Quote of the week - " We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them. All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us. They can't get away this time." - Lewis "Chesty" Puller, most decorated Marine in American history, from early in his career. (WWII) Yes, he kicked their ass and walked out of there.
I googled Lewis puller and my favorite quote is " Where do you put the bayonet?" After he saw his first flamethrower. That and "now we can fire in all directions!"
Remember the musical "The Music Man"? It is about folks in small-town Iowa. For everyone out there who still insists that people in small Iowa towns are friendly, consider the lyrics to the opening song (written by an Iowan):
Townspeople:
Oh, there's nothing halfway About the Iowa way to treat you, When we treat you Which we may not do at all. There's an Iowa kind of special Chip-on-the-shoulder attitude. We've never been without. That we recall. We can be cold As our falling thermometers in December If you ask about our weather in July. And we're so by God stubborn We could stand touchin' noses For a week at a time And never see eye-to-eye. But what the heck, you're welcome, Join us at the picnic. You can eat your fill Of all the food you bring yourself. You really ought to give Iowa a try. Provided you are contrary, We can be cold As our falling thermometer in December If you ask about our weather in July. And we're so by God stubborn We can stand touchin' noses For a week at a time And never see eye-to-eye. But we'll give you our shirt And a back to go with it If your crops should happen to die.
Farmer:
So, what the heck, you're welcome, Glad to have you with us.
Farmer and Wife:
Even though we may not ever mention it again.
Townspeople:
You really ought to give Iowa Hawkeye Iowa Dubuque, Des Moines, Davenport, Marshalltown, Mason City, Keokuk, Ames, Clear Lake Ought to give Iowa a try!
So what are they going to do about Carl's now that it's condemned? From photos it looks like it has been cordoned off. Will they just demo it? Do the current owners pay for demo? Do the taxpayers pay for demo and bill the current owners? Will everyone just let it sit there and fall in on itself like something out of Mad Max? Will out of town squatters take it over and cook crank in there till it explodes? This is the first time I can remember that a downtown business has been condemned. Just asking.
Quote of the week - " Because if it didn't work out, I didn't want to blow the whole day." - Paul Hornung, Green Bay Packers running back, when asked why his wedding was held in the morning.
To Orville K. Bass - Rap Music and "Hip Hop" is the natural regression of the African-Americans to their homeland in New Jersey, New York City, Atlanta, or somewhere in California. Most black individuals in the USA need to come to terms with the fact that other black African natives captured them and sold them to us white guys, helped us put them on the ships,and after we gave them some beads or fire or something, helped stuff them on the boat and said " Nacho Cheese." Or something like that. It did happen, though. And they know it, too, but they don't like it that much. It never wore off, though, and it pissed them off even more when people like Frank Sinatra and Perry Como would just walk around singing like it was nothing in particular. They decided they would just talk really loud about sex and drugs and capping cops and degrading women and that's what you have these days. They call it "hip hop."
I don't know what will happen to Carl's. It seems like I heard there were issues with the north wall of the building, which it shares with an adjoining business. Knowing Jefferson and the powers that be in that place, my guess is that absolutely nothing will be done unless us taxpayers pick up the bill some how.
They aren't going to do anything about Carl's. It's freaking them out. It will just cave in on itself and sit there, blocking Lincolnway and Chestnut. Kids from Scranton and Grand Junction will come over and throw the bricks at cars from Perry. This will go on for years, or at least until the next Bell Tower Festival, when Shriver Construction will level the site, build a hut out of coconut shells, and move their corporate headquarters to that location, saving millions of dollars in mowing expense.
I was looking on the internet on why people think the earth may only be 6,000 or so years old. Here's one thing I found:
Although many people don't accept the Bible's timeline of history, they have difficulty deciding exactly when to start disagreeing with it.
- Was Jesus Christ real? The Bible says he was, and no serious historian doubts it. - Was King David real? The Bible says he was. Again, there is no reason to doubt it. - Was Abraham real? The Bible says he was. There seems no reason to doubt this either. - Was Enoch real? The Bible says he was. There is no reason to think the Bible has suddenly lapsed into fiction when the other people were genuine historical figures. - Was Adam real? Well, Enoch was a son of Cain, who was a son of Adam. So if Enoch was real there is no reason to think that his father Cain wasn't, or that his grandfather Adam wasn't. They were only two generations away. And Adam was the first man, created in the first week of the earth's existence.
I just want to know...do people really think that?
I believe the Bible was written by men inspired by an all-knowing, all present God and is inerrant.
I've heard of the 6000-year-old Earth thinking. I've also heard that the genealogy has gaps, and the Earth could be 100,000 years old.
The Bible is a very historical holy book, with cross referencing of dates with the kings of Judah and Israel. Archaeology has been very helpful in corroborating the Biblical accounts.
Accounts of other happenings in antiquity like Plato are often based on fewer than 10 books found. With the destruction of the library at Alexandria during the Roman Empire, many well accepted historical facts are not heavily documented.
As a rule, I would suggest you not dwell on religion or politics on this site, but since religion has been brought up, I will post my one and only response. Yes, the bible is an historic book, in that it reflects the politics, worries, and hopes of the time in which it was assembled. By saying assembled, I am talking about the fact that early popes and their henchmen put together a book of their choosing to keep everyone in line so they could continue to gain wealth and power. Here is a short look at the popes who were in "office" before the King James Bible was assembled. Pope Sergious III - Had Pope Christopher & Pope Leo V strangled in prison. Also had an illegitimate son who would become Pope John XI. Pope Stephen VI - Had his predecessor dug up and tried for heresy, or whatever you want to call it, besides insane crap. Pope Pius II - Pius my ass - called up Vlad the Impaler and had 30,000 folks turned into potstickers. Now if Sergious had Christopher and Leo V strangled while in prison, what kind of badass crap did they have going on? If Stephen VI dug up some dead guy (Formosus) and put him on trial, what kind of badass crap did he have going on? If Pius II calls up Dracula and caps 30,000 people because he's pissed that the Raiders lost that's messed up. Just to remind you, these are the same individuals and their chosen delegates that decided what is in your Bible that you read today.
The Jefferson City Council has voted to award a $50,000 grant to whomever they can find to take over ownership of the building that most recently housed the Horse Collar Saloon. There would be no charge for the property; its previous owner has given it to the city. The new owner, when found, will merely inherit the deed.
Because the building has been officially condemned, whoever receives this property will have to refurbish it to the point that it meets all current safety and environmental standards. The $50,000 would presumeably be used toward that end. $50,000 was chosen because that is the amount that the city figures it would cost to raze the structure. If no owner is found, that is how this alloted sum will be spent.
Bob Schwarzkopf, city attorney for Jefferson, states that Federal and State grants can be obtained to aid in the restoration of the property. These grants total approximately $160,000. The total cost of restoration for this project is estimated at $360,000.
When the city's $50,000 is added in, the out-of-pocket cost of restoration for the new owner would be around $150,000.
It is intersting to note that the above-mentioned State and Federal aid hinges on the building being designated in the "National Registry of Historic Sites" (no kidding). Mr. Schwarzkopf states that this should not be a problem - this is similar to the grant money that enabled the city of Carroll to refurbish their downtown area years back. The state of Iowa alone has set aside over $50 million for use in this manner for each of the next three years.
Also interesting is that, when making his presentation to the Jefferson City Coucil, Mr. Schwarzkopf related the history of this building and in doing so included references to its use as a theater in the early years of its existence. He obtained this information from Jefferson Iowa News, along with our photo of the theater at that time (again, no kidding). The photo is in the "Photo Archives" link on our main web page. This is part of JIN's effort to save Carl's Bad Tavern.
In a related note, Schwarzkopf has suggested that the entire 9-block downtown area of Jefferson apply for recognition as a "National Historic District" (once again, no kidding). This would make similar grant money available to all Jefferson businesses lying within that area.
From time to time, I get asked that a Greene County Accessor link be added to the Jefferson Iowa News web site.
Well, starting tomorrow we have decided to do just that. Along the left-hand side of Jefferson Iowa News' main web page, under "recommended links", you'll find a link entitled "local property values". This will connect you to the Greene County Accessor's county-wide search engine.
You can use this link to search Greene County properties for information such as assessed values, owners, and purchase dates. Much additional information is there on each parcel, including color photos of most.
You can search by owner's name, address, business name, parcel number, or a number of other methods. Use this to get an idea of what property values are in the Jefferson area.
Ric: Any idea if there's an engineer's report detailing the problems with the Carl's Bad building?
The idea of creating a historic district is a good one. State and federal tax credits are available for fixing up buildings in these districts. Around 40% of the rehab can be funded with these credits.
I think Rich should come back to Jefferson, completely restore and refurbish Russell's Bad Tavern, open a porno and opium den upstairs, and become the "toast of the town". He could get in tight with Redfern and expand the tunnel system that Dino started out of Saba's Bakery so that no one will ever be caught. He could buy off Larry Mondello and with his proceeds buy into the lucrative Shriver Farms endless pit of government money. He could retire at age 3, kicking back and laughing at the rest of us working as he takes our every last tax dollar.
I'm sure that the city engineer has a report on his desk and the city council has reviewed it. That is what they have based their cost estimates on.
So far, as far as I can tell, it has not been made public. Of course, in Jefferson that might only mean that nobody from the paper has been interested enough to ask for it. I would be curious to read it. It might shed some light on the possibility of pursuing other, less-expensive options.
Diamond Dave said... The Bible is a very historical holy book, with cross referencing of dates with the kings of Judah and Israel. Archaeology has been very helpful in corroborating the Biblical accounts.
I can see an archeologist digging... "This piece of pottery definitely dates to the time of King David..." "Oh that bone? It's nothing. T-Rex by the looks of it. Can't be more than 5,800 years old at the most. Probably put there by Satan..."
My opinion of the bible ... a poorly written historical novel written by man to control men (and women) and definitely not inspired by a god.
"Oh that bone? It's nothing. T-Rex by the looks of it. Can't be more than 5,800 years old at the most. Probably put there by Satan..."
There are questions about any dating system (like carbon 14 or E-Harmony). Carbon 14 dating assumes there have been no catastrophes (like the Genesis Flood), and that things have always aged or progressed at the same rate.
40 years ago John Barber thought the earth was both created and evolved. That was fine for my 6th grade mind. I never talked about creation and evolution & felt that evolutionists had all the supporting scientific data. My brother lent "The Genesis Flood" by Morris to me. Now I believe that their are two camps with different worldviews.
The evolutionists have had the full support of the school system and academia for 50 years, so we reflexively buy into the dating methods which we've heard spoken of in school. Scientific inquiry and searching for the truth has been replaced by politicization in the global warming debate. I believe there is a laziness among tenured professors because of the politically correct smugness and lack of searching for truth wherever it leads.
I am not necessarily an evolutionist, but I don't have my head in the sand, either.
OK, I guess if you assume that there was a giant flood that covered the earth and caused carbon-14 to break down in an abnormal, yet consistent manner around the globe, you still have this problem with the fossil record.
Fossils have been found in a predictable, layered order for hundreds of years, predating Darwin. This order remains the same all over the world. There has never been found a fossil which disrupts the sequence. In other words, you never find a human fossil amidst those of mastodons, e.g.
Creationists are compelled to argue that all of these layers of fossils, including dinosaurs, mammoths, trilobites, early humans, and armored fish all co-existed, or nearly co-existed, and were somehow all fossilized in the same sequence of layers. They also claim that all of the sea creatures were somehow "drowned" by the flood.
This is clearly ludicrous. I think the real "laziness" is among creationists who seem to feel that it is easier to just believe the earth was created than to dig deep and try to understand the science.
It truly is smug to call professors "lazy" when the only activity you engage in is believing what your church tells you.
