Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

*dead again. This is quite the whack-a-mole

Description:

Bengal sister-kittens automatic whack-a-mole

Making an appearance again after 13 years!

Our previous American Shorthair sister-cats used to love to play with this, but how will the Bengal sisters react?

I decided to record them while they take it out for test drive...

i always find it interesting when people assume that i get my information from zeitgeist.as if the idea that i studied under a biblical scholar is something to not even be considered.

as for defending the sabbath as being sunday. might i suggest that when you use a souce *cough* wikipedia *cough* that you may wish to read the article in its entirety.

What I am assuming is that you (and the biblical scholar you studied under) are poorly researched, because the information you've provided here:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen046.html

is nearly completely false.

If you disagree, then please provide pre new testament sources for some of the claims, such as:

Horus having 12 disciples

Horus being a child teacher

Horus being baptized at age 30

Horus walking on water

Horus being known as the way the truth the light lamb of God, etc

Horus being crucified, dead for three days and resurrected

I'll wait..

As far as the Sabbath, I never claimed it was on Sunday. I said Sunday is the Lords day, not the Sabbath.

shiny.
you know i have no interest in changing how you believe or perceive the world around you.
Your faith is your own but please put a tad bit more time into rebuttals when concerning my posts.

If you actually provided a cohesive argument that was sourced, then I would have put more time into it. As it stands, all you did was link to a bunch of unsubstantiated claims.

apply to boston university and get your degree.i hear their theology courses are top notch.
ooooor continue to play whack a mole with every post,comment or inference that challenges your world view based on limited religious and biblical understandings.

I've done the same research you have and come to different conclusions. I used to have some of the same beliefs that you do, remember? I know quite a bit about what you believe and why you believe it. The Lord has shown me these arguments to be foolishness. They are predicated on very poor (or made up) evidence which has been in every case heavily exaggerated. Bible skeptics are willing to believe anything that is contrary to the bible being accurate, and never apply the same level of skepticism to those arguments.

i am sorry if that offends or hurts you but i read your posts and it is painfully obvious that you dont know what you are talking about concerning religious history.

so.try seminary school.
graduate and then our arguments can become legendary!

There isn't much to argue about. You've rejected the Lord Jesus Christ, and you teach others to do the same. You want to do things your own way, and you're willing to risk that you won't face judgment for your sins. God is willing to open your eyes, if you would humble yourself and repent.

oh.and another thing.scholars are still unsure of the exact date of resurrection.
just sayin....

For you, man is authoritative on these issues. I believe Gods word.

>> ^enoch

@shinyblurry
yaaaay.a video argument.
well allow me to retort:




i always find it interesting when people assume that i get my information from zeitgeist.as if the idea that i studied under a biblical scholar is something to not even be considered.

as for defending the sabbath as being sunday. might i suggest that when you use a souce *cough* wikipedia *cough* that you may wish to read the article in its entirety.

achary s has sourced ALL her claims in zeigeist and provides it:
(ok ok.its from the you tube page.too lazy to link diving for all her sources)
The New ZEITGEIST Part 1 Sourcebook (2010) Transcript
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/zeitgeistsourcebook.pdf

Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1'
http://truthbeknown.com/chrisforbeszeitgeist.html

The Mythicist Position - video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKW9sbJ3v2w

'The REAL Zeitgeist Challenge'
http://stellarhousepublishing.com/zeitgeist-challenge.html

9 September 2009 Listen to Acharya S on Peter Joseph's blogtalkradio. Show begins Wednesday September 9th at 3PM Eastern (12PM Pacific)
Acharya appears from 4PM Eastern (1PM Pacific)

This show is now ARCHIVED here:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Peter-Joseph

Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/christinegypt.html

Listen to Acharya on blogtalkradio - Truth or Fiction? Show April 4 2009: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/7hunder/2009/04/04/truth-or-fiction-with-very-sp...

Listen to Acharya talk about her new book on Gnostic Media - Podcast 21 March 9 2009: http://www.gnosticmedia.podomatic.com

31 July 2008 - Listen to the streaming radio interview with Acharya on Black Op Radio...Show #385 Part 1
http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2008.html - thank you Len

Cette vidéo avec des sous-titres français: http://tinyurl.com/594awz

The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1 is a 49-page ebook containing a scientific investigation of some of the facts from Part 1 of the ZEITGEIST movie, dealing with the comparisons of ancient religions and Christianity.
http://www.StellarHousePublishing.com/zeitgeist.html

http://www.TruthBeKnown.com

Acharya's blog post "Zeitgeist Part 1 Refuted? - NOT!" -
http://tbknews.blogspot.com/2008/04/zeitgeist-refuted-not.html

The sun/son issue was addressed long ago in Acharya's FAQ's:
http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=4835#p4835

Zeitgeist Part 1 & the Supportive Evidence
http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2997

"Astrotheology of the Ancients"
http://truthbeknown.com/astrotheology.html

Special thanks go to Freethinkaluva22 for providing tremendous assistance with the research.

