mike_rad

On 2/25/2024 at 1:52 PM, retarius said:

I wonder why he killed him?

 

Didn't like the music he played?

On 7/26/2023 at 9:09 AM, fredwiggy said:

 Dogs, especially larger ones, should not be allowed to be alone with small children, because children sometimes tease, sit on or hit dogs, and any dog will try to protect itself using what it knows best, biting. 

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. 

On 7/31/2023 at 11:25 AM, JBChiangRai said:

Agreed.

 

I view believers in modern religions with the same incredulity that I would someone believing in an Egyptian or Roman god.

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."

On 7/31/2023 at 11:24 AM, ozimoron said:

However small the odds of that happening, and I tend to think it's not that small given the billions of galaxies and the eternity of time.

 

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.  

On 7/31/2023 at 5:26 AM, HappyExpat57 said:

The vast majority of us are much more attractive WITH clothes.

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

 -- Mark Twain

1 hour ago, No Forwarding Address said:

Hello Folks, Concerning SCBEasy.net.  I tried last night and of course the banner (all in Thai) came up that the SCBEasy.net had been discontinued on 07/15/23, after a few try's, was able to download the mobile app - but there is an accessability setting on my phone that I need, but blocks the app from opening.  I am not in Thailand at this time, don't expect to get back till end of year............question is, how can I continue to check my balances if the mobile app won't open??  Any ideas.........would save me a lot of anxiety - always checked at least once a week on the scbeasy.net site on my computer - never use my phone for anything 'cept talk n text, once in awhile for new or directions.  Cheers

Seems they didn't consider overseas customers. Typical. 

3 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

In my view it is explained by the passage of time.  The odds of that spark are infinitesimally small in one year, but we are talking billions of years, it just needed that one spark to create life, every living thing is descended from that.

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?

2 hours ago, KannikaP said:

Some websites will NOT connect via a bookmark. My banks do luckily, as do many of my sites, but I probably imagine that they connect more quickly! 

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.

5 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Or more likely, he is fictitious 

 

Able & unwilling makes him unworthy in my book.

 

Are Ra, Osiris & Isis any less likely than any other god?

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.

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

Either God exists, created the universe and cares about every living thing in it, in which case every living thing in it answers ( eventually ) to God, or God created the universe and left it to get on with it till the last sun dies [...]

'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/

17 hours ago, TravelerEastWest said:

Jews are around 2/10ths of a percent of the worlds population yet 20% of the Nobel prize winners are Jewish. Why is that?

 

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

On 7/29/2023 at 2:25 PM, GammaGlobulin said:

If YOU consider Gelernter a "prominent scientists", then all meaningful discussion is OVER...Here is why......

 

 

Above image can be found at:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gelernter

 

 

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.
 

22 hours ago, Spiderfingers said:

To the best of my knowledge, Albert Einstein was a scientist and "super-smart."

 

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

18 hours ago, RocketDog said:

What nonsense!

On regular basis scientists confirm Einstein's work. Gravitational lensing is a good example. His very earliest work showing that light can also manifest in

particle form is another. That has long been accepted as demonstrably correct from the simplest of experiments.

To date his grossest error was a refusal to accept his own findings, which laid the groundwork for quantum theory. Oh, and he also suffered the God Delusion. Hey nobody is perfect.

Not at all. See the discussion:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Challenge_the_Claim_Special_Theory_of_Relativity_Has_Been_Disproved_Theoretically

2 minutes ago, pomchop said:

same except if u mean the ones at bus station that meet ekamai bus that is 50 baht and doesn't leave til full...bolt car quicker and easier for few baht more..

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, that's what I meant. In fact, I don't know any other bus station.

Bolt car? That's news to me. My guess is it's a taxi.

Last time I was there it was 10 baht anywhere along the route, and 20 baht from the bus station. Still the same?

Just curious.

1 hour ago, proton said:

 Hundreds of thousands are attacked in the USA every year and in the UK the NHS spends about 70 million a year treating dog bites. Killing by dogs continues to rise, dogs are not mans best friend they are dangerous and violent. When it comes to soi dogs the government are never going to do anything and the neutering schemes do not work even locally and where they are done the dogs remain pests. One idea would be to offer a bounty for dead dogs handed in, Thais would leave their hypocritical objection behind if there was cash on offer.

In the US the figure is more like around 3 million every year, and that was 10 years or so ago.

Solution: hold the owner directly responsible. If a dog causes death then the owner should be charged with manslaughter or the like. In the case of minor injuries the owner should pay for all medical costs plus compensation for all the trauma caused.

4 hours ago, jacko45k said:

And you can bet your last dollar they won't be shelling out for any neutering operation to prevent another litter of uncared for dogs. 

Not only that, but when a dog gets sick, or injured from fighting with other dogs, they won't pay for veterinary care, further demonstrating they are not their pets.

I've seen it in monasteries in Thailand. Local people dump dogs in the monastery and the monks will feed them yet when they get sick or injured or otherwise in need of veterinary care the monks do nothing. 

So much for the so-called compassion of Buddhists.

On 7/20/2023 at 2:41 PM, JensenZ said:

Each Soi dog is someone's pet.

No they are not. Because they will not take responsibility for them if they cause any damage to property or even worse, attack people and cause injury/death. People feed them because they take pity on them, not because they are their pets.

On 7/19/2023 at 11:32 PM, ujayujay said:

 

Perhaps your simple mind has failed to notice that the topic of this article refers to Thailand.....not Australia

The poster I was replying to wasn't just talking about Thailand.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

If you bothered to look up those links, you could have done a little more research on how many lives have been saved by dogs, or would that make too much sense?

Tell that to the parents of those children and toddlers killed by dog attacks.

2 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Dogs save lives almost daily worldwide

Yeah right. Have a look at some of these headlines:

first thing in the morning and sitting for the morning bowel movement and the seat is bloody cold! Quite a shock!!

Try squatting, then only your feet get cold.