bread." Bread is a staple for man. Grass for cows. And for that matter, wine is not natural as you claim of bread, so, what's the difference?
I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
What if:
1. The Christians who advocate having replaced the Old Testament are wrong? After all, Christ did not say he replaced the O.T; he said he fulfilled it. One may think that's saying the same thing. No. When the Pharisees ask him what the great commandment is, Jesus replies, "Love your father which is in heaven..." Is that not exactly the same sense as the first 5 commandments from Exodus given to Moses? And Jesus continues: "The second is like unto it, Love your neighbor as yourself." That settles the last 5 in a single phrase. Jesus said much more than just those 2 simple phrases, for example, the Sermon on the Mount, the best political platform I ever heard, by the way. If we all followed that, every single social ill we suffer today would be solved overnight. And that covers every example your "Why I left Christianity" offers for all the alleged bad God is alleged to have caused, and mostly to people who did deserve the action for their actions. They were not all stand-by innocents.
What if:
2. As above, the N.T. fulfills, it does not destroy the O.T. Christians who claim otherwise have read neither one completely, so, what do they know?
So, what if:
The "Why I left Christianity" guy is wrong?
Created:
-->
@oromagi
And there is the other side of the debate, with which I tend to agree. We only think we understand the brain and its multifunctions of intelligence, let alone attaching the cloud to it. That will likely result in too many micro-climates for climate change to deal with. Or will singularity actually yield the singular, ideal climate, worldwide?
God, I hope not. A boring place, then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
I repeat my criticism, post #9, of your original claim three weeks ago, noting that you have updated this "syllogism" with a 3P, and, that you have not dated the Columbian expedition this time. Neither change matters; it's still flawed, and much for the same reasons:
Syllogisms are not syllogisms simply because one can string 3 sentences together. P1& 2 must, themselves always be true. C must follow from P1 & 2.Your P1, in spite of being centuries off, is still not true because Columbus, in four separate voyages, never set foot on what is now sovereign U.S. soil. Your topic indicates "US."Your P2 is not correct, either. Columbus did not even take possession of the Caribbean Islands where he did set foot. His claim was made in the name of the King and Queen of Spain, although Columbus was, himself, Italian. He certainly did not take possession of what is now sovereign U.S. soil in anyone's name.Therefore, C is not correct, either, because the US Constitution forbids foreign claim on US sovereignty. See Article VI and common law understanding of sovereignty.
I will add that, since you claim no country in your profile, I conclude you have none, violating Article VI of the Constitution, or, as it states, literally, that you don't know. Okay; just reading the text for what it is. By what else should I draw conclusion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
As I've said repeatedly before, most alleged syllogisms fail completely, because the logic must hold in all possible conditions, and that is not an easy thing to accomplish, particularly when one conditional is an infinite possibility of factors, such as using an 'xxx.'
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
It disproves the syllogism because, in fact, silicon has become, 220 centuries later, rather valuable, but it still has a hard landing against morality, and absolutely none as conceived by my 20,000 BCE self. You syllogism simply lacks a time element. Without it, the logic fails. This is because your xxx could be, literally, anything, and your time factor is either going to express a relative present value for an xxx in a given time period, and maybe lose it in the future [such as a buggy whip, for example], or never have it in the first place in another time period.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Yeah, probably. I tend not to use it. I find most links to YouTube here to be nonsense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
The year is 20,000 BCE.
I am holding a small chunk of silicon, which you describe as xxx.
Tell me how and why the chunk has a feature of moral value in any future I can conceive.
Thus fails the syllogism.
Created:
Posted in:
@ Stephen
On pg 2, are those fence posts, or driving lanes?
Created:
-->
@Reece101
I'm wondering why Kurzwell is waiting so long? 2045 is 24 years from now., Let's take a tour 24 years ago: 1997.
Well, my Mac was OS 8.
