This entry was posted
on Saturday, December 12th, 2009 at 8:11 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
150 Responses to “General Debate 12 December 2009”
East Coast iwi Ngati Porou has been offered one of the biggest Treaty of Waitangi settlement packages, comprising $110 million in cash plus assets including forestry, carbon credits, 5869ha of conservation reserves and parks and the option to purchase schools and police stations.
…no wonder the countries broke and going backwards…
A new state-funded experiment is turning traditional sex education on its head – abandoning lectures on the dangers of sexual activity and teaching young people how to get better sex through “ethical relationships”.
Co-ordinator Sandra Dickson says it is “a new direction for sexual violence prevention. Instead of telling young people what not to do, it’s looking at what we want in a sexual relationship and how to get it.”
Parents Inc co-founder Ian Grant also welcomed the programme yesterday as “a step forward”, but still advised teenagers to delay having sex for as long as they could.
They are right acknowledging that just telling teenagers what not to do is unlikely to be effective.
” 4 Dec 09 – All this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, says Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change.
When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, Mörner launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown. Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades.
If there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner. His findings are based on “going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world”. . . ” http://www.iceagenow.com/Pacific_Ocean_sea_levels_falling.htm
NZ Atheist Bus Campaign – I don’t see the point. It seems to be some sort of unproductive philosophical point scoring, but it can prove nothing. Couldn’t they try something worthwhile. Why not promote what John Roughan suggests?
If you were John Key you could use a good summer holiday for time to think, read, dream and realise this is your moment.
With your luck and your reserves of political capital you might take daring steps that leave the country ever grateful. Or you might survive. It’s up to you.
interesting feature from Australia’s Radio National. Doesn’t matter if your a “warmist” a “denier” a “confused observer”, you should all ind something of interest here in how the pysche works on such topics. Download audio or read a transcript.
“Clark agrees that corruption undermines governments’ ability to act and serve their people by siphoning off the finance intended to reduce poverty, and, discouraging investment in economies.”
After all who would know that better than her and her left hand man Micky?
December 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
NZ Atheist Bus Campaign…a worthy ad campaign, or a waste of money?
As long as it is their money they can waste it anyway they want.
And we can make fun of it anyway we want
That’s right, andrei, you can. That’s because atheists, rationalists and humanists are open to discussion. On the other hand, make fun of something as stupid, say, as the “virgin mary”, and all hell and Lindsay Freer breaks loose.
Free wine – and bloody good stuff it is – for the first person who can find me ten measuring points from the thousands around the world, used by warmists Jones, Salinger, Mann et al, whose raw data has been ‘homogenised’ from a level trend to a decline over the last ten or twenty years.
Aetheist bus campaign indeed…….I’d be impressed if they wrote Allah instead of God and tried to do a few rounds of say Tehran ,Gaza or Riyadh. That would some balls .
In late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.’s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of man-made global warming. We find that to be unfounded:
“We find such claims to be far wide of the mark. The e-mails (which have been made available by an unidentified individual here) do show a few scientists talking frankly among themselves — sometimes being rude, dismissive, insular, or even behaving like jerks. Whether they show anything beyond that is still in doubt.”
Incredible – have they even read the emails?
I think they speak for themsleves, no “fact checking” required.
John Armstrong has written a superb piece about the Labour Party on its suffering of RDS – relevance deprivation syndrome. The lat 12 months have not brought it one step closer to power. They are flailing about like a demented catherine wheel sometimes to the right of National, sometimes to the left.
V2 – Good God man! That’s private ownership of schools as well! Labour will never support such a travesty. We can’t have these dirty rotten Maori capitalists making all that profit. Shit. Next thing you know they’ll be sending it all overseas to the bros who are living in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane and London.
democracymum, it’s not about the science it never was. While the emails are an embarrassment they will not get in the way of the NWO Juggernaut. The UN and it’s lackeys can smell the money, they can smell the power, it’s within their reach, they shall not be denied. Many accuse us of being paranoid but very few have actually read the proposed treaty. It says in black and white that a one world government will be formed to implement this evil piece of work. I believe getstaffed posted this the other day. The idiots in Carbonhargen are been played like pieces on a chess board, most probably honestly believe they are trying to save the world, misguided fools, they’re aiding and abetting in a plan to relinquish their countries sovereignties to a corrupt and evil organisation. And that nasty piece of work we kick out last year is a very willing participant
‘East Coast iwi Ngati Porou has been offered one of the biggest Treaty of Waitangi settlement packages, comprising $110 million in cash plus assets including forestry, carbon credits, 5869ha of conservation reserves and parks and the option to purchase schools and police stations’.
If the land has been returned to Maori (as supposedly the ‘original’ owners- at least coding to the treaty. . ), what is the legal position regarding mining and the felling/clearing of native bush, on this land since (at least in theory) Maori can now do what they want with THEIR land – land which would now be supra-government since it is no longer ‘owned’ by the ‘Crown’?
This would seem to raise interesting legal questions since my reading of treaty settlements indicates that in returning the land, the ‘Crown’ has also returned all ‘RIGHTS’ (note that word) to what happens on, under and over that land – and in so doing negates such bits of legalise as the RMA etc. The land supposedly reverts to ‘Tribal’ law (whatever that phrase may mean)
Am I correct in this, or does the Crown in fact continue to have legal title despite the nominal ‘return’ of this land to the tribe? If so, isn’t the whole action a bit of a farce and ‘title’ as a term, is consequently meaningless?
“When public money is stolen for private gain, it means fewer resources to build schools, hospitals, roads and water treatment facilities. When foreign aid is diverted into private bank accounts, major infrastructure projects come to a halt.” – Ban Ki-moon
Mr Ban Ki-moon, this INCLUDES then UN steals my tax money to satisfy the power-trip asperations of your people. Don’t give me this ‘we care for the world’ bollocks. While there may be a few in your ranks that genuinely rate this at the top of the motivations, the vast majority are global trough feeders, overflowing with self interest.
So as 2010 comes to a close, we deserve a break. A prime time one-on-one showdown – the people deserve this one. Bill it as “The Thrilla From Wasilla” versus “The Tennessee Tornado” – or whatever – and donate the proceeds to charity. But bring it on.
democracymum (608) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am
The link you presented is a very nice summary of why “Climategate” is simply much ado about nothing.
Chicken, I glanced though the article you linked to. Quite frankly, I am not surprised that Mann et al seek to deny “fodder” to M&M: those two have their own reasons to present spurious data as scientific fact, I’m sure, but rigorous adherence to the scientific method is clearly not one.
The case presented by all you clownish deniers and conspiracy theorists simply does not stand up to scientific scrutiny by our most respected scientists, and, even more damning, is being overtaken by the facts.
My recent reading of reputable research tells me the biggest problem has been not “alarmist” scientists but overly-conservative scientists reluctant to stick their heads above the parapet. Jim Hansen has been a notable and praiseworthy exception.
But even more telling is that events are simply overtaking your case. It is now clear that estimates of sea level rise, in particular, have been grossly underestimated and it seems unlikely that we can avoid anything less that a 1.4m mean sea level increase (as measured by the 290 WMO gauges worldwide). It’s easy to find out the effects of such a rise, they are not pretty, (Tuvalu and others look doomed: this is not alarmist, just a fact) and combined with other deleterious effects of temperature rise, we are bequeathing future generations a problematic future.
I’m sure they will rise to the occasion but I hate to think of how we will look in their eyes when they realise we (in particular, the scientific community) have been aware of this problem for about half a century.
I suggest you all go out and get Jim Hansen’s book, “Storms of my Grandchildren”
“do you think scientists have dedicated the last ten, twenty, thirty years of work to a one world government?” Not at all Pete I would say that by the looks of it scientists have dedicated their work and their answers to the billions of dollars paid to them to produce the correct answer. And don’t forget Pete there are thousands upon thousands of scientists not on the payroll who have put their names on petitions calling this junk science.
Pete……..Oh Pete – I’m waiting for you to show where Steve McIntyre has got it wrong.
It’s pretty funny really when a retired statistician takes on the mighty machine that is AWG and whips it’s arse, not once, not even twice but multiple times.
How long before the Nobel prize awarded to Gore and the IPCC is rescinded and awarded to Mr McIntyre instead?
The rush for credibility in the next few months will be a sight to see. For some it’s to late – MSM for instance have cooked their own goose, watch their ratings drop in the next 6mths as people go online for a more balanced coverage of issues.
Likewise any politician who signs anything at Copenhagen is signing their own political death warrant (in western countries at least).
There’s a revolution coming Pete, you may not be able to see it yet but if you open both eyes you might have a chance to jump out of the way before it squishes you like the little bug you appear to be.
I have just wrote a letter to every political party and the HRC regarding the sexist promotion by the Employment Opportunities Commisioner of enforcing gender targets in the work place. (see the herald link below) It is really concerning that they are promoting the target that boards of NZX listed compaines must be diverse by gender. Not only is it ignorant of demographics, it is illegal as such practices inevitably leads to the candidates of the majority gender being discriminated based on their gender.
France is leglislating such targets, and if NZ is to start encouraging such targets, we may find outselves with the same laws as the “Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys”. People, if you feel strongly against such sexism then please lay a complaint against Judy McGregor at the HRC, and write to your mp. It is important that such sexism is not given a chance to grow.
SSB, is it only the scientists that fit your antiview that are “on the payroll”, and the other thousands of scientists that you happen to agree with are straight?
Komata, I’m not a lawyer but I think you’ll find the Crown ‘owns’ every skerrick of land in NZ. It grants various rights to people by way of fee simple title or leasehold title which titles give those people various rights to occupy and use the land. But ALWAYS subject to the laws of the land and the Crown’s right to extinguish those titles at any time in certain circumstances. e.g. resumption for public works.
“..If you’ve been turning to “comfort foods” to treat the blues, chances are you may be feeding a vicious cycle.
New research links junk-food diets with vastly higher depression rates.
(Maybe we should call them “familiar foods” rather than “comfort foods,” since in reality they don’t make you feel comfortable!)
A recent British study analyzed the dietary intakes of 3,486 middle-aged Londoners, lumping them into one of two categories: ..
.. the “processed food” group (heavy consumers of sweetened desserts, fried food, processed meat, refined grains and high-fat dairy) ..
.. and the “whole food” group (favoring fruits and vegetables, fish, whole grains and legumes).
Dietary habits were then measured against emotional status as monitored over five years.
The result: ..
.. Those who ate the healthiest whole-food diets had a 26% lower chance of being depressed ..
.. while those who ate the least healthy processed-food fare ran a 58% increased risk of depression!
The linkage held true even when controlled for other factors ranging from activity levels to health status .. including diabetes and heart disease.
Why might this be?
One possibility is that nutritious whole foods such as fruit and vegetables help protect against the nutrient deficiencies that could endanger emotional equilibrium.
For example, previous studies have linked low levels of folate, omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D to depression.
Other research suggests clinical depression actually dulls the sense of taste ..
.. possibly leading sufferers to favor processed foods with artificially enhanced sweetness, saltiness, etc..”
It says in black and white that a one world government will be formed to implement this evil piece of work. I believe getstaffed posted this the other day.
