Cool as it is, the title of this video is an over statement. Not all snake venoms does that. My understanding of the subject is that by example hemotoxin produced by vipers destroys red blood cells which prevents blood clotting.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Yogi:
"You're gonna see a lot of drug seeking behavior in your practice...because it works."
-House
That doctor should have his license to practice taken away. I blame the cops for a lot of heartless things in this story, but the doctor is responsible for her health and well being and he is just shit at his job...Unless she died from some sort of aneurysm that couldn't be detected then maybe he's off the hook.

She was complaining about leg pain and numbness. The first thing they should check in that situation is for blood clots. If a blood clot broke off and lodged in her heart or lungs she could have (probably did) die directly from medical negligence.


Very good, yes I saw this while watching House as well. Good consult Dr. Boise_Lib.

>> ^Yogi:

"You're gonna see a lot of drug seeking behavior in your practice...because it works."
-House
That doctor should have his license to practice taken away. I blame the cops for a lot of heartless things in this story, but the doctor is responsible for her health and well being and he is just shit at his job...Unless she died from some sort of aneurysm that couldn't be detected then maybe he's off the hook.


She was complaining about leg pain and numbness. The first thing they should check in that situation is for blood clots. If a blood clot broke off and lodged in her heart or lungs she could have (probably did) die directly from medical negligence.

I'm not at all a scholar of the bible. I've read parts, I've been to
Sunday school before i was confirmed (age 14) and I have at times had
fun reading it.

Well, I would encourage you to try to understand it. Every conversation I've ever had with an atheist about the bible either brings up the same five things from the old testament or their doubts about who wrote the bible..and that's it. I've never actually spoken to an atheist, and I've spoken to many atheists, who even understood the basics. I think that if you're going to criticize something, you should at least try to understand it at a basic level..maybe that's just me. Although, the lack of understanding matches what the bible says, that the truth is spiritually discerned. Without the Holy Spirit, the atheist is going to find it fairly impossible to comprehend.

Arguing from authority is not a strong argument. Just because "the
intellectual scholarship" is much greater than I understand, doesn't
change what the book says. And since new evidence is not uncovered, it
is what it is, you are forced to "interpret new evidence" and that's
not the way the world works.

What you, and many others try to imply, is that what is the bible is simplistic, and for people without any intellectual standards. The truth is that what is in the bible is complex, and it takes a real intellect (supplanted with godly wisdom) to be able to understand it. The intellectual scholarship is vast because the bible is inexaustible. It functions as a cogent whole, and address all the deep questions that human beings have. It is not simple by any stretch of the imagination.

1) Personal evidence cannot be verified. What things were revealed to
you before you ever read or understood them? How were they revealed,
what was revealed, how did you later understand them / where did you
read them?

I would like to understand your thought process, which is why I ask.

Is it possible that you already had a forgone conclusion when you read
X, and therefore you interpreted X the way you wanted?

God had revealed to me through signs that He is a triune God, and that He has a Messiah, someone whose job it is to save the world. So when I finally read the bible, those signs are what initially confirmed it to be true. I didn't have any foregone conclusions about the bible before I read it. I had no actual idea what Christianity was all about.

What happened? How has your life improved, what did you do before,
what do you do now? How can you tell that it happened supernaturally?
Is there any difference from that to just having a profound change of
heart. If you are talking about addiction, it is possible to fill the
void of that addiction with other things - some people exchange
cigarettes with food, why not religion/faith? Does your faith take up
as much of your time as "the unhealthy things" you did before?

Before I became a Christian I was a theist, and before I was a theist I was an agnostic. When I became a theist my bad behavior didn't change. I was like Enoch, in that I believed that none of the religions were true, or that all of them just had pieces of who God is. I believed in a God that loved you the way you are and didn't particularly enforce any kind of behavior upon you, as long as your heart was in the right place. I would think that God, knowing me intimately, and knowing my good intentions, was very understanding if I did something which was out of line. Of course God is very patient with all of us, but the point is that I had plenty of faith in God at the time, and spent my time thinking about Him and pursuing the truth. The difference is that once I accepted Jesus into my heart as my Lord and Savior, everything changed.

It was only when I became a Christian that my behavior changed, and much of that practically overnight. When you're born again, you are spiritually cleansed and start out with a blank slate. You become like new. I had addictions, depression, anger, pain, sadness, and other issues that left me in short order. Some of those things I never thought I would give up, some of them I never wanted to give up, but I immediately lost the desire for them. It was a change of heart; God gave me a new one. It was supernatural because as I said, I didn't do any work. People spend their entire lives in therapy or counseling and spend tens of thousands of dollars or more to get rid of just some of these problems, and often don't see any results. I lost almost all of my baggage in just a few short months.

