|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What does the fossil record show? |
| Dinosaurs once walked the earth alongside people! |
|
17% |
[ 13 ] |
| God planted the fossils to test our faith! |
|
4% |
[ 3 ] |
| There were multiple successive creations before the current one. |
|
6% |
[ 5 ] |
| Those fossils are a giant hoax! |
|
2% |
[ 2 ] |
| I don't know but evolution ain't the answer anyway! |
|
10% |
[ 8 ] |
| [Insert personal wacko theory here] |
|
4% |
[ 3 ] |
| It proves evolution of course! |
|
54% |
[ 40 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 74 |
|
| Author |
Message |
luvnpeas

Joined: 03 Aug 2006 Location: somewhere i have never travelled
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:11 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
And an 11-year-old girl who can (in an unverified account) prove that a whale shark can swallow a human being.
Link?
|
Where did you cut and paste it from? |
Junior took that from a spoof of conservative Christians published in the Portland Mercury. Junior obviously didn't bother to do any research at all into the source. To give you an idea of the charcter of Junior's source, one of the Portland Mercury's regular columnists is Dan Savage, a gay male, amusingly over-the-top, "Dear Abbey". Here is Dan Savage's column from the same issue that Junior plagarized.
| Dan Savage wrote: |
Savage Love
Pretty Certain He's Gay
BY DAN SAVAGE
I recently met the straight cousin of a good friend. On the night of our first meeting, I ended up rimming, blowing, and getting fucked by him. And he blew me�badly. Since then, I've given him another blowjob. That night he slept with his arms around me and he repeatedly muttered to me�drunkenly�that he loves me!
I have since gone out with the friend and the cousin several times to straight bars and have watched the cousin pick up girls, which is fine. I am not in the market for a fucked-up only-straight-when-sober boyfriend.
But I do want to have sex with him.
So here are the stupid questions: Is he straight? Is he gay? Is he bi? Why does he only want to *beep* me when he's drunk? Now he wants to go on vacation with me and I don't know if I want to keep messing around with this "straight" hottie, even if he does have a beautiful, big, juicy cock. It's not like I can see marrying him. What is a confused gay guy to do?
Straight Cousin Unlikely Marry
Keep jumping on that beautiful, big, juicy cock, of course.
We advice professionals are never supposed to advise people�at least in print�to jump on a beautiful, big, juicy cock unless there's a chance they'll ride that cock all the way to the altar. Did Ann Landers�at whose desk I am delighted to be typing the phrase "beautiful, big, juicy cock"�advise a single reader to jump on a beautiful, big, juicy cock once in the 16 decades she was writing her column? Did Abigail Van Buren? Has Billy Graham? No, no, and I'm guessing not. (I don't read Graham's syndicated advice column religiously, so I can't rule out the possibility.)
It's not just that my advice-giving colleagues disapprove of premarital and/or no-possibility-of-marital sex. The whole culture has a problem with it. We all believe that sex should have some noble purpose�in theory, at least. The possibility of marriage is just the easiest and most obvious. But sex can have a noble purpose even when marriage is out of the question.
Needless to say, an Ann Landers or a Billy Graham can't see the noble purpose in a fag jumping on the beautiful, big, juicy cock of a drunken straight boy. I, however, can: One day BBJC is going to have to reconcile the person he is�and the people he fucks�when he's drunk with the person he is when he's sober. Every night he spends with you, SCUM, brings that day of reckoning eight or nine inches closer. So take the straight boy and his beautiful, big, juicy cock on vacation for his sake, SCUM, if not your own.
And finally, an answer to the stupidest question: gay, straight, bi? My money's on gay. Yes, there are a handful of straight men out there who will, when impaired or imprisoned, make do with a little man ass. And, yes, booze can bring out the inept cocksucker in many a bisexual dude. But a "straight" guy who makes drunken declarations of same-sex love is 110 percent faggot.
I am a 48-year-old gay man and have been in a committed and monogamous relationship with a wonderful man for 20 years. I am not sure how often people together this long have sex, but for us it is about once every three or four weeks. This is plenty for me, but my husband's libido seems to be getting much stronger than mine. About two years ago, he asked that we add "adventure" to our sex life. He has bought dildos, vibrators, and leather garb and wants me to use them. He wants me to call him fuckhole or slaveboy when we are intimate, and he wants to try nude vacations and three-ways. I should add that my husband is coming up on 40 and is quite the hottie. I, on the other hand, have not aged as gracefully. We also have small children and I don't think it is appropriate to have these things in the house. Last week, he asked me to take him to a resort he found online for his 40th where I can *beep* him in front of other men. Is this a normal gay midlife/about-to-turn-40 crisis?
Slaveboy's Husband Has Hesitations...{cut}
A new Savage Love podcast is available for listening every Saturday at portlandmercury.com/podcasts.
[email protected] |
It does serve to indicate how much effort Junior puts into researching sources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rteacher