The fuss kicked up over the appearance of that one word, “government,” with no mention of any “world” attached to it, and is intended in the sense of administering rather than ruling, and all this noise is simply another example of the misrepresentation indulged in obsessively by the deniers.
I have actually read the proposed treaty, and do not attach any sinister intent on the use of the word ‘government.”
Perhaps the left who scream about objective scientists supporting the AGW theory should remember this…:
“…the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Even scientific illiterates like Luc “Gosh-I’ve-Just-Discovered-RealClimate” Hansen should recognise that since they have merrily been quoting other parts of it for 30 years.
“I have actually read the proposed treaty, and do not attach any sinister intent on the use of the word ‘government.”
But Luc if you’re only looking at the immediate future then you’re displaying child-like innocence unfitting your clear intelligence.
How do you eat an elephant? A slice at a time.
That’s always been the way these things work, and they take decades and sometimes centuries to play out. At the very least if you’re prepared to make a judgement that everything’s just hunky-dory then really you owe it to yourself to understand just precisely what you’re prepared to deny as a possibility.
“But it is rarely as bad as the doomsayers and conspiracy theorists make out either.”
Well as I said earlier on another thread Pete, take a look at what’s waiting in the wings ready to be activated as a result of 911, and try telling me there’s no potential for that to be mis-used. And bear in mind the AGW juggernaught hasn’t even left the blocks yet.
Are the Atheists behind the proposed bus ad campaign just a little faint hearted?
Shouldn’t their slogan say THERE IS PROBABLY NO GOD OR ALLAH ?
Or is the problem that Allah doesn’t exist, but too many of his extreme followers do?
Or are they not allowed an ad in New Zealand which mentions Allah?
It says in black and white that a one world government will be formed to implement this evil piece of work. I believe getstaffed posted this the other day.
The fuss kicked up over the appearance of that one word, “government,” with no mention of any “world” attached to it, and is intended in the sense of administering rather than ruling, and all this noise is simply another example of the misrepresentation indulged in obsessively by the deniers.
I have actually read the proposed treaty, and do not attach any sinister intent on the use of the word ‘government.”
But then, I’m not paranoid.
Luc, I commented to Pete George (11:10 am; Climate Change head stood down 3-12-09) the other day regarding the link between the Climate Change fiasco and the aims of some to establish a One World Government – it’s worth restating it to you:
[PG:] What evidence is there of climate change being a cover for achieving global governance Kris?
MISSION INCREDIBLE
Clark tasked to pave the way for World Government
Media commentators missed the big story in Helen Clark’s appointment to the United Nations Development Programme. As bestselling “Air Con” author IAN WISHART explains, she takes the helm in the UN’s number three position just as the UN pitches to become an overarching world government, with real executive powers and effective control of the armies of all UN members. Clark didn’t join the UNDP to concentrate on third world charity work, but with a much bigger brief:
“What is at stake is to launch a reform process of the general UN system in view of fostering a new global agenda and building a New World Order.”
They could be the utterings of a raving conspiracy nut. Or perhaps the writings of one of those intellectual villains from any one of a dozen James Bond movies. But they aren’t. Instead, these are the words of one of the world’s major lobby groups – a collection of world leaders and left-wing politicians who meet each year for global conferences and policy initiatives. They call themselves Socialist International, and that paragraph kicked off a major 40 page briefing document that appears to set the stage for a new role for the United Nations: turning it into a full-fledged world government. …
[continues]
And if you don’t like Ian Wishart, then I suggest you download and read the following document:
December 12th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Are the Atheists behind the proposed bus ad campaign just a little faint hearted?
Shouldn’t their slogan say THERE IS PROBABLY NO GOD OR ALLAH ?
Or is the problem that Allah doesn’t exist, but too many of his extreme followers do?
Or are they not allowed an ad in New Zealand which mentions Allah?
Allah = god = jaweh = jehova = jesus = the fifty million hindu gods = any of the other millions of gods you can think of.
God, used here, is a generic term. Listen to English speaking Moslems and you will often hear them say god, not allah.
lâ ilâha illallâh, Muḥammadun rasûlullâh “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” in English.
Of course, there is NO god, so stop worrying and get on with enjoying this life – its the only one you’ll get.
My personal belief is that the threat of AGW and the resultant treaties, carbon taxes, ETSs, etc., will all lead us down the path to ultimately Global Governance – and that’s just based on the facts on the ground.
Of course, as a Christian I ALSO consider what God’s word says in this regard:
Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
Rev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Sounds like Global Governance to me!
And we have the technology to bring ALL of these things about; this technology didn’t exist prior to about 15-20 years ago.
Billyborker – “Allah = god = jaweh = jehova = jesus = the fifty million hindu gods = any of the other millions of gods you can think of.”
Granted, but I would have thought that if Islamists took the message to include their God there would have been a few more London buses blown up or torched by now.
Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.
The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god.
When the popularity of the Moon-god waned elsewhere, the Arabs remained true to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god.
While the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al- ilah, i.e. “the deity”, meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. As Coon pointed out, “The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God.” The Moon-god was called al- ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad’s father and uncle had Allah as part of their names.
“Why is Allah never defined in the Qur’an? Why did Muhammad assume that the pagan Arabs already knew who Allah was?” Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god.
In effect he said, “Look, you already believe that the Moon-god Allah is the greatest of all gods. All I want you to do is to accept that the idea that he is the only god. I am not taking away the Allah you already worship. I am only taking away his wife and his daughters and all the other gods.” This is seen from the fact that the first point of the Muslim creed is not, “Allah is great” but “Allah is the greatest,” i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the “greatest” except in a polytheistic context?
The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This “Allah” was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence. Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.
Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat.
The word previously referred to the moon god, one god among many, and the Muslims adopted it to refer to the Creator, the God of the Jews and the Christians.
While much of the agreement sounds like a return of sovereignty to Ngati Porou, “existing ministerial responsibilities remain with ministers”, who would participate in an “annual Ngati Porou-Crown Forum for high-level discussion between Ngati Porou and ministers, including the Prime Minister” or his or her delegate.
The word previously referred to the moon god, one god among many, and the Muslims adopted it to refer to the Creator, the God of the Jews and the Christians.
Didn’t think you hung out here on the weekend – although someone else said it was raining in Auckland. It’s just windy here in Wellington today; rain overnight but fine now.
Allah (or al-ilah) is still the same pagan god as he was prior to Mohammed sponsoring him. He wasn’t then, and nor is he now, the God of the Bible; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. No Muslim will identify him in this way.
From my previous comment:
Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.
Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat.
Kris, how is that any different from the way the jews came to decide upon yahweh as their god? They looked at what was around them, they adapted and changed, and “In the beginning there were thousands of gods, but Moses said ‘Let there be Yahweh’ and Moses saw it was good because he got the power and the glory.”
All gods in all religions are constructs based on the time, place and culture of their creation.
Didn’t think you hung out here on the weekend – although someone else said it was raining in Auckland. It’s just windy here in Wellington today; rain overnight but fine now.
Yeah, it’s a bit miserable here. I wouldn’t be able to enjoy it anyway – got work that needs done by Monday.
Allah (or al-ilah) is still the same pagan god as he was prior to Mohammed sponsoring him. He wasn’t then, and nor is he now, the God of the Bible; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. No Muslim will identify him in this way.
Every Muslim identifies him as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It was the name of a pagan god, and it was appropriated by the Muslims to refer to God with a capital G.
It doesn’t matter what someone says Jews and Christians at the time of Mohammed said. If you ask a Muslim, “What is the word you use to refer to the God of the Jews and the Christians, the one sole God, omnipotent Creator of the universe?” they will say truthfully, “Allah.”
December 12th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
billyborker 1:28 pm,
All gods in all religions are constructs based on the time, place and culture of their creation.
All – except One.
Nope, all.
Read your bible and see how it fits its time and place; it is not universal, it is not eternal, it speaks nothing of the world outside a very narrow piece of geography and it knows nothing of how Man will develop and grow.
It is full of logical errors, errors of fact and internal inconsistencies.
But I know I am wasting my time, you can’t have a rational conversation with a believer because if they were rational, they wouldn’t believe.
But I know I am wasting my time, you can’t have a rational conversation with a believer because if they were rational, they wouldn’t believe.
That’s just a stone’s throw from, “You can’t have a rational conversation with someone who disagrees with me, because of they were rational, they would agree with me.”
It doesn’t matter what someone says Jews and Christians at the time of Mohammed said. If you ask a Muslim, “What is the word you use to refer to the God of the Jews and the Christians, the one sole God, omnipotent Creator of the universe?” they will say truthfully, “Allah.”
I take little stock in what most Muslims say – they are either deceived or accomplished liars.
And I put more stock in what those “Jews and Christians at the time of Mohammed” said.
Many Bible believing Christians today also hold this same view today.
Also the Koran/Allah denies he has a son; and therefore denies the deity of Christ, the Son of God.
The God (Father) of the Bible embraces Christ; God the Son.
If these are the one in the same then they are schizophrenic.
Oh no, not at all. People who disagree with me are OK, as long as they are open to evidence and enquiry, just as I am. It is the act of belief that closes off any chance of accepting evidence and thus makes the believer irrational.
No amount of evidence sways believers, but us rational humans are open to changing views when new evidence comes to light.
Oh no, not at all. People who disagree with me are OK, as long as they are open to evidence and enquiry, just as I am. It is the act of belief that closes off any chance of accepting evidence and thus makes the believer irrational.
No amount of evidence sways believers, but us rational humans are open to changing views when new evidence comes to light.
And my repost would be: ‘No amount of evidence sways unbelievers.’
As a ‘rational human’ the more evidence that “comes to light”, the more I am convinced of the veracity of the Bible.
Your ‘belief’ in the non existence of God is just that; a statement of faith – despite the evidence to the contrary.
It is more you that is closed to the evidence that confronts you.
On the Atheist Bus Campaign, let them spend their money how they want, but I would be more impressed if they had put “there probably is no god (or allah)”. They’re not that brave though huh?
On AGW, the real sad thing here is that CO2 emissions reductions might make for some cleaner air somewhere, but really is a misguided waste of money (and that is sidestepping issues of corruption, one world government conspiracies, etc). If efforts were directed straight into projects like clean energy (instead of trading schemes and AGW hysteria) then the environment would benefit much much more than under carbon cap and trade schemes. The elephant in the room is definitely overpopulation, and ultimately we either have to limit births, or people have to die early. When (or hopefully IF) we reach the limits of exploiting and producing, and wars start over resources, then what good has reducing CO2 had? The UN estimated in 2005 that by 2050 we’ll be at 9.1 billion (from 6.5 billion in 2005). That sort of growth rate would basically mean double today’s population by 2100. I think that has more catastrophic potential than AGW.
Yes, they believe different things about the same God. Christians believe God was made flesh in Jesus. Muslims and Jews do not. Muslims believe that God spoke to and inspired Allah. Jews and Christians do not. And so on.
But the definition of the word – “God” or “Allah” – in its essence remains the same: the omnipotent Creator of the Universe, perfect, eternal, good, etc.
