zedvictor4

Obviously I wasn't referring to you as a condescending arsehole.

Though I would suggest that the truth is more of a case of what one thinks, rather than what one says.

As you pointed out, we verbally express varying opinions as necessity dictates.

So

Lovely to meet you Sir....Condescending arsehole methinks.

Paradox or Contradiction?

What I say to your face, is not what I say when your back is turned.

You condescending  arsehole.

Masses bleat and do as they are told.

Same old format.

In a hole, 

Down wind,

With an Asian cutie,

Convincing her that,

She needs to be massaged with baby oil,

From her own protection,

As do you.

I wonder why.

Enough said.

The Sun stays where it is.

And the Earth rotates.

Savage whilst in control.

Pathetic when he was dragged from a hole in the ground and hung.

17 years and move on to the next savage dictator.

I think that you're confusing science fiction with science fact.

Engineer is a general term for someone who engineers.

Inventor is a general term for someone who invents.

Scientist is a general term for someone who uses scientific method to solve problems and develop new ideas, so that inventors and engineers can invent and engineer.

I would suggest that the reason you don't like scientists, is for the age old reason why people resent others.

You work it out.

Slovenian sex workers are not readily available in the Welsh mountains.

So a Ewe with it's head stuck in a fence, is a GOD send.

So I am told.

Maybe this Universe is a re-initiation of the previous Universe, etc etc.

GOD principle.

Something from Nothing.

Once upon a time.

GOD damn it.

BOOM

Recoil!

Science is an ongoing challenge not a struggle.

If you drive a car or fly in planes, thank a scientist.

If you depend upon medication, thank a scientist.

If you have a continuously available food supply at your local store, thank a scientist.

If you have a continuous electricity supply, thank a scientist.

If you have a computer or smart phone, thank a scientist.

Most people take all this stuff for granted.

Whereas others have striven to develop it.

So will we ever crack the life puzzle.

Probably.

But maybe not.

So prove it.

Prove the authority.

Prove the creation.

Prove the sin.

When that job is conclusively done we can then move on to the possibility of a design flaw.

Dat true.

My dog often goes a bundle on my wife's leg.

And my tortoise will just about fu*k anything that he can mount...His current favourite is the base of the standard lamp.

Stopping the ageing clock will one day no doubt be a possibility.

It will then be necessary for a highly intelligent, ageless super-race to take control.

And the production of  purposeless, resource consuming human dross must cease.

For sure.

Get rid of all the rest and just save yourself and a cute Asian babe or a few cuties...Might as well make a harem of it.

The younger the better really, simply so that you can educate them to your standards.

As you will be in charge the morality angle will be up to you.

To assume that humanity can sin, is to assume that humanity is answerable to a greater authority

So to prove that sin is real and therefore a  human flaw, you must first prove that there is a greater authority to answer to.

Notwithstanding that, the notion that the greater authority is the creator of humanity must also be validated.

You seem to be suggesting that bestiality is exclusively a man thing.

Though Welsh farmers are/were renowned for their proclivities.

Though I stress that I am neither Welsh by birth nor a farmer.

Though for sure, in the interests of equality and diversity...LGBTBQ

Plus....

N for necrophilia.

Or M/W for the self abuse angle.

Anything else?

Oh! Almost for got H for heterosexual.

Boring old straightish sex.

And then roll over and go to sleep.

Was humanity created?

Need to answer the basics first Trade, before you go on to secondary hypotheses.

I would suggest that in terms of species development, Darwinian theory explains the explainable.

How life came about is another question.

Maybe it was deposited by advanced extra-terrestrials or maybe it was the result of a spontaneous electro-chemical reaction here on Earth.

Though if we plump for your UFO option, it still begs the same primary questions...When and where and how did the first life occur.

Because I would further suggest that even advanced extra-terrestrials must have developed from a primary life source.

As for science and scientists, they do exactly as the words define.

So with regard to the extra-terrestrial deposition of life theory, what do scientists actually have to work on, to be able to test the theory?

Species evolution theory and UFO deposition theory are two completely different ball games, in terms of what they set out to achieve.

The former attempts to explain B to Z, whereas the latter attempts to explain A.

Camel toe is the new normal.

Weather is.

And will be.

Crises are human internal dilemmas relative to survival and associated fears.

 Coping strategies are variable.

My point entirely.

Evolution is theoretical, though material development is discernible.

Whereas deism though hypothetical, is not discernibly evidenced.

And for sure, someone who reads old books a lot and thereby makes a lot of subjective assumptions, might be regarded as scholarly.

Especially within what might be  regarded as a scholarly environment.

Nonetheless there is no necessity for the basis of the associated data to be scholarly.

Though one must concede that scholarly today is not the same as scholarly was 2000 years ago, nor what scholarly has been over the intervening centuries.

Yet still no closer to proving deistic hypotheses.

