All categories - 15 July 2007

2007-07-15 13:34:59 · 7 answers · asked by devilprincess428 1 in Tattoos

Do you require them to get dressed before they do their work or do you let them stay in their night clothes? What about shoes do you make them wear shoes and socks?

2007-07-15 13:34:48 · 21 answers · asked by momof2crazykids 2 in Home Schooling

I use it during puja, but Im scared that the residues put my altar cloth in fire

2007-07-15 13:34:44 · 6 answers · asked by Maheswari 2 in Religion & Spirituality

Home depot gave me a qyuote and claimed their best vinyl windows were better than Andersens? I heard differently from a contractor. I would be doing about 15 double hung and 2 bays. Also, is there a good wholesale place to buy these if I wanted to install on my own?

2007-07-15 13:34:39 · 5 answers · asked by Jeffrey T 2 in Decorating & Remodeling

My mother recently aquired a really old game. It's called Alee Oop. It was made by Roy Toy. There isn't a date on the card board can with Tin lid. From what I gather though the game was made around 1937. I am looking for a link or someone with information about this game. Any feedback would be greatly apprieciated.

2007-07-15 13:34:34 · 1 answers · asked by Kishauna_P 3 in Other - Visual Arts

I'm writing a philosophy paper about theism/atheism. I was wondering if some atheists would answer a few questions. What is at our core/essence of being, or do we have a core (aka avocado vs. artichoke)? (For instance, Plato thought reason was at our core, theists say that we are made in the image of God at our core, etc.) Why are we here? What is our purpose in living? How do we determine what is right and wrong? Thanks!

2007-07-15 13:34:26 · 17 answers · asked by pinkflahippo16 2 in Religion & Spirituality

Question of priorities I guess right?

2007-07-15 13:34:26 · 18 answers · asked by MattH 6 in Politics

What criteria will you use to "Rightly divide" what he says? According to Christian Mythology, Satan knows the bible better than anyone, and is very smart, he could fool you easily, right?

2007-07-15 13:34:22 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Religion & Spirituality

why are there so many questions about bran muffins on here today?? who even cares about bran muffins?!?!

2007-07-15 13:34:12 · 17 answers · asked by laureg22893 2 in Cooking & Recipes

I dare you to describe something you've seen that ABSOLUTLEY could only have happened at the hands of an all powerful god-being. As in it is not remotly possible it could have happened naturally.

And keep in mind that improbable does not equal impossible.

2007-07-15 13:34:10 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Religion & Spirituality

Which, in your experience, is better for pain?

And yes, I know that they're NSAIDs of the same class.

2007-07-15 13:34:07 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Health

is between 40 and 48. use to live in walled lake michigan, is now running J & J construction in wixom michigan,. is divorced

2007-07-15 13:34:02 · 1 answers · asked by littlekaren222 1 in Other - United States

squirt?

2007-07-15 13:33:59 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Polls & Surveys

2007-07-15 13:33:56 · 6 answers · asked by MsAdventure 5 in Other - Science

2007-07-15 13:33:46 · 11 answers · asked by Jayme 2 in Polls & Surveys

1. Who is buried in Grant's tomb?
2. What color is George Washington's white horse?

NEXT PART OF THE TEST: STUPID QUESTIONS!

1. When companies ship Styrofoam, what do they pack it in?

2. Why do we drive on Parkways and park on Driveways?

3. If we get a frog in our throat, what does a frog get in its throat?

4. Should vegetarians eat animal crackers?

5. If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

6. Why is the word abbreviation so long?

7. When it rains, why don't sheep shrink?

8. Would a fly without wings be called a walk?

9. Why do they report power outages on TV?

10. When you open a bag of cotton balls, is the top one meant to be thrown away?


WHOEVER GET THE RIGHT ANSWERS WILL GET BEST ANSWER AND 50 THUMBS UP! GOOD LUCK TO ALL!

BONUS QUESTION: How do you make those symbols. Like the heart and the music note etc.?

2007-07-15 13:33:36 · 14 answers · asked by Populargrl584 3 in Jokes & Riddles

Help, I dont like mine, give me yours...

2007-07-15 13:33:31 · 6 answers · asked by mommy to be of 3 3 in Philosophy

If you are an evolutionist, you believe that natural processes formed all present life from chemicals to one-celled organisms through stages of "higher" organisms, culminating in humans, and furthermore, that this process, being driven by natural selection and random chance, took billions of years, and therefore the Earth and the whole universe is several billion years old. I'm going to describe eight specific reasons why the theory of evolution is seriously flawed and why an intelligent Creator must have designed and created the universe.

