LastPommerFan

Goose hunting is closer to demon removal. I consider goose hunters the holy knight's of the modern world.

Ok, Physics people, I need two ideas explained to me better, because I'm having trouble, and I'm sure there are clearer explanations than the ones I've received: 1- The universe is expanding, but it has no boundary, so it's not expanding into anything. 2- There is no 'before the big bang' because time wasn't a thing until the big bang happened. Much obliged, Whiskey

If you'd spend a little less time fishing, you could join me in an occasional demon removal...

I've thought a lot about this, the key difference I've come to is that, with science, repeatability is a hallmark, so I could, conceivably, go see the evidence myself.

they are an explanation of the facts, not an interpretation.

Intelligent Design, as typically presented, does not allow for this. Everything is designed by the Maker as it appears today. Surely, however, it is not a monolithic idea, and I am just relaying how it was typically presented in my philosophy and theology classes at ND.

Classical intelligent design is simply a proof for the existence of god. Basically that god must exist because complicated things exist that must have been designed. It's not really a parallel with evolution and creationism. It does challenge a part of evolution, as it does not allow for natural selection, but rather God's choices as to which features and lifeforms advance. The Catholic position is simply that all the science is correct, the timelines are approximately correct, and that all of the science and all of the timelines were guided by the unseen hand of god though his creation of the universe and the Natural Laws that guide natural selection. I think this is similar to the idea that you are trying to put forth.

Catholics accept evolution, and they have for a very long time. Young Earth Creationism is not a Catholic thing.

Theory != Theory. Words are dumb. In science, theory is a collection of statements that best describe the available empirical evidence. In science, something that is not proven is referred to as a hypothesis. Today, in common english, we use the word theory to describe our hypotheses. Words are dumb.

Manny! In the 13th!!!! Walk-offs are Awesome!

Not even internalized perpetual guilt?

L1ght, disparaging remarks are unlikely to bring people to the point where they do the self-reflection necessary to grow. Consider engaging the people who disagree with a bit more compassion and empathy. Attempt to inspire reflection rather than inflict remorse. I opened my comments here in this thread with an emotionally laden dressing down of a portion of the readership. I was poorly served by my words. Later posts, which attempted to clarify my thoughts and inspire reflection were easily dismissed because I had already been placed in the position of enemy. I put myself there.

unbelievable streak by the Jays. Well done.

I read most of the feedback as requesting clarification. I agree with you, they just need to be more clear with their request. Words are hard.

All you'd have to do is clarify that your intended meaning was not "another, in addition to this Kane accusation."

Fully agreed.

There are private schools, no? I'm not sure what your getting at.

There are public lawyers and doctors available to provide a product to those who cannot afford private doctors and lawyers.

D4rk. You have 1 month.

I think Josie mentioned heading down there around the same time. Maybe you and her new boyfriend can meet up for a bar fight.

My goal is your growth. I'm a manager now.

I'm good for either.

It's gonna be all the goalies.

One ironic point is that NRLC and other Anti-Abortion groups were up in arms about CHCs when the ACA initially expanded them 5 years ago. I'm happy to see that so many have come around to see the goodness of that law.

wait, who is Beukebamboom?