What Do the Bones Say? There is also physical evidence that dinosaur bones are not millions of years old. Scientists from Montana State University found T. rex bones that were not totally fossilized. Sections of the bones were like fresh bone and contained what seems to be blood cells and hemoglobin. If these bones really were tens of millions of years old, then the blood cells and hemoglobin would have totally disintegrated.26 Also, there should not be “fresh” bones if they were really millions of years old.27 A report by these scientists stated the following:
A thin slice of T. rex bone glowed amber beneath the lens of my microscope ... . The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center ... . Red blood cells? The shape and location suggested them, but blood cells are mostly water and couldn’t possibly have stayed preserved in the 65-million-year-old tyrannosaur ... . The bone sample that had us so excited came from a beautiful, nearly complete specimen of Tyrannosaurus rex unearthed in 1990 ... . When the team brought the dinosaur into the lab, we noticed that some parts deep inside the long bone of the leg had not completely fossilized ... . So far, we think that all of this evidence supports the notion that our slices of T. rex could contain preserved heme and hemoglobin fragments. But more work needs to be done before we are confident enough to come right out and say, “Yes, this T. rex has blood compounds left in its tissues.”28 Unfossilized duck-billed dinosaur bones have been found on the North Slope in Alaska.29 Also, creation scientists collected such (unfossilized) frozen dinosaur bones in Alaska.30 Evolutionists would not say that these bones had stayed frozen for the many millions of years since these dinosaurs supposedly died out (according to evolutionary theory). Yet the bones could not have survived for the millions of years unmineralized. This is a puzzle to those who believe in an “age of dinosaurs” millions of years ago, but not to someone who builds his thinking on the Bible.
Anonymous-I wondered where you came up with "all of the sea creatures were somehow "drowned" by the flood." then I read Genesis 7:4b which says "I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made." I had (and still do) believed Gen. 7:21-22 that all of the land creatures not in the Ark died. You have stirred my curiosity about Gen. 7:4.
With billions of fossils where are the intermediate species bridging the gap from one species to the next? How does evolution explain complexities like DNA, the eye and the brain? A book has an author, a painting has an artist. Yet this magnificently ordered creation has no Creator? Someone's "dumb luck" must be infinitely better than mine to believe this.
Evolution has dinosaurs becoming extinct 65,000,000 years ago, creation 4500+ to 100,000 years ago. Both sides have issues that are hard to understand/defend. The best debating tactic is throw a steady stream of cannonballs at the other's castle and brush aside any arrows coming your way.
Darwin stated in the "Origin of Species" that in a 100 years we would know how things originated. With the 3 theories of creation, evolution or some combination of both we will never "know" because no humans were there. Why is only one theory taught as fact in our public schools and universities?
The longest modern wooden ships are about 300 feet in length. Noah's ark was 450 feet (Gen. 6:15). Wood is simply unable to withstand the changing stresses created by water against the hull and the weight above. These modern wooden boats must be reinforced with iron straps and constantly pumped. Modern technology cannot make that ark seaworthy.
You would argue, I'm sure, that the Great Flood was violently intense, like no other - destroying all life beneath the sea as well as uprooting vegetation and becoming cataclysmic like world-wide volcanic power. Yet at the same time, here was this wooden boat, all held together with thousands of beasts, just bobbing along. By the way, the bible doesn't mention any cataclysmic events - just water and fountains.
Also, what about the millions and millions of different insects that must have traveled on the ark? How about the termites? Or the barnacles? These are usually conveniently left out of the mix.
And by the way, how did such a small crew dispose of all the tons and tons of waste?
Tree rings have been counted back well over 10,000 years, and ice cores taken from Greenland have annual layers of 30-40,000 years.
How could we have chalk? Chalk is made up of the bodies of plankton 700-1000 angstroms in diameter. Objects this size settle to the bottom at a rate of .0000154 mm/sec. In a year of the flood, they could have settled about half a meter.
A thousand kilometers' length along the northern coast of Russia contains 500,000 tons of fossilized tusks. Did all these mammoths live at approximately the same time? There are millions and millions of tons of these tusks in Siberia alone - Russia must have been wall-to-wall mammoths!
And, by the way, please explain the Great Barrier Reef, which is also a living organism.
Genesis 7:4b in the American Standard, Darby Version and Young's Literal translation "all the living creatures I have made on the ground" (other versions say earth)" This seems to square with verses 21 and 22-"Every living thing that moved on the earth perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died."
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. I believe that would qualify as a cataclysmic event. Harold Morris talks of the incredible power of water in "The Genesis Flood." We've seen it with Katrina and the Flood of 1993 and when the tsunami of Christmas 2004 hit and 250,000 died it was a catastrophe. These was as nothing compared to a 40 day downspour and the crust or springs of the earth bursting forth.
This next link speaks of the "gopher wood" (they said a scribe in the King James version erred-the letters in Hebrew appear similiar and gopher wood is an obscure reference) and the vessel's viability if constructed a certain way could have made it 10x stronger. http://www.noahsark-naxuan.com/arkmodel.htm
Insects I'm not certain- they may have been on. Morris theorizes God may have started hibernation for some of the animals, reducing the work load to some extent.
I've heard about 4500 years ago to 100,000 years ago for the Flood. The chalk I have no clue. Does the Barrier Reef qualify as marine life? If so, it wouldn't necessarily have been consumed.
If Siberian mammoth tusks weighed 100 lbs. per, that quantity would be for 10,000,000 mammoths in an area considerably larger than Alaska. Almost all of the humans could live in Texas, with 1/8 acre lots and a family of 5 in each. The mammoths wouldn't have been shoulder to shoulder everywhere.
How come the creation dudes are the only one to find living T-rexes? Everyone else finds them stoned to the bone. Why don't they clone them and unleash them on anon? Sounds like Gene Wilder should have been in on this one. Also who knows, it might have been some lutefisk left over. You never know. Those guys that make that stuff have used some ancient s#*t.
First of all, if you can find that many mammoth tusks, there were obviously many, many more than that around.
Secondly, I'm interested in how you make the ark that much stronger. You can't just say that "if constructed a certain way" it becomes 10x stronger. I think modern engineers would have thought of that - and would be using that technology today.
Thirdly, if the flood was that cataclysmic, it wasn't really a flood, was it? That wooden boat loaded down with dinosaurs and all other beasts would have disappeared in the wake. In short - the flood is a nice story to tell your kids, but very untenable to educated adults.
On the main web page of Jefferson Iowa News we have now installed a link allowing the reader to view the number of page requests or "hits" that occur monthly on our site.
Readers may find this interesting, but remember that these page requests do not readily translate into individual hits always.
The link can be found along the right-hand side underneath the local survey button, which is updated weekly.
In Genesis 9:16 ~ God creates a rainbow. This will remind us of the flood. Did rainbows not exist before this? The laws of light refraction changed?
In First Chronicles 16:30 ~ The earth is described as fixed and unmoving. This passage was used to force Galileo to recant his belief that the sun was at the center of the solar system. Does the earth move?
Numbers 13:33 ~ Here the Israelites encounter the sons of Anak. The Anakites came from a race of Giants who, according to Genesis 6:2-4, originated in pre-flood times when male angels mated with human daughters. That would mean that there were survivors of the flood.
I could go on and on. There are numerous biblical passages referring to the earth being flat. You get my point.
Good post. My understanding also is rainbows did not exist before the Flood. I don't know how best to defend the Bible in regards to 1 Chron. 16:30. I may not have time to research this. Gen. 6 immediately precedes the flood account. Noah, his 3 sons and their wives survived the flood. There are 100's of accounts world-wide of "Noah types" and stories remarkably similiar to the Flood like the Gilgamesh epic.
Please correct any mistakes in my understanding of evolution. Since no one has commented on, explained or defended an evolutionary account of what transpired I'll attempt it.
Somehow from gases in the atmosphere perhaps 4-5 billion years ago one single cell came about that reproduced asexually.
Somehow this and many other single cells changed or evolved into less complex life forms of intermediate species that eventually evolved into species we'd know that somehow began to reproduce sexually and have instinctual urges.
These "simple" forms changed to insects &/or fish with DNA which eventually evolved into land animals and dinosaurs. They became extinct from some event 65,000,000+ years ago.
Somehow 1-3,000,000 years ago apes evolved into "lower" forms of humans who evolved into Man with a brain and problem solving skills
20,000-30,000 vertebrate species and 1-30,000,000 species of insects, marine animals and invertebrates have resulted.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics talks of energy being lost in each change and things tending to entropy, chaos and disorder. We assume from this that evolving/mutations are virtually always bad and very seldom good. Example-"Mommy, mommy, look at the wonderful mutations my body is undergoing from my playing with the plutonium _____." In most families and science fiction the assumption is that mutations in your child or scientifically would not be beneficial.
Which is the most likely &/or unlikely? 1)Single cell asexual reproduction by happenstance, 2)single cell to lower life form to 3)lower life form to insect, fish 4)fish/marine life comes to land; invertebrates become vertebrates to 5)big honking dinosaurs who then die off to 6)apes to lower man to 7)lower man to Man. Somewhere reproduction changed for lower life forms from asexual to sexual and DNA's long chain of mapping and telling the characteristics of this species and particular animal "evolved".
My personal belief is any step along this line qualifies as a miracle as great as anything described in the Bible save for Creation.
The odds of biological evolution happening are 1 in 1 trillion, trillion, billion, billion, billion, billion billion or 1 x 10 to the 60th.
We have not discussed the philosophical/moral consequences of evolution. Karl Marx rejoiced upon hearing of Origin of Species lending scientific cover to his philosophy of materialism (all things are earthly, there is no spiritual realm).
The 20th Century has been by far the bloodiest century. Hitler's genocide killed about 15,000,000, Stalin 30,000,000+ and Mao around 70,000,000. All 3 were evolutionists. Fear was epidemic from the cruelty of these regimes. Alcoholism and excessive drinking ran rampant in the USSR with people attempting to numb their brain from reality. Ideas do have consequences. Might makes right in a land that does not fear God.
OK. Diamond Dave now no longer even disputes any of my arguments. All three biblical errors I reference are simply ignored. He used to at least state things like, "I read this.", or "I heard that." Now he just changes the subject. This is a classic example of religious brainwashing. He offers no solid logical arguments or personally deduced reasoning. He merely parrots what he has been told or told to read.
The laws of refraction and light obviously weren't changed by the flood. I know it is convenient to claim that the flood changed everything when your arguments are found to be devoid of scientific reasoning, but conditions on the planet's surface will not alter this atmospheric law.
I wonder where he gets his 1x10 to the 60th? I'll bet it was after weeks of laborious study. Or maybe he read it. He honestly thinks that the most logical theory explaining the universe's origin is that it was magically whipped up. Look, no one knows how the universe originated. That is why we study it so aggressively. Diamond Dave expects us to have a rock-solid theory that can be proven scientifically beyond all doubt. He offers nothing like this in his defense. Our theories may not be the best, but we seek to learn these answers rather than just accept the same theory we went with 5,000 years ago. Some day scientists will unwrap this riddle. When they do, religious fanatics will argue that it makes more sense to believe that somebody just snapped his fingers and then went away somewhere. That is by far the least credible theory I can imagine.
As far as evolution goes, he likes to couch the discussion in such a way that we have to prove evolution, yet he does not have to offer any proof whatsoever for creationism. He demands high levels of proof, with no scientific gaps or question marks, yet says the Bible is the only proof he is required to produce. Why is it harder to believe that 30million species evolved than they were all magically created in a day?
As far as the moralizing, I was really hoping that we could sustain our discussion without that aspect appearing, but that is unfortunately never possible when dealing with somebody who feels morally superior. He would have us believe that evolutionism is responsible for millions and millions of death, even though religion historically has played an integral part in nearly every war. Why would he moralize on this issue when the very God he worships destroyed nearly every living being on the earth in a flood? You really can't have it both ways.
By the way, here are the odds of some one pulling the universe out of a hat: zero.
Diamond Dave completely misses the point in the Genesis 6 reference. You see, the Israelites come across a race of people many years after the flood. This race could not have existed at that time, because they were supposedly all wiped out in the flood. They were not part of Noah's group - they were giants.
I referred to all 3 points in post 38 by anonymous. I was mistaken when looking at Numbers 13:33 and focused entirely on the Genesis 6 part, which I addressed. I will need to look at that again bcz before I'd always concentrated on the 10 spies bad attitude and had never noticed the "sons of Anak".
You are correct that I completely missed that point, sorry.
