Saru Inc

Quite possibly one of the worst defenses I've ever seen. You did not meet any of his points. And how did I not..? NoMoreDead is just looking for a fight, actually.

Although I respect the republican history, I can not agree more here: what the republicans stand for and stood for the last decades is sometimes no less than disgusting. It seems they have brought this very much upon themselves and I would be thrilled to see them losing their choking grip, finally, on the USA. Let's hope it can last for more than a couple of years and that they return to what they used to stand for. If they were still the party of Lincoln and Roosevelt as they so like to claim on their stumps, I would vote for them. Teddy R. is one of the best presidents of all time, and he could possibly be my favorite one. If this were 1904, I'd have some serious contemplating to do to make a choice between Teddy R. and Eugene Debs. TR was ok, but Lincoln was awful. :lol: Yes, he did the Emancipation Proclamation, but that really was the only good thing. He suspended Habeus Coprus, delcared Martial Law, almost lost half of US... I find it funny how all the Democrats act like no Democrat has ever done better than a Republican. Nonsense, of course they have sometimes, does that mean the Republican party has fallen apart? No... Also, I lose how people in other countries get so defensive, but it's not even they're country, Naturally, it still would impact them via policies and treaties but still.. I fear the day McCain wins, simply because I know people will riot. Off topic- Obama was 2 miles away from me today, and about half a mile from my school. I slept and didn't go see him though, not worth my time.

Does your keyboard also make you place commas in the wrong places? I can't debate? This is coming from someone who actually believes that the sun stood in the sky for a day, and then provides biased sources which, much like the person posting links to them, provides no factual evidence to back up it's claim. I can't debate? This is coming from the person who thinks that having a good grade in high school Biology put him on par with top scientists around the world. "Just because you can't comprehend something doesn't mean it can't exist", right? I can't debate? This is coming from the person who consistently provides hearsay evidence and proceeds to act like those sources are infallible. Without providing sound, scientific evidence your claims are nothing to the educated community. I can't debate? This is coming from the person who has resorted to name calling more than any other person involved in the topic, and acts as if he's defeated the other person's point. Abiogenesis? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html http://www.bio-medicine.org/biology-def ... iogenesis/ Abiogenesis is NOT, NOT, NOT something coming from nothing. Modern science does not consider Aristotelian abiogensis to be the modern, working definition, as it is easily disproven. "The modern definition of abiogenesis is concerned with the formation of the simplest forms of life from primordial chemicals. This is a significantly different thing from the concept of Aristotelian abiogenesis, which postulated the formation of complex organisms." Still don't understand? I suggest you read up. It's not acceptable to be willingfully ignorant of what's going on in the field of modern science, and debate as if you are well informed. Say wha? No, about the commas, but sometimes when I press a certain key, another one will pop up. Anyways, let's move on. 1) I did provide a link, about the sun. And, in what way can anything about religion not be biased, following your logic then? Also, I never said I was top par, I was just saying, that I have a basic understanding of Biology, and it didn't make sense. I was trying to udnerstand it, not say it couldn't exist. Consistently? Nope, how about once. You keep on bringing that up, why....? Lastly, most people are name calling also, by your standards, but more subliminally (sp?). You gotta know what they're talking about, and if you do you realize that they're calling you an ignorant moron, just not with those words. ;) And NoMoreDead, what the heck? What's with the vendetta... "willfully ignorant" uh huh... So not understanding something is being wilfully ignorant? Sounds like you're bring willfully pompous.

10\10.

Then I recommend these videos to you: 8RtfNdg1fQk pYdD-Qc7lbY pRiijctGcAY bIXDLUUn830 etHujh8Ao7Y

And you spelled 'just' wrong. Plus you actually said "Why me never know". Now spelling errors have nothing to do with the validity of a statement, but not being able to comprehend what you were trying to say hinders my ability to debate with you. All you've given in terms of information is hearsay. You've given opinions from unknown and totally unreliable sources. YOU rarely have anything to say besides "I heard from someone that...". It seems a bit contradictory to tell people they don't supply facts when you do nothing of the sort. Stop being an [wagon], I've already said this keyboard is broken, it has this wierd malfunction with it. We can't figure it out. Anyways, it in no way hinders any ability, you just can't debate so you resort to that. Plus, to my knowledge, only once did I say that. And you've shown me nothing to convince me. And Warri0r, depsite me having a 100+ in Biology all year, and getting a really high score on the SOL, I just can't see how Abiogensis is possible. Even seeing that page, I just can't fathom how something can come from nothing without divine intervention.