As for putting stock in what Muslims say, if you refuse to listen to what people tell you they mean by a word, you’re hardly going to be an authority on what they mean by it. Whatever the etymological origins of the word “Allah”, and whether or not most Muslims are aware of it, to learn what they mean when they utter it, you have to be open to hearing what they have to say.
As for putting stock in what Muslims say, if you refuse to listen to what people tell you they mean by a word, you’re hardly going to be an authority on what they mean by it. Whatever the etymological origins of the word “Allah”, and whether or not most Muslims are aware of it, to learn what they mean when they utter it, you have to be open to hearing what they have to say.
Oh, I’m open Ryan, I just think they’re wrong, and that their claims don’t stack up.
Their own words and writings condemn them in this regard.
And most of their ‘utterances’ mean ‘death to the infidel’.
Islam is a death cult, and one needs only look at its fruit to see it has very little in common with Biblical teaching, or the God of the Bible. By their fruits ye shall know them.
On the Atheist Bus Campaign, let them spend their money how they want, but I would be more impressed if they had put “there probably is no god (or allah)”. They’re not that brave though huh?
Indeed.
They’d only do it once in a Muslim country.
I think atheism is very much a closet religion in Muslim countries – funny that.
… The elephant in the room is definitely overpopulation, and ultimately we either have to limit births, or people have to die early. When (or hopefully IF) we reach the limits of exploiting and producing, and wars start over resources, then what good has reducing CO2 had? The UN estimated in 2005 that by 2050 we’ll be at 9.1 billion (from 6.5 billion in 2005). That sort of growth rate would basically mean double today’s population by 2100. I think that has more catastrophic potential than AGW.
Don’t worry, the One Worlders have this on their agenda, too.
Population control – coming soon to a town near you.
Kris K
Your ‘belief’ in the non existence of God is just that; a statement of faith – despite the evidence to the contrary.
It is more you that is closed to the evidence that confronts you.
Where is this evidence? I see plenty of evidence that the bible, like all religious books, is man made, nothing that shows the divine. BUT, I am open to the evidence, if evidence there be. You just need to use something other than the bible, your deeply held beliefs and faith as evidence.
On the Atheist Bus Campaign, let them spend their money how they want, but I would be more impressed if they had put “there probably is no god (or allah)”. They’re not that brave though huh?
Indeed.
They’d only do it once in a Muslim country.
I think atheism is very much a closet religion in Muslim countries – funny that.
Of course atheists must be careful in many moslem countries, it is punishable by death in some. Just as it was, not too far back, in many xtian countries. Its just that eventually rational thought began to attain the ascendancy in Europe and the US. Islam is about 500 years behind, but there are many ahteists of moslem background beginning to shake the tree.
BUT, I am open to the evidence, if evidence there be.
Myself and others have provided this to you on numerous occassions in the past – I suggest you read over those comments again.
I’m not going to elaborate for this reason, but let’s just say some of the evidence consists of the following:
• The Creation – real science reveals this.
• Fulfilled prophecy.
• Archeology.
Don’t you mean you won’t elaborate because your evidence is so flimsy?
What is The Creation? If you mean the account in Genesis that is so far from scientific truth it is laughable. As an attempt by early Man to explain his origins, it is a good try, but there is no science in it at all.
Fulfilled prophecy – by this I guess you mena the prophecies that are determined to have been fulfilled after tha act, never before. Or can you show evidence of prior prophecy being fulfilled?
Archeology shows us how and where Man lived, it has nothing to say about god(s).
If Jesus was the son of god, and if god is all knowing, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
If folks are interested in all this Allah/God business you could do worse than go to the Jihad Watch website.Very informative on Koran ,interpretations ,news etc and you can’t say it’s not a hot topic!!
Billy, not that this is going to make a blind bit of difference to you or any other obdurate atheist or agnostic, but since you’re interested in scientific debate on the nature of scripture, no doubt you’ve come across the work of the former agnostic, Ivan Panin. As a Christian I’m not interested in using his calculations to justify my position, but it’s a mathematical side-issue that people like yourself might find dry enough to engage yourself in analysing and attempting to disprove – if you can. Look forward to your response in a few months…
What interests me Billy, in your stated positions to date, is that you refuse point-blank to acknowledge the obvious simple fact that your position is as much a position of faith as any other. Faith is faith. You choose to have faith in science. I know plenty of scientists including some who’ve received the highest scientific honours NZ has to offer, who believe in G-d.
If you genuinely don’t understand why and how your position is as much faith-based as mine, perhaps you need to familiarise yourself with the concept of subjective truth espoused by the Existentialist Philosopher Kierkegaard.
If you’re genuinely curious and not just being childishly provocative, I don’t expect you to reply to this for several months, for that is long it’s going to take to judge for yourself the validity or otherwise of Ivan’s analysis. You’ll need original copies of the Bible in Hebrew and Greek, I recommend the Blue Letter Bible site.
You mean The Bible Code under a different name? Its a crock. Similar analysis have been done on Shakespeare, Homer, et al. Are they also god’s divine words?
You are still confused about the nature of faith. Faith is a full stop to thought.
As to a “scientific debate on the nature of scripture” are you referring to my query re Jesus’ scientific illiteracy? How can the “Son of God” be so ignorant? Quite simply because he was a character of his time with the beliefs and knowledge of his time, not the way things truly are.
Since that was written in 1899, no, I don’t mean the Bible Code under another name, billy but, yes, I suspected you wouldn’t even bother to look at it, billy. I just thought I’d give you an opportunity.
Why don’t you just admit you’re a fanatic, with all that entails?
Can’t change your mind and won’t change the subject.
Let us relegate you to the dustbin of irrelevance, otherwise, make a valid response to a valid argument
So billy, still waiting. That was a mathematical argument. Maths is science, isn’t it?
He lays it out, billy. For independent verification. That’s scientific, isn’t it?
Yet, you dismiss it as a crock within 6 mins. It’s a complex thesis, billy. You mean to tell me you’ve analysed what he said and verified it independently and come to your conclusion in 6 mins? Einstein couldn’t do that, billy.
So sevens in the Bible are fascinating, but I wonder about that in respect to the incidence of #21. Three women are mentioned-Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. The number of Greek letters in these three names is 14, or 7 x 2. for example, when a male line of decent is switched to three women [and a forth unnamed, who would be Bathsheba] then back to men again.
The sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?
“..Since Conan O’Brien took over the Tonight Show, one of his best reoccurring sketches has been interpretive performances by Emmy Award winner and master thespian William Shatner.
On Friday, Captain Kirk took on Sarah Palin’s “Going Rogue.”
Then Palin did her own reading of Shatner’s autobiography, “Up Till Now.”..”
Faith is faith. You choose to have faith in science.
Come on Reid, science doesn’t require faith. If you had the time, the ability and the resources you could create experiments, make observations and mathematical proofs sufficient to take you to the cutting edge of any field of science. No step along the way requires faith (belief without proof). Religion OTOH is pure faith without evidence or proof.
I know plenty of scientists including some who’ve received the highest scientific honours NZ has to offer, who believe in G-d.
And there are plenty who don’t. That line of argument doesn’t go anywhere. Science doesn’t advance by straw poll. You need evidence. I suspect if you ask any sincere scientist who believes in God they would acknowledge that there’s little to no evidence and would instead say something to the effect that their religion is a completely separate thing. People are able to compartmentalise and just because they’re a scientist doesn’t mean they apply science to every aspect of their life. Religions are good at creating mental dead-ends (“we’re mere creations of God so how can we possibly understand..” etc).
reid, sorry I don’t respond in your time frame, but I do have a life.
Panin is simply seeing patterns, a trait that evolved with humans as the observation of patterns in nature was an advantage to survival. Patterns prove nothing.
Interesting that he chooses the genealogy of Matthew has his starting point. What is the mathematical analysis of why Matthew has 28 generations from David to Jesus while Luke has 43.
Then there is a major problem with both genealogies – they lost Joseph as Jesus’ father, thus negating the whole idea of virgin birth and gad’s parentage. And IF god IS the father, why the need to tie Jesus to David?
So unless there is a damned good explanation as to these discrepancies, Panin’s work is just a crock.
Now, back to the question – As the “Son of God”, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
phil, a strawman has two definitions: one is as an outline sketch, the other is a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted (which you see a lot of in 911 debates).
I fail to see how either def applies to either of those two posts.
Billy strongly advocates the superiority of the scientific method, then when he’s given a scientific argument potentially refuting his position, he doesn’t respond.
reid, there is NO science in simply finding patterns. As I said, patterns are found everywhere in the world, and humans do seem to have evolved to look for something. Calling something science, dressing it up in scientific garb, does not make it science, otherwise we’d be teaching ID in schools.
No calculations are required.
Now, back to the question – As the “Son of God”, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
Thanks for that heads-up. That’s hilarious. There’s something about Bill Shatner’s delivery that’d make you laugh out loud at virtually anything, and the bits from his autobiography read by Palin are just… surreal.
Reid, can you give a single paragraph synopsis of the work by Ivan Panin and what it proves?
I’m not suggesting that you don’t know what this work is about, but on two occasions I’ve had Christians recommend to me a book called “The Case for Faith” (Lee Strobel) and they’ve said something like “Yeah this book proves that God exists and it’s done using modern scientific methods and detective work. You should read it as I think it will answer your questions”. And on both occasions when I’ve answered: “Yes, I have read it and it’s rubbish. Have you actually read it?”. They both said no.
“The sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?”
Er, what about them, Yvette?
Bear in mind, as I said in my post, the cycles of sevens isn’t something I care at all about, it’s merely an observable phenomena that billy needs to explain if he wants to retain his credibility as an advocate of the case that the Bible has no scientific proof. If billy can’t respond with scientific counter-evidence, then he’s shot out of the water, or hoisted by his own petard.
You’ll note his responses to date haven’t addressed the questions raised by that article. As I said, I expect it will take him a few months to exercise the scientific method and respond appropriately.
AS *I* said, reid, this is no proof of anything, other than Man’s adaptive ability to see patterns.
And, as I have already pointed out, similar “analyses” have been done on other texts, such as Shakespeare and Homer. Does that prove divinity or god?
Perhaps you could try answering the questions about Jesus’ lack of scientific knowledge, the mismatched genealogies or the need to prove Jesus’ ancestry back to David IF god was the father.
But I am sure each of these are far too hard for you and you would prefer to keep chasing Alice down rabbit holes.
“#21. Three women are mentioned-Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. The number of Greek letters in these three names is 14, or 7 x 2.” is an example. But, when a male line of decent is switched to three women [and a forth unnamed, who would be Bathsheba] then back to men again, the sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?
and
“There are words in the passage just described [the first 17 verses of the New Testament, The Gospel of Matthew] that occur nowhere else in the New Testament. They occur 42 times (7 x 6) and have 126 letters (7 x 18).” http://www.direct.ca/trinity/part1.html
So does this apply to Paul’s epistles, which were written one assumes before he died, so they come before the rest of the New Testament, and Mark is generally accepted as being written before Matthew and Luke, since both copy parts of Mark?
“AS *I* said, reid, this is no proof of anything, other than Man’s adaptive ability to see patterns.”