Numbers 13:33 has the fearful 10 spies who did not want to go to the Promised Land bcz of the dangers saying "the sons of Anak" were in the Promised Land. They could 've been exaggerating or wrong. Feel free to pick the easiest one of the 7 processes from my post of 12/16 and let us know what you think the odds of it happening. Is it 1 in 50 like Buster Douglas beating Mike Tyson? 1 in 1000? a 1,000,000? a billion? Pick a number we'll work with your numbers if you want.
All great organizations have a framework, structure, process, intelligence, planning, and attention to detail, some or all of the above.
To thrive their innovation helps them succeed or had outstanding leadership or personnel for a time. What great organization succeeds and can rightfully say, "It was just a huge crap shoot, Marv. We did it different everyday. No one had a clue. I'm just thankful to be out of that disruptive, chaotic mess with my 100 mill."
Randomness would be more like "The Curse of the Lottery" where someone actually realized their wildest dream only to fritter it away. Some planning or discipline needs to be exercised even when millions fall into your lap.
Garbage in, Garbage out. Random input, Random Output. Evidently unless the universe is involved, then it's COMPLETELY different.
Only the human mind cares about time. Only the human mind cares about whether things are ordered or random. The "universe" has been around a long time. Some human minds, via the bible, have determined the Earth and the universe to be 5,800 years old, plus or minus a long weekend. The Bible is purely a human invention, nothing more than a group of stories meant to control men and women.
When a person decides to follow, to believe the bible to be literal and inerrant, then that person, when discussing science, has to come up with the totally ridiculous rants and ravings of Diamond Dave, like comparing the universe to a well-managed corporation.
The universe is old, old, old...perhaps 14 billion years old. When dealing such big numbers, randomness, (or lack of a human-mind style corporate order), works just fine. When one believes the Earth and universe to be 5,800 hundred years old, then, yes, one must believe in intelligent design because there is just not enough time for "evolution" to do its thing. The "believers" have painted themselves into a corner and must turn a blind eye to overwhelming amount of scientific evidence in support of a very old universe. However, there are plenty of stupid, ignorant Americans that will listen, and believe, in their silly little arguments.
The Bible is full of references to dragons, unicorns, satyrs, and other assorted nonsensical monsters. More recent editions have omitted these obviously made-up creatures and replaced them with more acceptable beasts such as oxen and goats.
To anyone who was not indoctrinated at a very young age, all of this overwhelmingly shows the Bible to be nothing more than a fictionalized version of the world as people thought it may have existed a few thousand years ago.
Summation of arguments for theory of randomness by Anonymous: 1) I am not necessarily an evolutionist. 2) Fossils always are where they should be. This is inaccurate. Post on 12-4-09 @10:08pm. 3) Things may have started 14,000,000,000 years ago. How this transpired will not be considered or explained. 4) Mutation-Good Creation-Bad
When one argues religion with people like Diamond Dave, you can't help but be reminded of Galileo and his battle with the Church. In his time, the Church insisted that the earth was at the center of the solar system (universe). Even though science had proven that the earth circled the sun, religious leaders were having none of it. Eventually, Galileo was tortured and threatened with his life; he thus recanted, knowing science would prevail.
Today, amazing photographs are being taken of previously "empty" patches of outer space, revealing literally billions of additional galaxies of stars. They are millions of light-years away. The distance light travels in 4-6000 years is comically small by comparison. Planets are being found circling distant stars. In Genesis 1:14 God invents the stars to provide the earth with light. Two verses later he invents the sun. We now know that these passages are not scientifically sound.
Fortunately, in modern times, scientists are no longer in danger of being tortured or killed by the church. However, I'm sure that if Diamond Dave were alive back in Galileo's time, he would have backed the church 100%. The church will continue to fail to recognize man's insignificance in the face of the entire universe.
You see, randomness is perhaps the most prevalent force in the universe. In the vast totality of the universe, things are happening randomly all the time. We could be wiped out by a comet or meteor next week. We have absolutely no control over these things. Diamond Dave chooses to believe that he has control over these things. I'm sure he thinks that by praying to his God, he can alter events. Mankind on earth is completely insignificant and nothing in the universe depends on him.
DNA from apes is nearly a perfect match with that from humans. This is no small task. Have you ever seen a DNA strand? Mutations easily can, and do, take place when one considers that there have been billions and billions of years for it to happen. And all mutations are not bad, either. Scientists are always adjusting plants, grains, and even animal breeds in ways that will benefit mankind. Diamond Dave doesn't think these things can evolve, because he has limited himself to a 5,000 year time frame.
Does Diamond Dave really think that nothing can come about by chance? You can do anything you want simply by random chance. Roll the dice and if an even number comes up, call in sick today. Did God control that outcome? Of course not. Maybe you call in and get fired. Then you lose your home. All these things caused by a roll of the dice.
The church at some future point will probably have to bow to science again, just as it did in Galileo's time. In the meantime, we have people like Diamond Dave.
Diamond Dave is a great poster here. Agree with him or not, I appreciate that he posts his viewpoints here. Thanks Diamond, keep it up!
As for: "Fortunately, in modern times, scientists are no longer in danger of being tortured or killed by the church." You need to read your Koran again, pal. There are still areas where religion trumps science, even at the work place.
Tars, thanks for the kind word. The consequences of radical Islam left to do whatever it will in a free society are deeply troubling at the least. I have no clue how this should be properly addressed in a still free society, without gutting freedoms for the many.
To say nothing of when the inmates run the asylum and dictate governmental policy and indoctrinate blind hatred of Jews,Israel and the U.S., virtually from the cradle on up, and certainly in their schools.
Anonymous-"The Bible is unerrant." I prefer noniliradismiserrant. But that's just me. Unerrant is nice too. U to I, it's only a space away. I looked, did I make you look?
Thanks for the reference so I know to what you are referring with Genesis 1:14. "Lights in the expanse of the sky" does appear in v.14, in v. 16 "stars" are mentioned after the sun reference in v. 16. This all happened on the same "day" of creation.
"Day" in the creation narrative comes from the Hebrew "yom" which can mean a 24 hr. day or to a "time period of undetermined length." Perhaps like "in the day" can mean a certain decade or even era.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights"...Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson
"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him"... Genesis 1:27
If we are created by God in His image, than He has the power to give rights,and our lives have meaning and purpose bcz He created us in His likeness. Governments and the governing derive their position from God and answer to Him. They are not the final say. They will have to answer to Him for their actions on Judgment Day, as will we.
Anonymous has given a fair depiction of life in an evolutionary model. It's all random, there is no meaning. I said before that godless, totalitarian states that answer to no one and terrorize their minions feel no fear in murdering well over 100,000,000 of their own, just last century. Rights that are man-given can by man be taken away.
I prefer the dignity, worth and subjection to God rather than the capricious, random whims of man and his sinful, fallen nature.
Preferring subjegation to a God who destroyed all of mankind in a flood to the capricious nature of man is apparently some type of religious double-speak. And it really doesn't address the issue of which God we are to select. Mankind has worshipped thousands of them.
It's really a peachy world when we can tell ourselves how meaningful and important to the universe we all are. I would actually prefer that myself. Maybe some Jehova's Witness will come along some day and convince me of it.
As long as we're going to quote men as a part of our arguments, I'll choose Albert Einstein, who once said, "The thing most incomprehensible about our world is that it is comprehensible."
"So, the quick answer to the question is that Einstein did not believe in a personal God. It is however, interesting how he arrived at that conclusion. In developing the theory of relativity, Einstein realized that the equations led to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning. He didn't like the idea of a beginning, because he thought one would have to conclude that the universe was created by God. So, he added a cosmological constant to the equation to attempt to get rid of the beginning. He said this was one of the worst mistakes of his life."
Einstein did not believe in God. What religious people will do to bolster their arguments, is claim that scientists such as Einstein, or more often, Steven Hawking, claim that the universe had a beginning, thereby fortifying their beliefs.
What they conveniently leave out is their next statement - which is always something like, "This happened at least 15 billion years ago." They use the information that supports their argument, and discard the rest.
The odds quoted from that web site by Diamond Dave are obviously contrived, as any numbers used as a starting point from which to extrapolate odds would by definition have to be pure guess.
What is interesting, however, is not the number itself. The interesting thing is that in all the billions and billions of years that this planet has existed in the billions of oceans of trillions of galaxies and trillions and trillions of stars, each with its own individual billions and billions of years' history, anyone would blink at Diamond Dave's number is surprising, indeed.
You see, the odds of life forming in the manner that occurred on earth is indeed special. But even on the off-chance that his odds are even close, that would not be unlikely in the overall history of all the planets, stars, solar systems, and galaxies in the universe. They are simply more numerous than the human mind can ponder. The only people who think Dave's number proves that it couldn't happen are people who think that we've only been around a few thousand years, or that there are only a few hundred thousand galaxies. Einstein and Hawking would both laugh at either of these numbers, if they could.
I'm having difficulty with the part of the argument where Diamond Dave pounds away at "godless" states being responsible for all of those deaths. That arguments casts a blind eye toward all of the wars and mayhem that have been committed and still are committed in the name of one God or another. In some areas of the world religious sects have fought violently for hundreds or even thousands of years, and continue to do so with no end in sight.
The Spanish Inquisition and other medieval forces violently forced religious beliefs on people. The crusades were a series of wars fought under religious pretext. I could go on and on.
The God Diamond Dave worships not only destroyed all of mankind in a flood, (an incident Dave seems to have no problem with whatsoever), but according to the Bible was also regularly wiping out entire cities (Jericho, Soddom, Gammorah, et. al.) because he felt that they were all just plain bad (read: not worshipping the correct god). He even killed new-born infants in the process.
You should not bring war and other violent atrocities into an argument where you are primarity defending the role of religion in history.
"What religious people will do to bolster their arguments, is claim that scientists such as Einstein, or more often, Steven Hawking, claim that the universe had a beginning, thereby fortifying their beliefs."
Do you believe the universe did not have a beginning? I'd like to hear this one.
I submit nine paragraphs of well-spoken arguments for Diamond Dave, and instead of responding to any of them, I get this? Look, I keep rereading my posts and simply cannot find anywhere where I stated that the universe had no beginning.
What I said was that scientists usually state that the universe had some sort of beginning billions and billions of years ago. I went on to say that ultra- religious people will often use the first part of these findings and ignore the last part. To answer Diamond Dave, I have absolutely no idea how the universe got here. You see, nobody does. That's why so many scientists and astronomers are working on the problem.
Of course, they could all stop their research right now and just ask Diamond Dave. Diamond is the party in this argument who claims to know how the universe began - not me. Unfortunately, he doesn't think it necessary to explain it beyond stating that a god snapped his fingers and it appeared. That is the same theory first developed during the stone age. Of course, we're not really sure that Dave believes in the stone age. God could just snap his fingers and skip all of that inventing of fire and such.
The reason Diamond Dave thinks the universe had a beginning is because that is the only way the human mind can conceptualize the existence of something. Dave is trapped within the known bounds of human thought. There really is no reason to debate this particular portion of the discussion until either scientists obtain more information, or people like Diamond Dave elaborate on their views.
I had missed your recurring theme of God's wiping out virtually all of humanity w/the Flood.
The Bible does not whitewash it's "family tree." It shows it warts and all. Adam disobeyed, and when questioned blamed his wife for his eating the forbidden fruit. God's response-"the Curse" for the snake, intense pain in labor for women and more labor and complications raising a harvest for men. God killed an animal to clothe man, taking care of his nakedness and shame. Genesis 3:27 He provided for a Savior in Genesis 3:15.
Adam and Eve's son Cain killed his brother Abel. God's response- God warned Cain of his bitterness before the murder. Because Cain feared for his life God put a mark on him so he would not be killed. This is God's First Family.
In Genesis 6, the sons of God (Seth, Adam and Eve's righteous son after Cain & Abel)married the daughters of man (Cain, killer of Abel).
Marriage requires compromise. In both the Old and New Testament God would later instruct and command believers to not marry unbelievers, because of the resulting influence and corruption.
Predictably, right compromised with wickedness and violence flourished throughout the world. The heroes were giants (the Nephilim) where "might made right". Lamech, an ancestor of Cain in Gen. 4:24 bragged of his murdering an opponent who bruised him and how it should be revenged 77 times. Hero worship of the vile, glorifying murder, centuries before the 10 Commandments, mankind quickly devolved.