3) Not really. It only accounts for a visual interpretation of how men act. The writers of it has observed how people act and guessed at reasons why that is. Some are close to reality, some are way off. Which human behaviors does it predict? How and where does it describe in finite detail how those behaviors are created? I'm looking for actual citations here, because this is complete news to me.

It predicts all kinds of human behaviors by describing the mechanisms which motivate them to act. It shows the fundemental dichotomy of the heart of man. As an example:

James 3:3-10

When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.

All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.

and

Matthew 12:34

O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

and

Matthew 15:19-20

But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

4) I disagree. It describes a point of view. The morality of the God of the bible is hardly any good morality. We have an ingrown moral compass, I can agree on that, it's been naturally selected against because it helped our ancestors to survive and procreate. "His moral law" is atrocious, if the bible is any indicator.

If everyone followed the morality that Jesus taught us, this planet would be as close to a utopia it could possibly get. He taught us to love one another, to forgive as a rule, to do good to even those who hate you, to help everyone in need, and to follow the moral law. Your idea of Gods morality being atrocious is plainly false. The passages that you feel are atrocious have an explanation, its just whether you want to hear them or not. As far as natural selection goes, all it cares about is passing on its genes. That is the only criteria for success. This doesn't explain noble behavior in the least, such as sacrificing your life for someone else. That's a bad way to pass on your genes.

5) Which prophecies have been fulfilled? You don't think Israel chose their currency based on the bible instead? Which captivities have been prophecied down to the year and where in the bible?

http://www.khouse.org/articles/2004/552/


6) This is hardly uncontested. There are parts of the bible that seem to be true, but because some of it is true, does not mean that all of it is. http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/982front.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history#Historical_accuracy_of_biblical_stories

It's positive evidence in the bibles favor when it is verified by archaelogical evidence. There are many things in the bible that historians denied were true in the bible, like the hittite civilization, until archaelogy proved the bible correct.

7) Citation needed. Saying that the universe has a beginning is hardly proof of anything. That's the easy way to say it, anyone apart from earlier theories said that, so of course they did it in there too. In actuality the bible claims that God is eternal, which there is no basis for.

These claims are just claims, there is no basis for saying them in the bible. Blood clotting could be found by trial and error back then, ocean currents can to a great extent be measured by fishermen even back then. Scientists who believed in an eternal universe have since changed their mind, when evidence discredited the theory. It's all about being able to back up your claims. the bible just claims.

This guy discovered and mapped the ocean currents, and he did so being inspired by psalm 8, which is the one that mentions the "paths of the seas"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Fontaine_Maury

Abraham didn't learn from trial and error. They were doing circumcisions on the 8th day from the beginning.

You must think something is eternal, unless you believe something came from nothing. So your problem isn't really with eternal things, just an eternal person.

Here is a list of them

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scientific_facts_in_the_bible.html

8 ) How did you experience the holy spirit?

It's really impossible quite impossible to describe since it effects every level of your being at the same time, but experientially you could say it's like going from 110 to 220v. It's like you lived all your life being covered in filth and suddenly you're washed off and sparkling clean. It's like being remade into something brand new.

>> ^gwiz665

@shinyblurry Thank you for posting your reasons for believing the Bible to be credible. It is refreshing to have someone properly lay out their case instead of the normal circular reasoning I normally hear (God is real because the bible says it, the bible is true because God wrote it).

I'm not at all a scholar of the bible. I've read parts, I've been to Sunday school before i was confirmed (age 14) and I have at times had fun reading it.

Arguing from authority is not a strong argument. Just because "the intellectual scholarship" is much greater than I understand, doesn't change what the book says. And since new evidence is not uncovered, it is what it is, you are forced to "interpret new evidence" and that's not the way the world works.

1) Personal evidence cannot be verified. What things were revealed to you before you ever read or understood them? How were they revealed, what was revealed, how did you later understand them / where did you read them?

I would like to understand your thought process, which is why I ask.

Is it possible that you already had a forgone conclusion when you read X, and therefore you interpreted X the way you wanted?

2) What happened? How has your life improved, what did you do before, what do you do now? How can you tell that it happened supernaturally? Is there any difference from that to just having a profound change of heart. If you are talking about addiction, it is possible to fill the void of that addiction with other things - some people exchange cigarettes with food, why not religion/faith? Does your faith take up as much of your time as "the unhealthy things" you did before?

3) Not really. It only accounts for a visual interpretation of how men act. The writers of it has observed how people act and guessed at reasons why that is. Some are close to reality, some are way off. Which human behaviors does it predict? How and where does it describe in finite detail how those behaviors are created? I'm looking for actual citations here, because this is complete news to me.