So pray tell, billy. Tell us your actuarial calculations of the chances of this pattern happening by chance and whether the result of that, means that it’s a phenomena worth exploring, or not, and why?
So these arsehole leftists are promoting a One-Child Policy now, even though Western countries already have a negative population imbalance concerning births to deaths. And don’t even think they’ll apply this “policy” to the Third World. Proof, as if any more is needed, about the ulterior motives of the environmentalists: the destruction of the West.
“So does this apply to Paul’s epistles, which were written one assumes before he died, so they come before the rest of the New Testament, and Mark is generally accepted as being written before Matthew and Luke, since both copy parts of Mark?”
Er, I’m still struggling to understand your specific question, Yvette.
Reid, can you give a single paragraph synopsis of the work by Ivan Panin and what it proves?
It’s a very short letter, Malcolm and therefore no, I won’t give you a synopsis.
Perhaps you missed the significance of what I said in the original post:
“As a Christian I’m not interested in using his calculations to justify my position, but it’s a mathematical side-issue that people like yourself might find dry enough to engage yourself in analysing and attempting to disprove – if you can. Look forward to your response in a few months…”
See, I don’t care whether you or anyone else wants to look into it or not or whether you don’t. I don’t care about justifying it or not.
It’s merely an interesting observation of the mathematical nature of biblical construction. You can draw your own conclusions from that. Now if you want to, you can simply ignore the information and not even look at it – I don’t care. If you want to, you can look at the information and think to yourself, this can’t possibly be true – I don’t care. If you want to, you could look at the information and conclude there is something in this and I need to look further – I don’t care, but if you do take this course, I rejoice that you may find Eternal Truth and save your own self.
Whichever course you take, I don’t care, except insofaras I’ve laid the information before you, so consume it as you like.
Reid, what is your take on Steve McIntyre apparently being found out on his email critique, it looks like he has either been sloppy or devious, in either case wrong.
I love it. The same British “progressives” who whined about attacks on the Sun God’s background last year are doing the same thing to David Cameron in the UK. It’s not working, of course, which is pretty much Labour’s style. “No war but class war,” tossers. This is Old Labour in its purest form: red to the core.
That was yesterdays Reid, seems to have been left behind. Up to you on whether you want to comment. You’re one who seems to be prepared to look and discuss.
Pete I am [prepared look and discuss], however the whole AGW email debate isn’t something I’ve been following and I fear it’s progressed too far for me to catch up and add something meaningful to the collective knowledge, so if you don’t mind, I’ll keep my silence on that issue.
reid -
Despite the amazing 7′s maths [Matthew 1:1-17], the line of decent is through males and then inexplicably names three females [there are 4], then goes back to males. Is that the way descent was traced, or is the line here somewhat unconventional, despite the clever math?
* Dennis Shanahan, Political editor
* From: The Australian
* December 12, 2009 12:00AM
Penny Wong
Penny Wong poses in front of a large globe in Copenhagen during the fourth day of the climate change conference yesterday. Source: Getty Images
CHINA has accused the developed world of retreating from its undertakings to cut greenhouse gas emissions, rejected a proposal at the Copenhagen conference to reduce financial help to China and described the draft deal Kevin Rudd worked on as creating “a lot of problems”.
The Chinese have accused the developed world of abandoning the Kyoto Protocol and pressuring the developing nations to cut emissions without proper compensation for the “luxury emissions” the West has put out for the past century.
Great support from McCullum too, and the top order not so bad this time either, especially McIntosh setting things up, no ducks and only one in single figures. That’s good comparatively.
Biblical sevens
The question is: could one person do it, let alone several in different places?
The fact that Dr Pavin, who twigged to this in 1890, took a further 50 years and generated over 43,000 detailed, hand-penned pages of analysis, just to establish evidence of the patterns, would suggest actually writing texts to met all the different matches is inconceivable.
Write something, calculate whether it matched all parameters and rewrite and check again?
” Just to understand how unique these properties are try to design a genealogy-even from fiction that meets the following criteria:
1) The Number of words must be divisible by 7 evenly (In each of these constraints, it is assumed that the divisions are without remainders.)
2)The number of letters must also be divisible by 7.
3)The number of vowels and the number of consonants must be divisible by 7.
4)The number of words that begin with a vowel must be divisible by 7.
5)The number of words that begin with a consonant must be divisible by 7.
6)The number of words that occur more than once must be divisible by 7.
7)The number of words that occur in more than one form must be divisible by 7.
8)The number of words that occur in only one form shall be divisible by 7.
9)The number of nouns shall be divisible by 7.
10)Only 7 words shall not be nouns.
11)The number of names in the genealogy shall be divisible by 7.
12)Only 7 other kinds of nouns are permitted.
13)The number of male names shall be divisible by 7.
14)The number of generations shall be 21, also divisible by 7. ”
One cricket writer wrote in about 1990;
“Will there be life after Hadlee?”
For many years there wasn’t. Then Vettori blossomed.
I note that the Pakistan odds lengthened from $9 to $11 in the final hour of play today.
BillyB, I must admit to misunderstanding you. I believe you claim to be an atheist, personally I’m fine with that but why do you spend so much energy telling everyone else we are wrong. For shit sake man if you are so confident in your assessment of religion and God why do you feel that you need to justify your stand. I’m happy to believe in God I suspect that in the deep recesses of your mind you are not yet certain, trust me Billy God does exist and he has your number otherwise you wouldn’t bother.
It’s okay Hurf those fanatics wont be able to keep the peace and will resort to violence to impose their belief system on others, counter revolution will be a bitch.
SSB, the topic was raised by others, not me. Am I not permitted to respond? And trust ME bob, there ain’t no god, I have no number for him to have and life is great away from the demon haunted world in which you live.
Starboard at 8.17am, the first post in this thread, said
…Ngati Porou has been offered one of the biggest Treaty of Waitangi settlement packages, comprising $110 million in cash plus assets including forestry, carbon credits, 5869ha of conservation…
Given that Ngati Porou were the British colonialists’ major ally in wars with other tribes, shouldn’t Bro Key ask Ngati Porou to use some of their settlement offer to help meet claims from these other tribes?
Hi billy, no I don’t trust you so I’ll take my chances. Yes of course you should respond and good on you. The only thing I can say in my defense is that I have no wish to convince you that there is a God. You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time telling us why there is no God. WHY?? It seems to me that you are trying to convince yourself that you are right, Buzzzzzz billy you are wrong.
Phool, Lord Monckton rules you slimy piece of socialist shit.
Reid, yeah I did kind of misunderstand you re Ivan Panin. I see now that it was an aside.
I’ve read the letter and it seems interesting. As usual though the internet kind of spoils these things. There’s a lot of stuff showing how Panin had to use different versions of the Greek texts and in some cases modify them to make the patterns fit.
Interesting anyway. And 7 is a prime number and those things pop up in unexpected ways.
Gee phool why do you work yourself up so much. Does monckton upset you so because he challenges you universe?. Does not Al Bore sneer at those the call him out?. Does not the kangaroo court in Carbonhargen not sneer at those that question them. Please say no, let me call you out phool.
Cool phool if monckton thinks I’m a peasant I’ll get over it. “Do you yearn the tug of the forelock”……I’m already under the forelock, just ask the bank. I’m proud to be a peasant and one day I might even save your sorry arse.
Police claim EU carbon credit fraud has topped €5bn
Europol estimates carbon credit VAT fraud carried out by organised criminals could have cost EU billions in lost tax revenue
BusinessGreen.com Staff, BusinessGreen, 11 Dec 2009
The European police agency Europol has today revealed that the fraudulent trade in carbon credits that affected a number of countries over the past few months is far more widespread than previously thought and could have cost EU taxpayers up to €5bn in lost revenue over the past 18 months.
The agency said in a statement that it believed that in some countries up to 90 per cent of the trading of EU emissions allowances (EUAs) was subject to fraudulent activity.
EUA’s which are traded under the EU emission trading scheme have been involved in so-called carousel fraud whereby fraudsters sell carbon credits and collect the accompanying VAT, but then disappear before the money is handed over to the tax man.
Europol said that suspicions of carousel fraud, so named because the fraudster can often buy back credits and then repeat the practice several times over, first arose in late 2008.
Market volumes then peaked in the summer, at which point France, the Netherlands and the UK changed their VAT rules to crack down on the practice. Europol said that after the reforms the market volume in each country fell by up to 90 per cent, indicating that the problem was extremely widespread.
Spain and Denmark have subsequently introduced similar rules that ensure VAT is collected from the purchaser, rather than the organisation buying the credits.
Europol said that it was now working with Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom to set up a specific project to collect and analyse information in order to identify and disrupt the organised criminal structures that are believed to be behind these fraud schemes.
“These criminal activities endanger the credibility of the European Union Emission Trading System and lead to the loss of significant tax revenue for governments,” said Europol director Rob Wainwright. “Europol is using its expertise and information capabilities to help target the organised crime groups involved.”
The agency added that there were reasons to believe that fraudsters might soon migrate towards the gas and electricity branches of the energy sector.
Just how much will it cost small business and even big business and the government in monitoring and controlling this enforced activity. Just ask the small investor how much he has lost in New Zealand.
How can you put a price on carbon credits when there are billions of $ in fraud?
Borker is an angry late 50′s expat Australian who lost his Christian faith and deeply regrets he couldn’t fly back to Australia in time to euthanize his dying father. Tragic indeed, but he needs to vent it out every weekend – he adopts the MyNameIsjack handle when at work during the week.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:17 am
East Coast iwi Ngati Porou has been offered one of the biggest Treaty of Waitangi settlement packages, comprising $110 million in cash plus assets including forestry, carbon credits, 5869ha of conservation reserves and parks and the option to purchase schools and police stations.
…no wonder the countries broke and going backwards…
December 12th, 2009 at 8:24 am
I see Helen Clark is up to her usual socialist tricks again at the UN again,
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10614943&pnum=2
Her antics over the electoral finance act were just a dry run, for “wealth appropriation” on a much bigger scale.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:26 am
A new approach. Worth trying?
They are right acknowledging that just telling teenagers what not to do is unlikely to be effective.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Ngati Porou must be happy their ancestors signed the treaty aye?
December 12th, 2009 at 8:30 am
” 4 Dec 09 – All this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, says Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change.
When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, Mörner launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.
Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades.
If there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner. His findings are based on “going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world”. . . ”
http://www.iceagenow.com/Pacific_Ocean_sea_levels_falling.htm
December 12th, 2009 at 8:42 am
http://www.nogod.org.nz/
NZ Atheist Bus Campaign…a worthy ad campaign, or a waste of money?
December 12th, 2009 at 8:42 am
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10615055&pnum=0
Looks like a promising start.
Like the bit about them owning all the state houses. Sooner the better.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
As long as it is their money they can waste it anyway they want.
And we can make fun of it anyway we want
December 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
NZ Atheist Bus Campaign – I don’t see the point. It seems to be some sort of unproductive philosophical point scoring, but it can prove nothing. Couldn’t they try something worthwhile. Why not promote what John Roughan suggests?