Was Krisyhna's mum, Devaki, a virgin?
http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1597

The Origins of Christianity
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/originsofchristianity.pdf

shiny.
you know i have no interest in changing how you believe or perceive the world around you.
your faith is your own but please put a tad bit more time into rebuttals when concerning my posts.
apply to boston university and get your degree.i hear their theology courses are top notch.
ooooor continue to play whack a mole with every post,comment or inference that challenges your world view based on limited religious and biblical understandings.
i am sorry if that offends or hurts you but i read your posts and it is painfully obvious that you dont know what you are talking about concerning religious history.

so.try seminary school.
graduate and then our arguments can become legendary!

oh.and another thing.scholars are still unsure of the exact date of resurrection.
just sayin....

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

OK thanks for the screenshot. It's like playing whack-a-mole with these asshats.>> ^paul4dirt:

@dag http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulvandijk/7206161004/in/photostream this was one. sounds start, starts with a popup like this. (this is one for a dutch supermarket branche but there were others before)
if i click it it minimizes to a small screen somewhere in the right panel but the sound continues. EXTREMELY annoying.

I can understand Maher being concerned about piracy of his movie, that's fine. Sadly, he's woefully ignorant on the actual bills; he said himself that when you get one, another pops up. These bills will only speed up this game of BitTorrent whack-a-mole, and greatly undermine free speech and the principals that make the internet.

Next time, Bill, read up on subjects that you're going to mention on air.

Santorum and Huntsman are the only two candidates who haven't been in the lead. I'm not sure why Santorum is surging, I guess because he's not any of the other candidates. It's kind of funny to see the media knock the candidates down like a whack-a-mole while the voters just keep switching. Pick a candidate and stick with it!

It costs money to do a credit/debit card transaction. In most cases, this charge is eaten by the merchant. The cost of doing the service have not decreased. In fact, they are going up. The bank has to have systems in place to receive the transaction, record it, log it, verify it, and process it. That takes computers, databases, and networks - all of which have to work quickly and with very few mistakes. That doesn't come cheap. Not to meantion all the audits they constantly undergo as a matter of federal law.

Some brag about credit unions. No offense - but that's like comparing apples to t-bone steak. Credit unions and banks are treated very differently. CUs don't get hit with a fraction of the regulations, taxes, fees, and audits that even small banks do. That's why a CU can afford to run at lower profit margins. It isn't that the credit union is 'nicer'. Banks are treated like a pro baseball team. Credit unions are treated like a 3-year old T-ball team.

Why the change all of a sudden? Well, you can thank (as usual) your Federal government. Obama is putting a cap on how much banks can charge merchants for transactions. I think Obama's "theory" (as usual based on the assumption banks are evil) is that merchants will no longer have to 'pass on' this hidden cost to consumers. As usual, he assumes the banks will just shrug and start coughing up billions of dollars to do transactions for free. He's an idiot.

Banks will charge consumers directly for transaction fees now - or (as BoA is doing) they will charge a yearly fee for the priveledge of a debit card. Congratulations - you've discovered The Law of Unintended Consequences! You can't legislate morality. People will or won't do the right thing on their own. Likewise, you can't legislate 'fairness'. If you think a business is unfair, then don't go there. That is how you punish a business. Relying on legislation just creates an environment of 'whack-a-mole' uncertainty.

Okay, so this is the latest of several self-linked videos submitted for this Doritos viral commercial thing. Subbie is trying to win $10,000, and while I wish him good luck self-linking is a clear violation of the terms of use, blah, blah, blah. I would have insta-banned, but it wasn't an option available for some reason. *edit*- I now know why I couldn't instaban this guy- it's because I instabanned another Doritos guy yesterday. Checks and balances- fair enough.

I've got a little bit of an issue with these- a couple of contestants have been hijacking the mailing list at FreeCycle to get attention for their commercials. I'm an admin there and have spent too much time trying to play whack-a-mole for the last few days- it's almost like a DDOS attack.

While his rhetoric is par for the course stupidity - Mr. Doofus has a point (even if he only steps in it accidentally).