It's just all the jargon used, Warrior.

I started reading a book called ' The Audacity of Deceit' basically saying how Obama woud suck as president. It had a lot of good points, but I didn't finish the first chapter even, because they weren't talking about any good points, just the bad ones. What an awful way to form a book.

I wanna read that! But yes, it's banned. (1984) Also, Animal Farm is an awesome book!! I think Origin of the Species should be banned. I'm kidding you guys, lol I want to see if anyone flames me for saying this. Really, I mean, my library has books like the Bible, Qu'arn, Origin of the Species, and some hindu book all banned. But allow books like angels having gay sex. I mean wtf...? Some of these things have knowledge in them. God I hate my school system.

Uhh are you saying Rihanna isn't bangin'? :twss: /end stupid joke No, it's not at all. In fact, I'm white and won't date any white girl because they remind me of my sister, even if they're nothing like them. I go for the dark meat if you know what I mean. And the kind with soy sauce and sushi. ;)

Well, Warri0r, I'll tell you straight up, you're the only one I like to debate with. Because evn though I still have no idea how Abiogensis is even possible, you just seem more educated than othewr people. And NoMoreDead, you spelled 'incorrectly,' and 'coherent' wrong. Jst thought I'd say that. And also, NoMoreDead, even some atheistic scientisis I've talked too say some things about Evolution make no sense at all. I mean, really, do you think everything in Evolution is %100 no matyter what correct? And Warri0r, I clicked on that link, and it confused me, God I hate biology. But, Reb, I'd have to say you're a really annoying person, instead of simply putting the facts, you must do so in a [developmentally delayed]ed way. Why...? Why me never know, but you rarely have anything to say than "lolz [bleep] God" or "Christians are [developmentally delayed]s"

Aha, I haven't heard of any of these bands you guys talk about, well, at least not the majority. The Memory Of Trees By the Taliesin Orchestra Though I like rap and emo music, I do tend to listen to some classical.

Yea, my lilttle bro uses his phone ONLY for Metallica and his other lame bands; which is fine, except that he turns off his hpone when he's not using. What's the point of it being a phone, then?

Oh ok, I was about to say 'scientologist!' and really, it's not.

So what you're saying is, if one thing says it's not true, then it means all others are wrong? Use it for Evolution then: If one fundamentlistic Islamic site says Evolution is wrong, and thousands say it's right. Does it mean it's wrong because of one site?

No, if you read that site (and it's one site out of 30 or so that it says is incorrect) it still acknowledges the Bible was true, but it was 'wrong' in this occasision. And, also a 'tl;dr' moment, because I JUST provided it like 10 posts ago,for the third time!

You're still missing the first point, so I concede defeat to save my sanity. Also - tl;dr = too long; didn't read. Because if you did, the fact is, a supposed 'myth' that the sun stood still, was proven to be correct. But now you're dismissing this as false because it's a minute detail? A minute error, could destroy a huge building, if you know what I mean.

:shock: Do you live in Virginia also? That's pretty epic. Represent the 757 is all I gotta say. But yea, here in VA Beach, it goes from boiling hot one day, to extremely cold the next. Infact, a looooooong time ago, it was so warm on Christmas Eve, we all went outside to the park, then on Christmas day, it snowed. One of only like 5 Christmas' I rememeber it snowing. But uhhh.... I wish I was there. I love it after a snow storm, and the sky at night is orange, it's so cool. But it never snows here.

Ok, I agree with you that a RAND survery would go above teachers and such, and I will agree that you'r eright about most of the UN. Just one problem: Iraq were buddies with other countries, so while this may not be the case, couldn't Iraq simply if not shipped the WMDs to Iran and such to disable then and destroy all traces, then at least sold them to Iran\other countries? Second, ok, so you do understand what it's about, I apologize for being so harsh. Just one thing you may know, but if you don't, here it is: That Washington made that speech, because America as a country was not ready for any alliances, if they allied with Spain, and then England attacked Spain, Americans would have to go in and fight again the English. But Washington in general was not against all alliances, just the entangling ones. But, what I believe, is that now that America can fend for itself, that we can forget it, not entirely, but as in (and we already have)created new alliances.