In other words you can be a true blue Keywi, not just another Kiwi Keith.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:49 am
interesting feature from Australia’s Radio National. Doesn’t matter if your a “warmist” a “denier” a “confused observer”, you should all ind something of interest here in how the pysche works on such topics. Download audio or read a transcript.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stories/2009/2746165.htm
And another about carbon trading, looking back at the success or failure of other, similar schemes in the past.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/stories/2009/2750919.htm
Australians get all this, and more, for 6 cents a day – we get Kim Hill and fillums!
December 12th, 2009 at 8:50 am
I really liked this bit democracymum:
“Clark agrees that corruption undermines governments’ ability to act and serve their people by siphoning off the finance intended to reduce poverty, and, discouraging investment in economies.”
After all who would know that better than her and her left hand man Micky?
December 12th, 2009 at 8:52 am
andrei (462) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 8:48 am
NZ Atheist Bus Campaign…a worthy ad campaign, or a waste of money?
As long as it is their money they can waste it anyway they want.
And we can make fun of it anyway we want
That’s right, andrei, you can. That’s because atheists, rationalists and humanists are open to discussion. On the other hand, make fun of something as stupid, say, as the “virgin mary”, and all hell and Lindsay Freer breaks loose.
Double standards are what god botherers do best.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Free wine – and bloody good stuff it is – for the first person who can find me ten measuring points from the thousands around the world, used by warmists Jones, Salinger, Mann et al, whose raw data has been ‘homogenised’ from a level trend to a decline over the last ten or twenty years.
http://nominister.blogspot.com/2009/12/on-decline-hiding-and-homogenising.html
All I’ve see so far are the myriads of sites where a decline has been changed into an increase. Kinda makes you wonder, don’t it?
December 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Aetheist bus campaign indeed…….I’d be impressed if they wrote Allah instead of God and tried to do a few rounds of say Tehran ,Gaza or Riyadh. That would some balls .
December 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am
I see now where Copenhagen leaders have been getting their “facts” from
http://factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/
In late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.’s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of man-made global warming. We find that to be unfounded:
“We find such claims to be far wide of the mark. The e-mails (which have been made available by an unidentified individual here) do show a few scientists talking frankly among themselves — sometimes being rude, dismissive, insular, or even behaving like jerks. Whether they show anything beyond that is still in doubt.”
Incredible – have they even read the emails?
I think they speak for themsleves, no “fact checking” required.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:57 am
John Armstrong has written a superb piece about the Labour Party on its suffering of RDS – relevance deprivation syndrome. The lat 12 months have not brought it one step closer to power. They are flailing about like a demented catherine wheel sometimes to the right of National, sometimes to the left.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:02 am
V2 – Good God man! That’s private ownership of schools as well! Labour will never support such a travesty. We can’t have these dirty rotten Maori capitalists making all that profit. Shit. Next thing you know they’ll be sending it all overseas to the bros who are living in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane and London.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:04 am
This is why the CRU, IPCC etc are shit scared of Steve McIntyre.
His excellent first analysis of some of the emails tied in with historical context. Lots more to come.
None of this is a smoking gun but the body of evidence is being built. I’m sure a ‘consensus’ will be reached soon.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Chicken Little Says: None of this is a smoking gun but the body of evidence is being built. I’m sure a ‘consensus’ will be reached soon.
Chicken Little Says: The emails are building! The emails are building!
December 12th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Yeah right Pete, have you even read the article? Since you posted your snark 5 minutes after my comment I’m guessing the answer is NO
Care to point out where he has got it wrong?
Maybe you could show me where I said ‘the emails are building’?
Seems you are a pretty typical Warmonger – lots of bluster and little if any content.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:33 am
democracymum, it’s not about the science it never was. While the emails are an embarrassment they will not get in the way of the NWO Juggernaut. The UN and it’s lackeys can smell the money, they can smell the power, it’s within their reach, they shall not be denied. Many accuse us of being paranoid but very few have actually read the proposed treaty. It says in black and white that a one world government will be formed to implement this evil piece of work. I believe getstaffed posted this the other day. The idiots in Carbonhargen are been played like pieces on a chess board, most probably honestly believe they are trying to save the world, misguided fools, they’re aiding and abetting in a plan to relinquish their countries sovereignties to a corrupt and evil organisation. And that nasty piece of work we kick out last year is a very willing participant
December 12th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Apropos Starboards post – to whit:
‘East Coast iwi Ngati Porou has been offered one of the biggest Treaty of Waitangi settlement packages, comprising $110 million in cash plus assets including forestry, carbon credits, 5869ha of conservation reserves and parks and the option to purchase schools and police stations’.
If the land has been returned to Maori (as supposedly the ‘original’ owners- at least coding to the treaty. . ), what is the legal position regarding mining and the felling/clearing of native bush, on this land since (at least in theory) Maori can now do what they want with THEIR land – land which would now be supra-government since it is no longer ‘owned’ by the ‘Crown’?
This would seem to raise interesting legal questions since my reading of treaty settlements indicates that in returning the land, the ‘Crown’ has also returned all ‘RIGHTS’ (note that word) to what happens on, under and over that land – and in so doing negates such bits of legalise as the RMA etc. The land supposedly reverts to ‘Tribal’ law (whatever that phrase may mean)
Am I correct in this, or does the Crown in fact continue to have legal title despite the nominal ‘return’ of this land to the tribe? If so, isn’t the whole action a bit of a farce and ‘title’ as a term, is consequently meaningless?
Any comments from the lawyers amongst us?
December 12th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Do you think scientists have dedicated the last ten, twenty, thirty years of work to one world government?
December 12th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Mr Ban Ki-moon, this INCLUDES then UN steals my tax money to satisfy the power-trip asperations of your people. Don’t give me this ‘we care for the world’ bollocks. While there may be a few in your ranks that genuinely rate this at the top of the motivations, the vast majority are global trough feeders, overflowing with self interest.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Sarah vs Al: The People Want This One.
So as 2010 comes to a close, we deserve a break. A prime time one-on-one showdown – the people deserve this one. Bill it as “The Thrilla From Wasilla” versus “The Tennessee Tornado” – or whatever – and donate the proceeds to charity. But bring it on.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:12 am
democracymum (608) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am
The link you presented is a very nice summary of why “Climategate” is simply much ado about nothing.
Chicken, I glanced though the article you linked to. Quite frankly, I am not surprised that Mann et al seek to deny “fodder” to M&M: those two have their own reasons to present spurious data as scientific fact, I’m sure, but rigorous adherence to the scientific method is clearly not one.
The case presented by all you clownish deniers and conspiracy theorists simply does not stand up to scientific scrutiny by our most respected scientists, and, even more damning, is being overtaken by the facts.
My recent reading of reputable research tells me the biggest problem has been not “alarmist” scientists but overly-conservative scientists reluctant to stick their heads above the parapet. Jim Hansen has been a notable and praiseworthy exception.
But even more telling is that events are simply overtaking your case. It is now clear that estimates of sea level rise, in particular, have been grossly underestimated and it seems unlikely that we can avoid anything less that a 1.4m mean sea level increase (as measured by the 290 WMO gauges worldwide). It’s easy to find out the effects of such a rise, they are not pretty, (Tuvalu and others look doomed: this is not alarmist, just a fact) and combined with other deleterious effects of temperature rise, we are bequeathing future generations a problematic future.
I’m sure they will rise to the occasion but I hate to think of how we will look in their eyes when they realise we (in particular, the scientific community) have been aware of this problem for about half a century.
I suggest you all go out and get Jim Hansen’s book, “Storms of my Grandchildren”
December 12th, 2009 at 10:18 am
“do you think scientists have dedicated the last ten, twenty, thirty years of work to a one world government?” Not at all Pete I would say that by the looks of it scientists have dedicated their work and their answers to the billions of dollars paid to them to produce the correct answer. And don’t forget Pete there are thousands upon thousands of scientists not on the payroll who have put their names on petitions calling this junk science.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Pete……..Oh Pete – I’m waiting for you to show where Steve McIntyre has got it wrong.
It’s pretty funny really when a retired statistician takes on the mighty machine that is AWG and whips it’s arse, not once, not even twice but multiple times.
How long before the Nobel prize awarded to Gore and the IPCC is rescinded and awarded to Mr McIntyre instead?
The rush for credibility in the next few months will be a sight to see. For some it’s to late – MSM for instance have cooked their own goose, watch their ratings drop in the next 6mths as people go online for a more balanced coverage of issues.
Likewise any politician who signs anything at Copenhagen is signing their own political death warrant (in western countries at least).
There’s a revolution coming Pete, you may not be able to see it yet but if you open both eyes you might have a chance to jump out of the way before it squishes you like the little bug you appear to be.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:20 am
I have just wrote a letter to every political party and the HRC regarding the sexist promotion by the Employment Opportunities Commisioner of enforcing gender targets in the work place. (see the herald link below) It is really concerning that they are promoting the target that boards of NZX listed compaines must be diverse by gender. Not only is it ignorant of demographics, it is illegal as such practices inevitably leads to the candidates of the majority gender being discriminated based on their gender.
France is leglislating such targets, and if NZ is to start encouraging such targets, we may find outselves with the same laws as the “Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys”. People, if you feel strongly against such sexism then please lay a complaint against Judy McGregor at the HRC, and write to your mp. It is important that such sexism is not given a chance to grow.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10614320
December 12th, 2009 at 10:30 am
SSB, is it only the scientists that fit your antiview that are “on the payroll”, and the other thousands of scientists that you happen to agree with are straight?
December 12th, 2009 at 10:40 am
Chicken Little, I don’t feel like spending much time on your paltry claims of cooked geese.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Komata, I’m not a lawyer but I think you’ll find the Crown ‘owns’ every skerrick of land in NZ. It grants various rights to people by way of fee simple title or leasehold title which titles give those people various rights to occupy and use the land. But ALWAYS subject to the laws of the land and the Crown’s right to extinguish those titles at any time in certain circumstances. e.g. resumption for public works.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:25 am
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/a-diet-of-junk-foodwill-make-you-depressed/
December 12th, 2009 at 11:28 am
SSB 9.33am said
It says in black and white that a one world government will be formed to implement this evil piece of work. I believe getstaffed posted this the other day.
The fuss kicked up over the appearance of that one word, “government,” with no mention of any “world” attached to it, and is intended in the sense of administering rather than ruling, and all this noise is simply another example of the misrepresentation indulged in obsessively by the deniers.
I have actually read the proposed treaty, and do not attach any sinister intent on the use of the word ‘government.”
But then, I’m not paranoid.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Perhaps the left who scream about objective scientists supporting the AGW theory should remember this…:
Even scientific illiterates like Luc “Gosh-I’ve-Just-Discovered-RealClimate” Hansen should recognise that since they have merrily been quoting other parts of it for 30 years.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:43 am
“I have actually read the proposed treaty, and do not attach any sinister intent on the use of the word ‘government.”
But Luc if you’re only looking at the immediate future then you’re displaying child-like innocence unfitting your clear intelligence.
How do you eat an elephant? A slice at a time.