Joined: 23 May 2005 Location: Western MA, USA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
In Vedic literatures there are several references to timingila fish which were so large that they would eat big whales...
Apparent loving affection exhibited by animals with relatively developed consciousness - especially toward their young offspring - is due to the fact that all living beings are part-and-parcels of the original personal source of all loving relationships. (Jesus never said that animals have no souls - most early Christians were vegetarian and believed in transmigration...)
If America abandons "In God We Trust" in favor of "In Science We Trust" a lot of people will fall victim to blindly following materialistic speculators to hell... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tomato

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher, I thought your religion didn't believe in hell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
luvnpeas

Joined: 03 Aug 2006 Location: somewhere i have never travelled
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| (Jesus never said that animals have no souls - most early Christians were vegetarian and believed in transmigration...) |
Hitler was a vegetarian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:52 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
[quote="Nowhere Man"]
| Quote: |
And an 11-year-old girl who can (in an unverified account) prove that a whale shark can swallow a human being.
Where did you cut and paste it from? |
you. A couple pages back.
| Quote: |
| Your stomach is big enough to hold a squirrel. So theoretically, I suppose you could swallow one. |
No I'm talking about having a wide enough throat passage. gullet. oesophagus. Wide enough to swallow whole, not in bite-size chunks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man

Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:03 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No I'm talking about having a wide enough throat passage. gullet. oesophagus. Wide enough to swallow whole, not in bite-size chunks. |
Yes. That's the problem. It's hard to swallow whole with a filter mouth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man

Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:05 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In Vedic literatures there are several references to timingila fish which were so large that they would eat big whales... |
And in Vedic literature how old is the earth? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:21 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Quote: |
| No I'm talking about having a wide enough throat passage. gullet. oesophagus. Wide enough to swallow whole, not in bite-size chunks. |
Yes. That's the problem. It's hard to swallow whole with a filter mouth. |
Ameteur hour I see...better retrace your steps and start again..
Sperm whale, great white and Whale shark are all hypothetically able to swallow a human whole. We're not talking about baleen whales. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
If America abandons "In God We Trust" in favor of "In Science We Trust" a lot of people will fall victim to blindly following materialistic speculators to hell... |
Yeah since they stamped it on their money they've definitely become less materialistic.
I'm in favour of 'Trust No One', since America is run by Zionist Lesbian Lizards from the moons of Jupiter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man

Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:03 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
Not dangerous for human beings
Whale sharks live in tropical, warm waters all around the world. For eating, they swim quite near the water surface.
Whale sharks are not dangerous for human beings, on the contrary. Though their mouth is about 1,5 meter wide, the opening to the stomach is very small. So, they are not able to swallow a human body. Whale sharks only live on plankton and krill. |
http://www.philippines.hvu.nl/animals5.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rteacher