I chatted [no texting] on a cordless telephone
My music was on CD
The cloud was white and fluffy - sometimes looked like the Michelin Man
I was using Netscape because Explorer had not yet discovered itself [MS has always been behind, so I don't expect singularity will be a Windows achievement]
If singularity doesn't happen in 10 years, I may have to start using my Mac System 1 [circa 1984] again. Yes, it still works. My Window pane broke long ago
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Your #1 and #19 are some of the greatest wisdom I've read here in a long time. We don't often agree on details of things, but on these, grand slams! Well done!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Spot on, bro! See? This dumb Yank has respect for Brits.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Conway
I am saying Christianity is mainstream. I am also saying my Christianity is not as mainstream considers it. For one thing, I do not believe the heavens closed and that God no longer speaks to man after Jesus left the earth. I believe in current-day revelation, and that, relative to my personal stewardship, I have the right of personal revelation from God to guide my dominion of what is mine. My home. My family. my actions in my community that relate to those things that are mine. These are my personal dominion. They guy down the road has his dominion. I may offer help, and I can ask it of him. That's service. Service to one another is service to God. I believe that the Sermon on the Mount was, certainly, Jesus' best effort to describe how we best improve ourselves, and then how best to treat one another. As such, though probably not the intent, it is the best political platform ever developed, aside of its religious implications, because following its precepts would solve every single social ill we face to today, bar none. What is politics for, presumably, but to improve ourselves and our community? As a political platform no one has ever presented a better one. So, why are we not all sermonists? Democrats? Republicans? Socialists? They all fail next to Christ's sermon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
You misunderstand. I acknowledge that the Sabbath is a recognition of Creation. At issue seems to be when and how long Creation occurred. I'm saying that it makes no difference when and how long Creation occupied to acknowledge that it occurred. Does God sit on a thrown with a stopwatch to count how long we spend in worship? No. He need not do that. He will know the value of our devotion to him by the improvement we accomplish in our lives, primarily by how and why we are in service to one another as acts of appreciation for our creation. God will not strike us dead if one of us believes he created in six days, and another believes he did it in 6 billion years. The duration just doesn't matter. The fact that it happened does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
It's not really that difficult of an apparent conundrum.
What is the traditional Sabbath of the JudaicTorah, based on the 10 Commandments? It is on the 7th day, Saturday in the calendar, as the day God rested from his creation labor.
What is the traditional Sabbath of the Christian New Testament? it is on Sunday, the first day of the Calendar; the day Christ resurrected from the dead.
It is a change of tradition, from commemorating the creation to commemorating a new creation, the advent of resurrection into a perfect being. As I said, I believe creation continues beyond the six days. It is why it is called a New Testament; the old Testament having been fulfilled in Christ. It does not ignore, nor reject the original period of creation; it just recognizes a new creative event.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Every Sunday, my friend, as well as remembering my worship through the week by trying to uphold my efforts in that regard by additional reading, contemplating, and prayer.
But, from where is that question with regard to my belief relative to the age of earth, which, in a final analysis, makes not one bit of difference to the dedication of my worship. Why should it? If God occupied 6 days or 6 billion years in creation, since I also believe that creation continues to this day, what is that to me and my proper course in life?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Nope, just not a mainstream Christian. Too many people in that lane, but it does not limit the smile of Jesus on my face. Not to mention in my .44.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Does that mean birds would hum like bees?
All this tech-speak, and I'm still wondering who the f**k thought a human interface with a computer was a mouse with a tail crammed into its head. Thank God we at least deleted the tail.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
As if I don't accept 66M years. I'm not a 6-day creation, 6,000 year-old earther Christian. That is a bunch of bunk bunko squad drivel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
When I have the rare migraine, I play Led Zeppelin, full volume, with headphones, with my 600 RMS/channel amp. Kills it every time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
popping uppers?
Is that like looking up while making plosive popping sounds with my lips?
No, I know, just being outside the box in the cold.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Crude, but effectively expressed. Too bad the guy probably engages premature efactulation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Sure, but not very loyal Luciferians.
Created: