I've seen that once. Might have been after one of the irish scandals, a guy holding a sign with a little kid and an old clergyman with a robe-tent approaching with his hands out like mr burns and a big grin. The thing is when it comes to paedophilia, you can't think it of anyone you think you know, so you discard images like that as silly fairy tales without thinking beyond the metaphor. You don't want to be wondering if the guy you just shook hands with gets drunk before sunday school and manipulates extra private tuition with the shy kid who doesn't have a dad and cries a lot.

Sorry to be so graphic there, but it is what it is in all its vileness, and everyone complicit ought to feel fucking ashamed of themselves. I'll stop before i derail, but the moral standards these people are hiding behind are very shady indeed, because somewhere in that chain of command someone knew and kept quiet about the institutional rape-centres the Catholics kept running for many decades. Unless they've leaned on their own faith-leaders to press for justice and HARD, their hands are dirty, and they are ridiculous to stand there shouting shame on someone else.

Man, i think i'm in love with this woman..

Well, the radius of the moon is about 1,080 miles, and the radius of the Sun is about 432,687 miles.
Do I need to say the rest of your grasp of the science involved is not firm?

Newtboy, please pull out a calculator and punch in 1080 x 400..the answer is 432000.

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/dr-marc-earth/moon-general.html

"The Moon's size and distance contribute to a wonderful coincidence for those of us who live here on Earth. The Moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun, but it also just happens to be about 400 times closer. The result is that from Earth, they appear to be the same size. And when its orbit around Earth takes the Moon directly between Earth and the Sun, the Moon blocks our view of the Sun in what we call a solar eclipse. This is just the same as when you use your thumb to block your view of something that is both much larger and much farther away."

See, my fairy tale tells me that giant bean stalks are real

I think you have a misunderstanding of what faith is. I have faith that the Sun will rise tomorrow because the evidence shows that it is more likely to happen than not. No one could prove that it would, but my faith is justified based on the evidence. In the same way, I have faith that Christianity is true based on the evidence of the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe the evidence is extraordinary and sufficient to place my faith in, and that the contrary case is insufficient. Have you ever studied the evidence for the resurrection? If you haven't then you have rejected it based on your preconceived notions and biases rather than because you believe the evidence is insufficient. There are plenty of things we take on faith and believe and are perfectly rational for doing so. Here is a highlight that talks about 5 different things we all take on faith:

Oh Shiny....SOOO much and so large a failure of fact here....
A quick science fact for YOU....(cut and pasted from Google)

How many of earth's moon would fit inside the sun if it were hollow?

Well, the radius of the moon is about 1,080 miles, and the radius of the Sun is about 432,687 miles. The moon and the sun are both spheres, and math tells us how to relate the volume inside a sphere to its radius. I don't know how much math you have done, so let me just tell you the answer and you can maybe ask your teacher for more information. The answer is that you could get about 64.3 million moons inside the Sun if it were hollow.
Do I need to say the rest of your grasp of the science involved is not firm?

I must also tell you, being able to say "we don't know exactly" about what happened BEFORE the big bang is no where near 'faith'...'faith' is making up some BS and claiming 'See, my fairy tale tells me that giant bean stalks are real, you're just deluding yourself that they're all tiny. Just because you (along with everyone else) has never SEEN a giant one means nothing, my book said they're real, so they're real'. Science says 'we've never seen a giant bean stalk, ever, and genetics and physics tell us they never can exist'. The 'faithful' then say 'science is wrong and delusional and ignores all our evidence of giant bean stalks...namely the stories in our book, and look, I found this large bean, it's proof that there are GIANT beans out there.'. If you don't 'believe' the book is 'true', it's useless as 'proof'. Just consider all the other 'holy' books you discount...that's how I see ALL holy books. I only took it one step farther than you, though, before you think differently.

I believe the problem is with the government's use of competitive judiciary : where each side debates their case, regardless of merit, and the expectation is that the 'right' argument will win simply because truth should naturally be able to present a stronger argument.

