| Author | Post |
|---|
Randy in Pensacola
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Nov 3rd, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 916 |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 06:22 am |
|
empty wrote: Arguing politics, religion, and oil types on the internet has proven to be fuitless.
Test it, I dare ya! (ie; nobody's beliefs will change, you will just get more red in the face because of it)
Been there done that.... didnt get no where. You are right.
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1658 |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 01:58 am |
|
Arguing politics, religion, and oil types on the internet has proven to be fuitless.
Test it, I dare ya! (ie; nobody's beliefs will change, you will just get more red in the face because of it)
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 01:14 am |
|
Yes, "your model of the world" or:
In the late 1940s a man walked into a laboratory of a major photographic
manufacturer in America to demonstrate a new photographic process. But
he didn't bring along a camera or film. He brought along a red box with a
shiny steel plate, a charging device, a light bulb and a container of black
powder. The picture he created was faint but discernible.
"But where's the film?" they asked. "Where's the developer? Where's the
darkroom? Why, that's not really photography!" And so the company
passed up an opportunity to acquire the process for electrostatic
photography, or xerography...a process that has grown into a multi-billion
dollar industry.
Why did they pass up such a great opportunity? Because the people who
saw the process were suffering from PARADIGM PARALYSIS.
So, why did you come up with the statement you did make? Why have you changed your story?
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 12:28 am |
|
OR, it could be that I use an OLD Mac computer that is not fast enough to look at videos... which would be the truth, along with what I posted before. Also, I believe the proper word to use there is presuppositions, not paradigms. I am not sure I would understand the statement, "ok, so you just don't like your models challenged" lol
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 12:12 am |
|
| Ok, so you just don't like your paradigms challenged, otherwise you would comment on the video. A video incidently that I'm sure you would enjoy.
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 3rd, 2008 12:00 am |
|
Scare me? I don't think so. Libs only scare me when they get elected..lol
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 11:12 pm |
|
the preacher wrote: Thanks, but no, I will pass. I am not interested in anything Darwinian, Muslim, UK, or Dem.
but thanks for thinking of me.
Did I scare you? You won't even watch it to comment?
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 10:56 pm |
|
Thanks, but no, I will pass. I am not interested in anything Darwinian, Muslim, UK, or Dem.
but thanks for thinking of me.
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 10:05 pm |
|
Well Preacher, since you mentioned the UK and sharia law, this video should be to your liking. I think it cut to the core of the debate, enjoy.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5aCUNE4Z8
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 09:00 pm |
|
OK, got it. We were talking about oil and the dems, and a post about Darwin fits right in there...like I said, I got it?
RSDF
addendum: I'm sorry, I didn't realize the article was from the United Kingdom, home of universal health care, sharia (sp?) law, bending to muslims so they won't be offended, and a myriad of other wonderful things that America should absolutely and whole-heartedly follow as the example of a perfect society. My error....ROFLMBO
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 08:49 pm |
|
the preacher wrote: Fritz, and the point is????
This falls under the heading "in today's news" I found it refreshing and thought I'd share.
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 07:29 pm |
|
Dave: yeah, I know...by not having any oil to change it with, or gas to ride it, even if I do pump up my tires along with everyone else, therefore stopping the problem of not enough supply...(hey, don't blame me, that is what he said, to make sure my tires were correctly inflated so I wouldn't be wasting gas)
boy, cannot WAIT until November when the Obama followers get what they want. Of course for at LEAST 2 years, (which is about the time, hopefully it will take folks to wake up and elect a republican congress to control this moron) we will still here the faithful anthem
"It's Bush's Fault" ad nauseum
RSDF
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 07:25 pm |
|
Fritz, and the point is????
|
Fritz
Prospect
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 07:10 pm |
|
Must be frustrating being a scientist. There you are, incrementally discovering how the universe works via a series of complex tests and experiments, for the benefit of all mankind - and what thanks do you get? People call you "egghead" or "boffin" or "heretic", and they cave your face in with a rock and bury you out in the wilderness.
Not literally - not in this day and age - but you get the idea. Scientists are mistrusted by huge swathes of the general public, who see them as emotionless lab-coated meddlers-with-nature rather than, say, fellow human beings who've actually bothered getting off their arses to work this shit out. The wariness stems from three popular misconceptions:
1) Scientists want to fill our world with chemicals and killer robots; 2) They don't appreciate the raw beauty of nature, maaan; and
3) They're always spoiling our fun, pointing out homeopathy doesn't work or ghosts don't exist EVEN THOUGH they KNOW we REALLY, REALLY want to believe in them.
