The "Mark of the Beast" may very well be an allusion to humanity's addiction to the machine, to material gain. The Whore Babylon, the system that feeds upon resources and in doing so, consumes itself. The same whore which deludes and seduces humans to blindly follow a system which may inevitably wipe out the species.

Some scholars believe the allegory refers to the Roman Empire ,or a similar one.... the NOW-

Personally, I can't wait for some bio-mods, heads-up display retinas, all of it. Plug me into Babylon, baby!!

Back in 1993, I remember this guy with a bad leg, living in a slum in Freetown (Sierra Leone's capital), in a tiny room plastered with Bollywood and Hong Kong B-movie posters, and whose door was made of pieces of cardboard glued together. He didn't have much.
He was called "Prof" Abubakar and made a living creating and selling steel wire sculptures from stuff he was scavenging off the streets. You're probably thinking of African steel wire toys, but his were crazy, there was nothing like it. They were incredibly complex, animated, spring-loaded, or with some sparkling devices.

Some years later, someone I knew came across him. He was exposing at the Pompidou centre in Paris.

Two decades later, it's like Kelvin Doe is his Internet-era spiritual son. I hope he does as well.

[EDIT]
Correct name: Abu Bakarr Mansaray (bio | one of his contraptions). He now lives in the Netherlands.

Matthew 16:26 What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?

It is written that in the last days, knowledge will increase, but it doesn't mention anything about wisdom. You can see that very clearly in the world system, that for all of mans hubris regarding his accomplishments, the character of man has not changed one iota. The evil that is done in this world is symptomatic of a disease that has no modern cure, which is called sin, and all who sin are slaves to sin. This is why Jesus came into the world, to free men from slavery to sin and death. Investigating 4 alpha decay sets and why the neptunium set doesn't appear in nature is never going to reveal that to you. There is no knowledge that you can gain from studying the natural world which is going to solve the problem of sin; it is only Jesus Christ who has solved this problem.

Yes, you're correct, the bible is not a science book; it is a salvation book. God inspires men to do great things in science; just ask Newton. Yet there are two questions science cannot answer; why am I here, and what happens after I die? No experiment will give you any revelation on these matters. They are the most important questions, and Jesus did answer them. He said we are here because God created us to be in fellowship with Him, and there will be a judgment after we die that determines where we end up. That is why, if Satan came to your door and gave you a deed to all of the nations of the world and all of their wealth (hundreds of trillions at the least), in exchange for your soul, you would have made an unprofitable deal. Everything in this world is perishing and will pass away, but those who do the will of God will abide forever.



>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^shinyblurry:
1 Corinthians 1:18-21
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know God, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

What does the bible have to say about the 4 alpha decay sets and why the neptunium set doesn't appear in nature? Problem is, the bible doesn't really answer any scientific questions, nor does it give any useful tools into discovering how the world works. So while I still hold that Corinthians has the best definition of love, it can't give you an understanding of the bio-chemical-neurological goings on of love, and has to deal with deformities of the working order of the body with the deus ex machina of demons. No one prayed the printing press into existence so you could even have a bible in written form, or a keyboard and the internet, or medicine, or refrigeration. Anyone who can't agree that science and technology vastly improve the quality of life on the planet more than any one other thing, including religion, has a large burden of evidence to overcome, imo. While I don't go as far as Bill Maher kind of people and say that religion is bad (I think it does do a lot of good), I will say that I think STEM has done most of the heavy lifting in our modern world in terms of doing good.

>> ^shinyblurry:

1 Corinthians 1:18-21
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know God, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.


What does the bible have to say about the 4 alpha decay sets and why the neptunium set doesn't appear in nature? Problem is, the bible doesn't really answer any scientific questions, nor does it give any useful tools into discovering how the world works. So while I still hold that Corinthians has the best definition of love, it can't give you an understanding of the bio-chemical-neurological goings on of love, and has to deal with deformities of the working order of the body with the deus ex machina of demons. No one prayed the printing press into existence so you could even have a bible in written form, or a keyboard and the internet, or medicine, or refrigeration. Anyone who can't agree that science and technology vastly improve the quality of life on the planet more than any one other thing, including religion, has a large burden of evidence to overcome, imo. While I don't go as far as Bill Maher kind of people and say that religion is bad (I think it does do a lot of good), I will say that I think STEM has done most of the heavy lifting in our modern world in terms of doing good.