This assumption not only leads to some face-palm-worthy cases/charges, it also inevitably leads to people being convicted in situations where everyone involved knows with absolute certainty that the defender is innocent (often because quirks within the rules of the official process).

In this case, the "right" thing to do is : Apologize to the man, and refund him any costs that he's incurred so far due to this mess.

But "process" requires that the government push their argument to its absolute limit, even with zero merit, because the officially sanctioned way by which the situation is resolved is via argument in court (conveniently, the need to do this is also decided by people working in court - effectively excusing their professional existence and securing their very employment).

There is no 'admitting there was a mistake'. A mistake has to be proven in court. So even though everyone involved knows that the man is not at any fault, they will still force him to spend his time and money arguing a case, just to jump through hoops, and in the end it's _extremely_ unlikely that his personal costs will be refunded to him (lawyer fees, etc).

In the mean time, everyone on the government side is simply doing their 9-5. None of this is a burden to them, and it's in fact 'how they put food on the table'. If they aren't charging him, they're charging someone else. This is just another day at the office.

The guy getting screwed can't say 'no thanks, I'll not participate', because men with guns will show up and drag him away (police arrest for not going to court). It's effectively a predatory practice whereby the government fleeces people. Everyone involved knows it's meritless, but they simply force you to dance [else go to jail], and collect some fees in the process.

Because, really, what's at stake is not 'the truth' or 'justice'. It's simply "process". An excuse to inflate the number of court cases, to keep court spending high (to secure next year's budget - "use it or lose it" accounting), to keep collections high, and generally keep the high paid welfare cases (9/10 govt employees) employed.
TBH, for a country that supposedly "hates communism", actual communist countries haven't even managed to work it out this well. (I'm not talking fairy tale boogey man communism like you see in old propaganda. I mean the practical day to day actual workings. Vast government employment, bureaucracy, "process above all".)

-scheherazade

Perhaps we should all treat him that way...if you say 'I believe in fairy tales, magic dudes, and talking snakes' we should simply walk away, because you're an idiot, and likely a dangerous angry zealous one.
It's hard to single out Steve for his 'opinion' since MOST 'christians' and other religious people actually think this way. Most of them don't have the strength of their convictions enough to follow through on this smarmy assholyness (pun intended) or even state it out loud, but it is not a minority thought.
What a douche...I nominate Steve for the next 'Biggest Douche in the Universe' for having the bad taste to say this hateful ignorant crap out loud on TV.

A person of faith argues with semantics and rhetoric. and without any proof or substance.

I have no issues agreeing to disagree, as I won't strip someone of their faith or beliefs in what ever they believe. Just, please keep it out of my backyard where we deal in realities, and tangent proof.

I agree to a person's right to their belief, but never presume I'll stand aside when your fairy tales get in the way with reality.

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean mean it was designed by an intelligent being.

Just fail dude.
I never claimed to be an expert in geology, just to have enough knowledge to understand the science involved, unlike you.
EDIT: but your millionaire uncles HAVE talked about money with you, right...so you understand, say, interest?
Uniformitarianism as stated was proven false in the early 1800's. Many factors are involved in the time frame for feature formations, they are not uniform.
Yes, you are consistently anti-science here. You completely ignore the scientific method when making obviously false claims like 'that proves it was caused by a giant flood'.
Oh dude, no where in your fairy tale book does it ever say the earth is 6000 years old, you've been duped by idiots with agendas. Give it up, even your religious 'leaders' have realized the insanity of that stance and the requirement to suspend reality for it to be correct. Try listening to them.
There is absolutely zero evidence for a 'world wide flood' unless you can create some out of thin air with your level of faith in ridiculousness. There is not a single whit of actual evidence, which would take the form of a single, homogeneous layer of sediment world wide at the same geologic age. Doesn't exist. Sorry, you're just plain wrong about what you claim.
The 'evidence' in this video is evidence that landslides happen fast, not that layered non-volcanic sediments can be put down in tens of thousands of distinct and differing layers in an instant, then massive erosion can happen also in an instant, as you claim it does. True enough, erosion can happen fast, but doesn't often, and sedimentary layering simply can't...neither can fossilization. (oops, forgot, the devil put those stone bones there to fool me...but since I AM the devil, I'm not fooled)
Your claim that there is a homogeneous sediment layer all over the world is a complete fabrication. It does not exist. If it did, that would be HUGE scientific discovery heard on every network and science program for years to come, not one only heard about in church and/or afterwards in the lobby.
Once again...fail....as I suspect you did in your science classes.

