mike_rad

Didn't like the music he played?

This is a true story from the Philippines. A bar/guesthouse owner, an Englishman, had three dogs, one of which was a large breed. One night a Filipino family visited and their little toddler girl was playing with this large dog when it turned on her and chewed her ear off. The father wanted action taken and called the cops. But the bar owner bribed them to stay away. He valued his dog over the welfare of a little toddler girl. That sums up the mentality of so many dog owners.

Most if not all religions are 'astrothelogical' in origin. As Thomas Paine put it: "The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man called Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the adoration originally payed to the sun."

Where do you start? Put a group of monkeys and apes into an enclosure in the jungle and wait for something to happen? Now that wait could very well be decillions upon decillions of years. The human species would likely become extinct before that.

Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. -- Mark Twain

Seems they didn't consider overseas customers. Typical.

Possibly, but it's still a theory, and always will be, because how would it be possible to prove it scientifically, given the scientific process requires repeated experiments, peer review, etc?

Unless your browser is set to clear history on close then typing the first letter or two will show that site in the address field. No bookmark needed.

I guess that's why it's called the Problem of Evil. Yet when we look at the complexity of life we can't help but wonder how this could possibly have come about by a random accident. What are the odds? Gazillions to one with the Big Bang Theory or whatever else is in vogue ?at present?

So from your post it's clear that Bangkok Bank still allows online banking to be done on a laptop. Not so with SCB. I tried logging in a week ago only to find I could not locate the username/password field. Only then did I see a notification that from 14th July online banking can only be done from a mobile device such as a 'smart' phone, or presumably, a tablet. Looks like I'll have to change to Bangkok Bank. EDIT: Ah, ok I just saw there's already a thread on this.

'The “Epicurean paradox” or “Riddle of Epicurus” is a version of the problem of evil. 'Lactantius attributes this trilemma to Epicurus in De Ira Dei: “God,” he says, “either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able.” ' https://epicurus.today/the-epicurean-paradox/

Mencken could be right: "The Jewish theory that the Goyim envy the superior ability of the Jews is not borne out by the facts. Most Goyim, in fact, deny that the Jew is superior, and point in evidence to his failure to take the first prizes: he has to be content with the seconds. No Jewish composer has ever come within miles of Bach, Beethoven and Brahms; no Jew has ever challenged the top-flight painters of the world, and no Jewish scientist has equaled Newton, Darwin, Pasteur or Mendel. In the latter bracket such apparent exception as Ehrlich, Freud and Einstein are only apparent. Ehrlich, in fact, contributed less to biochemical fact than to biochemical theory, and most of his theory was dubious. Freud was nine-tenths quack, and there is sound reason for believing that even Einstein will not hold up: in the long run his curved space may be classed with the psychosomatic bumps of Gall and Spurzheim. But whether this inferiority of the Jew is real or only a delusion, it must be manifest that it is generally accepted. The Goy does not, in fact, believe that the Jew is better than the non-Jew; the most he will admit is that the Jew is smarter at achieving worldly success. But this he ascribes to sharp practices, not to superior ability." -- H. L. Mencken, Minority Report

No surprise there. Dissenters always come under fire when they speak out against powerful interests. As that article says, 'Science never ceases to question. When a theory is taught as an unquestionable fact, it should be quite obvious that something is wrong. Today, science isn’t really science, and this is not only true for topics such as evolution, it’s true in many areas where science is used for an agenda by powerful and corrupt forces. 'Health sciences are a great example. As Bud Relman, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine said, “The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.” '

Related topic: An article published a few years ago titled, "Prominent Yale Professor Explains How Darwin’s Theory of Evolution Doesn’t Match The Science" but last time I checked that web site was down. It might still be found elsewhere. I did save it so here's the intro: Scientists who have rejected the basic premises of Darwin’s theory continue to be condemned and shunned by the mainstream community and powerful people. The average person who gets a bachelor’s degree in science is trained to simply repeat the same old textbook rhetoric as to why evolution is the be all and end all of human existence, without actually looking into why the theory is highly questionable. One of the latest dissenters is David Gelernter, a prominent scientist and distinguished professor of computer science at Yale University. He recently published an essay in the Claremont Review of Books explaining his objections to a premise behind Darwin’s theory. He first points to the famous “Cambrian Explosion” which occurred half a billion years ago, in which a number of new organisms, including the first ever known animals, pop up suddenly in the fossil record over a period of approximately 70 million years. Apparently, this giant explosion of spontaneous life was followed by evolution, slow growth and “scanty fossils, mainly of single celled organisms, dating back to the origins of life roughly three and a half billions years ago.” From here, he explains how Darwin’s theory predicts that new life forms evolve gradually from preceding ones. but if this is applied to the Cambrian creatures as well, it doesn’t work. The predecessors to the Cambrian creatures are missing, something that Darwin himself was disturbed by as well. Furthermore, even without this fact, many scientists have already used other aspects of the fossil record to demonstrate that Darwin’s theory is clearly wrong.

Super smart people don't need to resort to plagiarism.