"When the Lord saw that man's wickedness was widespread on the earth and that every scheme his mind thought of was nothing but evil all the time, The Lord regretted He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart." Gen. 6:5,6
When Israel went to take the Promised Land, he told them to not intermarry and to wipe these people out. Why? Some sacrificed babies to the god Molech, and some worshipped fertility goddesses who had temple prostitutes at the temple door to greet and "attend to" the men as needed. Not a prudent pathway to godliness or formation of godly, loving families.
I think it might help you if you were to think of time as sort of a man-made thing. Time does not necessarily exists in all dimensions. I think what most scientist believe is that the current universe started (or in edffect, time started) some billions of years ago. They do not necessarily believe that the universe has not "started" before.
I can not see a starting point having anything to do with having or not having a god(s). Just because we do not understand how the universe "started" does not mean the answer is magic (i.e. God did it).
What I've been reading lately skews towards what you are saying time-wise. The "Genesis Flood" book by Henry Morris was written in the 1960's and updated a simplistic book written around 1923.
They indicate man dating from 20,000 to 50000B.C. and of land bridges 10-15000 years ago allowing man to spread to Alaska and other places tougher to cross by sea.
I'm only jumping into this thread to clarify a reference. If we are going to discuss the book, "The Genesis Flood", the following should be taken into consideration:
No current leading scientist takes this work seriously. It has been roundly criticized for being scientifically inaccurate. The work repeatedly takes quotes from scientists out of context, and occasionally completely misquotes sources.
The USGS has criticized the book for being scientifically inaccurate. John G. Solum, A geologist with the USGS states that "Whitcomb and Morris (the authors) are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed, and his explanation of relative dating is not 'somewhat simplified', it is entirely incorrect."
I personally don't mind anyone using this work to support their arguments, but other readers need to be aware of this source. It should also be noted that John C. Whitcomb has voiced many other controversial ideas, such as declaring the craters on the moon to be the result of a war between God and fallen angels. You decide.
So, let me get this right - "God regretted that he had created man"? Seems rather an unusual emotion coming from some one who is all-knowing. Almost as though he could have anticipated these events.
Rick's post referring to Dr. Solun talking about "The Genesis Flood" means he disagrees with their theory on dating old rocks.
I've never heard the crater on the moon coming from an intergalactic spiritual war before. That is "out there."
Dr. Richard Dawkins, biologist, atheist and author of the best-seller author of "The God Delusion" and "The Blind Watchmaker-Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design", declared in the movie "Expelled",(which is pro-Intelligent Design,) mocked the theory God created the Earth.
Later he proposed that, not God, but aliens, were instrumental in directing the outcome.
"He disagrees with their theory on dating old rocks."
Well, I guess. A casual reader of this thread might interpret that as a minor disagreement contained in a more extensive body of work. Actually, professor Solum disagrees with the entire body of work on which that book is based, as the dating of rocks forms the backbone of Whitcomb and Morris' theory.
The geologic column refers to the order in which plant and animal life is found when digging down, or observing exposed strata of rock. The layers are used to determine what life forms inhabited the earth during various historic periods in our past. Morris likes to claim that all of those layers occurred at once during the flood, with larger, more mobile or intelligent animals moving toward the top to escape flood waters. This is how he explains trilobytes at the bottom, and dinosaurs near the top. Unfortunately, as Mr. Solum points out, if that were the case, these layers would all be compacted instead of spread widely apart throughout the earth in predictably repeating patterns. Ancient fish would not ALWAYS be found many layers underneath more modern fish. There are many such instances of proof that the Morris theory is not sound, and is not taken seriously by anyone with even a rudimentary scientific background.
As far as the alien theory goes, I don't find it any less objectionable than the "it was magic" theory still widely accepted by Christians today. How can you possibly dismiss out of hand alien space travel?
How can otherwise reasonably intelligent people take the biblical timeline seriously?
The biblical timeline refers to the events listed somewhat chronologically in the bible, including the geneological history of biblical characters, usually meaning the ages these characters attained, their deaths, and the lifespans of their offspring. Some bibliophiles argue that by working backwards, the age of the earth can be ascertained and events such as the flood can be given approximate dates. By using this method, most of these pseudo-scientists place the creation of the earth at around 4000 BC.
Adam lives almost 1000 years, until around 3000 BC. About that time, Noah was born, and lived to around 2000 BC. It is interesting to note that even after the flood, the bible has its characters living to two, three and even four hundred years old. That means Noah and his offspring were alive in the 1500 BC era (approximate). About 2000 BC, God finally allowed people to eat meat. Apparently, prior to that everyone was vegetarian.
Anyway, if we are allowed to work backward through known chronologic geneological records in the bible, then I assume that we can do the same with other written records. Using these, we can with certainty place the Minoan Empire around 2000 BC, the Greece civiliztion at around 1000 BC, the ancient Egyptian civilization at 2000 BC (probably earlier), and the Chinese Xia Dynasty around 2000 BC.
What I want to know is, when these people stepped off the ark in 2000 BC, how could all of these civilizations be up and thriving almost immediately? This includes the great Grecian buildings like the Parthenon and Acropolis, the lighthouse and library at Alexandria, the Colossus of Rhodes, and the Great Pyramids? Carbon dating is not being used to date these findings. We have actual written records, indeed, much more extensive than those found in the bible. No records exist in any of these civilizations refering to Noah or his ark, even though he was around at the time. The records of a great flood that are found in other cultures' writings, and are so often used by bible-timeline adherents, always talk about the flood occurring long ago, not recently.
China and the far east were heavily populated and recording their activities within a few years after the flood supposedly subsided. Somehow we are supposed to believe that the earth recovered from a major flood of cataclysmic proportions in a few hundred years and performed all of these feats. Completely illogical.
The people who believe in the Biblical timeline are the ones that make the Bible look like Harry Potter. I've read the entire Bible from cover-to-cover. Which is something very few "Good Christians" can say! There are plenty of good things contained in the Bible, but there are also things that are ridiculous (and that is saying it nicely). Anyone who argues that has NOT read it entirely. Or put another way...they skip over the parts that make them feel uncomfortable. Ask your minister sometime how old Noah lived to be and you'll see what I mean. He/she will of course know it, but will not be so willing to give you the answer. They know what a terrible door that opens. And Noah is only one of many of those doors...
Noah died at the age of 950. One of Noah's sons, Shem, was born when Noah wss 502. Shem lived to be 600. Because the Bible is inerrant, it must be so. Or not. I'll go with the latter.
"Dr. Richard Dawkins, biologist ... mocked the theory that God created the earth. Later he proposed that, not God, but aliens were instrumental in directing the outcome."
This statement is a deliberate attempt to mislead the casual reader of this thread. Diamond Dave is well aware that although Dr. Dawkins did indeed cast aspersions on the idea that the earth was created by a God, he never implied that the earth was created by aliens. What Dr. Dawkins, along with several other researchers, said was that aliens may have been instrumental in populating the planet.
This distinction has been left out in order to make Dawkins' theory less credible. In no way does Dawkins or any other scientist, for that matter, theorize that the earth was popped up by aliens or anyone else. That theory is the sole property of creationists.
o interesting that Diamond Dave responds with utter disbelief when presented with the possibility of the universe having no beginning. His reply literally drips with sarcasm, as he finds it an absurd idea. It is quite obvious that DD insists on a beginning for everything being not only logical, but naturally absolute.
On the other hand, Mr. Dave sees no contradiction when he refers to his God, who of course has always existed, needing no starting point. These are the ridiculous ans transparent inconsistencies that more intelligent people can see through.
You are correct that I see no inconsistency in their being an Almighty God who always was. The Biblical account is a very brief explanation that has spoken to 120 generations of very diverse scientific understanding.
Once again, an answer deliberately misworded. Diamond Dave states "I see no inconsistency in there being an almighty god who always was."
By leaving out the other half of the equation, indeed the half that created the inconsistency, he makes it sound as though we are questioning his belief in a god. The casual reader is left thinking, "there is no inconsistency there. Lots of people believe in God."
The inconsistency we are referring to is the result of not just that one belief of Dave's, but from the way that belief relates to his other stated belief, that everything must have a beginning. After he states that everything must have a beginning, he turns around and exempts his god from that rule, and then says he sees no inconsistency.
Even a youngster in grade school can find the inconsistency here when both statements are included in the text, so Diamond Dave solves that problem by leaving one out. Also, circular logic doesn't work well in an intelligent discussion, and that is why I give so little credence to his continued use of the bible as support for his arguments. You can't just say that god is eternal and had no beginning, and that you know it's true because the bible says so. There is no way of knowing how much of the bible is correct. We already know that the bible toots its own horn and proclaims itself to be the divine inspired word of god. But the only proof of this lies within the bible itself. Circular logic. Only effective on small children.
The Biblical timeline you mention was devised around 1650 by taking the genealogies of Genesis 5 & 11 and using simple arithmetic to come up with 4004B.C. for Adam. Jewish scholars knew not to go there from their heritage.
Missionaries to China were rejected bcz of this dating. American Indians, Australian Aborigines & Europeans date their origins from 9500B.C. to 30,000B.C.
On 11/24 & 12/5 I mentioned 6000 to 100,000 (I mistakenly put 4500 years meaning for the Flood, not the Earth) year old earth. On 1/5 I mentioned mankind at 20,000 to 50,000 years ago.
I'm qualifying my supposition to Mankind starting more in the 20,000 to 60,000B.C. timeframe.
Of the 15 factors limiting human longevity, 3 could apply. 1) Cosmic radiation-the Vela supernova erupted 8-15,000 years ago. This would've brought a few months of global cooling & increased ultraviolet radiation by 2-10 times.
2)Radioisotope radiation (from uranium, radium & thorium)-If they were well isolated from igneous rocks, they could've had little decay from this.
3)They were vegetarians before the Flood-Meat adds higher concentrations of heavy elements. This could be 10 to 10,000 times the level of a vegetarian diet. Eating meat would have sharply reduced man's life span. In Genesis 6:3 God put a 120 year limit on us. Scientists call this apoptosis or planned cell death. Meat eating isn't as detrimental in those confines.
"Richard Dawkins Admits to Intelligent Design" -Google this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoncJBrrdQ8
You are correct,I didn't say things right. I said, Dawkins "mocked the theory God created the Earth."
I should have said "Dawkins mocked the theory of God creating Man."
My summation-Dawkins stated Intelligent Design could be possible in a very slow evolutionary way. He says it could be a highly-developed technological aliens evolved by Darwinian means that brought self-replicating molecules that they seeded onto the earth. You may find a biochemical signature from a designer. That designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe. The designer could not have just jumped into existence spontaneously.
Dawkins admits to the possibility of intelligent design- he simply couldn't stomach it being God.
84 comments:
The Hawkeyes lose to Northwestern - again. Look for them to finish out the season with three losses and wind up 9-3.
Quote of the week - " We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them. All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us. They can't get away this time." - Lewis "Chesty" Puller, most decorated Marine in American history, from early in his career. (WWII) Yes, he kicked their ass and walked out of there.
I googled Lewis puller and my favorite quote is " Where do you put the bayonet?" After he saw his first flamethrower. That and "now we can fire in all directions!"
Hilarious and timely, Marty. I don't know whether courage, recklessness or faith is Puller's most admirable trait.
I see where Terry Brandstad now beats Chet Culver 60-40 in Des Moines Register polls. Any chance of him running?
Remember the musical "The Music Man"? It is about folks in small-town Iowa. For everyone out there who still insists that people in small Iowa towns are friendly, consider the lyrics to the opening song (written by an Iowan):
Townspeople:
Oh, there's nothing halfway
About the Iowa way to treat you,
When we treat you
Which we may not do at all.
There's an Iowa kind of special
Chip-on-the-shoulder attitude.
We've never been without.
That we recall.
We can be cold
As our falling thermometers in December
If you ask about our weather in July.
And we're so by God stubborn
We could stand touchin' noses
For a week at a time
And never see eye-to-eye.
But what the heck, you're welcome,
Join us at the picnic.
You can eat your fill
Of all the food you bring yourself.
You really ought to give Iowa a try.