Joined: 23 May 2005 Location: Western MA, USA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to Vedic (and Hindu) cosmology, there is a partial, cataclysmic devastation of the universe (including Earth) by fire and water elements at the end of each day of Brahma (demigod empowered with universal creation...) Each of Brahma's days lasts four billion, three hundred twenty million years (4,320,000,000) Brahma lives for 100 (of his) years , and at the end of his lifetime there is a total devastation, with all material and spiritual energies winding back up into the body of MahaVishnu (for a period equaling another 100 of Brahma's years until it's time for a new creation.) The creation-destruction cycle of material universes repeats endlessly (but virtually all evidence of life is wiped out by the cataclysms that occur during Brahma's nights ...)
Here is a more extended version of the famous quote by Carl Sagan in reference to Vedic cosmology (sure to tic off "mindmetoo" again...):
"The main reason that we oriented this episode of Cosmos towards India is because of that wonderful aspect of Hindu cosmology which first of all gives a time-scale for the Earth and the universe -- a time-scale which is consonant with that of modern scientific cosmology. We know that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years old, and the cosmos, or at least its present incarnation, is something like 10 or 20 billion years old. The Hindu tradition has a day and night of Brahma in this range, somewhere in the region of 8.4 billion years."
"As far as I know. It is the only ancient religious tradition on the Earth which talks about the right time-scale. We want to get across the concept of the right time-scale, and to show that it is not unnatural. In the West, people have the sense that what is natural is for the universe to be a few thousand years old, and that billions is indwelling, and no one can understand it. The Hindu concept is very clear. Here is a great world culture which has always talked about billions of years."
"Finally, the many billion year time-scale of Hindu cosmology is not the entire history of the universe, but just the day and night of Brahma, and there is the idea of an infinite cycle of births and deaths and an infinite number of universes, each with its own gods...
http://www.answers.com/topic/hindu-cosmology
There are numerous other quotes from great thinkers regarding the science of ancient India in the above-cited answers.com article... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
Here is a more extended version of the famous quote by Carl Sagan in reference to Vedic cosmology (sure to tic off "mindmetoo" again...):
|
I take issue when you attempt to use that quote as an endorsement by Sagan for your vedic cosmology. Sagan merely highlights that not all religions believe the world is necessarily young. The two do not go hand in hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rteacher

Joined: 23 May 2005 Location: Western MA, USA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He didn't endorse the Vedic/Hindu cosmology over that of modern science, but Sagan did single it out as the only ancient religioius tradition with a time-scale of the universe that was within the ballpark figure of current scientific estimates. Moreover, he expressed appreciation for the sophistication and "clear concepts" of the "wonderful Hindu [Vedic] culture, which regards the entire history of this universe as just the duration of one day and night in the life of Brahma, further contextualized by the "idea of an infinite cycle of births and deaths and an infinite number of universes, each with their own gods"...
Some scholars have noted that scientists of ancient India also had advanced ideas in other areas:
"... They came closest to modern ideas of atomism, quantum physics, and other current theories. India developed very early, enduring atomist theories of matter. Possibly Greek atomistic thought was influenced by India, via the Persian civilization."
(quote from D. Teresi)
http://www.answers.com/topic/hindu-cosmology
The fact that ancient India didn't use its scientifc knowledge to produce material technology like the west is because of its advanced philosophical understanding and technical science of spiritual values (essentially presented in Bhagavad-gita...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:11 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
Apart from this issue, which is still unclear and unresolved, the rest of the worlds scientific evidence points to a young earth. How do you get around the following?
Young earth evidence:
a)Comets disintegrate too quickly.
b)Not enough mud on the sea floor.
c)Not enough sodium in the sea.
d)Earth's magnetic field is decaying too fast.
e)Many strata are too tightly bent.
f)Injected sandstone shortens geologic 'ages'.
g)Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic 'ages' to a few years.
h)Helium in the wrong places.
i)Agriculture is too recent.
j)History is too short.
read about these points here:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c012.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:17 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Though their mouth is about 1,5 meter wide, the opening to the stomach is very small. So, they are not able to swallow a human body. Whale sharks only live on plankton and krill. |
[/quote]
That still leaves us with the Sperm whale & Great white.
Not to mention various, now extinct, species.
Biblically speaking, the story goes that God "prepared" the whale beforehand. ie..he made it capable of swallowing a man. However as I'm sticking only to science here, and you don't believe in the supernatural we will have to ignore that for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|