meol

As much as it might seem that way, I'm just trying to clear up many misunderstandings you have (if you areso adamant against science, it should at least be well justified), not trying to convince you to abandon your religion. I wouldn't even say I'm an atheist myself, for the matter. Trying to falsify all the human effort that's gone to science with religion isn't cool, but following a religion because it gives you hope and comfort is OK. I sometimes wished I could have that much faith so I wouldn't have all these many questions right now, but I just can't force myself to accept religion like you do. You could say God made me an Agnostic. But I'm getting way off topic now. Anyway, evolution and religion don't have to be exclusive, because they serve different purposes. Believing in a God doesn't mean you have to believe in a literal interpretation of the Genesis either. [Edit] Meh. It was much better when you could see what people posted while you were writing your post. Now I'm just repeating what everyone above me said. Also, sorry if I'm getting too verbose. I'm sleepy and had some coffee.

Now Jes, there's no need to call anyone an idiot, please cut that out. The reason some people might not blindly believe in the Bible is because it makes extraordinary, untestable claims, ranging from amazing miracles to the creation of the universe, while there are more feasible alternatives provided by science. Not to say it's horribly biased. I'd be more eager to believe a biography of Stalin made by a current historian than an official Soviet biography. The same applies to the Bible. Sure, it might contain many historical facts, but that doesn't mean all its statements are correct or that it has the same validity of a history book.

Let's just clear up some things right now. My last question was actually rhetorical, as I wanted the Creationists to answer it, but thanks to warrior for answering it. :-P To Jes: A theory is not the same as an hypothesis. In the scientific vocabulary, a theory is a set of statements that try to explain (and make predictions) about specific events and facts. Wikipedia's article explains it pretty well with the example of Evolution. Another example: It's a fact that masses are attracted to each other. Both the theory of general relativity and Newton's theory of gravity try to explain that fact, and try to make predictions about it. But that doesn't mean that the attraction was made up. For instance, the Big Bang Theory can be tested (even if it's "an historical event") because it makes predictions about our universe that we can measure. It's not blind faith as you try to say. The Bible, instead, makes no predictions, but instead changes its interpretation as new facts arise up. It's easy to make prophecies on hindsight, and it certainly isn't the same as making and testing scientific predictions. Also, Evolution doesn't claim humans came from monkeys, nor does it claim that there would be a substantial change in a species in merely 400 years. Evolution says that both humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor millions of years ago, and noticeable changes in humans have taken up hundreds of thousands of years. Don't go around building strawmen. (There, I said it). Theories become accepted because their predictions match experimental observations. There is proof to them, but you just don't want to accept it. To 1230: Again, the Big Bang doesn't claim the universe came from nothing. In fact, it makes no statements about what happened or what the conditions were before the Big Bang. The link Zierro posted explains it excellently. It just happens that some people fill this gap with God, just as God has served to fill the gaps many times before in the past.

Will I have any troubles updating if Vista is in German and Windows 7 is in English?

Does the Big Bang Theory even claim that all matter in the universe came from nothing, or appeared suddenly? I was pretty sure it only tried to explain the initial (very hot and dense) conditions, and how it all expanded into our current universe.

That can not be healthy. I'm really sick, I've been sick since last friday, and I haven't improved, I'm starting to lose my voice, and I've had a fever that's been getting higher and higher for the past five days. I really ought to go to the doctors soon. Lol, I totally wrote that's can not be healthy. silly me. I was pretty sure that anything above 3 days of fever required a doctor. :-?

But that's not fun at all. ;) What would be of OT if we all agreed to disagree from the very beginning? Plus, your beliefs can only really grow when challenged. -And the new smileys suck.

It's funny how exactly the same question comes up in religion and sport threads. There's a huge difference between debating something and making derogatory comments. We still have managed to hold civil discussions on heated topics like those, and I'm pretty sure homosexuality doesn't have to be the exception. If your opinion is against the consensus, then you'll need to have sounder arguments and a better logic, that's all.

You shouldn't be so worried about getting pills to control your attacks. Even though they only solve the problem in the short-term, that's exactly what you need right now, isn't it? Now, after getting those panic attacks controlled a little you can start thinking about solving the problem in the long run, with a psychologist or whatnot. Avoiding pills from the start just because they won't solve the problem isn't really sensible considering your situation.

I see what's wrong, and I see how it is a nuisance. Banning url tags around large images altogether isn't a great solution in my eyes though.

Like most people in Latin America, I'm a latino mestizo. Pretty much a mix between (west) Europeans and Native American.

You should find it under your profile > edit your profile > settings > general settings.

Moved to the correct forum and fixed your post (you can only use BBCode here, no HTML) . Thanks for the correction, though! :thumbsup: Actually, it seems you only uploaded the thumbnails no the pics. Mind uploading them again?

They're still nubs. But they're our nubs. <3: Congrats!

Nope. Your profile picutre (which is separate from your avatar) would go there, if it is enabled in the future. Right now, there's no way you can get rid of that icon.

Almost everyone agreed with this one. We had to whip the Admins for a while, but it's finally done.

Reading Nadril's recommendations, I started reading Monster. Up to chapter 15 so far, and it's really catching.

Just finished Braid and I'm almost done with Trine. Both are really creative and well done ideas. :thumbsup:

If you want to change your avatar, you'd go to your profile (the link's on your name in the top right), then to "edit my profile", then to "change avatar". Profile pictures (the silhouettes on profiles) aren't active at the moment. Is this what you're looking for?

Argh, there's so much derailment in this thread it's not funny. Make a new thread about ridiculous laws, about the government in general or about the climate change, but please, please stay on topic..

I'm neutral on this issue, but I'm just wondering what makes you think that a new separate (sub-)forum for game ideas would get more attention than the Libraries, that already are followed?

Adrenal, you suck. :lol: It'll take me a while to go through the index again since the conversion messed up with the listing, so bare with me for a while.

I just finished playing Tales of Symphonia and Trine and I really loved both of them. Any recommendations excluding Braid? Got a good PC, but no Wii or Gamecube anymore.

Even in countries without universal healthcare like the US, doesn't the state usually answer emergency calls like car accidents and the like?

A chocolate and salami sandwich. Never do that. :-| It's awful.