That’s always been the way these things work, and they take decades and sometimes centuries to play out. At the very least if you’re prepared to make a judgement that everything’s just hunky-dory then really you owe it to yourself to understand just precisely what you’re prepared to deny as a possibility.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Everything’s never just hunky-dory. But it is rarely as bad as the doomsayers and conspiracy theorists make out either.
And Reid, this time I won’t confuse you with the previous post “Perhaps the left who scream about objective scientists supporting the AGW theory”.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
“But it is rarely as bad as the doomsayers and conspiracy theorists make out either.”
Well as I said earlier on another thread Pete, take a look at what’s waiting in the wings ready to be activated as a result of 911, and try telling me there’s no potential for that to be mis-used. And bear in mind the AGW juggernaught hasn’t even left the blocks yet.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Are the Atheists behind the proposed bus ad campaign just a little faint hearted?
Shouldn’t their slogan say THERE IS PROBABLY NO GOD OR ALLAH ?
Or is the problem that Allah doesn’t exist, but too many of his extreme followers do?
Or are they not allowed an ad in New Zealand which mentions Allah?
December 12th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
There may be a lot more problems in the AGW juggernaut than there could be in climate change.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Luc Hansen 11:28 am,
Luc, I commented to Pete George (11:10 am; Climate Change head stood down 3-12-09) the other day regarding the link between the Climate Change fiasco and the aims of some to establish a One World Government – it’s worth restating it to you:
Have a read of this, Pete.
And if you don’t like Ian Wishart, then I suggest you download and read the following document:
The Socialist International paper, referencing UNDP material, can be downloaded from the UN website:
http://www.un-ngls.org/orf/UN-reform-Socialist%20International-%20Position%20Paper_%20240105.doc
December 12th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Yvette (384) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Are the Atheists behind the proposed bus ad campaign just a little faint hearted?
Shouldn’t their slogan say THERE IS PROBABLY NO GOD OR ALLAH ?
Or is the problem that Allah doesn’t exist, but too many of his extreme followers do?
Or are they not allowed an ad in New Zealand which mentions Allah?
Allah = god = jaweh = jehova = jesus = the fifty million hindu gods = any of the other millions of gods you can think of.
God, used here, is a generic term. Listen to English speaking Moslems and you will often hear them say god, not allah.
lâ ilâha illallâh, Muḥammadun rasûlullâh “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” in English.
Of course, there is NO god, so stop worrying and get on with enjoying this life – its the only one you’ll get.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Its raining in Auckland today
Why hasn’t this abomination been legislated out ?
December 12th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Allah is God in Arabic.
The slogan does already refer to Allah as well, but it’s an English slogan as we speak English in NZ…
December 12th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
My personal belief is that the threat of AGW and the resultant treaties, carbon taxes, ETSs, etc., will all lead us down the path to ultimately Global Governance – and that’s just based on the facts on the ground.
Of course, as a Christian I ALSO consider what God’s word says in this regard:
Sounds like Global Governance to me!
And we have the technology to bring ALL of these things about; this technology didn’t exist prior to about 15-20 years ago.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Enjoy this life it’s the only one you’ll get…………..unless you’re the Dalai Lama.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Billyborker – “Allah = god = jaweh = jehova = jesus = the fifty million hindu gods = any of the other millions of gods you can think of.”
Granted, but I would have thought that if Islamists took the message to include their God there would have been a few more London buses blown up or torched by now.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
fishe 12:35 pm,
WRONG.
Allah was just one of many ‘gods’ which Mohammed chose to win over his tribesmen.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Kris,
The word previously referred to the moon god, one god among many, and the Muslims adopted it to refer to the Creator, the God of the Jews and the Christians.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the “greatest” except in a polytheistic context?
I ask the same question about the first commandment.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
komata; From the press release.
While much of the agreement sounds like a return of sovereignty to Ngati Porou, “existing ministerial responsibilities remain with ministers”, who would participate in an “annual Ngati Porou-Crown Forum for high-level discussion between Ngati Porou and ministers, including the Prime Minister” or his or her delegate.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
kowtow (14) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Enjoy this life it’s the only one you’ll get…………..unless you’re the Dalai Lama.
Nope, each of them still only gets one life.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Ryan Sproull 1:12 pm,
Didn’t think you hung out here on the weekend – although someone else said it was raining in Auckland. It’s just windy here in Wellington today; rain overnight but fine now.
Allah (or al-ilah) is still the same pagan god as he was prior to Mohammed sponsoring him. He wasn’t then, and nor is he now, the God of the Bible; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. No Muslim will identify him in this way.
From my previous comment:
December 12th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Kris, how is that any different from the way the jews came to decide upon yahweh as their god? They looked at what was around them, they adapted and changed, and “In the beginning there were thousands of gods, but Moses said ‘Let there be Yahweh’ and Moses saw it was good because he got the power and the glory.”
All gods in all religions are constructs based on the time, place and culture of their creation.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Yeah, it’s a bit miserable here. I wouldn’t be able to enjoy it anyway – got work that needs done by Monday.
Every Muslim identifies him as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It was the name of a pagan god, and it was appropriated by the Muslims to refer to God with a capital G.
It doesn’t matter what someone says Jews and Christians at the time of Mohammed said. If you ask a Muslim, “What is the word you use to refer to the God of the Jews and the Christians, the one sole God, omnipotent Creator of the universe?” they will say truthfully, “Allah.”
December 12th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
billyborker 1:28 pm,
All – except One.
And many of those are demonic entities masquerading as a ‘god’.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Kris K (1151) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
billyborker 1:28 pm,
All gods in all religions are constructs based on the time, place and culture of their creation.
All – except One.
Nope, all.
Read your bible and see how it fits its time and place; it is not universal, it is not eternal, it speaks nothing of the world outside a very narrow piece of geography and it knows nothing of how Man will develop and grow.
It is full of logical errors, errors of fact and internal inconsistencies.
But I know I am wasting my time, you can’t have a rational conversation with a believer because if they were rational, they wouldn’t believe.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
That’s just a stone’s throw from, “You can’t have a rational conversation with someone who disagrees with me, because of they were rational, they would agree with me.”
December 12th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Ryan Sproull 1:29 pm,
I take little stock in what most Muslims say – they are either deceived or accomplished liars.
And I put more stock in what those “Jews and Christians at the time of Mohammed” said.
Many Bible believing Christians today also hold this same view today.
Also the Koran/Allah denies he has a son; and therefore denies the deity of Christ, the Son of God.
The God (Father) of the Bible embraces Christ; God the Son.
If these are the one in the same then they are schizophrenic.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Oh no, not at all. People who disagree with me are OK, as long as they are open to evidence and enquiry, just as I am. It is the act of belief that closes off any chance of accepting evidence and thus makes the believer irrational.
No amount of evidence sways believers, but us rational humans are open to changing views when new evidence comes to light.
Kris’s post above is a classic example of this.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
billyborker 1:47 pm,
And my repost would be: ‘No amount of evidence sways unbelievers.’
As a ‘rational human’ the more evidence that “comes to light”, the more I am convinced of the veracity of the Bible.
Your ‘belief’ in the non existence of God is just that; a statement of faith – despite the evidence to the contrary.
It is more you that is closed to the evidence that confronts you.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
On the Atheist Bus Campaign, let them spend their money how they want, but I would be more impressed if they had put “there probably is no god (or allah)”. They’re not that brave though huh?
On AGW, the real sad thing here is that CO2 emissions reductions might make for some cleaner air somewhere, but really is a misguided waste of money (and that is sidestepping issues of corruption, one world government conspiracies, etc). If efforts were directed straight into projects like clean energy (instead of trading schemes and AGW hysteria) then the environment would benefit much much more than under carbon cap and trade schemes. The elephant in the room is definitely overpopulation, and ultimately we either have to limit births, or people have to die early. When (or hopefully IF) we reach the limits of exploiting and producing, and wars start over resources, then what good has reducing CO2 had? The UN estimated in 2005 that by 2050 we’ll be at 9.1 billion (from 6.5 billion in 2005). That sort of growth rate would basically mean double today’s population by 2100. I think that has more catastrophic potential than AGW.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Kris,
Yes, they believe different things about the same God. Christians believe God was made flesh in Jesus. Muslims and Jews do not. Muslims believe that God spoke to and inspired Allah. Jews and Christians do not. And so on.
But the definition of the word – “God” or “Allah” – in its essence remains the same: the omnipotent Creator of the Universe, perfect, eternal, good, etc.
As for putting stock in what Muslims say, if you refuse to listen to what people tell you they mean by a word, you’re hardly going to be an authority on what they mean by it. Whatever the etymological origins of the word “Allah”, and whether or not most Muslims are aware of it, to learn what they mean when they utter it, you have to be open to hearing what they have to say.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Ryan Sproull 2:07 pm,
Oh, I’m open Ryan, I just think they’re wrong, and that their claims don’t stack up.
Their own words and writings condemn them in this regard.
And most of their ‘utterances’ mean ‘death to the infidel’.
Islam is a death cult, and one needs only look at its fruit to see it has very little in common with Biblical teaching, or the God of the Bible. By their fruits ye shall know them.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
RightNow 2:05 pm,
Indeed.
They’d only do it once in a Muslim country.
I think atheism is very much a closet religion in Muslim countries – funny that.
Don’t worry, the One Worlders have this on their agenda, too.
Population control – coming soon to a town near you.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Kris K
Your ‘belief’ in the non existence of God is just that; a statement of faith – despite the evidence to the contrary.
It is more you that is closed to the evidence that confronts you.
Where is this evidence? I see plenty of evidence that the bible, like all religious books, is man made, nothing that shows the divine. BUT, I am open to the evidence, if evidence there be. You just need to use something other than the bible, your deeply held beliefs and faith as evidence.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Kris K (1155) Says:
December 12th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
RightNow 2:05 pm,
On the Atheist Bus Campaign, let them spend their money how they want, but I would be more impressed if they had put “there probably is no god (or allah)”. They’re not that brave though huh?
Indeed.
They’d only do it once in a Muslim country.
I think atheism is very much a closet religion in Muslim countries – funny that.
Of course atheists must be careful in many moslem countries, it is punishable by death in some. Just as it was, not too far back, in many xtian countries. Its just that eventually rational thought began to attain the ascendancy in Europe and the US. Islam is about 500 years behind, but there are many ahteists of moslem background beginning to shake the tree.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
billyborker 2:26 pm,
Myself and others have provided this to you on numerous occassions in the past – I suggest you read over those comments again.
I’m not going to elaborate for this reason, but let’s just say some of the evidence consists of the following:
• The Creation – real science reveals this.
• Fulfilled prophecy.
• Archeology.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Don’t you mean you won’t elaborate because your evidence is so flimsy?
What is The Creation? If you mean the account in Genesis that is so far from scientific truth it is laughable. As an attempt by early Man to explain his origins, it is a good try, but there is no science in it at all.
Fulfilled prophecy – by this I guess you mena the prophecies that are determined to have been fulfilled after tha act, never before. Or can you show evidence of prior prophecy being fulfilled?
Archeology shows us how and where Man lived, it has nothing to say about god(s).
If Jesus was the son of god, and if god is all knowing, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
December 12th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
billyborker 2:44 pm,
I don’t have the time nor the inclination at the moment.