It's not something you really think of. I just figured, they come in, scoop them up, throw down a layer of soapy ammonia and all it good. But I never considered the all the possible bio-hazards involved especial to the structures of the house. I'm getting a new appreciation for what some of these companies like disaster clean-up companies go through. After the Bio-hazard team cleans up and removes everything, then all that stuff needs to also be rebuilt and replaced. So much more work than what we are led to believe really happens.

>> ^probie:

So as a firm believer in evolution, I'm fascinated by this creature. But it begins to raise simple questions. What are it's natural predators and/or what the heck has been walking around on the beach for the last X thousands of years for it to evolve such a defense mechanism?
It seems that Australia and Madagascar are the two prime examples of how extreme bio-diversity can become, due to their isolation. Is it that evolution responds differently to different sized "cages". Or could it be that I just am looking at it subjectively, in that, North America's fauna is just as odd and bizarre, (ie. rattlesnakes, grizzly bears, etc.) and that I'm just used to them?
Points to ponder.


Hrm, after watching that spider crab video, maybe stingrays, or even octopus (in shallow water).

So as a firm believer in evolution, I'm fascinated by this creature. But it begins to raise simple questions. What are it's natural predators and/or what the heck has been walking around on the beach for the last X thousands of years for it to evolve such a defense mechanism?

It seems that Australia and Madagascar are the two prime examples of how extreme bio-diversity can become, due to their isolation. Is it that evolution responds differently to different sized "cages". Or could it be that I just am looking at it subjectively, in that, North America's fauna is just as odd and bizarre, (ie. rattlesnakes, grizzly bears, etc.) and that I'm just used to them?

Points to ponder.

>> ^bmacs27:

@scannex Dude... are you really citing a marketing campaign for weight loss pushers? I bet you I could find data that shows the effectiveness of penis enhancement pills too. If you took a few you might find you like 'em thick ;-). Try some primary literature, and I'll respond in kind.

Try to refute this claim: "Overweight or mildly obese individuals with otherwise normal bio-markers show no decrease in life expectancy from normal."

If you can't, then tell me why it is okay to berate someone about their weight knowing nothing about their health overall?


I don't what source your quote came from.
But I will happily refute it.
Here you go, from the NIH
A referenced article from Oxford
Another study
Heres the wiki for Leptin so you can understand why the release of leptin (from having too much fat) creates a vicious cycle causing you to eat more and more.
Another article on the increased risk for diabetes in the obese from you know... the journal NATURE

This is not a "jury is out" scenario. Directly and indirectly obesity causes a myriad of health complications and increased risk for debilitating and deadly diseases.

You are fighting against countless areas of research with one obscure data point from what is probably a single study that I have no source for. Even with the source its an incredibly uphill battle for you.

Being Obese is unhealthy, and except for in an EXTREME minority of genetic cases, completely modifiable.

@Duncan And yet this is the commonly suggested course of action for those overweight. Eat 1000-1200 calories a day, and exercise. That's a recipe for disaster. Further, your claim that if you intake fewer calories than you expend you will lose weight. This is not necessarily true. Your body is not a bunsen burner. That's why we have terms like "metabolism" as in so and so has a high metabolism or a low metabolism. In other words, some people can eat and eat and eat, and their body will simply convert the excess energy into heat. For others, that energy is stored as fat. My claim is that there are people for whom prolonged caloric restriction will not result in continued weight loss. Instead the body will continue to store the energy it receives as fat and your brain will be deprived of the energy it needs to allow activity levels necessary to burn anything off. Even with continued restriction. There are cases (e.g. with OCD patients) that prolonged weight loss can be achieved, but often it's simply impossible.

With regards to "life-style change," I agree. It's necessary. However, losing weight isn't. Much more success has been reported encouraging an active lifestyle. Eat until you are sated. That's okay (assuming you don't have a broken sensory system in that regard). People that pursue this approach will usually not lose weight, but they will become healthy. All of their bio-markers (e.g. cholesterol) often come into check. They are active, happy, and healthy. Yet still, people would somehow feel justified sending them a letter telling fatty to get off their ass.

I'll give an example. I watched my girl eat 1200 calories a day for six months. She's 5'2" at 180. The first month of this brought her down to 165/170, but the following five brought her no further. I watched her. She measured every meal with a measuring cup. She's also a geneticist, so she knows a thing or two about the relevant biochem. She was depressed as hell, and her activity level dropped. She was miserable and didn't even really lose substantial weight.