That last delusion is the most insidious. Science is like a good friend: sometimes it tells you things you don't want to hear. It tells you the truth. And we all know how much that can hurt, don't we, fatso?
Many people find bald, unvarnished truths so disturbing, they prefer to ram their heads in the sand and start dreaming at the first sign of scientific reality. The more contrary evidence mounts up, the harder they'll ignore it. And even the greatest, most widely-admired scientists can provoke this reaction. Take Darwin. Or rather, take The Genius Of Darwin (Mon, 8pm, C4), the latest documentary from professional God-hatin' Professor Yaffle impersonator Richard Dawkins, which sets out to calmly and lucidly explain a) Why Darwin was so ace, and b) Just how much evidence there is to support his findings.
Darwin's theory of evolution was simple, beautiful, majestic and awe-inspiring. But because it contradicts the allegorical babblings of a bunch of made-up old books, it's been under attack since day one. That's just tough luck for Darwin. If the Bible had contained a passage that claimed gravity is caused by God pulling objects toward the ground with magic invisible threads, we'd still be debating Newton with idiots too.
Since Darwin's death, Dawkins points out, the evidence confirming his discovery has piled up and up and up, many thousand feet above the point of dispute. And yet heroically, many still dispute it. They're like couch potatoes watching Finding Nemo on DVD who've suffered some kind of brain haemorrhage which has led them to believe the story they're watching is real, that their screen is filled with water and talking fish, and that that's all there is to reality - just them and that screen and Nemo - and when you run into the room and point out the DVD player and the cables connecting it to the screen, and you open the windows and point outside and describe how overwhelming the real world is - when you do all that, it only spooks them. So they go on believing in Nemo, with gritted teeth if necessary.
What was it that spooked them so? Probably natural selection's lack of reassuring narrative. It lays the ruthless, godless world pretty bloody bare. As Dawkins says: "The total amount of suffering in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute it takes me to say these words, thousands of animals are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, feeling teeth sink into their throats. Thousands are dying from starvation or disease or feeling a parasite rasping away from within. There is no central authority; no safety net. For most animals the reality of life is struggling, suffering and death."
Woo-hoo! Compare and contrast with the plot of Finding Nemo and it's easy to understand why people would rather believe in the purdy singing clown fish. But this is our reality, people. Like the man says, there's no safety net - so since we're all in this together, we'll have to make our own. And we can't do that with our eyes and minds shut now, can we?
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 06:46 pm |
|
But Preacher, Obama wants to help make your oil changes cheaper...
Obama Alters Offshore Drilling Position
Senator Doesn't Want Washington To Get Gridlocked Over Energy
POSTED: 4:42 pm PDT August 1, 2008
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. -- Sen. Barack Obama is modifying his position on offshore drilling.
He now says he'd support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that's what it takes to pass a comprehensive energy policy. Obama said that policy should foster fuel-efficient cars and develop alternate energy sources.
Obama said he doesn't want Washington to get gridlocked over energy, nor does he want to be so rigid "that we can't get something done."
Recently, Sen. John McCain has been criticizing Obama for opposing more offshore oil drilling as gasoline prices rose past $4 a gallon. Polls show that's helped McCain gain ground.
http://www.knbc.com/politics/17068226/detail.html?dl=mainclick
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 06:16 pm |
|
Weasle: nope, no mistake...HD oil, 60 weight, 7 bucks a quart...2 months ago, I paid 5.15 a quart. Ain't got nothin to do with me hanging out at a rice shop, it's all Bush's fault...ask anyone...
RSDF
|
Randy in Pensacola
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Nov 3rd, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 916 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 06:13 pm |
|
empty wrote: Synthetic is better than dyno.  
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 05:36 pm |
|
| Think I paid about $4.00 a quart for RevTech dino...
|
weasle
Supporter
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 05:30 pm |
|
7 bucks a quart for straight 50 weight preacher ?? bought some 20-50 and a filter couple mounths ago dont rember it bein much over meby 25 bucks for everything ?? i know whats wrong , that rice shop yer hanging at is over chargin ya. LMAO. . or else like ya said its bush,s fault . Last edited on Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 05:32 pm by weasle |
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 2nd, 2008 04:02 pm |
|
I can't afford synthetic...then again, since HD Dino just hit 7 bucks a quart, I can't afford that either...maybe I should sell the bike for carbon credits so Gore has enough money to fill his SUV's?
ROFL
|
|
|