Provided you are contrary,
We can be cold
As our falling thermometer in December
If you ask about our weather in July.
And we're so by God stubborn
We can stand touchin' noses
For a week at a time
And never see eye-to-eye.
But we'll give you our shirt
And a back to go with it
If your crops should happen to die.
Farmer:
So, what the heck, you're welcome,
Glad to have you with us.
Farmer and Wife:
Even though we may not ever mention it again.
Townspeople:
You really ought to give Iowa
Hawkeye Iowa
Dubuque, Des
Moines, Davenport, Marshalltown,
Mason City, Keokuk, Ames,
Clear Lake
Ought to give Iowa a try!
That should be the final word.
So what are they going to do about Carl's now that it's condemned? From photos it looks like it has been cordoned off. Will they just demo it? Do the current owners pay for demo? Do the taxpayers pay for demo and bill the current owners? Will everyone just let it sit there and fall in on itself like something out of Mad Max? Will out of town squatters take it over and cook crank in there till it explodes? This is the first time I can remember that a downtown business has been condemned. Just asking.
Whatever happened to Rich?
Quote of the week - " Because if it didn't work out, I didn't want to blow the whole day." - Paul Hornung, Green Bay Packers running back, when asked why his wedding was held in the morning.
To Orville K. Bass - Rap Music and "Hip Hop" is the natural regression of the African-Americans to their homeland in New Jersey, New York City, Atlanta, or somewhere in California. Most black individuals in the USA need to come to terms with the fact that other black African natives captured them and sold them to us white guys, helped us put them on the ships,and after we gave them some beads or fire or something, helped stuff them on the boat and said " Nacho Cheese." Or something like that. It did happen, though. And they know it, too, but they don't like it that much. It never wore off, though, and it pissed them off even more when people like Frank Sinatra and Perry Como would just walk around singing like it was nothing in particular. They decided they would just talk really loud about sex and drugs and capping cops and degrading women and that's what you have these days. They call it "hip hop."
Marty -
I don't know what will happen to Carl's. It seems like I heard there were issues with the north wall of the building, which it shares with an adjoining business. Knowing Jefferson and the powers that be in that place, my guess is that absolutely nothing will be done unless us taxpayers pick up the bill some how.
They aren't going to do anything about Carl's. It's freaking them out. It will just cave in on itself and sit there, blocking Lincolnway and Chestnut. Kids from Scranton and Grand Junction will come over and throw the bricks at cars from Perry. This will go on for years, or at least until the next Bell Tower Festival, when Shriver Construction will level the site, build a hut out of coconut shells, and move their corporate headquarters to that location, saving millions of dollars in mowing expense.
They're going to do nothing about Carl's? Just let it cave in and collapse on the VFW? This is truly a day that will live in infamy.
I was looking on the internet on why people think the earth may only be 6,000 or so years old. Here's one thing I found:
Although many people don't accept the Bible's timeline of history, they have difficulty deciding exactly when to start disagreeing with it.
- Was Jesus Christ real? The Bible says he was, and no serious historian doubts it.
- Was King David real? The Bible says he was. Again, there is no reason to doubt it.
- Was Abraham real? The Bible says he was. There seems no reason to doubt this either.
- Was Enoch real? The Bible says he was. There is no reason to think the Bible has suddenly lapsed into fiction when the other people were genuine historical figures.
- Was Adam real? Well, Enoch was a son of Cain, who was a son of Adam. So if Enoch was real there is no reason to think that his father Cain wasn't, or that his grandfather Adam wasn't. They were only two generations away.
And Adam was the first man, created in the first week of the earth's existence.
I just want to know...do people really think that?
I believe the Bible was written by men inspired by an all-knowing, all present God and is inerrant.
I've heard of the 6000-year-old Earth thinking. I've also heard that the genealogy has gaps, and the Earth could be 100,000 years old.
The Bible is a very historical holy book, with cross referencing of dates with the kings of Judah and Israel. Archaeology has been very helpful in corroborating the Biblical accounts.
Accounts of other happenings in antiquity like Plato are often based on fewer than 10 books found. With the destruction of the library at Alexandria during the Roman Empire, many well accepted historical facts are not heavily documented.
I have cars in my yard that are over 6,000 years old, and I would sell them cheap.(New upholstery)!!
As a rule, I would suggest you not dwell on religion or politics on this site, but since religion has been brought up, I will post my one and only response. Yes, the bible is an historic book, in that it reflects the politics, worries, and hopes of the time in which it was assembled. By saying assembled, I am talking about the fact that early popes and their henchmen put together a book of their choosing to keep everyone in line so they could continue to gain wealth and power. Here is a short look at the popes who were in "office" before the King James Bible was assembled. Pope Sergious III - Had Pope Christopher & Pope Leo V strangled in prison. Also had an illegitimate son who would become Pope John XI. Pope Stephen VI - Had his predecessor dug up and tried for heresy, or whatever you want to call it, besides insane crap. Pope Pius II - Pius my ass - called up Vlad the Impaler and had 30,000 folks turned into potstickers. Now if Sergious had Christopher and Leo V strangled while in prison, what kind of badass crap did they have going on? If Stephen VI dug up some dead guy (Formosus) and put him on trial, what kind of badass crap did he have going on? If Pius II calls up Dracula and caps 30,000 people because he's pissed that the Raiders lost that's messed up. Just to remind you, these are the same individuals and their chosen delegates that decided what is in your Bible that you read today.
Just so you know, I will not respond to any crap anyone will give me on this. I already said that. You got the down and out.
This just in -
The Jefferson City Council has voted to award a $50,000 grant to whomever they can find to take over ownership of the building that most recently housed the Horse Collar Saloon. There would be no charge for the property; its previous owner has given it to the city. The new owner, when found, will merely inherit the deed.
Because the building has been officially condemned, whoever receives this property will have to refurbish it to the point that it meets all current safety and environmental standards. The $50,000 would presumeably be used toward that end. $50,000 was chosen because that is the amount that the city figures it would cost to raze the structure. If no owner is found, that is how this alloted sum will be spent.
Bob Schwarzkopf, city attorney for Jefferson, states that Federal and State grants can be obtained to aid in the restoration of the property. These grants total approximately $160,000. The total cost of restoration for this project is estimated at $360,000.
When the city's $50,000 is added in, the out-of-pocket cost of restoration for the new owner would be around $150,000.
It is intersting to note that the above-mentioned State and Federal aid hinges on the building being designated in the "National Registry of Historic Sites" (no kidding). Mr. Schwarzkopf states that this should not be a problem - this is similar to the grant money that enabled the city of Carroll to refurbish their downtown area years back. The state of Iowa alone has set aside over $50 million for use in this manner for each of the next three years.
Also interesting is that, when making his presentation to the Jefferson City Coucil, Mr. Schwarzkopf related the history of this building and in doing so included references to its use as a theater in the early years of its existence. He obtained this information from Jefferson Iowa News, along with our photo of the theater at that time (again, no kidding). The photo is in the "Photo Archives" link on our main web page. This is part of JIN's effort to save Carl's Bad Tavern.
In a related note, Schwarzkopf has suggested that the entire 9-block downtown area of Jefferson apply for recognition as a "National Historic District" (once again, no kidding). This would make similar grant money available to all Jefferson businesses lying within that area.
From time to time, I get asked that a Greene County Accessor link be added to the Jefferson Iowa News web site.
Well, starting tomorrow we have decided to do just that. Along the left-hand side of Jefferson Iowa News' main web page, under "recommended links", you'll find a link entitled "local property values". This will connect you to the Greene County Accessor's county-wide search engine.
You can use this link to search Greene County properties for information such as assessed values, owners, and purchase dates. Much additional information is there on each parcel, including color photos of most.
You can search by owner's name, address, business name, parcel number, or a number of other methods. Use this to get an idea of what property values are in the Jefferson area.
Ric: Any idea if there's an engineer's report detailing the problems with the Carl's Bad building?
The idea of creating a historic district is a good one. State and federal tax credits are available for fixing up buildings in these districts. Around 40% of the rehab can be funded with these credits.
I think Rich should come back to Jefferson, completely restore and refurbish Russell's Bad Tavern, open a porno and opium den upstairs, and become the "toast of the town". He could get in tight with Redfern and expand the tunnel system that Dino started out of Saba's Bakery so that no one will ever be caught. He could buy off Larry Mondello and with his proceeds buy into the lucrative Shriver Farms endless pit of government money. He could retire at age 3, kicking back and laughing at the rest of us working as he takes our every last tax dollar.
Rich -
I'm sure that the city engineer has a report on his desk and the city council has reviewed it. That is what they have based their cost estimates on.
So far, as far as I can tell, it has not been made public. Of course, in Jefferson that might only mean that nobody from the paper has been interested enough to ask for it. I would be curious to read it. It might shed some light on the possibility of pursuing other, less-expensive options.
It's a toss-up. Collecting farm subsidies and illegal drugs are probably the two best businesses in Jefferson these days.
Diamond Dave said... The Bible is a very historical holy book, with cross referencing of dates with the kings of Judah and Israel. Archaeology has been very helpful in corroborating the Biblical accounts.
I can see an archeologist digging... "This piece of pottery definitely dates to the time of King David..." "Oh that bone? It's nothing. T-Rex by the looks of it. Can't be more than 5,800 years old at the most. Probably put there by Satan..."
My opinion of the bible ... a poorly written historical novel written by man to control men (and women) and definitely not inspired by a god.
I do still have a blue Carlsbad softball jacket I could hang on the wall.
Take a last look at the celebrity look-alikes in the Jefferson area on our web site. Soon it will be in the "news archives" section.
But - due to popular demand - a second installment is on the way! Make sure you look for it in the same location in the very near future.
We have had a tremendous favorable response to this feature.
"Oh that bone? It's nothing. T-Rex by the looks of it. Can't be more than 5,800 years old at the most. Probably put there by Satan..."
There are questions about any dating system (like carbon 14 or E-Harmony). Carbon 14 dating assumes there have been no catastrophes (like the Genesis Flood), and that things have always aged or progressed at the same rate.
40 years ago John Barber thought the earth was both created and evolved. That was fine for my 6th grade mind.
I never talked about creation and evolution & felt that evolutionists had all the supporting scientific data. My brother lent "The Genesis Flood" by Morris to me. Now I believe that their are two camps with different worldviews.
The evolutionists have had the full support of the school system and academia for 50 years, so we reflexively buy into the dating methods which we've heard spoken of in school. Scientific inquiry and searching for the truth has been replaced by politicization in the global warming debate. I believe there is a laziness among tenured professors because of the politically correct smugness and lack of searching for truth wherever it leads.
I am not necessarily an evolutionist, but I don't have my head in the sand, either.
OK, I guess if you assume that there was a giant flood that covered the earth and caused carbon-14 to break down in an abnormal, yet consistent manner around the globe, you still have this problem with the fossil record.
Fossils have been found in a predictable, layered order for hundreds of years, predating Darwin. This order remains the same all over the world. There has never been found a fossil which disrupts the sequence. In other words, you never find a human fossil amidst those of mastodons, e.g.
Creationists are compelled to argue that all of these layers of fossils, including dinosaurs, mammoths, trilobites, early humans, and armored fish all co-existed, or nearly co-existed, and were somehow all fossilized in the same sequence of layers. They also claim that all of the sea creatures were somehow "drowned" by the flood.
This is clearly ludicrous. I think the real "laziness" is among creationists who seem to feel that it is easier to just believe the earth was created than to dig deep and try to understand the science.
It truly is smug to call professors "lazy" when the only activity you engage in is believing what your church tells you.
What Do the Bones Say?