Suffice to say; this is old ground, and has been covered ad nauseum.
I’m off for a while.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
“..and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations…”
kkk..!
that’s michael jackson..!
how could it not be..?
or..maybe..google..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
“..And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:..”
gene simmonds..?..from kiss..?
..and his kiss-army..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
If folks are interested in all this Allah/God business you could do worse than go to the Jihad Watch website.Very informative on Koran ,interpretations ,news etc and you can’t say it’s not a hot topic!!
December 12th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
“”.. And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…”
that’s rupert murdoch..!
and his plans to reconquer the web..!
how could it not be..?
or..fonterra..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“..Suffice to say; this is old ground, and has been covered ad nauseum..”
ain’t that the truth..!
“..I’m off for a while..”
ah well..!..small blessings..!
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz0
December 12th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
here I am oh Lord, and here is my prayer …
please be there !
… don’t want to ask too much …
no miracles and such
… just whisper in the air
please be there … !
… when I die like other folks
don’t want to find out you’re a hoax
so I’m not on my knees asking for world peace
or that the polar ice cap freeze and save the polar bear
… or even that the poor be fed
… or angels hover o’r my bed
but I would sure be pissed
if I should have been an atheist
… so Lord …
please exist.
- that’s garrison keillor
December 12th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Sort of sums religion up – wishful thinking.
Which is why it crumbles when we shine the light on it.
December 12th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Billy, not that this is going to make a blind bit of difference to you or any other obdurate atheist or agnostic, but since you’re interested in scientific debate on the nature of scripture, no doubt you’ve come across the work of the former agnostic, Ivan Panin. As a Christian I’m not interested in using his calculations to justify my position, but it’s a mathematical side-issue that people like yourself might find dry enough to engage yourself in analysing and attempting to disprove – if you can. Look forward to your response in a few months…
What interests me Billy, in your stated positions to date, is that you refuse point-blank to acknowledge the obvious simple fact that your position is as much a position of faith as any other. Faith is faith. You choose to have faith in science. I know plenty of scientists including some who’ve received the highest scientific honours NZ has to offer, who believe in G-d.
If you genuinely don’t understand why and how your position is as much faith-based as mine, perhaps you need to familiarise yourself with the concept of subjective truth espoused by the Existentialist Philosopher Kierkegaard.
If you’re genuinely curious and not just being childishly provocative, I don’t expect you to reply to this for several months, for that is long it’s going to take to judge for yourself the validity or otherwise of Ivan’s analysis. You’ll need original copies of the Bible in Hebrew and Greek, I recommend the Blue Letter Bible site.
December 12th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
I am a confessed atheist, but I do respect others’ right to believe in religion and uphold any personal beliefs.
Each one to his own. Life is too precious to waste it.
December 12th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
You mean The Bible Code under a different name? Its a crock. Similar analysis have been done on Shakespeare, Homer, et al. Are they also god’s divine words?
You are still confused about the nature of faith. Faith is a full stop to thought.
As to a “scientific debate on the nature of scripture” are you referring to my query re Jesus’ scientific illiteracy? How can the “Son of God” be so ignorant? Quite simply because he was a character of his time with the beliefs and knowledge of his time, not the way things truly are.
December 12th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Since that was written in 1899, no, I don’t mean the Bible Code under another name, billy but, yes, I suspected you wouldn’t even bother to look at it, billy. I just thought I’d give you an opportunity.
Why don’t you just admit you’re a fanatic, with all that entails?
Can’t change your mind and won’t change the subject.
Let us relegate you to the dustbin of irrelevance, otherwise, make a valid response to a valid argument
December 12th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
So billy, still waiting. That was a mathematical argument. Maths is science, isn’t it?
He lays it out, billy. For independent verification. That’s scientific, isn’t it?
Yet, you dismiss it as a crock within 6 mins. It’s a complex thesis, billy. You mean to tell me you’ve analysed what he said and verified it independently and come to your conclusion in 6 mins? Einstein couldn’t do that, billy.
You asked for science, I gave you science.
Admit it, you’re a fanatic.
December 12th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
You call that an atheist bus?! This is an atheist bus!
December 12th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Excellent, Rex.
Amazing how people who don’t get it, don’t understand that G-d built our sense of humour along with everything else…
December 12th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
reid..can we call you ‘straw-man’..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
in what sense, phil?
December 12th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
So sevens in the Bible are fascinating, but I wonder about that in respect to the incidence of
#21. Three women are mentioned-Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. The number of Greek letters in these three names is 14, or 7 x 2. for example, when a male line of decent is switched to three women [and a forth unnamed, who would be Bathsheba] then back to men again.
The sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?
December 12th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
palin..!..shatner..!..together..!..finallly..!
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/sarah-palin-vs-william-shatner-on-tonight-show/
December 12th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
reid..try a re-reid of yr 4.09..and 4.01..
and then get back to me..
(if you still need to ..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Come on Reid, science doesn’t require faith. If you had the time, the ability and the resources you could create experiments, make observations and mathematical proofs sufficient to take you to the cutting edge of any field of science. No step along the way requires faith (belief without proof). Religion OTOH is pure faith without evidence or proof.
And there are plenty who don’t. That line of argument doesn’t go anywhere. Science doesn’t advance by straw poll. You need evidence. I suspect if you ask any sincere scientist who believes in God they would acknowledge that there’s little to no evidence and would instead say something to the effect that their religion is a completely separate thing. People are able to compartmentalise and just because they’re a scientist doesn’t mean they apply science to every aspect of their life. Religions are good at creating mental dead-ends (“we’re mere creations of God so how can we possibly understand..” etc).
December 12th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
reid, sorry I don’t respond in your time frame, but I do have a life.
Panin is simply seeing patterns, a trait that evolved with humans as the observation of patterns in nature was an advantage to survival. Patterns prove nothing.
Interesting that he chooses the genealogy of Matthew has his starting point. What is the mathematical analysis of why Matthew has 28 generations from David to Jesus while Luke has 43.
Then there is a major problem with both genealogies – they lost Joseph as Jesus’ father, thus negating the whole idea of virgin birth and gad’s parentage. And IF god IS the father, why the need to tie Jesus to David?
So unless there is a damned good explanation as to these discrepancies, Panin’s work is just a crock.
Now, back to the question – As the “Son of God”, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
December 12th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
phil, a strawman has two definitions: one is as an outline sketch, the other is a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted (which you see a lot of in 911 debates).
I fail to see how either def applies to either of those two posts.
Billy strongly advocates the superiority of the scientific method, then when he’s given a scientific argument potentially refuting his position, he doesn’t respond.
What about that is a “strawman?”
December 12th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
@ billy 5:01:
You haven’t addressed the science. Please respond with calculations, not rhetoric.
Try not to stray outside what he says, as well. That’s just unscientific.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
reid, there is NO science in simply finding patterns. As I said, patterns are found everywhere in the world, and humans do seem to have evolved to look for something. Calling something science, dressing it up in scientific garb, does not make it science, otherwise we’d be teaching ID in schools.
No calculations are required.
Now, back to the question – As the “Son of God”, why was Jesus so scientifically illiterate?
December 12th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
philu:
Thanks for that heads-up. That’s hilarious. There’s something about Bill Shatner’s delivery that’d make you laugh out loud at virtually anything, and the bits from his autobiography read by Palin are just… surreal.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Reid, can you give a single paragraph synopsis of the work by Ivan Panin and what it proves?
I’m not suggesting that you don’t know what this work is about, but on two occasions I’ve had Christians recommend to me a book called “The Case for Faith” (Lee Strobel) and they’ve said something like “Yeah this book proves that God exists and it’s done using modern scientific methods and detective work. You should read it as I think it will answer your questions”. And on both occasions when I’ve answered: “Yes, I have read it and it’s rubbish. Have you actually read it?”. They both said no.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Reid
I refer you to my comment 4.50pm
“The sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?”
December 12th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
And on both occasions when I’ve answered: “Yes, I have read it and it’s rubbish. Have you actually read it?”. They both said no.
You get the same answer about the bible if most of them were honest. few have read it, most rely on the preachers and the few verses on a Sunday..
December 12th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I admired their honesty. One is now my wife and one was a former workmate in the UK
I agree that many Christians have not read the Bible. Don’t worry Kris, I know you have.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
“The sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?”
Er, what about them, Yvette?
Bear in mind, as I said in my post, the cycles of sevens isn’t something I care at all about, it’s merely an observable phenomena that billy needs to explain if he wants to retain his credibility as an advocate of the case that the Bible has no scientific proof. If billy can’t respond with scientific counter-evidence, then he’s shot out of the water, or hoisted by his own petard.
You’ll note his responses to date haven’t addressed the questions raised by that article. As I said, I expect it will take him a few months to exercise the scientific method and respond appropriately.
No doubt he’s googling furiously as we speak.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
AS *I* said, reid, this is no proof of anything, other than Man’s adaptive ability to see patterns.
And, as I have already pointed out, similar “analyses” have been done on other texts, such as Shakespeare and Homer. Does that prove divinity or god?
Perhaps you could try answering the questions about Jesus’ lack of scientific knowledge, the mismatched genealogies or the need to prove Jesus’ ancestry back to David IF god was the father.
But I am sure each of these are far too hard for you and you would prefer to keep chasing Alice down rabbit holes.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Reid : I asked -
“#21. Three women are mentioned-Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. The number of Greek letters in these three names is 14, or 7 x 2.” is an example. But, when a male line of decent is switched to three women [and a forth unnamed, who would be Bathsheba] then back to men again, the sevens may be very clever but what about what the words themselves say?
and
“There are words in the passage just described [the first 17 verses of the New Testament, The Gospel of Matthew] that occur nowhere else in the New Testament. They occur 42 times (7 x 6) and have 126 letters (7 x 18).”
http://www.direct.ca/trinity/part1.html
So does this apply to Paul’s epistles, which were written one assumes before he died, so they come before the rest of the New Testament, and Mark is generally accepted as being written before Matthew and Luke, since both copy parts of Mark?
December 12th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
“AS *I* said, reid, this is no proof of anything, other than Man’s adaptive ability to see patterns.”
So pray tell, billy. Tell us your actuarial calculations of the chances of this pattern happening by chance and whether the result of that, means that it’s a phenomena worth exploring, or not, and why?
December 12th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
So these arsehole leftists are promoting a One-Child Policy now, even though Western countries already have a negative population imbalance concerning births to deaths. And don’t even think they’ll apply this “policy” to the Third World. Proof, as if any more is needed, about the ulterior motives of the environmentalists: the destruction of the West.
December 12th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
“So does this apply to Paul’s epistles, which were written one assumes before he died, so they come before the rest of the New Testament, and Mark is generally accepted as being written before Matthew and Luke, since both copy parts of Mark?”
Er, I’m still struggling to understand your specific question, Yvette.
December 12th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
It’s a very short letter, Malcolm and therefore no, I won’t give you a synopsis.
Perhaps you missed the significance of what I said in the original post:
“As a Christian I’m not interested in using his calculations to justify my position, but it’s a mathematical side-issue that people like yourself might find dry enough to engage yourself in analysing and attempting to disprove – if you can. Look forward to your response in a few months…”
See, I don’t care whether you or anyone else wants to look into it or not or whether you don’t. I don’t care about justifying it or not.