Within the context of Universal development, why is it likely that there is another more advanced intelligence that is capable of interstellar travel.

Maybe we are the most intelligent lifeform in the Universe.

Maybe other intelligent lifeforms are at the same stage of material development as us.

Even so...If the seeds of life were sown here long ago by a UFO, then why wouldn't Darwin's theory of species evolution still be relevant?

Scum of the Earth indeed.

Though I sometimes refer to it as organic fluff.

Fragile, but persistent for now.

So what is the better UFO theory?

And as I see it, evolution started at the beginning and is ongoing, and will be to the end.

I refer to it as material evolution...Which is a universal process.

The development of life and living organic structures is one small part of the sequence, and I see no reason why as a part of a universal process, extra-terrestrial intervention should not play a part. UFO's and all.

Though I  think it unlikely, given the difficulties of interstellar travel, that we would have been visited by UFO's.

But if we have been visited, then I think it odd that we are not already an integral part of interstellar species evolution.

Why are still stuck here on little old planet Earth with nowhere else to go?

Other than an ageing space station, and little old Mars perhaps...Such is the evolutionary rate of human driven flying objects.

Yep.

All of history would have been played out differently if all of history had been played out differently.

History didn't begin in the 1930's...Nor did history begin with Homo-sapiens.

So for instance, if a mass extinction event hadn't played out back in the day, then ongoing events and development would have been different.

Notwithstanding that a whole load of stuff occurred previously.

The formation of our solar system for example.

Well.

A UFO is a UFO, therefore an unidentified object flying and not evidence to negate Darwin's theory of species evolution.

Species evolution is just as likely to have applied to the development of advanced extra-terrestrial life forms.

And atheism/ atheist is more of a general term that is used by those who see no logic in the idea of worshipping fantasy MANGODS, especially the fantasy MANGODS that developed relatively recently amongst the peoples of the Arabian peninsular.

Atheists do no presume to know the meaning of everything nor the specific processes of the GOD principle.

Therefore most atheists would not dismiss non-fantastic hypotheses out of hand...Extra terrestrial intervention for example.

Though one should not confuse theism with deism. Deism being the fantasy and theism being the associated nonsense that consequently develops 

Thoughts.

That other stuff inside your head that no one gets to hear about.

How long before that is accessed?

As Orwell the Prophet predicted.

LGBTT

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans-sexual and Trojan.

Sound advice.

Prostitutes with strap-ons then.

Perhaps you're too old and refined to understand the concept of a strap on.

Though you seem to understand the concept of prostitutes.

Or do you mean a thorough and reciprocal massage with a pert young Asian thing.

Sounds good to me.

No lady-boys though?

Know what you mean Deb

I would be lying if I said I didn't overfunk too.

I bet that Bro D overfunks when no one is looking.

I bet that even Mother Tersa overfunked when she was younger.

Catholic priests are renowned for their overfunking.

Especially when alter-boys are concerned.

Q. How many alter-boys fit under a priest's  cassock.

A. Only one...Kneeling...Either facing forwards or backwards and not praying to God.

Hope that you didn't find this Q and A session too funking much.

People are programmed to think in a certain way and therefore are likely to return to default settings.

Some people are programmed more rigidly that others, hence responses will vary.

Thereby we conclude that someone who refuses to agree or accept an alternative point of view is stubborn, when in fact they just lack the wherewithal to be open-minded.

So stubbornness is our perception of others, rather that someone else's behaviour.

I reject the idea that anyone can be scholarly about about  non-scholastic assumptions.

Which isn't to say that non- scholastic assumptions don't evolve into broader subjects.

So I would differentiate between a hypothetical text and  the ongoing  historical and social ramifications  of a hypothetical text.

Underwear overthink.

Thanks for the info Bro.

A. Who?

B. Who?

Yep, interesting Japanese style guy.

Presumably one can be a monodeist polytheist.

And therefore also a polydeist monotheist.

Such are the wonders of swapping around symbolic representations of abstract concepts.

Do they mention lingerie in the bible?

Q. When are multi-verses not a universe?

A. As a collective.

I basically explained this.

Though theory also suggests that as Middle Eastern Shaman, they probably used hallucinogenic substances as a means of connection with another realm.

Good day Bruce.

Wasn't asking anything Deb.

Was a relative statement.

Bulls kick dirt when they're pissed off.

If you see a bull kick dirt,

Then it's time to piss off.

Or a Kangaroo.

I reject the scholars.

Shame really.

A few million people who have grabbed a lot of sympathy from around the World, but a few million people who the sympathisers wouldn't really want to share their backyard with.

Can you blame them?

3 mobile data processing units that get a mention in a book.

They shared  an imaginative solution to a conundrum.

Lot's of that about for sure.

But still no tangible MANGOD as such.

Just the same old imaginative metaphor.

Thinking that,

Now is,

Yesterday was,

And, 

Tomorrow might be.

Good stuff.