• In case most of you have not noticed, I made changes to the donation amounts as well as the durations for all of the paid membership levels. Things are winding down here, and this seems to be the most prudent way to deal with the "end of life" period of this site.

    Contributor level members - $10 per 30 days
    Sponsors - Eliminated
    Benefactor level members - $25 per 30 days
    Endowment level members - $50 per 30 days

    Account Upgrades Page
  • Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

Why do people....... More.....

Ssthisto said:
However, there's a problem with this. According to the bible and the myths that go along with it, God most certainly DID create evil - God created the group of angels that later disagreed with him on how the universe should be run, God cast them down, God let them retain their powers, and God even took up his wayward angel Lucifer's challenge to do evil things, cruel things, to a faithful worshipper - Job. God placed the tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden - and if God is all-knowing and all powerful, God must certainly have known that the serpent would tempt Man and that Man would be weak - and God let it happen anyway.

Vengeful God/Loving God - it's the paradox in itself. If God is all-powerful, then God is not interested in preventing evil. If God is not all-powerful, then I could understand him giving Man free choice.
Click to expand...

God also did not force Eve to take the fruit from the serpent. It clearly states in the bible that we have free will and if we refuse to listen to God's word than that is our choice. He works in wonderous ways but i do not beleive he forces people to do anything for him. He is all powerful in a way that most people wouldn't see as "controlling everything"
 
surfrkidts said:
God also did not force Eve to take the fruit from the serpent. It clearly states in the bible that we have free will and if we refuse to listen to God's word than that is our choice. He works in wonderous ways but i do not beleive he forces people to do anything for him. He is all powerful in a way that most people wouldn't see as "controlling everything"
Click to expand...
Then God Is sadistic. Why would any being or entity give someone something like free will, and then punish them with eternal damnation for using it. That is not something an all-powerful, all-knowing, loving God would do. That is something an abusive parent would do.
 
I think it's pretty neat that all you guys KNOW what this supposed god DID and DID NOT do.

How do I get a membership in your all knowing cult? I want to know what ALL the gods think and do. Who needs mistique anyway? Highly over-rated, eh?
 
This is kinda Off the off topic conversation, but i found this interesting link. It talks about and verifies that dogs were first domesticated in asia, then the rest of the breeds of dogs followed in just the last 200 years. I'm sure all of you would like to read that.
 
ok, i feel that i have my page about ready. Evolutoinist will probably be pleased, with what all thoughts i have put into this. Creatoinist's and others will dismiss this, i'm fully sure of this. With all the stuff i have read and quicky studied so that i have a basis for this thesis, i have determined that evolution is VERY alive and well. It's happening all the time to this day still in africa. This is exlained in MY evolution theory.

Here is the link.Tell me what you all think.

This time i hope i got the right topic, I dont know what happened before...
 
I think this is all good! And I'd love to stay, but I think i am going to go have my teeth pulled.......just for fun!
 
Bringerofdoom said:
This is kinda Off the off topic conversation, but i found this interesting link. It talks about and verifies that dogs were first domesticated in asia, then the rest of the breeds of dogs followed in just the last 200 years. I'm sure all of you would like to read that.
Click to expand...

Does this mean then that all the legends of Native Americans, both those in the Northern parts such as Alaska and the entire continent of No. America are false?

What about Coyote, the trickster, what about stories of taming wolves? That has been documented for several thousand years, not 200. Or was that 200 a typo?
 
Right on, Monte!

. . . listening to you guys try to write about theology is almost as funny as listening to some of you talk about genetics. . .
Click to expand...
This is the absolute BEST post on this entire thread!!!
 
Monte said:
. . . Wiley Coyote- little guy could never get that roadrunner . . .
Click to expand...
Thats not why he's at the dentist right now! ......having his canines pulled!
He read this thread too!
 
wilomn said:
Does this mean then that all the legends of Native Americans, both those in the Northern parts such as Alaska and the entire continent of No. America are false?

What about Coyote, the trickster, what about stories of taming wolves? That has been documented for several thousand years, not 200. Or was that 200 a typo?
Click to expand...

i was just relinking and requoting stuff from the msn news.

All in the family
Ostrander’s group used their genetic data to construct an evolutionary tree showing which breeds were most closely related. The tree contained three relatively recent groups and one ancient one.

The oldest group includes dogs whose origins date back to antiquity — the very oldest ones being from Asia, such as the shar-pei and the chow, and from Africa, such as the basenji. Others, like the Afghan, come from the Middle East, while the Siberian husky and others come from the Arctic. These dogs are also the most genetically similar to wolves.

It may seem surprising that dogs with such different appearances and geographical origins are so closely related, but it’s consistent with one hypothesis that dogs were first domesticated from wolves in Asia. Some researchers have proposed that the early dogs then migrated with nomadic human groups to Africa and the Arctic and around Asia.

Looks can be deceiving
The other breeds outside this group didn’t emerge until the around the 1800s, underscoring the fact that appearances can be deceiving. For example, a small fluffy Shih Tzu, which the authors assigned to the ancient group of Asian dogs, is more closely related to the wolf than a German shepherd is.

The authors’ results also turned up a couple of breeds that are in fact much younger than previously thought. The pharaoh hound and the Ibizan hound, for example, are commonly believed to have ancient origins. Not so, according to their genetics. These dogs appear to be “re-creations” bred more recently from combinations of other breeds.

“There are stories and histories for every breed. It’s interesting to figure out how much of that lore is accurate and what new relationships you can pull out that aren’t necessarily known from the history books,” said Kruglyak.
Click to expand...
 
I disagree . . .

. . . I know the Schnauzer side of my Schnoodle, 'Bentley' - dates back to the 12th Century and Scotland's Sir William Wallace's travels into Europe during his childhood. During his war with King Edward the 1st "Longshanks" - he had a chance to meet with the Princess of Wales (a native of France), who, of course, owned a poodle. Their burgeoning romance, included the dogs - Schnauzer and poodle - which produced a Schnoodle - of which Bentley is a direct descendent . . .

You guys know nothing of natural history. Sheesh . . .
 

Attachments

  • bentley.jpg
    bentley.jpg
    326.4 KB · Views: 103
As i said before, i was quoting a msn news article. Even i thought the process at adapting wolves into dogs by humans was alot longer and done by other cultures.

Though i can also agree with that msn article too. I have worked with chows and if bred to other species of canine for certain generations can yield totally different dogs (NOT ugly mutts). I even own a male Chow crossed with labs for 3 generations (without inbreeding) it posses a genetic pattern. It's very similar to the pattern found on a rottweiler and the pattern appeared out of the blue just on him, in that litter. One of his sons in later breedings looked identical to him, besides some new head features from crossing back into labs..

Well anyways here is a picture of my dog, to show his pattern. It's recent, and he is shedding still. In the start of winter he actaully has chow-like fur.
 

Attachments

  • Kb.jpg
    Kb.jpg
    38.8 KB · Views: 92
Back
Top