4) I disagree. It describes a point of view. The morality of the God of the bible is hardly any good morality. We have an ingrown moral compass, I can agree on that, it's been naturally selected against because it helped our ancestors to survive and procreate. "His moral law" is atrocious, if the bible is any indicator.

5) Which prophecies have been fulfilled? You don't think Israel chose their currency based on the bible instead? Which captivities have been prophecied down to the year and where in the bible?

6) This is hardly uncontested. There are parts of the bible that seem to be true, but because some of it is true, does not mean that all of it is. http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/982front.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history#Historical_accuracy_of_biblical_stories

7) Citation needed. Saying that the universe has a beginning is hardly proof of anything. That's the easy way to say it, anyone apart from earlier theories said that, so of course they did it in there too. In actuality the bible claims that God is eternal, which there is no basis for.
These claims are just claims, there is no basis for saying them in the bible. Blood clotting could be found by trial and error back then, ocean currents can to a great extent be measured by fishermen even back then. Scientists who believed in an eternal universe have since changed their mind, when evidence discredited the theory. It's all about being able to back up your claims. the bible just claims.

8 ) How did you experience the holy spirit?

I think your have veiled your eyes more than I do.


Yea, I tell you, if you do not have an orange aura, you will never understand the complexities of the universe.

I am very open-minded to new ideas, even though it might not seem like it in my comments here, but that's entirely because no one has yet presented any new ideas with any shred of evidence or backup other than, for instance, the bible which is not a credible source. @shinyblurry, I'm looking at you.

Have you ever read the bible? I've found most critics of the bible haven't actually even read it, much less understood it. Generally, the average atheist will pick through it and find a few things he doesn't like and then turns off his brain at that point. The intellectual scholarship of Christianity is much greater than you understand, and if you studied the bible for an entire lifetime you still wouldn't know everything there is to know that is in it. It is inexaustible.

I'll give you a few reasons why I think the bible is credible. The first two are personal. One, that revelation was given to me about certain facts in the bible, before I ever read or understood it, so that when I did read it, it was instantly confirmed to me as being divinely inspired.

Two, by following the words of Jesus Christ, my life has been completely transformed for the better in every tangible way. I stopped doing many unhealthy things I formally did not have the willpower or inclination to stop doing, and these near instantaneously. There was also a transformation of my character, and a 100 percent cure to any depression that I experienced, that being replaced with joy. None of this was accomplished by hard work on my part; I simply believed in Gods promises and followed His word and it all happened supernaturally through the Holy Spirit. The experience I've had matches the promises to the letter.

Three, the bible accurately describes the human condition. It lays bare the nature of man and describes the fundemental dichotomies of his existence. It accurately predicts human behavior and describes in finite detail the mechanisms that create those behaviors.

Four, the bible accurately describes the moral realm. It shows that right and wrong is intuitive to human nature, being that each of us has a God given conscience that knows right from wrong. This matches the universal norms of morality we see in all human civilizations. It also matches my experience, that although humans can justify any kind of behavior, that there is a sense of absolute right and wrong which precedes any intellectual calculation. It further illustrates the moral responsibility we have to our Creator, because sin transgresses His moral law. That the guilty conscience you have is foremost because you have offended a holy God, and the things you think you have gotten away with are really the chains that bind you.

Five, the bible has much fulfilled prophecy, starting with all of the prophecies of the Messiah, which Jesus fulfilled hundreds and in some cases over a 1000 years after they were written. There are also prophecies about israel going into captivity at certain times down to the year, the destruction of Jerusalem, the recent reformation of Israel, accurately predicting even the very currency it would be using.

Six, that it is historically accurate, and has been verified by archaelogy literally 10s of thousands of times. The people, places and civilizations in the bible have been confirmed as being real and existing as described, and this over much scoffing and skepticism over the centuries.

Seven, that it contains certain facts about the world that simply could not have been known at the time, such as information about the hydrologic cycle, ocean currents and springs, the right day for circumcision (on the 8th day the chemicals for blod clotting are at their highest peak), that the earth is free floating in space, the uncountable number of stars (at the time they thought that they could put a number to it by counting the ones we can see), etc..or at the most basic, that it says the Universe had a beginning, which science didn't figure out until more recently..and scientists actually used to use their belief in an eternal Universe to discredit the bible..

One of the biggest confirmations was that I received the Holy Spirit. That alone confirms everything Jesus said is true. It is something tangible and is an experiential experience that isn't simply wishful thinking. More than an experience, it is to know God personally, because His Spirit dwells within you.