One of the GOP's many problems is that it tries too hard to appeal to 'values voters'. I would more accurately refer to them as 'Social Conservatives'. The problem is that SoCons are (typically) single issue voters who want government to ban things they don't like. I may agree with SoCons on some issues at a personal level, but their efforts to use government as a bludgeon for social enforcement are misguided and wrong.

Abortion is a good example. SoCons want abortions banned. On a personal level I am sympathetic to the SoCon perspective that abortions are wrong except in extreme cases. But I do not support any attempt to make them illegal because that is taking away vital human freedom. If your cause is truly just (as I believe it is when discouraging abortions) then you make your case at a personal, individual level with persuasion and logic. If the person chooses a different path then that's their business.

The GOP - in an effort to court these misguided SoCons - ends up abandoning the one position that would sweep the GOP into office in perpetuity... SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT. You can't claim to stand for limited government if you are always using government to control people. These days the GOP has abandoned the 'limited government' platform and tries too hard to be 'Democrat Lite' with massive spending and big government solutions. Uh Uh.

The GOP has lost its soul with that position. If the GOP would reclaim the mantle of small government, tax cuts, reduced spending, and fiscal responsibility then they'd dominate the Democrats handily and wouldn't need to chase after these SoCons special interest groups like they were playing Whack-A-Mole.

>> ^MINK:
The underlying problem is that people sift stuff for popularity, rather than from their love of sharing video. The incentive system here is not conducive to "good" sifting. We've all posted crap we wouldn't normally post but we know it's going to get upvotes, and we've all suppressed good stuff that isn't worth sifting because it's so obscure, or been disheartened when something super interesting is buried under a pile of lolcats. Do people really love lolcats this much? or is it partly because we made a biased reward scheme specifically for short videos that make you smile?


What incentive system would work better? I'm struggling to think of one that doesn't have inherent flaws.

I enjoy seeing the best videos in catsanddogs to take a populist channel but inevitably we accept they are going to crowd out obscure music videos for example. At this point it depends on your tastes as to whether that is a problem or not. Some would say you're getting the best of all kinds of video content and Videosift is just doing fine.

But if the site is too populist it must come down to the channels that are allowed. Those are the primary filters and encourage certain kind of content. If Videosift actively discouraged submissions of cats and people face-planting then I'm sure the place would look alot different. That not being the case you can start to use your downvote as Farhad says but this feels like playing whack-a-mole.

My only suggestion is that there could be a place (something better than Beggar's Canyon) that bridges the gap between the obscurity of personal queues and the promotion of videos back to the unsifted listing. How about a Recommended Gems page where channel owners can put stuff on a weekly basis? I don't know how such content would be organised exactly but it should be trivial to switch between channels and perhaps it would be less confusing if the page *didn't* load up the channel subdomain.

"...a person can forfeit their life, if they commit a heinous crime. There is no reason for such a criminal to live, because they cannot contribute to society, so they should be put down like a rabid dog."

OK, who do we kill first? We must have some sort of standard for eliminating said persons. I propose the tombola... (I'm certain it is as objective a device as we can find to determine "social contributions." We cam call it something catchy. I suggest: whack-a-mole justice)

>> ^Throbbin:
What is it about you Paultards?
This schiff dude predicted it - that IS pretty impressive.
However, so many people have formed a cult around Paul and Schiff. This is not healthy.
Much like the pacificists(looking at you MINK), there is a dramatic and substantial difference between idealogical merit and practical application. The world is too messy to allow for it.
But I guess it's ok on the internet?...


I'm guessing you're referring to military spending, so I'll just leave you to it. It's not like it's even possible to continue doing it, it will either end voluntarily or involuntarily, there's simply no way to fund it without hyperinflation. I'm personally satisfied with nuclear arms, no country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded. 9/11 was a poor man's stunt that we should be blaming on our own ineptitude. We were lazy on intel, there were no plane sheriffs, and cockpits had no barricades. If any one of those had been addressed, it would have failed.

Keep on believing that "national defense" is Americans sacrificing their kids to defend countries other than America, buddying up with some dictators and overthrowing others, and building bases around the world. As for psychopaths, have fun spending trillions to play terrorist whack-a-mole where your collateral damage produces more terrorists than it kills. That's exactly what Bin Laden wanted, he can inflict so much more damage and recruit so many more people if we're mired in sectarian Islamic strife.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I do filter out ads where I can. The problem is that they are geo-targeted as well. The ones I see in Australia can be very different. I will try and get these removed, but it's kind of like whack-a-mole.