Now, she bikes at least 10-12 hilly miles a day, swims a couple miles three times a week, and does yoga. She eats when she's hungry and stops when she's full. She eats healthily for the most part, but rewards herself with a sweet now and again. Every measure known to correlate with health shows that she is healthy despite her weight. People call her fat all the time. There's just no need. Her doctor doesn't, because many doctors these days know BMI is a bullshit measure. She's not a weird case. I mentioned by buddy the pullup champ in a previous post. The dude was vegetarian in boot camp. He doesn't have an ounce of fat on him, and can do effectively perpetual pushups. He's technically "obese." For a medical term, it's about as useful as "idiot."

The fact is evidence is mounting that your disposition towards retaining fat probably has more to do with what was eaten by your mother during pregnancy than anything you do in your lifetime (other than maybe early childhood). Your body has a weight it would like to keep, and it will succeed in keeping it. If people would just change the societal pressure towards becoming healthy rather than losing weight people doomed to carry extra pounds wouldn't have to feel like outcasts, and would probably be more likely to pursue the correct goal. Instead, most people here seem to think it's okay to berate strangers about their weight. Let them talk to their doctor. If their doctor is good with it, you probably should be too.

@scannex Dude... are you really citing a marketing campaign for weight loss pushers? I bet you I could find data that shows the effectiveness of penis enhancement pills too. If you took a few you might find you like 'em thick ;-). Try some primary literature, and I'll respond in kind.

Try to refute this claim: "Overweight or mildly obese individuals with otherwise normal bio-markers show no decrease in life expectancy from normal."

If you can't, then tell me why it is okay to berate someone about their weight knowing nothing about their health overall?

>> ^dag:

I'm just glad that no animals are harmed in the production of McDonalds™ beef patties.


or the ribs I am about to eat.

The meat tree is fantastic engineering of bio science.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Kylie-Minogue-and-the-Carrot-from-Bio-Dome

Now, now Greogory, troll is convenient label for all manner of folk who use the internet like crack cocaine....

I must concur with the spider not playing a pivotal role in the bio-train. If this project were halted by otters, snakes, owls, mice or beavers I could understand the fuss....Hell, even fleas or mosquito threatened would be cause for major alarm but a rare species of fucking arachnid?? Stomp that squishy, worry about the karma later, and build the fucking bypass!

....unless some arachnologist can find a biochemical compound it produces that cures cancer maybe....or maybe repairs livers "I dunno, JUST DON'T SQUASH IT!!"

>> ^zombieater:

>> ^Chaucer:
>> ^zombieater:
>> ^Chaucer:
That spider does shit for the bio diversity. One spider or even 10 spiders dont affect anything. They should just kill it and put it out of its misery.

Neither do you. Is that a valid argument to kill you as well?

Wow. show your ignorance and hate. Here's a helpful suggestion for you.... Kill yourself before your spread.

MY ignorance and hate? I repeated your OWN statement back at you. If you can't respect other life, why should anyone respect yours?


Yes your ignorance and hate... My comments were not about disrespecting life. But you tried to turn it into that and I called you on your hate. You should just off yourself and the world would be rid of one less troll.

Back on topic, I was saying that it doesnt matter what a dozen spiders of this one species will do as there's 100's more of a different type around to do the same function. It isnt like this one spider eats one type of bug that nothing else eats. If it did, then I would say be sure to keep it around. There's likely not even enough of those spiders to keep the gene pool straight.

>> ^Chaucer:

>> ^zombieater:
>> ^Chaucer:
That spider does shit for the bio diversity. One spider or even 10 spiders dont affect anything. They should just kill it and put it out of its misery.

Neither do you. Is that a valid argument to kill you as well?

Wow. show your ignorance and hate. Here's a helpful suggestion for you.... Kill yourself before your spread.


*MY* ignorance and hate? I repeated your OWN statement back at you. If you can't respect other life, why should anyone respect yours?

>> ^zombieater:

>> ^Chaucer:
That spider does shit for the bio diversity. One spider or even 10 spiders dont affect anything. They should just kill it and put it out of its misery.

Neither do you. Is that a valid argument to kill you as well?


Wow. show your ignorance and hate. Here's a helpful suggestion for you.... Kill yourself before your spread.