There is also physical evidence that dinosaur bones are not millions of years old. Scientists from Montana State University found T. rex bones that were not totally fossilized. Sections of the bones were like fresh bone and contained what seems to be blood cells and hemoglobin. If these bones really were tens of millions of years old, then the blood cells and hemoglobin would have totally disintegrated.26 Also, there should not be “fresh” bones if they were really millions of years old.27 A report by these scientists stated the following:
A thin slice of T. rex bone glowed amber beneath the lens of my microscope ... . The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center ... . Red blood cells? The shape and location suggested them, but blood cells are mostly water and couldn’t possibly have stayed preserved in the 65-million-year-old tyrannosaur ... . The bone sample that had us so excited came from a beautiful, nearly complete specimen of Tyrannosaurus rex unearthed in 1990 ... . When the team brought the dinosaur into the lab, we noticed that some parts deep inside the long bone of the leg had not completely fossilized ... . So far, we think that all of this evidence supports the notion that our slices of T. rex could contain preserved heme and hemoglobin fragments. But more work needs to be done before we are confident enough to come right out and say, “Yes, this T. rex has blood compounds left in its tissues.”28
Unfossilized duck-billed dinosaur bones have been found on the North Slope in Alaska.29 Also, creation scientists collected such (unfossilized) frozen dinosaur bones in Alaska.30 Evolutionists would not say that these bones had stayed frozen for the many millions of years since these dinosaurs supposedly died out (according to evolutionary theory). Yet the bones could not have survived for the millions of years unmineralized. This is a puzzle to those who believe in an “age of dinosaurs” millions of years ago, but not to someone who builds his thinking on the Bible.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/what-happened-to-the-dinosaurs
Anonymous-I wondered where you came up with "all of the sea creatures were somehow "drowned" by the flood." then I read Genesis 7:4b which
says "I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made." I had (and still do) believed Gen. 7:21-22 that all of the land creatures not in the Ark died. You have stirred my curiosity about Gen. 7:4.
With billions of fossils where are the intermediate species bridging the gap from one species to the next? How does evolution explain complexities like DNA, the eye and the brain? A book has an author, a painting has an artist. Yet this magnificently ordered creation has no Creator? Someone's "dumb luck" must be infinitely better than mine to believe this.
Evolution has dinosaurs becoming extinct 65,000,000 years ago, creation 4500+ to 100,000 years ago. Both sides have issues that are hard to understand/defend. The best debating tactic is throw a steady stream of cannonballs at the other's castle and brush aside any arrows coming your way.
Darwin stated in the "Origin of Species" that in a 100 years we would know how things originated.
With the 3 theories of creation, evolution or some combination of both we will never "know" because no humans were there. Why is only one theory taught as fact in our public schools and universities?
The longest modern wooden ships are about 300 feet in length. Noah's ark was 450 feet (Gen. 6:15). Wood is simply unable to withstand the changing stresses created by water against the hull and the weight above. These modern wooden boats must be reinforced with iron straps and constantly pumped. Modern technology cannot make that ark seaworthy.
You would argue, I'm sure, that the Great Flood was violently intense, like no other - destroying all life beneath the sea as well as uprooting vegetation and becoming cataclysmic like world-wide volcanic power. Yet at the same time, here was this wooden boat, all held together with thousands of beasts, just bobbing along. By the way, the bible doesn't mention any cataclysmic events - just water and fountains.
Also, what about the millions and millions of different insects that must have traveled on the ark? How about the termites? Or the barnacles? These are usually conveniently left out of the mix.
And by the way, how did such a small crew dispose of all the tons and tons of waste?
Tree rings have been counted back well over 10,000 years, and ice cores taken from Greenland have annual layers of 30-40,000 years.
How could we have chalk? Chalk is made up of the bodies of plankton 700-1000 angstroms in diameter. Objects this size settle to the bottom at a rate of .0000154 mm/sec. In a year of the flood, they could have settled about half a meter.
A thousand kilometers' length along the northern coast of Russia contains 500,000 tons of fossilized tusks. Did all these mammoths live at approximately the same time? There are millions and millions of tons of these tusks in Siberia alone - Russia must have been wall-to-wall mammoths!
And, by the way, please explain the Great Barrier Reef, which is also a living organism.
Excellent post. Well written and thought out.
Genesis 7:4b in the American Standard, Darby Version and Young's Literal translation "all the living creatures I have made on the ground" (other versions say earth)" This seems to square with verses 21 and 22-"Every living thing that moved on the earth perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died."
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
I believe that would qualify as a cataclysmic event. Harold Morris talks of the incredible power of water in "The Genesis Flood." We've seen it with Katrina and the Flood of 1993 and when the tsunami of Christmas 2004 hit and 250,000 died it was a catastrophe.
These was as nothing compared to a 40 day downspour and the crust or springs of the earth bursting forth.
This next link speaks of the "gopher wood" (they said a scribe in the King James version erred-the letters in Hebrew appear similiar and gopher wood is an obscure reference) and the vessel's viability if constructed a certain way could have made it 10x stronger.
http://www.noahsark-naxuan.com/arkmodel.htm
Insects I'm not certain- they may have been on. Morris theorizes God may have started hibernation for some of the animals, reducing the work load to some extent.
I've heard about 4500 years ago to 100,000 years ago for the Flood. The chalk I have no clue. Does the Barrier Reef qualify as marine life? If so, it wouldn't necessarily have been consumed.
If Siberian mammoth tusks weighed 100 lbs. per, that quantity would be for 10,000,000 mammoths in an area considerably larger than Alaska. Almost all of the humans could live in Texas, with 1/8 acre lots and a family of 5 in each. The mammoths wouldn't have been shoulder to shoulder everywhere.
How come the creation dudes are the only one to find living T-rexes? Everyone else finds them stoned to the bone. Why don't they clone them and unleash them on anon? Sounds like Gene Wilder should have been in on this one. Also who knows, it might have been some lutefisk left over. You never know. Those guys that make that stuff have used some ancient s#*t.
First of all, if you can find that many mammoth tusks, there were obviously many, many more than that around.
Secondly, I'm interested in how you make the ark that much stronger. You can't just say that "if constructed a certain way" it becomes 10x stronger. I think modern engineers would have thought of that - and would be using that technology today.
Thirdly, if the flood was that cataclysmic, it wasn't really a flood, was it? That wooden boat loaded down with dinosaurs and all other beasts would have disappeared in the wake. In short - the flood is a nice story to tell your kids, but very untenable to educated adults.
On the main web page of Jefferson Iowa News we have now installed a link allowing the reader to view the number of page requests or "hits" that occur monthly on our site.
Readers may find this interesting, but remember that these page requests do not readily translate into individual hits always.
The link can be found along the right-hand side underneath the local survey button, which is updated weekly.
I just "googled" Rick Bland and Jefferson Iowa News was the number two listing.
A couple of things for Diamond Dave to clear up.
In Genesis 9:16 ~ God creates a rainbow. This will remind us of the flood. Did rainbows not exist before this? The laws of light refraction changed?
In First Chronicles 16:30 ~ The earth is described as fixed and unmoving. This passage was used to force Galileo to recant his belief that the sun was at the center of the solar system. Does the earth move?
Numbers 13:33 ~ Here the Israelites encounter the sons of Anak. The Anakites came from a race of Giants who, according to Genesis 6:2-4, originated in pre-flood times when male angels mated with human daughters. That would mean that there were survivors of the flood.
I could go on and on. There are numerous biblical passages referring to the earth being flat. You get my point.
Good post. My understanding also is rainbows did not exist before the Flood.
I don't know how best to defend the Bible in regards to 1 Chron. 16:30. I may not have time to research this.
Gen. 6 immediately precedes the flood account. Noah, his 3 sons and their wives survived the flood. There are 100's of accounts world-wide of "Noah types" and stories remarkably similiar to the Flood like the Gilgamesh epic.
Please correct any mistakes in my understanding of evolution. Since no one has commented on, explained or defended an evolutionary account of what transpired I'll attempt it.
Somehow from gases in the atmosphere perhaps 4-5 billion years ago one single cell came about that reproduced asexually.
Somehow this and many other single cells changed or evolved into less complex life forms of intermediate species that eventually evolved into species we'd know that somehow began to reproduce sexually and have instinctual urges.
These "simple" forms changed to insects &/or fish with DNA which eventually evolved into land animals and dinosaurs. They became extinct from some event 65,000,000+ years ago.
Somehow 1-3,000,000 years ago apes evolved into "lower" forms of humans who evolved into Man with a brain and problem solving skills
20,000-30,000 vertebrate species and 1-30,000,000 species of insects, marine animals and invertebrates have resulted.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics talks of energy being lost in each change and things tending to entropy, chaos and disorder.
We assume from this that evolving/mutations are virtually always bad and very seldom good.
Example-"Mommy, mommy, look at the wonderful mutations my body is undergoing from my playing with the plutonium _____." In most families and science fiction the assumption is that mutations in your child or scientifically would not be beneficial.
Which is the most likely &/or unlikely?
1)Single cell asexual reproduction by happenstance, 2)single cell to lower life form to 3)lower life form to insect, fish 4)fish/marine life comes to land; invertebrates become vertebrates to 5)big honking dinosaurs who then die off to 6)apes to lower man to 7)lower man to Man. Somewhere reproduction changed for lower life forms from asexual to sexual and DNA's long chain of mapping and telling the characteristics of this species and particular animal "evolved".
My personal belief is any step along this line qualifies as a miracle as great as anything described in the Bible save for Creation.
The odds of biological evolution happening are 1 in 1 trillion, trillion, billion, billion, billion, billion billion or 1 x 10 to the 60th.
We have not discussed the philosophical/moral consequences of evolution. Karl Marx rejoiced upon hearing of Origin of Species lending scientific cover to his philosophy of materialism (all things are earthly, there is no spiritual realm).
The 20th Century has been by far the bloodiest century. Hitler's genocide killed about 15,000,000, Stalin 30,000,000+ and Mao around 70,000,000. All 3 were evolutionists.
Fear was epidemic from the cruelty of these regimes.
Alcoholism and excessive drinking ran rampant in the USSR with people attempting to numb their brain from reality. Ideas do have consequences. Might makes right in a land that does not fear God.
OK. Diamond Dave now no longer even disputes any of my arguments. All three biblical errors I reference are simply ignored. He used to at least state things like, "I read this.", or "I heard that." Now he just changes the subject. This is a classic example of religious brainwashing. He offers no solid logical arguments or personally deduced reasoning. He merely parrots what he has been told or told to read.
The laws of refraction and light obviously weren't changed by the flood. I know it is convenient to claim that the flood changed everything when your arguments are found to be devoid of scientific reasoning, but conditions on the planet's surface will not alter this atmospheric law.
I wonder where he gets his 1x10 to the 60th? I'll bet it was after weeks of laborious study. Or maybe he read it. He honestly thinks that the most logical theory explaining the universe's origin is that it was magically whipped up. Look, no one knows how the universe originated. That is why we study it so aggressively. Diamond Dave expects us to have a rock-solid theory that can be proven scientifically beyond all doubt. He offers nothing like this in his defense. Our theories may not be the best, but we seek to learn these answers rather than just accept the same theory we went with 5,000 years ago. Some day scientists will unwrap this riddle. When they do, religious fanatics will argue that it makes more sense to believe that somebody just snapped his fingers and then went away somewhere. That is by far the least credible theory I can imagine.
As far as evolution goes, he likes to couch the discussion in such a way that we have to prove evolution, yet he does not have to offer any proof whatsoever for creationism. He demands high levels of proof, with no scientific gaps or question marks, yet says the Bible is the only proof he is required to produce.
Why is it harder to believe that 30million species evolved than they were all magically created in a day?
As far as the moralizing, I was really hoping that we could sustain our discussion without that aspect appearing, but that is unfortunately never possible when dealing with somebody who feels morally superior. He would have us believe that evolutionism is responsible for millions and millions of death, even though religion historically has played an integral part in nearly every war. Why would he moralize on this issue when the very God he worships destroyed nearly every living being on the earth in a flood? You really can't have it both ways.
By the way, here are the odds of some one pulling the universe out of a hat: zero.
Diamond Dave completely misses the point in the Genesis 6 reference. You see, the Israelites come across a race of people many years after the flood. This race could not have existed at that time, because they were supposedly all wiped out in the flood. They were not part of Noah's group - they were giants.
I referred to all 3 points in post 38 by anonymous. I was mistaken when looking at Numbers 13:33 and focused entirely on the Genesis 6 part, which I addressed. I will need to look at that again bcz before I'd always concentrated on the 10 spies bad attitude and had never noticed the "sons of Anak".
You are correct that I completely missed that point, sorry.
The first point you answered by stating that you believed in the Bible.