Lastly, and most importantly, is the person of Jesus Himself. His words outrank by a vast degree any earthly wisdom, and expose the vain philosophies of man as foolish and futile. His words are a fountain of life, living and active, and they set the standard for all human discourse. Indeed, they are the words this civilization is built upon. The transforming power they have had on the world and in the hearts of men is beyond dispute, and direct proof of their pure truth. To follow the example of Jesus is the most difficult thing any person could ever try to do (indeed it is impossible without supernatural help) and it is also the most rewarding (as in eternally). In truth, they are the only words that lead to life. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

So, these are a few reasons I think the bible is credible. What I can tell you is that without the Holy Spirit you will never understand it, because it is truth that comes by supernatural revelation. Feel free to disagree, but I was once in your position, and believed much the same things about the bible. You just cannot imagine how far off you are from understanding it until that veil is removed from your eyes.

>> ^gwiz665

I was always under the impression that the Tea Party was a group of individuals who don't know anything about history, don't understand how taxes work or that a society exists specifically to help the people in it, and are utterly terrified of Barack Obama

That impression is a left-wing media construction that you would do well to disabuse yourself of immediately. "The TP is nothing but a bunch of angry, white racists" has been a meme of the left for over 2 years. The facts are diametrically opposed. The TP is composed of all bands of citizens, and thier message is simple. Vote for people - whoever they are - that will reduce government, balance the budget, and return the US to a path of fiscal responsibility. That's it.

Also, winston, i will be very surprised if you have met "most" of the people who agree with Occupy Everywhere. I will be even more surprised to find out that you haven't but you're going around stating that "they are mostly college students who favour leftist causes."

I watch the videos of the US OWS movement across a gamut of places. I've seen them post thier own vids. I've seen the videos that love them such as those on KOS, Underground, Huffington, et al. I've seen ones that makes fun of them on late night TV, daytime talk, and so forth. I've seen others that definitely dislike them such as on Brietbart, Newsbusters, et al. I've seen fawning stuff on national news, and other stuff more even-handed on Drudge. Of course I haven't met 'most' of them. I never claimed to. But I've seen enough of them to accurately get the feel of who they are and what they are. Regardless, see the link above that I already referenced. It simply repeats what I already knew to be the case by my own observations. All I do is repeat the facts. Don't like it? Prove you've got a better source....

Wikipedia...only source I'm going to dignify you with...

Aaaand - an epic fail...

The truth is that OWS is - for the most part - a clot of young, left-wingers. Sure there is a mix of 'other' in there too (as well as a lot of union astroturf, and other political hangers-on) but the backbone of the movement is leftist college kids. You don't have to like it, but that's just how it is. There's nothing 'wrong' with that per se. Not sure why you're so defensive about it. But it is conclusively true that OWS is not composed of a demographic representative of the U.S. public at large.

@spoco2

Let me get this straight... A young kid gets vaccinated, suffers an adverse reaction to it which leads to "autism like" symptoms. And the vaccine did NOT cause autism? The kid was going to get autism anyway? Bullshit. You have no evidence to back up that position.

BTW, they can make mercury-free vaccines. So why do you statist idiots want to mandate everyone get blasted with neurotoxins?

And typical deflecting argument... you can't argue a position without blurring the debate with ad hominem static. What happened to your false analogy? Did you fart again? You must have if you thought HPV vaccines lower cervical cancer rates. And you're ignoring the unintended consequences of trying to vaccinate a relatively common STD that's usually harmless and goes away without treatment. How's that happen you say? Our body has it's own defense system that eliminates the virus. Maybe we should start vaccinating people for colds, you think? Then no one will have colds anymore!

Neil Miller: "Research has shown that when vaccines only target a small number of strains capable of causing disease, less prevalent strains can replace the targeted vaccine strains. These less prevalent strains graduate from minor factors to major influences and may even become more dangerous. Scientists are now concerned that Gardasil -- which only targets two of at least 15 different cancer-causing HPV strains -- might be allowing HPV strains previously considered minor to flourish and become major influences."

More from the article:
By February 2011, more than 20,500 adverse reaction reports pertaining to Gardasil were filed with the U.S. government -- an average of 12 reports per day [VAERS]. Nearly half of all reports required a doctor or emergency room visit, with hundreds of teenage girls and young women needing extended hospitalization.

In the case reports submitted to the FDA, 89 deaths were described due to blood clots, heart disease and other causes. In addition, many of the vaccine recipients -- young women -- were stricken with serious and life-threatening disabilities, including Guillain-Barre syndrome (paralysis), seizures, convulsions, swollen limbs, chest pain, heart irregularities, kidney failure, visual disturbances, arthritis, difficulty breathing, severe rashes, persistent vomiting, miscarriages, menstrual irregularities, reproductive complications, genital warts, vaginal lesions and HPV infection -- the main reason to vaccinate.