EDIT:...and I love that your 'proof' video includes Uluru, the oldest large rock in the known world, which is proven by numerous differing methods to be well over 550 Million years old (that's how long ago it was rotated, it existed well before then) I guess the devil/gawd made that too, in order to confuse scientists? I'm not going to watch more time wasting ridiculous unscientific propaganda by the scientifically challenged, so it goes unwatched.
and good job with the cut and paste in order to quote me and answer me without me noticing,...sorry, didn't work.
SECOND EDIT: Do you not notice that on one side you claim uniformitarianism is wrong, but you also insist it's held as a major tenant of modern geology? If it's that obvious to you, an admitted lay person, don't you think it might be more obvious to professionals?

Stating explicitly that you are only seeing what you want to see is exactly why we can't give you any credence. When I wear beer goggles, I see exactly what I want to see as well, only difference being, I sober up after a while.

Just because some book says one thing, doesn't mean someone else's book doesn't have other magical stories that discredit yours. You picked the one you want to believe in, and you'll find any imaginary evidence to back up your stance. Reality won't change that. And this video won't make the rest of us believe in fairy tales.

'Fairy tales'

lot of directions a person could go with that one

Gays aren't tell people how to live their lives bases on fairy tales.

German Fairy tales are my favorite Fairy tales.

Most Christians (and other religious people) post on secular websites freely without any issue. It is only the zealous, hyper religious people that can't form a thought that isn't based on their fairy tale book that regularly garner animus.
The idea that Christians are persecuted by the non-religious is laughable. The opposite is true, in real life and the internet. When one side of an argument is arguing for exclusion or hatred of a group, it's invariably the religious side making that argument. Because you can find one post in 1000 that's blatantly anti-religious doesn't make you persecuted. What about the 250 in 1000 posts that are blatantly anti-secularism (like each and every post of yours I've ever read even part of)? I'm guessing that, like logic and rationality, you ignore them in favor of your story book answers and your imaginary friend's 'laws'.

I disagree, I think you garner hostility here because you do not add to the discussion, you merely spout your hyper religious nonsense ad nauseaum and flail and spin to make your arguments, while ignoring or twisting all input from others and even your own previous statements. That, and you have to write an essay or novel to answer each single line question.
At least those are my issues with you. There are plenty of other religious thinkers here that aren't being mass-ignored. That proves your 'they don't like christianity' stance is obvious BS, it's something else.
I grew up in a non-theistic household, and I'm just sick of the endless ridiculous fanatical ramblings. I haven't ignored you, I just don't read most of it. As soon as you start quoting the bible I stop reading, because I see that as a cop out that fanatics use when they can't make a rational argument, 'I know it's true because my fairy tale book tells me so" is not a rational argument, it is an indicator that the speaker is incapable of making one.

This was more intriguing than I'd expected.

I'm not that fascinated by old imagery (though definitely interested, and seeing such almost makes my mind wander in the same way old fairy-tales used to).

As someone from this generation, I work to see these realities, and our history in general, encapsulate these eras and peoples in some simulative aspect, so we can truly experience them.

Granted it will be even less than a carbon copy of the reality that was, but only so much as viewing the ghosts of history burnt to images by light.