The second point you answered by stating that "you didn't know how to defend the Bible".
The third point, as you stated, you missed entirely.
Numbers 13:33 has the fearful 10 spies who did not want to go to the Promised Land bcz of the dangers saying "the sons of Anak" were in the Promised Land. They could 've been exaggerating or wrong.
Feel free to pick the easiest one of the 7 processes from my post of 12/16 and let us know what you think the odds of it happening. Is it 1 in 50 like Buster Douglas beating Mike Tyson? 1 in 1000? a 1,000,000? a billion? Pick a number we'll work with your numbers if you want.
All great organizations have a framework, structure, process, intelligence, planning, and attention to detail, some or all of the above.
To thrive their innovation helps them succeed or had outstanding leadership or personnel for a time.
What great organization succeeds and can rightfully say, "It was just a huge crap shoot, Marv. We did it different everyday. No one had a clue. I'm just thankful to be out of that disruptive, chaotic mess with my 100 mill."
Randomness would be more like "The Curse of the Lottery" where someone actually realized their wildest dream only to fritter it away. Some planning or discipline needs to be exercised even when millions fall into your lap.
Garbage in, Garbage out.
Random input, Random Output.
Evidently unless the universe is involved, then it's COMPLETELY different.
Only the human mind cares about time. Only the human mind cares about whether things are ordered or random. The "universe" has been around a long time. Some human minds, via the bible, have determined the Earth and the universe to be 5,800 years old, plus or minus a long weekend. The Bible is purely a human invention, nothing more than a group of stories meant to control men and women.
When a person decides to follow, to believe the bible to be literal and inerrant, then that person, when discussing science, has to come up with the totally ridiculous rants and ravings of Diamond Dave, like comparing the universe to a well-managed corporation.
The universe is old, old, old...perhaps 14 billion years old. When dealing such big numbers, randomness, (or lack of a human-mind style corporate order), works just fine. When one believes the Earth and universe to be 5,800 hundred years old, then, yes, one must believe in intelligent design because there is just not enough time for "evolution" to do its thing. The "believers" have painted themselves into a corner and must turn a blind eye to overwhelming amount of scientific evidence in support of a very old universe. However, there are plenty of stupid, ignorant Americans that will listen, and believe, in their silly little arguments.
The Bible is full of references to dragons, unicorns, satyrs, and other assorted nonsensical monsters. More recent editions have omitted these obviously made-up creatures and replaced them with more acceptable beasts such as oxen and goats.
To anyone who was not indoctrinated at a very young age, all of this overwhelmingly shows the Bible to be nothing more than a fictionalized version of the world as people thought it may have existed a few thousand years ago.
Really, when you think about it, just how big a sacrifice is dying on the cross anyway, when you're planning on coming back a few minutes later?
Summation of arguments for theory of randomness by Anonymous:
1) I am not necessarily an evolutionist.
2) Fossils always are where they should be. This is inaccurate. Post on 12-4-09 @10:08pm.
3) Things may have started 14,000,000,000 years ago. How this transpired will not be considered or explained.
4) Mutation-Good
Creation-Bad
Summation of argument for theory of creation by Diamond Dave:
1. No proof or correlating evidence is necessary
2. It says so in the Bible
3. The Bible is unerrant; we know this because
4. The Bible says so
5. DNA proves creationism
That last statement is so completely utterly absurd that I have trouble typing it
When one argues religion with people like Diamond Dave, you can't help but be reminded of Galileo and his battle with the Church. In his time, the Church insisted that the earth was at the center of the solar system (universe). Even though science had proven that the earth circled the sun, religious leaders were having none of it. Eventually, Galileo was tortured and threatened with his life; he thus recanted, knowing science would prevail.
Today, amazing photographs are being taken of previously "empty" patches of outer space, revealing literally billions of additional galaxies of stars. They are millions of light-years away. The distance light travels in 4-6000 years is comically small by comparison. Planets are being found circling distant stars. In Genesis 1:14 God invents the stars to provide the earth with light. Two verses later he invents the sun. We now know that these passages are not scientifically sound.
Fortunately, in modern times, scientists are no longer in danger of being tortured or killed by the church. However, I'm sure that if Diamond Dave were alive back in Galileo's time, he would have backed the church 100%. The church will continue to fail to recognize man's insignificance in the face of the entire universe.
You see, randomness is perhaps the most prevalent force in the universe. In the vast totality of the universe, things are happening randomly all the time. We could be wiped out by a comet or meteor next week. We have absolutely no control over these things. Diamond Dave chooses to believe that he has control over these things. I'm sure he thinks that by praying to his God, he can alter events. Mankind on earth is completely insignificant and nothing in the universe depends on him.
DNA from apes is nearly a perfect match with that from humans. This is no small task. Have you ever seen a DNA strand? Mutations easily can, and do, take place when one considers that there have been billions and billions of years for it to happen. And all mutations are not bad, either. Scientists are always adjusting plants, grains, and even animal breeds in ways that will benefit mankind. Diamond Dave doesn't think these things can evolve, because he has limited himself to a 5,000 year time frame.
Does Diamond Dave really think that nothing can come about by chance? You can do anything you want simply by random chance. Roll the dice and if an even number comes up, call in sick today. Did God control that outcome? Of course not. Maybe you call in and get fired. Then you lose your home. All these things caused by a roll of the dice.
The church at some future point will probably have to bow to science again, just as it did in Galileo's time. In the meantime, we have people like Diamond Dave.
Diamond Dave is a great poster here. Agree with him or not, I appreciate that he posts his viewpoints here. Thanks Diamond, keep it up!
As for: "Fortunately, in modern times, scientists are no longer in danger of being tortured or killed by the church." You need to read your Koran again, pal. There are still areas where religion trumps science, even at the work place.
Tars, thanks for the kind word.
The consequences of radical Islam left to do whatever it will in a free society are deeply troubling at the least. I have no clue how this should be properly addressed in a still free society, without gutting freedoms for the many.
To say nothing of when the inmates run the asylum and dictate governmental policy and indoctrinate blind hatred of Jews,Israel and the U.S., virtually from the cradle on up, and certainly in their schools.
Anonymous-"The Bible is unerrant."
I prefer noniliradismiserrant. But that's just me. Unerrant is nice too.
U to I, it's only a space away.
I looked, did I make you look?
Thanks for the reference so I know to what you are referring with Genesis 1:14. "Lights in the expanse of the sky" does appear in v.14, in v. 16 "stars" are mentioned after the sun reference in v. 16. This all happened on the same "day" of creation.
"Day" in the creation narrative comes from the Hebrew "yom" which can mean a 24 hr. day or to a "time period of undetermined length." Perhaps like "in the day" can mean a certain decade or even era.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights"...Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson
"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him"... Genesis 1:27
If we are created by God in His image, than He has the power to give rights,and our lives have meaning and purpose bcz He created us in His likeness. Governments and the governing derive their position from God and answer to Him. They are not the final say. They will have to answer to Him for their actions on Judgment Day, as will we.
Anonymous has given a fair depiction of life in an evolutionary model. It's all random, there is no meaning.
I said before that godless, totalitarian states that answer to no one and terrorize their minions feel no fear in murdering well over 100,000,000 of their own, just last century. Rights that are man-given can by man be taken away.
I prefer the dignity, worth and subjection to God rather than the capricious, random whims of man and his sinful, fallen nature.
Preferring subjegation to a God who destroyed all of mankind in a flood to the capricious nature of man is apparently some type of religious double-speak. And it really doesn't address the issue of which God we are to select. Mankind has worshipped thousands of them.
It's really a peachy world when we can tell ourselves how meaningful and important to the universe we all are. I would actually prefer that myself. Maybe some Jehova's Witness will come along some day and convince me of it.
As long as we're going to quote men as a part of our arguments, I'll choose Albert Einstein, who once said, "The thing most incomprehensible about our world is that it is comprehensible."
Einstein on a personal God
"So, the quick answer to the question is that Einstein did not believe in a personal God. It is however, interesting how he arrived at that conclusion. In developing the theory of relativity, Einstein realized that the equations led to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning. He didn't like the idea of a beginning, because he thought one would have to conclude that the universe was created by God. So, he added a cosmological constant to the equation to attempt to get rid of the beginning. He said this was one of the worst mistakes of his life."
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/probabilitieslife.html#5pVptzIeVpH1
Above is where they state the probabilities for supporting life are 1 with 99 zeros behind it. I said 10 to the 60th.
I'm constantly screwing up the links.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/probabilitieslife.html#5pVptzIeVpH1
Hopefully this shows things.
Einstein did not believe in God. What religious people will do to bolster their arguments, is claim that scientists such as Einstein, or more often, Steven Hawking, claim that the universe had a beginning, thereby fortifying their beliefs.
What they conveniently leave out is their next statement - which is always something like, "This happened at least 15 billion years ago." They use the information that supports their argument, and discard the rest.
The odds quoted from that web site by Diamond Dave are obviously contrived, as any numbers used as a starting point from which to extrapolate odds would by definition have to be pure guess.
What is interesting, however, is not the number itself. The interesting thing is that in all the billions and billions of years that this planet has existed in the billions of oceans of trillions of galaxies and trillions and trillions of stars, each with its own individual billions and billions of years' history, anyone would blink at Diamond Dave's number is surprising, indeed.
You see, the odds of life forming in the manner that occurred on earth is indeed special. But even on the off-chance that his odds are even close, that would not be unlikely in the overall history of all the planets, stars, solar systems, and galaxies in the universe. They are simply more numerous than the human mind can ponder. The only people who think Dave's number proves that it couldn't happen are people who think that we've only been around a few thousand years, or that there are only a few hundred thousand galaxies. Einstein and Hawking would both laugh at either of these numbers, if they could.
I'm having difficulty with the part of the argument where Diamond Dave pounds away at "godless" states being responsible for all of those deaths. That arguments casts a blind eye toward all of the wars and mayhem that have been committed and still are committed in the name of one God or another. In some areas of the world religious sects have fought violently for hundreds or even thousands of years, and continue to do so with no end in sight.
The Spanish Inquisition and other medieval forces violently forced religious beliefs on people. The crusades were a series of wars fought under religious pretext. I could go on and on.
The God Diamond Dave worships not only destroyed all of mankind in a flood, (an incident Dave seems to have no problem with whatsoever), but according to the Bible was also regularly wiping out entire cities (Jericho, Soddom, Gammorah, et. al.) because he felt that they were all just plain bad (read: not worshipping the correct god). He even killed new-born infants in the process.
You should not bring war and other violent atrocities into an argument where you are primarity defending the role of religion in history.
"What religious people will do to bolster their arguments, is claim that scientists such as Einstein, or more often, Steven Hawking, claim that the universe had a beginning, thereby fortifying their beliefs."
Do you believe the universe did not have a beginning? I'd like to hear this one.
I submit nine paragraphs of well-spoken arguments for Diamond Dave, and instead of responding to any of them, I get this? Look, I keep rereading my posts and simply cannot find anywhere where I stated that the universe had no beginning.
What I said was that scientists usually state that the universe had some sort of beginning billions and billions of years ago. I went on to say that ultra- religious people will often use the first part of these findings and ignore the last part. To answer Diamond Dave, I have absolutely no idea how the universe got here. You see, nobody does. That's why so many scientists and astronomers are working on the problem.
Of course, they could all stop their research right now and just ask Diamond Dave. Diamond is the party in this argument who claims to know how the universe began - not me. Unfortunately, he doesn't think it necessary to explain it beyond stating that a god snapped his fingers and it appeared. That is the same theory first developed during the stone age. Of course, we're not really sure that Dave believes in the stone age. God could just snap his fingers and skip all of that inventing of fire and such.
The reason Diamond Dave thinks the universe had a beginning is because that is the only way the human mind can conceptualize the existence of something. Dave is trapped within the known bounds of human thought. There really is no reason to debate this particular portion of the discussion until either scientists obtain more information, or people like Diamond Dave elaborate on their views.
I had missed your recurring theme of God's wiping out virtually all of humanity w/the Flood.
The Bible does not whitewash it's "family tree." It shows it warts and all.
Adam disobeyed, and when questioned blamed his wife for his eating the forbidden fruit.