According to Dr. Diane Harper, director of the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group at the University of Missouri, 'The rate of serious adverse events [from Gardasil] is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer.' [ABC News (August 19, 2009).]

Gardasil is being promoted as 100 percent effective. However, this is a deceptive assessment of its true ability to protect against cervical cancer. Gardasil is effective against just two strains of cancer-causing HPV -- the ones included in the vaccine -- but researchers have identified at least 15 cancer-causing HPV strains!

Gardasil will not prevent infection with HPV types not contained in the vaccine. In fact, during clinical trials of the vaccine, hundreds of women who received Gardasil contracted HPV disease. Furthermore, the drug maker warns women (in its product insert) that 'vaccination does not substitute for routine cervical cancer screening.'
/source
In other words, your propaganda quote from the NCI is horseshit.

R. Buckminster Fuller wrote, "There can be no planetary equity until all the sovereign nations are abolished and we have but one accounting system [i.e. electrical energy]."

&

"The 150 nations act as 150 blood clots in blocking the flow of recirculating metals and other traffic essential to realization of the design science revolution."

>> ^doogle:

In what situation would I need to do this?
That would be helpful. Apart from "for fun".


Watch the video again, from the beginning, where it says "Indications." What follows is a list of situations in which this procedure is "indicated" (or "prescribed," or whatever layman's term for "you only do this when this situation occurs.") I can break them down for ya.

If you are ever in a situation where you find someone unconsious, with a pulse, but no signs breathing, you need to establish why they are not breathing. There are training videos and classes on this sort of thing, and I highly recommend everyone not only do so, but stay on top of new data and findings. Even just recently CPR guidelines have changed - mouth-to-mouth is only really necessary for drowning victims. Cardiac arrest is usually the cause of most instantaneous medical emergencies, and keeping steady chest compression rhythm to manually pump the heart is more important to saving the brain and oxygen-dependent tissues M2M breaths should only be administered once or twice every 30 compressions or so.

Anyway, to break things down:

"Severe Maxilofacial trauma" Nasty wounds to the jaw and mouth that prevent mouth-to-mouth or mouth-to-airbag contact.

"Severe Bleeding to the airway/oropharynx" Just another big word for hole on everyone's face that is their mouth extending back into their vocal chords. Blood and/or clotting is preventing breathing. CPR would force blood into the lungs in a bad way.

"Foreign matter in upper airway" They've got something lodged in their throat, far enough in that you can simply pull it out with your fingers, or you can't get them to a position to "heimlich" them (not that we use the Heimlich maneuver anymore - there's a similar, more modern-science-informed method).

"Edema secondary to burns to the face and airway" Edema is another word for swelling. Again, you can't mouth-to-mouth or to-airbag over burn wounds, and sometimes your throat can swell shut from burns, be they burns from fire or chemical.

The last couple should be self-explanitory.

What then follows are a list of "Contraindications" or situations in which you should AVOID this procedure. In medicine, these are important. For example, massaging someone's swollen legs after they just landed from an airplane flight is contraindicated, as leg swelling is a sign on deep-vein thrombosis. Failure to identify and accommodate contraindications will could lead to patient death exposing you to legal and civil liability. And the guilt of knowing you killed someone you were trying to help.

I'm not a doctor. I'm just a certified massage therapist with over 600 hours of training in massage-oriented anatomy, physiology, pathology and ethics, among other important lessons. I have no authority to make diagnoses.. But my massage school gave me enough information to know when I could potentially harm someone, and how to identify those situations should they arise in my practice.

EMTs have known this for years...on another note: Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust" works well, too.

Sadly, my 7 yo daughter (who was born with a congenital heart defect, and then had 2 heart transplants) finally succumbed to heart failure at Stanford University, due to complications of rejections resulting in Coronary Heart Disease. She died suddenly just days after Easter, and days before her birthday.

And as for the Chest Compression only, it is far more important to keep the heart pumping manually than it is to get "air into the lungs". By his recommendation, 911 would have the Emergency Medical Technicians there in a timely manner with very little to no damage to brain matter and other organs. Ventilation is sketchy at best (the R in CPR), and it stops one from manually pumping the heart for a short time. Remember, we don't absorb all the oxygen in the blood by the first pass, and you keep clots from forming, too (as I seem to recall...someone correct me on this?)

@Mazex

Well, where your claim about brainwashed people falls apart is that if Jesus was made up (which no reputed historian would claim), or His resurrection wasn't true, his disciples certainly wouldn't have martyred themselves for that lie. Being direct witnesses of the fact, you can't claim they were brainwashed. So yeah.

I posted the historical reliability of the bible because it shows its not just cooked up, as you tried to claim. It's highly intricate, and I dare say it would be actually be more miraculous for holding up so reliably if it wasnt true. 100 percent historical accuracy is pretty compelling, I think..it indicates that these are honest eye witness accounts we're dealing with.

