Temporary Injunction against USAPA filed today

[nic4us]

There is no way in hell you're a 133.

Those twenty question internet IQ test don't count??????

 

[aquagreen73s]

I'm moving to Asheville! Can't wait!!! 😀

Nothing but granolas and retired folk up there. BORING. Rather be in DC. Gerogetown. Now that's livin'!

 

[aquagreen73s]

Hitchikers was from the late 70's. In it there was this thing called a babel fish. A babel fish was a fish about the size of a small goldfish, that if you put in your ear, would instantly translate any language, so that all the races of the galaxy could understand one another. The idea that something so mindbogglingly useful would have evovled naturally was then used as an arguement for both the existence and the non-existence of God.

Interesting. I would bet that best results are attained if illegal narcotics are first ingested. The more LSD, the more verbose of a fish in your ear?

 

[autofixer]

Nothing but granolas and retired folk up there. BORING. Rather be in DC. Gerogetown. Now that's livin'!

Good for you guys. I'm moving to PHX. Housing is dirt cheap there and I want to do the PHX-Hawaii year around...no winter weather. 😀

 

[Move2CLT]

It's yours. Enjoy the 8am arrivals into PHX.

 

[ggiby]

Nothing but granolas and retired folk up there. BORING. Rather be in DC. Gerogetown. Now that's livin'!

Wow... you must have lots of money.... Can you afford it? DC is a pretty junior base just because of the costs of everything......

 

[CallawayGolf]

Hitchikers was from the late 70's. In it there was this thing called a babel fish. A babel fish was a fish about the size of a small goldfish, that if you put in your ear, would instantly translate any language, so that all the races of the galaxy could understand one another. The idea that something so mindbogglingly useful would have evovled naturally was then used as an arguement for both the existence and the non-existence of God.

Well that explains a lot more than Wikipedia did and now I understand why you referenced it. I suppose I would have enjoyed that aspect of the story since I was once on each side of that kind of debate. When I was a young atheist, armed with just enough high school biology to sound smart, I would challenge my Christian friends with all kinds of made-up facts and what I thought were logical conclusions that proved that Carl Sagan was spot on that the Universe didn't need a Creator and rather "proved" that He didn't exist. I would pull things out my ..., well, out of the air like "gorillas and orangutangs have the same number of hair follicles per square inch of skin as humans so that proves we evolved from lower primates". It sounded logical at the time, but its not like there was a shred of evidence to support my rather absurd leaps in causal relationships.

Now that I have actually studied the scientifically verifiable facts, I don't have to pull things out of thin air. I know that my position on the veracity of special creation is fully defensible while those who hold to Darwinian evolution must, of necessity, choose to be willfully ignorant of the scientific data that exists. For example (and there are tens of thousands more), we know that we live in a cause and effect universe so that every effect has a precedent cause. Of course you can't have an infinite regression of causes or you will never have a starting point from which all things began as scientists once claimed. Based on Einstein's theory (now proven as a scientific fact) everyone knows that the universe is not eternal and that it had a marked beginning point. This is where the concept of a Big Bang came from. Of course the Big Bang Theory does not and cannot answer what preceded the Big Bang or specifically where the matter and energy came from for the Big Bang explosion? Any honest and reputable scientist will admit that there are simply no viable atheistic solutions to these first-cause questions. The only logical and scientifically tenable solution is that a "Cause" that does not exist in or that is subject to the same finite laws in the known universe, and who would logically be greater than all of the observable forces in the universe, had to be the catalyst which caused the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. There is simply no way to deny this need for a first-cause without resorting to fanciful and illogical tales that simply show how desperate atheists are to deny the implications of the facts that lead to a Creator that they willingly deny. One of my favorite quotes from a Harvard biologist that speaks directly to this same point but in the context of biological evolution is:

One only has to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that spontaneous generation of a living organisms is impossible; yet, I choose to believe that which I know to be impossible rather than accept the unthinkable, special Creation.​

 

[crazystnic]

Hey afterbirth, you can stay on LOA 93 then. I'm already a Captain and I make more than you do. Come to think of it, so do the Repubic guys. Full pay to the last day was it? What a joke you guys are.

Most EAST F/O's make more than west based on Longevity and years of service.

 

[Res Judicata]

Most EAST F/O's make more than west based on Longevity and years of service.

Great!! Glad you enjoy it because that's where you're staying for the foreseeable future...YEARS.

