We’ve been over this. Repeatedly.
He was trolling them, as he often did. This was his style. It just goes over your head.
If he’s one of the dumb ones, Democrats are hyper intelligent super brains. I certainly don’t think that.

Johnson grew up in Washington, D.C. His father worked for the Bureau of Prisons and was the director of classifications and paroles. Up to that time, he was the highest ranking African-American in the bureau.
Johnson received his B.A. degree from Clark College (now Clark Atlanta University) in 1976, is a member of Omega Psi Phi Kappa Alpha Alpha Chapter, Decatur, Georgia, and received his J.D. degree from Texas Southern University Thurgood Marshall School of Law in Houston in 1979; he practiced law in Decatur, Georgia, for more than 25 years.

From 1989 to 2001, Johnson served as an associate judge of the DeKalb County magistrate's court. He was elected to the DeKalb County Commission in 2000 and served from 2001 to 2006.

Edit: "The subtle humor of this obviously metaphorical reference to a ship capsizing illustrated my concern about the impact of the planned military buildup on this small tropical island," Johnson said in a statement at the time.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported last year that Johnson has battled Hepatitis C for more than a decade, an ailment that causes him to get "lost in thought in the middle of a discussion."

He’s hardly dumb. I know it’s hard to know from your viewpoint, but you’ve been well informed before….you could TRY to remember a few facts you are taught.

That said, there do seem to be real reasons why he should retire, not the least of which is hep C that’s recently left him sick and weak. You don’t need to be dishonest to make your point, bob. Why are you?

Always dishonest Bob. Every time you post. It’s really sad. Sour grapes have rotted your brain.

Edit: BTW, this isn’t just two out of control, violent Retrumpicans, they are representative of all Trumpists, and this display was done to appeal to people just like you, Bobby, and be your actual representatives.

Music is "Hep Cats" by Kevin MacLeod.

https://open.spotify.com/track/4fJPl0Il0dBNcubbLYe5rd

Err...peanut galleries weren't meant for just blacks. They were the cheap seats, and peanuts were the least expensive snacks...

Yes, there WERE segregated theatres, but the term wasn't necessarily racial. It was more.. elitist? against the poor.

And Hip Hip Hooray is credited with being dated back to 19th century Britain.. and there's no actual factual proof that it was used during the German hep hep riots.

I just.. can we stop looking for places to find social justice? please? this is just getting silly. There's NOTHING to be offended about, get a better idea for a show and stop skimping on the research that proves your damn idea wrong.

Reince Priebus makes me wish I had a Slapovision-enabled TV. Too bad getting humiliated won't shut these idiots up at all. Do the salaried Fox political commentators ever appear on any shows outside of Fox, and are they ever not pissy, snotty, arrogant, condescending, self-righteous, ignorant, and just plain STOOPID? It's as if Republicanism is a religion to them. No evidence required. "I don't believe the polls." Has Krauthammer EVER been right about anything? He's still on the Fox payroll! Miller still says "cat", ffs. Yer a really hep dude, Dennis.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
>> ^Payback:
This is why Springer doesn't work with smart people.

I'm not hep to your jive.
??

Who would watch Springer if the guests just sang broadway musical scores at each other instead of throwing chairs?


Ah yes, of course.

Thank You for your patience with my density.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Payback:
This is why Springer doesn't work with smart people.

I'm not hep to your jive.
??


Who would watch Springer if the guests just sang broadway musical scores at each other instead of throwing chairs?

>> ^Payback:

This is why Springer doesn't work with smart people.


I'm not hep to your jive.
??

Just because the universe might be eternal, does not mean that God is the automatic solution, nor the simplest explanation. That's just the one that makes sense to you. I would say that an eternal universe filled with rocks and gas is a little less complicated than an eternal, thinking, feeling, all-powerful being. But again, that's just my opinion. Those are large concepts, and the rules of physics, or even the seemingly bizarre rules of quantum mechanics do nothing to help explain them.

To me it is simply a probability argument. If you say that everything is equally unlikely, then if you strip away all other concerns, you just have the question..was the Universe deliberately created? The answer is either yes or no. You have evidence that perhaps there is design, which implies an intelligent (and powerful) creator. You have evidence that perhaps it could have happened by chance, by naturalistic processes. From there, you have to figure out what explanation best matches reality. You could ask, does something as wonderful as life and as amazing as the Universe just happen by itself? You could ask, am I just a bunch of atoms moving through space or is there something more to me than that?

Is an eternal God hard to grasp? Yes, but easier I think than something from nothing. If it is something from nothing we will always be ignorant of the initial conditions. If God created it, He will (presumably) educate us about the mystery of His existence. He promised this:

1 Corinthians 13:12

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

It is basically saying that God promises full disclosure when His Kingdom is established on Earth..

Occam's razor is simply a pragmatic way to find a solution, it does not prove anything, but just suggest what a likely answer might be. People use that argument about the complexity of universal laws all the time, but the fact of the matter is, we still don't understand 99.99999999% of the universe or how it works. We can see that if we "tweaked the dials", it would probably look much different than the universe we know, but there isn't a scientist out there in this world that could tell you with any certainty what would happen. Only that on a large scale, things might fall inward or burst outward faster, or that water might not congeal the same way.