Here are some interesting science facts that the bible fortold thousands of years before science knew anything about it..pretty good for made up isnt it?

The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true – “He hangs the earth on nothing.”

Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the "springs of the sea." Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain. Yet in the 1970s, with the help of deep diving research submarines that were constructed to withstand 6,000 pounds-per-square-inch pressure, oceanographers discovered springs on the ocean floors!

There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea

Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11; 14). Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled” and many died as a result (e.g. George Washington). Today we know that healthy blood is necessary to bring life-giving nutrients to every cell in the body. God declared that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” long before science understood its function.

Noble behavior understood (John 15:13; Romans 5:7-8). The Bible and history reveal that countless people have endangered or even sacrificed their lives for another. This reality is completely at odds with Darwin’s theory of the survival of the fittest.

The first three verses of Genesis accurately express all known aspects of the creation (Genesis 1:1-3). Science expresses the universe in terms of: time, space, matter, and energy. In Genesis chapter one we read: “In the beginning (time) God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)…Then God said, “Let there be light (energy).” No other creation account agrees with the observable evidence.

The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; Hebrews 1:10-12). Starting with the studies of Albert Einstein in the early 1900s and continuing today, science has confirmed the biblical view that the universe had a beginning. When the Bible was written most people believed the universe was eternal. Science has proven them wrong, but the Bible correct.

Light can be divided (Job 38:24). Sir Isaac Newton studied light and discovered that white light is made of seven colors, which can be “parted” and then recombined. Science confirmed this four centuries ago – God declared this four millennia ago!

Ocean currents anticipated (Psalm 8:8). Three thousand years ago the Bible described the “paths of the seas.” In the 19th century Matthew Maury – the father of oceanography – after reading Psalm 8, researched and discovered ocean currents that follow specific paths through the seas! Utilizing Maury’s data, marine navigators have since reduced by many days the time required to traverse the seas.

Incalculable number of stars (Jeremiah 33:22). At a time when less than 5,000 stars were visible to the human eye, God stated that the stars of heaven were innumerable. Not until the 17th century did Galileo glimpse the immensity of our universe with his new telescope. Today, astronomers estimate that there are ten thousand billion trillion stars – that’s a 1 followed by 25 zeros! Yet, as the Bible states, scientists admit this number may be woefully inadequate.

The number of stars, though vast, are finite (Isaiah 40:26). Although man is unable to calculate the exact number of stars, we now know their number is finite. Of course God knew this all along – “He counts the number of the stars; He calls them all by name” (Psalm 147:4). What an awesome God!

The fact that God once flooded the earth (the Noahic Flood) would be denied (2 Peter 3:5-6). There is a mass of fossil evidence to prove this fact, yet it is flatly ignored by most of the scientific world because it was God’s judgment on man’s wickedness.

The continents were created as one large land mass (Genesis 1:9-10). Many geologists agree there is strong evidence that the earth was originally one super continent – just as the Bible said way back in Genesis.

Life begins at fertilization (Jeremiah 1:5). God declares that He knew us before we were born. The biblical penalty for murdering an unborn child was death (Exodus 21:22-23). Today, it is an irrefutable biological fact that the fertilized egg is truly an entire human being. Nothing will be added to the first cell except nutrition and oxygen.

God has created all mankind from one blood (Acts 17:26; Genesis 5). Today researchers have discovered that we have all descended from one gene pool. For example, a 1995 study of a section of Y chromosomes from 38 men from different ethnic groups around the world was consistent with the biblical teaching that we all come from one man (Adam)

Origin of the major language groups explained (Genesis 11). After the rebellion at Babel, God scattered the people by confounding the one language into many languages. Evolution teaches that we all evolved from a common ancestor, yet offers no mechanism to explain the origin of the thousands of diverse languages in existence today.

Origin of the different “races” explained (Genesis 11). As Noah’s descendants migrated around the world after Babel, each language group developed distinct features based on environment and genetic variation. Those with a genetic makeup suitable to their new environment survived to reproduce. Over time, certain traits (such as dark skin color for those closer to the equator) dominated. Genesis alone offers a reasonable answer to the origin of the races and languages.

Air has weight (Job 28:25). It was once thought that air was weightless. Yet 4,000 years ago Job declared that God established “a weight for the wind.” In recent years, meteorologists have calculated that the average thunderstorm holds thousands of tons of rain. To carry this load, air must have mass.

Medical quarantine instituted (Leviticus 13:45-46; Numbers 5:1-4). Long before man understood the principles of quarantine, God commanded the Israelites to isolate those with a contagious disease until cured.