God's response-"the Curse" for the snake, intense pain in labor for women and more labor and complications raising a harvest for men. God killed an animal to clothe man, taking care of his nakedness and shame. Genesis 3:27
He provided for a Savior in Genesis 3:15.
Adam and Eve's son Cain killed his brother Abel.
God's response- God warned Cain of his bitterness before the murder.
Because Cain feared for his life God put a mark on him so he would not be killed. This is God's First Family.
In Genesis 6, the sons of God (Seth, Adam and Eve's righteous son after Cain & Abel)married the daughters of man (Cain, killer of Abel).
Marriage requires compromise. In both the Old and New Testament God would later instruct and command believers to not marry unbelievers, because of the resulting influence and corruption.
Predictably, right compromised with wickedness and violence flourished throughout the world.
The heroes were giants (the Nephilim) where "might made right". Lamech, an ancestor of Cain in Gen. 4:24
bragged of his murdering an opponent who bruised him and how it should be revenged 77 times.
Hero worship of the vile, glorifying murder, centuries before the 10 Commandments, mankind quickly devolved.
"When the Lord saw that man's wickedness was widespread on the earth and that every scheme his mind thought of was nothing but evil all the time, The Lord regretted He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart." Gen. 6:5,6
When Israel went to take the Promised Land, he told them to not intermarry and to wipe these people out. Why? Some sacrificed babies to the god Molech, and some worshipped fertility goddesses who had temple prostitutes at the temple door to greet and "attend to" the men as needed. Not a prudent pathway to godliness or formation of godly, loving families.
Diamond -
I think it might help you if you were to think of time as sort of a man-made thing. Time does not necessarily exists in all dimensions. I think what most scientist believe is that the current universe started (or in edffect, time started) some billions of years ago. They do not necessarily believe that the universe has not "started" before.
I can not see a starting point having anything to do with having or not having a god(s). Just because we do not understand how the universe "started" does not mean the answer is magic (i.e. God did it).
Tars
What I've been reading lately skews towards what you are saying time-wise.
The "Genesis Flood" book by Henry Morris was written in the 1960's and updated a simplistic book written around 1923.
They indicate man dating from 20,000 to 50000B.C. and of land
bridges 10-15000 years ago allowing man to spread to Alaska and other places tougher to cross by sea.
I'm only jumping into this thread to clarify a reference. If we are going to discuss the book, "The Genesis Flood", the following should be taken into consideration:
No current leading scientist takes this work seriously. It has been roundly criticized for being scientifically inaccurate. The work repeatedly takes quotes from scientists out of context, and occasionally completely misquotes sources.
The USGS has criticized the book for being scientifically inaccurate. John G. Solum, A geologist with the USGS states that "Whitcomb and Morris (the authors) are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed, and his explanation of relative dating is not 'somewhat simplified', it is entirely incorrect."
I personally don't mind anyone using this work to support their arguments, but other readers need to be aware of this source. It should also be noted that John C. Whitcomb has voiced many other controversial ideas, such as declaring the craters on the moon to be the result of a war between God and fallen angels. You decide.
So, let me get this right - "God regretted that he had created man"? Seems rather an unusual emotion coming from some one who is all-knowing. Almost as though he could have anticipated these events.
Rick's post referring to Dr. Solun talking about "The Genesis Flood" means he disagrees with their theory on dating old rocks.
I've never heard the crater on the moon coming from an intergalactic spiritual war before. That is "out there."
Dr. Richard Dawkins, biologist, atheist and author of the best-seller author of "The God Delusion" and "The Blind Watchmaker-Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design", declared in the movie "Expelled",(which is pro-Intelligent Design,) mocked the theory God created the Earth.
Later he proposed that, not God, but aliens, were instrumental in directing the outcome.
"He disagrees with their theory on dating old rocks."
Well, I guess. A casual reader of this thread might interpret that as a minor disagreement contained in a more extensive body of work. Actually, professor Solum disagrees with the entire body of work on which that book is based, as the dating of rocks forms the backbone of Whitcomb and Morris' theory.
The geologic column refers to the order in which plant and animal life is found when digging down, or observing exposed strata of rock. The layers are used to determine what life forms inhabited the earth during various historic periods in our past. Morris likes to claim that all of those layers occurred at once during the flood, with larger, more mobile or intelligent animals moving toward the top to escape flood waters. This is how he explains trilobytes at the bottom, and dinosaurs near the top. Unfortunately, as Mr. Solum points out, if that were the case, these layers would all be compacted instead of spread widely apart throughout the earth in predictably repeating patterns. Ancient fish would not ALWAYS be found many layers underneath more modern fish. There are many such instances of proof that the Morris theory is not sound, and is not taken seriously by anyone with even a rudimentary scientific background.
As far as the alien theory goes, I don't find it any less objectionable than the "it was magic" theory still widely accepted by Christians today. How can you possibly dismiss out of hand alien space travel?
How can otherwise reasonably intelligent people take the biblical timeline seriously?
The biblical timeline refers to the events listed somewhat chronologically in the bible, including the geneological history of biblical characters, usually meaning the ages these characters attained, their deaths, and the lifespans of their offspring. Some bibliophiles argue that by working backwards, the age of the earth can be ascertained and events such as the flood can be given approximate dates. By using this method, most of these pseudo-scientists place the creation of the earth at around 4000 BC.
Adam lives almost 1000 years, until around 3000 BC. About that time, Noah was born, and lived to around 2000 BC. It is interesting to note that even after the flood, the bible has its characters living to two, three and even four hundred years old. That means Noah and his offspring were alive in the 1500 BC era (approximate). About 2000 BC, God finally allowed people to eat meat. Apparently, prior to that everyone was vegetarian.
Anyway, if we are allowed to work backward through known chronologic geneological records in the bible, then I assume that we can do the same with other written records. Using these, we can with certainty place the Minoan Empire around 2000 BC, the Greece civiliztion at around 1000 BC, the ancient Egyptian civilization at 2000 BC (probably earlier), and the Chinese Xia Dynasty around 2000 BC.
What I want to know is, when these people stepped off the ark in 2000 BC, how could all of these civilizations be up and thriving almost immediately? This includes the great Grecian buildings like the Parthenon and Acropolis, the lighthouse and library at Alexandria, the Colossus of Rhodes, and the Great Pyramids? Carbon dating is not being used to date these findings. We have actual written records, indeed, much more extensive than those found in the bible. No records exist in any of these civilizations refering to Noah or his ark, even though he was around at the time. The records of a great flood that are found in other cultures' writings, and are so often used by bible-timeline adherents, always talk about the flood occurring long ago, not recently.
China and the far east were heavily populated and recording their activities within a few years after the flood supposedly subsided. Somehow we are supposed to believe that the earth recovered from a major flood of cataclysmic proportions in a few hundred years and performed all of these feats. Completely illogical.
The people who believe in the Biblical timeline are the ones that make the Bible look like Harry Potter. I've read the entire Bible from cover-to-cover. Which is something very few "Good Christians" can say! There are plenty of good things contained in the Bible, but there are also things that are ridiculous (and that is saying it nicely). Anyone who argues that has NOT read it entirely. Or put another way...they skip over the parts that make them feel uncomfortable. Ask your minister sometime how old Noah lived to be and you'll see what I mean. He/she will of course know it, but will not be so willing to give you the answer. They know what a terrible door that opens. And Noah is only one of many of those doors...
Noah died at the age of 950. One of Noah's sons, Shem, was born when Noah wss 502. Shem lived to be 600. Because the Bible is inerrant, it must be so. Or not. I'll go with the latter.
"Dr. Richard Dawkins, biologist ... mocked the theory that God created the earth. Later he proposed that, not God, but aliens were instrumental in directing the outcome."
This statement is a deliberate attempt to mislead the casual reader of this thread. Diamond Dave is well aware that although Dr. Dawkins did indeed cast aspersions on the idea that the earth was created by a God, he never implied that the earth was created by aliens. What Dr. Dawkins, along with several other researchers, said was that aliens may have been instrumental in populating the planet.
This distinction has been left out in order to make Dawkins' theory less credible. In no way does Dawkins or any other scientist, for that matter, theorize that the earth was popped up by aliens or anyone else. That theory is the sole property of creationists.
"In no way does Dawkins or any other scientist, for that matter, theorize that the earth was popped up by aliens or anyone else."
You think aliens are not responsible for creating and populating the Earth!!! I will not tolerate such blasphemous talk on this thread!
Tar Tarkus
Future Operating Thetan VIII, Church of Scientology
o interesting that Diamond Dave responds with utter disbelief when presented with the possibility of the universe having no beginning. His reply literally drips with sarcasm, as he finds it an absurd idea. It is quite obvious that DD insists on a beginning for everything being not only logical, but naturally absolute.
On the other hand, Mr. Dave sees no contradiction when he refers to his God, who of course has always existed, needing no starting point. These are the ridiculous ans transparent inconsistencies that more intelligent people can see through.
You are correct that I see no inconsistency in their being an Almighty God who always was. The Biblical account is a very brief explanation that has spoken to 120 generations of very diverse scientific understanding.
Once again, an answer deliberately misworded. Diamond Dave states "I see no inconsistency in there being an almighty god who always was."
By leaving out the other half of the equation, indeed the half that created the inconsistency, he makes it sound as though we are questioning his belief in a god. The casual reader is left thinking, "there is no inconsistency there. Lots of people believe in God."
The inconsistency we are referring to is the result of not just that one belief of Dave's, but from the way that belief relates to his other stated belief, that everything must have a beginning. After he states that everything must have a beginning, he turns around and exempts his god from that rule, and then says he sees no inconsistency.
Even a youngster in grade school can find the inconsistency here when both statements are included in the text, so Diamond Dave solves that problem by leaving one out. Also, circular logic doesn't work well in an intelligent discussion, and that is why I give so little credence to his continued use of the bible as support for his arguments. You can't just say that god is eternal and had no beginning, and that you know it's true because the bible says so. There is no way of knowing how much of the bible is correct. We already know that the bible toots its own horn and proclaims itself to be the divine inspired word of god. But the only proof of this lies within the bible itself. Circular logic. Only effective on small children.
The Biblical timeline you mention was devised around 1650 by taking the genealogies of Genesis 5 & 11 and using simple arithmetic to come up with 4004B.C. for Adam. Jewish scholars knew not to go there from their heritage.
Missionaries to China were rejected bcz of this dating. American Indians, Australian Aborigines & Europeans date their origins from 9500B.C. to 30,000B.C.
On 11/24 & 12/5 I mentioned 6000 to 100,000 (I mistakenly put 4500 years meaning for the Flood, not the Earth) year old earth. On 1/5 I mentioned mankind at 20,000 to 50,000 years ago.
I'm qualifying my supposition to Mankind starting more in the 20,000 to 60,000B.C. timeframe.
Tars on Noah living to 950.
Of the 15 factors limiting human longevity, 3 could apply. 1) Cosmic radiation-the Vela supernova erupted 8-15,000 years ago. This would've brought a few months of global cooling & increased ultraviolet radiation by 2-10 times.
2)Radioisotope radiation (from uranium, radium & thorium)-If they were well isolated from igneous rocks, they could've had little decay from this.
3)They were vegetarians before the Flood-Meat adds higher concentrations of heavy elements. This could be 10 to 10,000 times the level of a vegetarian diet. Eating meat would have sharply reduced man's life span.
In Genesis 6:3 God put a 120 year limit on us. Scientists call this apoptosis or planned cell death. Meat eating isn't as detrimental in those confines.
"Richard Dawkins Admits to Intelligent Design" -Google this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoncJBrrdQ8
You are correct,I didn't say things right.
I said, Dawkins "mocked the theory God created the Earth."
I should have said "Dawkins mocked the theory of God creating Man."
My summation-Dawkins stated Intelligent Design could be possible in a very slow evolutionary way.
He says it could be a highly-developed technological aliens evolved by Darwinian means that brought self-replicating molecules that they seeded onto the earth.
You may find a biochemical signature from a designer. That designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe. The designer could not have just jumped into existence spontaneously.
Dawkins admits to the possibility of intelligent design- he simply couldn't stomach it being God.
Please Google and hear it for yourself.
Post a Comment