Well, just in the initial conditions of the Universe, you have several values which just defy any naturalistic explanation. Even atheist scientists have to admit that a straight forward explanation indicates a designer:

Fred Hoyle, Astronomer said

"A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

This has major implications for scientific theories, because it isn't simply a matter of it being incredibly unlikely, it is also matter of contradicting the predictions of standard models. I think you'll enjoy this article:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0208/0208013v3.pdf

Speaking of complexity, here's an exercise for your brain: Think about a mountain, on part of that mountain, pressure builds up, and a rock slide starts to fall. When it finally settles, the rocks, all the little pebbles and large boulders and particles of dust are arranged in just a certain way. Even though it's just a pile of rocks, it contains within it an inconceivable amount of complexity. Nowhere else in the entire universe, will there ever be a pile of rocks that have the exact specifications of this one. And even if it did, it wouldn't be composed of the same stone, And even if was, the elements that make up the stone wouldn't be arranged the same way. Nor would it be the exact same temperature, unless it was in the exact same relative position in the universe with an identical sun, with all the particles of gas and dust in between them arranged in exactly the same way.

In a way, the pile of rocks, when you think about it, is an impossibility. And yet it exists. There is no simple solution to explain it. An eternal creator, or the laws of physics? Either way, the true meaning is something that neither of us can comprehend. And to say that either one is "simpler" than the other is merely a statement of faith. Not fact.

Sure, taken by itself, such a thing is astonishing to behold. Divorced from its circumstances, it is perplexing to say the least. Yet, either explanation for the origin of this impossibility leads to a definitive conclusion. If it was naturalism, there is no meaning to it. It just happened that way and at best you can invent a meaning for it and decide to believe it. If it was created, however, it was created for a purpose. It has meaning because of that purpose; it is invested with meaning. In naturalism, you are practically looking at something alien. It is cold, dead, inexplicable, and doesn't care about you. Under creation, you are at the least staring this quote from Einstein dead in the face:

"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

I go a step further because I believe God has revealed a bit about his Dewey Decimal System, but essentially, I am in staring at this in awe and wonder. I think those rocks are amazing and startling, but I also praise God for making them that way.

>> ^Ryjkyj:
We love you too. (but it's a rough, heathen love)
Just because the universe might be eternal, does not mean that God is the automatic solution, nor the simplest explanation. That's just the one that makes sense to you. I would say that an eternal universe filled with rocks and gas is a little less complicated than an eternal, thinking, feeling, all-powerful being. But again, that's just my opinion. Those are large concepts, and the rules of physics, or even the seemingly bizarre rules of quantum mechanics do nothing to help explain them.
Occam's razor is simply a pragmatic way to find a solution, it does not prove anything, but just suggest what a likely answer might be. People use that argument about the complexity of universal laws all the time, but the fact of the matter is, we still don't understand 99.99999999% of the universe or how it works. We can see that if we "tweaked the dials", it would probably look much different than the universe we know, but there isn't a scientist out there in this world that could tell you with any certainty what would happen. Only that on a large scale, things might fall inward or burst outward faster, or that water might not congeal the same way.
Point being, just because we can tell that the universe would be different, doesn't mean that it was designed. It just means that it is this way.
Speaking of complexity, here's an exercise for your brain: Think about a mountain, on part of that mountain, pressure builds up, and a rock slide starts to fall. When it finally settles, the rocks, all the little pebbles and large boulders and particles of dust are arranged in just a certain way. Even though it's just a pile of rocks, it contains within it an inconceivable amount of complexity. Nowhere else in the entire universe, will there ever be a pile of rocks that have the exact specifications of this one. And even if it did, it wouldn't be composed of the same stone, And even if was, the elements that make up the stone wouldn't be arranged the same way. Nor would it be the exact same temperature, unless it was in the exact same relative position in the universe with an identical sun, with all the particles of gas and dust in between them arranged in exactly the same way.
In a way, the pile of rocks, when you think about it, is an impossibility. And yet it exists. There is no simple solution to explain it. An eternal creator, or the laws of physics? Either way, the true meaning is something that neither of us can comprehend. And to say that either one is "simpler" than the other is merely a statement of faith. Not fact.

Sounds good.

Good work.

However, as you indicated, it's likely an inconsequential finding since, for the majority of the 135 vaccine-adverse event pairs that were studied, "the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship." That is, "few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines."

But you still might want to attempt to claim your prize.


>> ^oritteropo:

Nope, got it. Institute of Medicine reports, 25 August 2011, Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality.
Report finds that anaphylaxis, meningitis, or encephalitis are in fact possible side effects of several vaccines. Measles and varicella were associated with meningitis or encephalitis, and anaphylaxis was a risk for Varicella, Influenza, Hep B, Tetanus, Meningococcal, HPV.
This does, I feel, somewhat support my conclusion that it would be possible to suffer brain damage as a result of a vaccine.
My other assertion, that this does in fact happen to very small numbers of people... well... that's a bit harder to support. The percentage chances of any of these side effects is "vanishingly small"... too small to show up in any of the 1000 vaccine studies they investigated, and it is only as a result of case studies that they felt they could make these associations. Oh, and they're far more likely in immune compromised subjects (as you'd expect).
I stand by my assertion that the diseases that these vaccines protect against are far more dangerous and far more likely to cause brain damage than the vaccines themselves.

werd

In reply to this comment by Fusionaut:
Thanks, daddio! You're hep in my books, dig?

Hey man, what's wrong with these jive turkeys? These cats ain't hep at all! Don't pay them no never mind, dig?

Thank you! You hep cat, you.

In reply to this comment by Fusionaut:
Dig

He's hepped up on goofballs!

I'm pretty sure that's not really her, Just someone parody/Mocking her. (AKA an actor)

>> ^kagenin:

Isn't this the skank that white trash bike builder Jesse James is banging instead of his Oscar-Winning Wife? What a retard.
Yeah, they prolly got the hep. Do not want. Besides, do you really want to look down and see something that resembles the sunday newspaper's comics section?