Circumcision on the eighth day is ideal (Genesis 17:12; Leviticus 12:3; Luke 1:59). Medical science has discovered that the blood clotting chemical prothrombin peaks in a newborn on the eighth day. This is therefore the safest day to circumcise a baby. How did Moses know?!

Our ancestors were not primitive (Genesis 4:20-22; Job 8:8-10; 12:12). Archeologists have discovered that our ancestors mined, had metallurgical factories, created air-conditioned buildings, designed musical instruments, studied the stars, and much more. This evidence directly contradicts the theory of evolution, but agrees completely with God’s Word.

A seed must die to produce new life (1 Corinthians 15:36-38). Jesus said, “unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much grain.” (John 12:24). In this verse is remarkable confirmation of two of the fundamental concepts in biology: 1) Cells arise only from existing cells. 2) A grain must die to produce more grain. The fallen seed is surrounded by supporting cells from the old body. These supporting cells “give their lives” to provide nourishment to the inner kernel. Once planted, this inner kernel germinates resulting in much grain

Olive oil and wine useful on wounds (Luke 10:34). Jesus told of a Samaritan man, who when he came upon a wounded traveler, he bandaged him – pouring upon his wounds olive oil and wine. Today we know that wine contains ethyl alcohol and traces of methyl alcohol. Both are good disinfectants. Olive oil is also a good disinfectant, as well as a skin moisturizer, protector, and soothing lotion. This is common knowledge to us today. However, did you know that during the Middle Ages and right up till the early 20th century, millions died because they did not know to treat and protect open wounds?

The Pleiades and Orion star clusters described (Job 38:31). The Pleiades star cluster is gravitationally bound, while the Orion star cluster is loose and disintegrating because the gravity of the cluster is not enough to bind the group together. 4,000 years ago God asked Job, "Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades, or loose the belt of Orion?" Yet, it is only recently that we realized that the Pleiades is gravitationally bound, but Orion's stars are flying apart.

Soil conservation (Leviticus 23:22). Not only was the land to lay fallow every seventh year, but God also instructed farmers to leave the gleanings when reaping their fields, and not to reap the corners (sides) of their fields. This served several purposes: 1) Vital soil minerals would be maintained. 2) The hedge row would limit wind erosion. 3) The poor could eat the gleanings. Today, approximately four billion metric tons of soil are lost from U.S. crop lands each year. Much of this soil depletion could be avoided if God’s commands were followed.

Animals do not have a conscience (Psalm 32:9). A parrot can be taught to swear and blaspheme, yet never feel conviction. Many animals steal, but they do not experience guilt. If man evolved from animals, where did our conscience come from? The Bible explains that man alone was created as a moral being in God’s image.

@xxovercastxx
It certainly happens that traffic jams and car accidents cause major inconvenience, but that's not the same as going out with the intent of clogging the roads. It's no accident that the event was originally named the "Commute Clot".
I don't think CMers much like or identify with the old name, which I think was just some arguably witty consonance. I wouldn't join a ride with that name because I don't necessarily want to disturb people. The new name comes from a line in a documentary film, where bicycle traffic in Beijing was stopped indefinitely at certain intersections, never allowed to proceed until "a critical mass of (waiting) cyclists" formed, spilled out in front of the cars, blocking their way, and finally allowed the cyclists to move, which they all did together, in the protection of numbers. Today's CM rides are the planning of that "critical mass of cyclists" so that once a month, at most, we can experience the freedom to ride our own roads.

I actually do love riding my bike, or at least I did before a neck injury made it agonizing to do so.
Really, really sorry to hear this.

I have no problem sharing the road with anyone who is willing. Breaking traffic laws most certainly is, or at least was when this thing got started.
Well, it's not the point anymore. Traffic laws aren't the problem. In Toronto (my city) for this reason, we started following traffic lights, but this caused its own problems with breaking up the ride, and creating dangerous situations with a few cyclists going through anyway, and confusing the cross traffic, so we mostly now just go on through. It's safe.

And if all you want to do is have a bunch of cyclists go for a ride together, obeying stop signs, red lights, right-of-way, etc, that's awesome and no, you don't need permission or special paperwork or anything like that.
When that's all I want, I stay off the roads, and use bicycle paths and nature trails. I actually don't much like riding with other people, to be honest.