 

[Art at ISP]

Nothing but granolas and retired folk up there. BORING. Rather be in DC. Gerogetown. Now that's livin'!

Georgetown is sweet--my daughter lives there--but I am payin' for it. And let me tell you it has NOT suffered the declines in real estate values the rest of the country has.... I have the double whammy-private housing plus tuition..... good thing she's a good kid with a 3.85 GPA.

 

[autofixer]

Great!! Glad you enjoy it because that's where you're staying for the foreseeable future...YEARS.

Most East F/Os HAVE already been captains--a couple of times and could be today; we just don't have little thingies and big egos that require us to commute to fulfill that void in our life.

 

[nic4us]

Well that explains a lot more than Wikipedia did and now I understand why you referenced it. I suppose I would have enjoyed that aspect of the story since I was once on each side of that kind of debate. When I was a young atheist, armed with just enough high school biology to sound smart, I would challenge my Christian friends with all kinds of made-up facts and what I thought were logical conclusions that proved that Carl Sagan was spot on that the Universe didn't need a Creator and rather "proved" that He didn't exist. I would pull things out my ..., well, out of the air like "gorillas and orangutangs have the same number of hair follicles per square inch of skin as humans so that proves we evolved from lower primates". It sounded logical at the time, but its not like there was a shred of evidence to support my rather absurd leaps in causal relationships.

Now that I have actually studied the scientifically verifiable facts, I don't have to pull things out of thin air. I know that my position on the veracity of special creation is fully defensible while those who hold to Darwinian evolution must, of necessity, choose to be willfully ignorant of the scientific data that exists. For example (and there are tens of thousands more), we know that we live in a cause and effect universe so that every effect has a precedent cause. Of course you can't have an infinite regression of causes or you will never have a starting point from which all things began as scientists once claimed. Based on Einstein's theory (now proven as a scientific fact) everyone knows that the universe is not eternal and that it had a marked beginning point. This is where the concept of a Big Bang came from. Of course the Big Bang Theory does not and cannot answer what preceded the Big Bang or specifically where the matter and energy came from for the Big Bang explosion? Any honest and reputable scientist will admit that there are simply no viable atheistic solutions to these first-cause questions. The only logical and scientifically tenable solution is that a "Cause" that does not exist in or that is subject to the same finite laws in the known universe, and who would logically be greater than all of the observable forces in the universe, had to be the catalyst which caused the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. There is simply no way to deny this need for a first-cause without resorting to fanciful and illogical tales that simply show how desperate atheists are to deny the implications of the facts that lead to a Creator that they willingly deny. One of my favorite quotes from a Harvard biologist that speaks directly to this same point but in the context of biological evolution is:

Big bang came from Georges Lemaitre and the first observational support came through Edwin Hubble's findings, not Einstein. Also, Hubble blew holes in a couple of Einstein's theories, which BTW relativity remains.

Other than that, I hope you enjoyed the story of the Babel Fish.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Big bang came from Georges Lemaitre and the first observational support came through Edwin Hubble's findings, not Einstein. Also, Hubble blew holes in a couple of Einstein's theories, which BTW relativity remains.

Other than that, I hope you enjoyed the story of the Babel Fish.

Thanks. I never intended to imply that Einstein proposed the Big Bang theory. It was the implications of having all four physical properties of time, space, matter and energy being relative to the velocity of the observer, rather than universal constants, that radically shifted the old-school "scientific" thinking that we lived in an eternal universe which somehow always existed without a beginning or a Beginner.

Even Einstein didn't prefer to admit that the universe was finite because he likely knew that the implications would lead objective thinkers back to a biblical model of Creation. However once science determined that a finite universe was the only acceptable conclusion, men like Lemaitre and Hubble began to develop cosmological models that referenced a singular event that began the processes of star and planet formations. The actual term Big Bang was introduced much later by Fred Hoyle who intended the term to be used as a pejorative for any scientist that believed in such a singular event as he too knew the implications of such a model would invoke references back to a biblical model, and no atheistic scientist wants to have people actually thinking that Genesis 1:1 was correct all along.

Sorry if my post wasn't clear on that point.

 

[Art at ISP]

I thought the Big Bang Theory came from Chuck Lorre

 

[Move2CLT]

Most East F/Os HAVE already been captains--a couple of times and could be today; we just don't have little thingies and big egos that require us to commute to fulfill that void in our life.

You guys define egos. That's all you care about is the fourth stripe. So much so that you're will to fly the EMB yo have it. Pathetic.