1. Information Theory
One important argument against evolution is the fact that information always requires an intelligent mind. It appears to be a real law of nature that information can never develop of its own accord. It is like the way a book is much more than just the paper and ink that comprises its physical form. The information inside it can only be produced (and then understood and used) by an intelligent being. The information in books is intended to be conveyed to another intelligent being.

Life itself also contains information. All life contains the genetic information to both make it run and, under the right circumstances, reproduce itself. Linguistics shows that DNA is literally a language containing four letters, and comparisons to computer science show that DNA is the most compact form of information that we know of, more compact that any form of data storage that humans have made. Originally, this information had to come from an intelligent being.

2. Mutations and Variation of Species
According to evolution, mutations are supposed to be the mechanism by which species evolve new traits and become more complex. However, genetics has shown that mutations are almost always harmful and always destroy information rather than creating it. As point 1 shows, information has to come from an intelligent being, and so natural mutations cannot create genetic information that is not already in the genetic code. Individual members of a species exhibit various ranges of their traits, and traits can even be bred to extremes, as we have done with many different varieties of dogs, but all dogs are still dogs and still produce dogs, and they all (except for possible inconvenient size differences) can interbreed. And if breeders attempt to breed the most extreme value of a trait, they usually find a genetic limit on how far they can take it. A dog will not grow as large as an elephant even if breeders keep breeding the largest dogs, for example.

Extreme variation of a species can produce a group that cannot interbreed with the original group, but while this is a new species by the definition that different species cannot normally interbreed, this is still just a subset of the original group, not an entirely different creature. This variation does happen, and is sometimes called micro-evolution, but this is most definitely not proof for macro-evolution, the changing of one species into another species. This shows that evolutionists' efforts to use such examples as the peppered moths, Galapagos finches, and fruit flies is futile, as these are all examples of variation within a species and not evidence for anything more.

3. The Second Law of Thermodynamics
The second law of thermodynamics itself opposes evolution also. Evolution says that natural selection will select for traits that make the creature more suited to its environment and also more complex. A better working creature has more complexity and less randomness, correct? This is despite the fact that the mutations are random? (Why do we say "descent" and "descendants" if ancestors are supposed to be lower forms of life than their descendants?) The second law essentially says that energy becomes less and less available in a system and entropy is always increasing. In other words, disordered states are much more likely than ordered states, so a natural system left to itself will always move toward a more chaotic state, not a more ordered state.

4. Embryological Development
Evolutionists often talk about "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" and claim that human embryos go through the stages of evolution as they develop in the womb. I was taught that in high school biology as well, but that idea actually originated solely from some drawings of embryos that Ernst Haeckel drew in the 19th century. Fairly recently, it's been brought to light that he faked those drawings. Modern imaging techniques show that animal embryos look very different from each other and from human embryos. Have you ever seen pictures of human embryos? By eight weeks or so, the general shape is all there in miniature: head, body, limbs, looking nothing like an animal. The early development probably looks similar to other vertebrates to some extent, but ultimately, small differences early on become magnified as the embryo grows, until the different features are clearly apparent, and these differences form a unique pattern of development for each kind of life. And an embryo must start from a single cell because an egg is a single cell. That says nothing about descent from single-celled organisms.

5. Chemical Complexity
There are serious chemical problems with the beginning of evolution, meaning the formation of the first amino acids and such compounds of life from a mixture of chemicals. One simple problem is the fact that randomly-forming amino acids will be an equal mixture of left-handed and right-handed molecules, but every single amino acid used in living things today is left-handed. Right-handed amino acids do not work in the bodies of living things. This chirality cannot be the product of natural random processes.

A second chemical problem is that of reactivity. Proteins are formed from a very specific sequence of many amino acids (all of which must be left-handed, of course), but these sequences do not correspond at all to the reactivity of the amino acids with each other. In a randomly-forming protein, the most reactive amino acids will bind together first, and then less reactive ones later. Also, there are many different orders of the same amino acids due to the way they could bind to either end of the chain. Producing a specific protein for a specific function randomly is mathematically and chemically impossible even without the chirality problem.

6. Probability
Not only are there real chemical problems with the idea that the necessary building blocks for life formed by themselves and assembled themselves into a living cell, the whole idea is mind-numbingly improbable. By improbable, I don't mean "unlikely, but possible by a remote chance." I mean that the probability against it is so high that it is literally impossible. Even the probability that the correct sequences of amino acids could come together to form a working cell is almost literally zero, let alone form more complex living things.