I most certainly do not acknowledge this as a protest. Protests are against something: a war, discrimination, etc. What is CM protesting; traffic laws? Equal access to the road? No, this is just a troll festival. However, if that's what your local city does then you have strayed from the intent of CM, that being to block off roads with massive quantities of traffic-law-ignoring cyclists so as to disrupt anyone else's commute. If that's the goal, then that's what parade paperwork is for. Just don't expect to be allowed to fuck up the city every month. You keep referring to it as a protest, so why don't you tell me what you're protesting?
As there is no leader, there are maybe as many ideas about what CM is as there are cyclists in the ride. Most, however, will agree with what you said, that we're protesting for equal access to the roads, as well as improved cycling infrastructure, increased cycling budget, and so on. And if that defies what you perceive as the original intent of CM, that's none of my business. I am not against anybody. I just want to enjoy my slice of the pie as comfortably and unmindfully (is that a word? you know what I mean) as car drivers get to do every day.

@messenger

Also, you could as easily describe all car drivers as "assholes coming together to inconvenience everyone else" every day during rush hour, but I'm guessing you're a car driver, so you empathise with them, but not with cyclists.

It certainly happens that traffic jams and car accidents cause major inconvenience, but that's not the same as going out with the intent of clogging the roads. It's no accident that the event was originally named the "Commute Clot". I actually do love riding my bike, or at least I did before a neck injury made it agonizing to do so. I have no problem sharing the road with anyone who is willing.

Breaking laws "at every opportunity" is not the point of CM. You acknowledge it's a protest, of sorts, so you shouldn't be surprised that we go through stop signs.

Breaking traffic laws most certainly is, or at least was when this thing got started. I most certainly do not acknowledge this as a protest. Protests are against something: a war, discrimination, etc. What is CM protesting; traffic laws? Equal access to the road? No, this is just a troll festival.

I don't like that idea because it requires declaring an official leader and an official "parade route", both of which miss the point of not needing to ask permission to use our own roads, and the point of it being a protest, not a parade.

And if all you want to do is have a bunch of cyclists go for a ride together, obeying stop signs, red lights, right-of-way, etc, that's awesome and no, you don't need permission or special paperwork or anything like that. However, if that's what your local city does then you have strayed from the intent of CM, that being to block off roads with massive quantities of traffic-law-ignoring cyclists so as to disrupt anyone else's commute. If that's the goal, then that's what parade paperwork is for. Just don't expect to be allowed to fuck up the city every month.

You keep referring to it as a protest, so why don't you tell me what you're protesting?

I know we joke that every roast is lame, and we all have a good laugh pretending the roastee is someone not deserving of notice, and so on. We then take pot shots at the MC, make a good joke about him or her and how they fucked the proceedings up somehow, but... Sigh. Today I'm just feeling like this really, truly, honestly is NOT worth our time. No jokes. Completely serious now.

Would any of us care if @thinker247 or @MrFisk got banned tomorrow? Or left? Or died? Okay, if they died I'd probably at least feign a touch of sympathy, but it would be disingenuous if it was anything more than a sigh. I wouldn't trade @rottenseed's shit covered dick from @berticus' ass to save their lives. What two miserable subhuman beings. I mean they're really the crust of peggedbea's vagina. Speaking of @peggedbea's vagina, it's seen so many dicks the cum has clotted over and it's already started to heal shut.

Today I'd like to propose we kill this SiftTalk post right here and now. I'd ask permission from @dotdude first, seeing how he's kind of the unsaid facilitator of these shit shenanigans, but he's too busy posting mild, inoffensive oneliners under the alter-ego 'THE JESTER'. Newsflash, dotdude, jesters are typically amusing and at times hilarious. You're none of these.

The real reason I hate these two is because, first, thinker247's name is so telling of just how lame a person he must be in real life. It's like me calling myself movieDirector#1 or superDickSized. Or rottenseed calling himself notGay. And this third grader thinks he's edgy because he wrote "motherfucking" and "bitches" in the title. Hey, dickhead, this roast isn't about you.

Second, there's the roastee, MrFisk. A person so miserable and unlikable that only choggie could come to his defense during his Siftquisition. That's like having Jared Lee Loughner represent you in a murder trial. What a joke that whole Siftquistion was, huh? And I love how @dag and @kronosposeidon became the busybody Perry fucking Masons of the Sift as if calling those SiftTalk posts a "Siftquisition" made them anything more than a discussion thread on a website that plays videos. My favorite is when dag claimed he had "something else to enter into the docket" and "Department of HomeSift Security." The fuck? There's about as much credibility in a Siftquisition as there would be if @kulpims claimed he wasn't gobbling @dystopianfuturetoday's dick. Or was that @laura's dick? Either way, they're both effeminate dudes.

So who's with me? Who thinks we ought to kill this embarrassing navel-gazing jerkfest and pretend it never happened. While we're at it, let's finish what we started and *ban these two for trying so hard to be cool and outrageous. Sorry, thinker247 and MrFisk, did mommy not give you two enough of her tit to suck on when you were a baby? You still need approval and acceptance? I hear 4chan is looking for a few more whores for their ranks.