obfuscator

By that definition, then yes the universe was a random event. But I don't think thats how people are using the term... For example, you flip 5 coins, and you see that 2 of them come up heads. You then look at these and say "Look! It came out randomly? Its too random, God did it!" CGF is using the idea of "random" to somehow imply that the event is unrealistic, illogical, or improbable. All he's trying to do is call a horse a horse - random is random, and if you believe that there is no creator or higher being then the universe cannot have been anything but random. I don't know if I'd call it unrealistic or illogical, but certainly it is highly improbable.

Nice :) Yeah I remember when I used to work out legs days were always the worst...

Nice intro, glad to have you here.

Nice name lol, welcome :)

Well if you keep taking creatine it may be a lot more than that :P Good job so far, would be interesting to see your full workout (all your exercises + reps).

It's one thing to accept constructive criticism with grace (as many people have been posting criticism which is constructive) but when your "c/c" is basically just insults and rude comments I don't think anyone is obligated to take that seriously. I'm no expert in photography but when I did take pictures AF was the way I usually went for many situations... Interested to see the next ones :)

To be honest the ACC isn't the loudest of rinks...the combination of an (often) mediocre team, expensive seats and such mean that often the rink is full of executives who don't even use their seats. Still a good time though. Personally I want to go to a habs game, they have to have one of the best arenas.

Just be honest about it...at very least she'll appreciate that and you won't have to deal with it after that (for better or worse).

Good game tonight - first period was awful (ton of penalties) but after that it picked up. First time I'd been to a game in ages :D

Damn inconsistent leafs. I hope they're better against Atlanta (i'm going to the game :D)

Interesting to hear your bets. However, I think it would make more sense if you held judgement and didn't jump to conclusions ;) Yet neither Christopher Hitches, nor Richard Dawkins, nor Sam Harris have backgrounds in physics, but I doubt you'd bring up that particular objection were they to postulate on science as the proof of supernatural nonexistence. You also seem quite content to try to explain, through physics, how the universe cannot exist...tell me, do you have a doctorate degree in physics? I also doubt it. My point is that an intelligent person can still research and know a topic reasonably well despite the fact that may not be their major area of study. However...here's another intelligent design book, written by an astrophysicist, just for you: http://www.amazon.com/Creator-Cosmos-Greatest-Scientific-Discoveries/dp/0891097007/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296916342&sr=1-10 I feel like all I'm doing is linking to books in this thread but here's an interesting one on the topic. http://www.amazon.com/Privileged-Planet-Cosmos-Designed-Discovery/dp/0895260654/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1296917221&sr=8-4 See, the "unguided evolution as a starting point of life" has some flaws. I think it's fairly hard to deny that evolution is in fact real. It's generally portrayed as a linear process of trial and error...yet there's nothing linear about many of the things we see on earth. Take a cell, for example....it requires no less than forty different components, functioning perfectly together, to process as a whole. If evolution is a linear process, the question of the evolution of a cell raises further questions? Did the mitochondria spend millions of years developing to be perfect, then did it stop and wait until evolution designed a nucleus that would work, then did this process continue forty times over? One might say yes....but the fact is that individual cellular components are function-less by themselves and therefore it would be impossible for them to "tell" when they had achieved the right form to function correctly with further cellular parts yet to exist. A question I have personally, in regards to unguided evolution, is the question of intelligence. Darwin postulated that each species adapted to suit its relative environment, and this seems plausible enough...until you take humanity into the equation. Now, a bear for example, has fur to keep it warm, and sharp claws to keep itself safe. An ape has strong limbs and can climb trees. A human has none of these assets, and, in fact...I've seen the argument made many times that humans were shafted by evolution in that aside from intelligence, we are among the weakest and defenseless creatures on the planet. Even the turtle, for example, which cannot move with any speed comes with a hard shell to protect itself. Humans have only intelligence. Yet humans have fared surprisingly well despite our lack of most "ordinary" evolutionary tools of defense. Extremely well, and one might say even too well, to the point at which humans have complete dominance over practically all other life forms and we're even on pace to destroy our planet. In this, I believe, is clear evidence that, despite our lack of "ordinary" evolutionary defenses, we have obtained the createst gift through evolution of all - as intelligence has led us to not only survive, but prosper far more than other species. Now, IF intelligence, then, is the masterpiece of evolution...why has it yet to show it's face once more? Of course, many animals have been observed with very basic intelligence, but nothing anywhere near what's been observed in humanity. I find this nonsensical...if intelligence is the most superior tool for survival, why have more animals not evolved to also have it? We see many animals with sharp teeth, many animals with claws, many animals who can disguise themselves...but only one animal with truly superior intelligence. Another thing that comes to mind is....take, for example, the cow and the shrimp. What are their evolutionary defense tool?. The shrimp basically exists to be eaten by other animals (as far as we've seen), so their only survival tool seems to be a high rate of reproduction. Likewise, the cow is fat, slow, and largely unable to defend itself...so it seems it's basic purpose is merely to be nourishment for other animals. If evolution was truly unguided, survival of the fittest would have dictated the extinction of both these creatures before they could have even evolved. Now I don't know if this is any documented scholarly type of thinking, and I'm certainly open to being proven wrong....these are just some questions I have that spring from the theory of unguided evolution as an origin of life.

Brodeur has played a lot better as of late. But add James Reimer to that list of epic young goalies :D

Interestingly enough, calculations have been done that show the chance of the earth's existence is more like 1x10^130 something....and the universe hasn't existed long enough to even come close to affording a reasonable chance at this... I've linked to this book already but I'll do it again...it's a great source for some scientific ideas that can reflect the existence of God: http://www.amazon.com/New-Proofs-Existence-God-Contributions/dp/0802863833/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1296826209&sr=8-4

i laughed. don't think most people will get the reference though [hide] [/hide] Not any major family problems here - I'm quite lucky in that regard.

Aha awesome :D

Yep, looks like Harper's going to overrule it. Good news imo...I wonder what andrew coyne likes about the crtc's decision?

And 85 on the lock. Gear grind time....except this time for pvp as well.

It's at the very bottom, click on themes in the lower left hand corner.

This. If they start metering I'll look into switching..

You get 135 honour points? I get like 40 tops even when we win...which isn't often :( Having a lot of fun with it though, at 83 the only class I really have trouble with is rogues (don't have the trinket yet).

Moved on request :)

Yeah well this is going nowhere so I'm locking it. Topic summation: All sports have their pretentious fans, soccer is no exception, england won the rugby world cup in 2003, etc etc...

Of course it was a waste of time, but it was a good waste of time :) I'm just glad to see them doing something different with the ASG which, to be honest, had gotten rather stale as of late.

Agreed. Him and Hugh Jackman. And DTG, no one said she was a good actress :P

Their model is pretty creepy: http://www.furhatworld.com/classic-winter-hats-c-42_44.html.