No Reb, actually. What I meant was I was trying to make a point, NOT that Creationism or Evolution is a fact, which none of you understand, but thaqt both sides of the argument would believe there side to the death. I added the Bible part because he said NOTHING was factually correct, and I corrected him on it. And no, I just said I wasn't trying to debate, I just thought it was interesting about what she said, I expect you wrote "tl;dr" but then deleted. And what I meant, was how NoMoreDead says I have all these 'holes' in arguments, but he doesn't point them out. If I have holes in them, point em out to me. But, just incase you missed it: [hide=proof.]They ran the computer measurement back and forth over the centuries, and it came to a halt. The computer stopped and put up a red signal, which meant that there was something wrong with either the information fed into it or with the results as compared to the standards. They called on the service department to check it out, and they said, Whats wrong? Well, they found there is a day missing in space in elapsed time. They couldnt figure it out at all. Finally a Christian man on the team said, You know, one time I was in Sunday School, and they talked about the sun standing still. While they didnt believe him, they didnt have an answer either, so they said, Show us, He got a Bible and went to the book of Joshua where they found a pretty ridiculous statement for any one with common sense. There they found the Lord saying to Joshua, Jos 10:12 Then spoke Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. Jos 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Joshua was concerned because he was surrounded by the enemy! And if darkness fell, they would overpower them. So Joshua asked the Lord to make the sun stand still! The sun stood still and the moon stayed and lasted not to go down about a whole day! The astronauts and scientists said, There is the missing day! They checked the computers going back into the time it was written and found it was close but not close enough. The elapsed time that was missing back in Joshuas day was 23 hours and 20 minutesnot a whole day. They read the Bible. Isaiah spoke to the Lord, and the Lord brought the shadow ten degrees BACKWARD! Ten degrees is exactly 40 minutes! Twenty-three hours and 20 minutes in Joshua, plus 40 minutes in Second Kings make the missing day in the universe.[/hide] Say wha? Atheists not having all the answers? o.o! And thus, the Atheists were conviced. Now, I could care less if you're Atheist, many of my friends are, but you guys DEBASE everyone who doesn't believe what you believe. Why? If someone is in folly, let them be in folly. I'm just trying to pass the time, actually but then I got really involved, and you know what? My opinion is my opinion, go spend about five minutes outside, especially you, RebDragon.

First off, RangeThis, I'm not saying you make up data, I'm saying the sources you get it from are obviously liberal, I understand that CNN is largely unbiased, but they to stray to liberal side a bit. Second, I asked EVERY single one of my teachers todasy, past abnd present, Christian, Athiest, and one Muslim, if they thought the UN was effective. All of them said no. In fact, when I brought up the fact that UN people found no WMDs my gov't teacher said 'well what do you expect if you warn them you're coming?' And ok, describe to me waht you think the Neutrality Proclamtion is, and what is stood for.

Good grief, you guys blew this way out of proportions. I was just making a point. And second, NoMoreDead, if you really did study Ancient History, then you'd know that EVERY single civilization in the Bible has been discovered through digs and such. Also, this is completely off-topic but not: My Bio teacher is actually my study block teacher also, and I asked her about Abiogenesis and such and she said, that with Abiogenesis, and evolution, there is proof to prove it. but She also said she found proof to disprove it, I'm not quite sure what she meant, though. But she said with 'Ready's Fly' experiments, that people did not observe the whole time, or something, how they said that Fly came from meat, but did not see that the flies had laid eggs which gave to maggots which gave to flies. Also, she said with Aristotle, that when he said he saw hay, then left and saw mice, he came to the conclusion the the mice came from the hay. Which she says that there was mice all along, but he left, and didn't see the whole conclusion. I'm really not trying to make a debate out of that, just putting it out there. And NoMoreDead, nothing you say makes any sense, and doyou really need to debate my grammatical errors?

I should just move on... One last time: I'm not trying to disproive Evolution or Creationism, I was just saying how one side thinks the other side is wrong and ridiculous. And, this is un related but I found this site that proves Christianity, read the one about Biogenesis. http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml Then the sun standing still *sigh* I'll repost http://www.endtimespost.org/new_page_24.htm Yea, I know that the site looks like crazy religous fanatics, it does to me too. XD But just go behind their pics.