7. Transitional Forms
If creatures evolved gradually over time, then there must be many transitional forms between fully formed creatures. However, almost all fossils appear with fully formed features. Some fossils are of creatures that no longer exist, so they are unfamiliar to us compared to existing creatures, but they are still fully functional. If creatures really evolved, then there must be many times the number of transitional forms than fully-formed creatures, but the fossil record does not show this. Darwin probably just assumed that people had not found enough fossils yet, and future fossils would support his ideas, but despite the wealth of fossils that have been found since then, this plethora of transitional forms has not been found.

Note that I'm not even talking about how well fossils make sequences without all the "missing links," just that the ratio of transitional forms to fully-formed creatures is much lower than it should be if evolution were correct (it is probably close to zero, in fact). Even the forms we now think are transitional are probably just creatures we don't understand yet.

8. Vestigial organs
Years ago, biologists thought that living things had many different organs and parts that were the remnants of functioning parts from the past but currently served no known function. Some examples from humans are the appendix and the tonsils, both of which are now known to play a role in the immune system. Of course, not knowing a function does not prove there is no function: there can always be a function that we do not understand yet. Most of the other historically vestigial parts are also known to have functions now as well. Evolutionists try to use supposedly vestigial parts as evidence for evolution, but even if there were any vestigial parts, the change is in the wrong direction. If anything, these parts would have devolved from something functioning to something non-functioning. Again, this is a loss of information and hardly support for macro-evolution.

Conclusion
I hope the preceding points have given you some idea of the grave problems that evolutionists have encountered when trying to fit the physical evidence to their theory. Not only does the fossil record not support the theory, but several individual scientific laws directly contradict it! Furthermore, while natural selection as a method of genetic variation within a species has certainly been observed both inside and outside of the lab, neither macro-evolution (one species turning into another) nor spontaneous generation (living cells or organisms appearing from non-living chemical matter) has ever been observed. Evolution is scientifically impossible and only continues to be supported by evolutionists due to blind faith in their theory.

2007-07-15 13:33:20 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Biology

2007-07-15 13:33:07 · 40 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Music

2007-07-15 13:33:05 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Cars & Transportation

I heard from a Friend that Larry Bird Died..
When? Where I would relly like to know information on this..
He was only about 52 right?

2007-07-15 13:32:30 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Basketball

i will visit cairns with my mum next month~
we are chinese and my mum doesnt know english~
so i prefer to join some local tours with chinese guide~
anybody could give me some useful information such as where to go and the approximate price~

2007-07-15 13:32:26 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Australia

2007-07-15 13:32:21 · 1 answers · asked by Melissa N 2 in Other - Business & Finance

Who would win?

2007-07-15 13:32:17 · 10 answers · asked by Jared S 1 in Zoology

Going to Cancun soon with family (including 2 teenagers) and thinking about all inclusive properties. Leaning toward RIU Caribe or Royal Solaris closer to Cancun. Also Allegro or Occidental Xcaret closer to Playa Carmen. Not looking to go "top of the line", but don't want to scrape the bottom either. Any opinions....I know Riviera Maya/Playa del Carmen are further, is it worth the hour drive from the airport, etc? Thanks!

2007-07-15 13:32:15 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cancun

drove to store turned of truck. came out truck will not start --no light no lighter no nothing. battery good cables good. help truck still at store

2007-07-15 13:32:15 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Dodge

2007-07-15 13:32:04 · 2 answers · asked by Jman 1 in Software

2007-07-15 13:31:58 · 7 answers · asked by phat_mexican_98 2 in GMC

2007-07-15 13:31:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Science

I hear that many think we will be able to seek independent medical treatment outside the government healthcare system. This is highly flawed logic even more so than some of the other problems i see with socialized healthcare. The moment the government is willing to foot the insurance companies will cease to provide medical insurance. They will take all their premiums and run. The companies we work for will stop paying for our insurance since the government is going to do that for them.

This will result in a loss of many jobs in the insurance and medical billing field. Yes our healthcare system is expensive and has problems but unversal is not the way to go.
Lets reform our civil courts to cut down on petty lawsuits. Retire the ambulance chasers and insurance will get cheaper.

Here is a question. If they give universal healthcare to the people will they give universal malractice insurance for our doctors. Heck that would proabably work better and be cheaper than UHC.

2007-07-15 13:31:48 · 17 answers · asked by cutiessailor 3 in Politics