It’s merely an interesting observation of the mathematical nature of biblical construction. You can draw your own conclusions from that. Now if you want to, you can simply ignore the information and not even look at it – I don’t care. If you want to, you can look at the information and think to yourself, this can’t possibly be true – I don’t care. If you want to, you could look at the information and conclude there is something in this and I need to look further – I don’t care, but if you do take this course, I rejoice that you may find Eternal Truth and save your own self.
Whichever course you take, I don’t care, except insofaras I’ve laid the information before you, so consume it as you like.
December 12th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Reid, what is your take on Steve McIntyre apparently being found out on his email critique, it looks like he has either been sloppy or devious, in either case wrong.
Thus, once again, McIntyre’s speculations are shown to be utterly without foundation.
December 12th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Pete, aren’t you taking some heat on that on the AGW thread today?
How’s about sticking to our knitting shall we?
December 12th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
I love it. The same British “progressives” who whined about attacks on the Sun God’s background last year are doing the same thing to David Cameron in the UK. It’s not working, of course, which is pretty much Labour’s style. “No war but class war,” tossers. This is Old Labour in its purest form: red to the core.
December 12th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
That was yesterdays Reid, seems to have been left behind. Up to you on whether you want to comment. You’re one who seems to be prepared to look and discuss.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
so..reid..in summary..
you don’t feel the need to read this ‘mathematical-proof’..
..’cos you are a ‘believer’..
so you don’t ‘need’ it/to..
(could that be called a straw-man-defence..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Pete I am [prepared look and discuss], however the whole AGW email debate isn’t something I’ve been following and I fear it’s progressed too far for me to catch up and add something meaningful to the collective knowledge, so if you don’t mind, I’ll keep my silence on that issue.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
phil, the possibility that a religious artefact such as the Bible is mathematically interesting says nothing about its truth or falsity to a believer.
I’m surprised you’re fascinated by the potential confluence and I hope you explore it further.
That’s about it, really.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
reid -
Despite the amazing 7′s maths [Matthew 1:1-17], the line of decent is through males and then inexplicably names three females [there are 4], then goes back to males. Is that the way descent was traced, or is the line here somewhat unconventional, despite the clever math?
December 12th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
China rejects draft climate deal
* Dennis Shanahan, Political editor
* From: The Australian
* December 12, 2009 12:00AM
Penny Wong
Penny Wong poses in front of a large globe in Copenhagen during the fourth day of the climate change conference yesterday. Source: Getty Images
CHINA has accused the developed world of retreating from its undertakings to cut greenhouse gas emissions, rejected a proposal at the Copenhagen conference to reduce financial help to China and described the draft deal Kevin Rudd worked on as creating “a lot of problems”.
The Chinese have accused the developed world of abandoning the Kyoto Protocol and pressuring the developing nations to cut emissions without proper compensation for the “luxury emissions” the West has put out for the past century.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Vettori gets 100!
What a legend he is, best allrounder in NZ history by far IMO
December 12th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Great support from McCullum too, and the top order not so bad this time either, especially McIntosh setting things up, no ducks and only one in single figures. That’s good comparatively.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Biblical sevens
The question is: could one person do it, let alone several in different places?
The fact that Dr Pavin, who twigged to this in 1890, took a further 50 years and generated over 43,000 detailed, hand-penned pages of analysis, just to establish evidence of the patterns, would suggest actually writing texts to met all the different matches is inconceivable.
Write something, calculate whether it matched all parameters and rewrite and check again?
” Just to understand how unique these properties are try to design a genealogy-even from fiction that meets the following criteria:
1) The Number of words must be divisible by 7 evenly (In each of these constraints, it is assumed that the divisions are without remainders.)
2)The number of letters must also be divisible by 7.
3)The number of vowels and the number of consonants must be divisible by 7.
4)The number of words that begin with a vowel must be divisible by 7.
5)The number of words that begin with a consonant must be divisible by 7.
6)The number of words that occur more than once must be divisible by 7.
7)The number of words that occur in more than one form must be divisible by 7.
8)The number of words that occur in only one form shall be divisible by 7.
9)The number of nouns shall be divisible by 7.
10)Only 7 words shall not be nouns.
11)The number of names in the genealogy shall be divisible by 7.
12)Only 7 other kinds of nouns are permitted.
13)The number of male names shall be divisible by 7.
14)The number of generations shall be 21, also divisible by 7. ”
http://www.direct.ca/trinity/part1.html
December 12th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
nickb
“What a legend he is, best allrounder in NZ history by far IMO”
I will excuse that comment based on your youth.
I think there might be a couple of other blokes who have greater claim to that title.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Hadlee
86 matches
3124 runs avg 27.16
431 wickets avg 22.29
Vettori
96 matches
3645 runs avg 29.87
311 wickets avg 33.41
On stats I’d put Hadlee slightly ahead based on his bowling, but Vettori’s captainship must figure in it too.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Pete
Stats only tell you so much, name me a time when world cricket has been this weak when it comes to top class bowlers?
The fact that our top order cannot score runs in the current climate just highlights how piss poor we actually are.
Over all the standard of world cricket is not high, certainly nowhere near the quality of the 80′s and 90′s.
Vettori is (IMHO) third at best on any NZ allrounder list.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
One cricket writer wrote in about 1990;
“Will there be life after Hadlee?”
For many years there wasn’t. Then Vettori blossomed.
I note that the Pakistan odds lengthened from $9 to $11 in the final hour of play today.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
BillyB, I must admit to misunderstanding you. I believe you claim to be an atheist, personally I’m fine with that but why do you spend so much energy telling everyone else we are wrong. For shit sake man if you are so confident in your assessment of religion and God why do you feel that you need to justify your stand. I’m happy to believe in God I suspect that in the deep recesses of your mind you are not yet certain, trust me Billy God does exist and he has your number otherwise you wouldn’t bother.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Leftist thugs shut down something that doesn’t accede to their belief system, as usual. Fuck Copenhagen, fuck AGW, fuck the left.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
It’s okay Hurf those fanatics wont be able to keep the peace and will resort to violence to impose their belief system on others, counter revolution will be a bitch.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
SSB, the topic was raised by others, not me. Am I not permitted to respond? And trust ME bob, there ain’t no god, I have no number for him to have and life is great away from the demon haunted world in which you live.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
i just warched some vid of that lord monckton..
what a fat/arrogant/odious/slimy tory of the first order he is…
(marty feldman eyes and all..).
ew..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Starboard at 8.17am, the first post in this thread, said
Given that Ngati Porou were the British colonialists’ major ally in wars with other tribes, shouldn’t Bro Key ask Ngati Porou to use some of their settlement offer to help meet claims from these other tribes?
December 12th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Hi billy, no I don’t trust you so I’ll take my chances. Yes of course you should respond and good on you. The only thing I can say in my defense is that I have no wish to convince you that there is a God. You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time telling us why there is no God. WHY?? It seems to me that you are trying to convince yourself that you are right, Buzzzzzz billy you are wrong.
Phool, Lord Monckton rules you slimy piece of socialist shit.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
oh yeah..!..moncton is a real class act..
the vid i saw showed him calling young jewish protestors ‘hitler youth’..repeatedly..
..and then giveing his bullshit denialist ;scientific’-spiel..
(qualified as a journalist..and a student of ‘the classics’..as he is..eh..?..)
that you would identify with this sneering piece of shit..bloody-hands-bob..
really dosen’t come as much of a surprise..eh..?
and this tub of class-bile is the front-man/spokesperson for the deniers..eh..?
what a sad/sick/fucken joke you all are..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Reid, yeah I did kind of misunderstand you re Ivan Panin. I see now that it was an aside.
I’ve read the letter and it seems interesting. As usual though the internet kind of spoils these things. There’s a lot of stuff showing how Panin had to use different versions of the Greek texts and in some cases modify them to make the patterns fit.
Interesting anyway. And 7 is a prime number and those things pop up in unexpected ways.
cheers
Malcolm
December 12th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
and of course..the funny thing is ..bloody-hands-bob..
that should monckton meet you..
he would think you were nothing more than a peasant..eh..?
do you yearn to tug the forelock..?
do you..?..bloody-hands-bob..?
know your ‘place’..do you..?
was ‘Lord Monckton rules’ a freudian slip there..?
..bloody-hands-bob..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/mccormack.html
December 12th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
Gee phool why do you work yourself up so much. Does monckton upset you so because he challenges you universe?. Does not Al Bore sneer at those the call him out?. Does not the kangaroo court in Carbonhargen not sneer at those that question them. Please say no, let me call you out phool.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
i am laughing..
for months you knuckledraggers have been banging on about monckton..
and in the flesh..
he is this pompouus/arrogant/ignorant colonel-blimp caricature..
..a total figure of fun..
(what’s not to laugh at..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
December 12th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Cool phool if monckton thinks I’m a peasant I’ll get over it. “Do you yearn the tug of the forelock”……I’m already under the forelock, just ask the bank. I’m proud to be a peasant and one day I might even save your sorry arse.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Why do you lefties work yourselves up so much on pompous/arrogant/ ignorant people. God you never pick on the Dear one.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:01 am
Got this in my inbox –
Yeh, good idea.
December 13th, 2009 at 1:54 am
Billions $ in green Fraud
Just how much will it cost small business and even big business and the government in monitoring and controlling this enforced activity. Just ask the small investor how much he has lost in New Zealand.
How can you put a price on carbon credits when there are billions of $ in fraud?
December 13th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Aspiring Auckland supercity mayor Williams the wierdo
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/news/3155230/Mayors-rude-texts-target-John-Key
December 13th, 2009 at 11:26 am
I have watched the odd game of cricket in my time and started counting the number of all-rounders I’ve seen who were better than the current cancer.
Ran out of fingers rather quickly.
December 13th, 2009 at 11:48 am
why is anyone even responding to fuckwit borker? he had a go at someones kids ffs.
he shouldnt even be on here.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Hey dime, you got issues, take it outside and we’ll see who tha Man is.
And that other shit fight was started by the bitch, not by me. Fucking retard.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
“why is anyone even responding to fuckwit borker?”
Agree. Shallow one dimensional troll. Some people must have fuck all to do.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
You left out the knuckle dragging bit red, you’re slipping.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I see we are at the cutting edge of rational debate here.
Where the fuck is general debate 13th?
Must have been a good party last night!
December 13th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Did anyone see the protests in Carbonhargen? Amazing, I never realised you could get so many drongos in one city.
December 13th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
BAHAHAHA borker thinks he’s tough. funny.
you should be careful who you call out over the net borker
ya mean little leftist.
December 13th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Borker is an angry late 50′s expat Australian who lost his Christian faith and deeply regrets he couldn’t fly back to Australia in time to euthanize his dying father. Tragic indeed, but he needs to vent it out every weekend – he adopts the MyNameIsjack handle when at work during the week.
December 13th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
heh..!
the health-message that junk food will make you depressed..
gets a massive thumbs-down..
(i wonder if they are all junk food addicts..?.and depressed..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)