Make her come to you, to see if it works. Drop hints, playing hard to get, if you do it just right, works wonderfully.

No. Iraq has never attacked the United States of America and Saddam Hussein also did NOT harbor or help Al-Qaeda. Link: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp You know what is fact? That most Americans think that invading Iraq was a dumb idea. Obviously you're not one of them. Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/07/AR2005060700296.html After September 11th, Americans felt like they needed to strike back on something, anything. Going to Afghanistan was justified, to me. It was the home of Osama Bin-Laden, but the Iraq war is ridiculous. There was not sufficient evidence. Here's some reasons why: You know what that means? The UN did NOT find evidence for WMDs. Only the United States and United Kingdom's intelligence agencies did. If you're having trouble connecting the dots, unlike most Americans today, here's another quote that has been hammered at you already, but you choose to keep ignoring. So in your opinion, since the United States has a powerful military, we have to take out crazed dictators every time they pop up? No, I think that there were other reasons for going into Iraq. Why aren't we occupying Darfur? Surely you know of the genocide being committed there. What about Hitler and the Jews? We remained neutral until we were attacked. No, the reason we went into Iraq is because it benefited our country. Darfur doesn't benefit us because Africa is a lost cause and after Somalia, I think our country knows better. We need to leave the policing of the world to the United Nations, not the United States. It's what it was designed for. So does George Bush, in fact, he told him to go in there. I'm not debating the facts of what happened. Every American knows them (or should). What I'm trying to say is that George Bush treated it as if nothing happened. I didn't hear an address to the nation on the fact that he got bad information and that he made a mistake, and like I have stated twice now, to me, that means he doesn't care and that is as good as lying to the American Public. We're pouring billions of dollars into the Iraq black hole every year when everyone knows that once we leave, it's just going to go back to the way it was. History shows that that area of the world will NEVER have any form of democracy or peace. [/hide] Most of my quotes and links, I got from Wikipedia. Want another source that says the same thing? http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/21/iraq.poll/index.html This was from 2006 and still it was 61% disapproved. Imagine what the rate is 2 years later. Our job is not to police the world. According to our founding fathers we should not engage in "entangling alliances". In other words, WE SHOULD MIND OUR OWN BUSINESS. It is not our job. Regardless of the fact that 60% of our country is not below the age of 30 and older than the age of 18 (which is what percentage disagrees with the War in Iraq and is allowed to vote in polls maintained by the government and news stations), since when does it matter what age a person has to be for their opinion to be voiced? Are you really questioning the UN's competence? They have served as a world peace-keeper for 63 years, yet somehow you doubt their competence to solve an issue. Right, so in all your infinite wisdom, you have come up with such unrefutable evidence to compel me to completely give up my arguments to the likes of "I'd bet $50 that all those 'Iraqi war hating Americans' are below the age of 30." I have yet to see you post ANY links or articles related to your argument. The most you do is rant (with many curses and spelling mistakes present) on your own uneducated, extremely biased opinions. And no, citing your dad as a reporter does NOT count as a credible news source. I can't even begin to address your arguments because they make absolutely no sense. You address none of my points except by asking me pointless questions. Are you done yet? That's how I know I'm winning the debate, you use my language, and various spelling mistakes as a fact to discredit me. Without even wondering if maybe my keyboard is broken....? Second, do not even start to talk about the Neutrality Proclamation, if you don't even believe in what Washington believed in. Second, I've posted some links, but I do more research, then just copying and pasting. Because, for me, you should know what you're talking about, without the need for links, maybe they're helpful if you have a certain percentage you need to share, but could easily be faked. But, most of these threads are opinionated. And fyi, any one with knowledge of the UN, sees that it's a nice idea, but should stick to food aid and disaster relief. It is awful at mediating crisis, does it have any more right to mediate in a seperate countries affairs then we, as a country do? And what I meant is, that most of the people who are against the war are younger people. And please, quote something b esides Msnbc and CNN, do FoxNews, or AP, or Drudge, dare to be different. And lastly, I think you highly misunderstood Washington, and what he meant. JeremyM, (post below), careful, no anti liberal thinking allowed