Why Obama needs to be the next President.
-
Because most people I have talked to that don't believe in the Bible believe in big bang or other theories that can't explain where everything came from.
ryanb31 wrote:
Because most people I have talked to that don't believe in the Bible believe in big bang or other theories that can't explain where everything came from.
Theories are models that provide an explanation of observed processes in the material universe. They enable us to predict. Theories are constantly being tested, prediction versus observation. When its predictions do not match observations, a theory may be scrapped, or elaborated (e.g., Newton's 'universe' is a special case of Einstein's 'universe'). Therefore no true scientist 'believes' in any theory, but many believe in a god. Science is a methodology, it poses no threat to religion (except to contradict 'holy writ' on the nature of the material universe). It is not capable of proving or disproving the existence of gods.
Use carrots and sticks to force the little fish into the big tent - Anon
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Because most people I have talked to that don't believe in the Bible believe in big bang or other theories that can't explain where everything came from.
Theories are models that provide an explanation of observed processes in the material universe. They enable us to predict. Theories are constantly being tested, prediction versus observation. When its predictions do not match observations, a theory may be scrapped, or elaborated (e.g., Newton's 'universe' is a special case of Einstein's 'universe'). Therefore no true scientist 'believes' in any theory, but many believe in a god. Science is a methodology, it poses no threat to religion (except to contradict 'holy writ' on the nature of the material universe). It is not capable of proving or disproving the existence of gods.
Use carrots and sticks to force the little fish into the big tent - Anon
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Thanks for the lesson. Care to explain your point?
ryanb31 wrote:
Because most people I have talked to that don't believe in the Bible believe in big bang or other theories that can't explain where everything came from.
no true scientist 'believes' in any theory
Use carrots and sticks to force the little fish into the big tent - Anon
-
Yeah, odd how gas can change like the market. The station buys it at (hypothetical) 2.00 a gallon. When they say gas is up, they still sell it at a higher rate. Then they make 3.50 a gallon off the same stuff they were selling at 2.00 a minute ago. Makes no sense to me. I remember two things. First, when 911 hit they got fined for price gouging. Second, when I was in Oklahoma the gas was steadily rising. When it hit $2.50 a gallon the first time people quit their jobs to find work closer, moved, dropped out of school ,etc.. It was back down in the first week to the last "stable" price and held there until after I moved. (this was several years ago).
If it moves, compile it
loctrice wrote:
Yeah, odd how gas can change like the market. The station buys it at (hypothetical) 2.00 a gallon. When they say gas is up, they still sell it at a higher rate. Then they make 3.50 a gallon off the same stuff they were selling at 2.00 a minute ago. Makes no sense to me.
Gas stations actually make more money when gas prices are going down. A simplified model makes that clear... 1. Whole sale price $3.00, when station buys. Sells for $3.20. Next purchase wholesale price is $3.40. So station must pay more for same amount of gas as last time. So it loses. 2. Whole sale price $3.00, when station buys. Sells for $3.20. Next purchase wholesale price is $2.60. So station wins. Excluding limited markets, stations have a very strong competitive market because there are so many of them. So they keep prices as low as they can. Most stations prefer stable prices so they can predict it.
-
You have an obsession with Fox. I do not even watch or read the news, any news. You need a new conspiracy theory. Wikipedia can be changed by anyone. How is that better than youtube? So, why aren't you all over Dave, the original poster of this thread. He did not have ANY references, just his opinion. So, what is your problem if I post a video that is a COMPILATION, not a single source, of video and radio? All I was doing was bringing up the possibility not a fact, as I stated in the post.
ryanb31 wrote:
I do not even watch or read the news, any news.
Just curious how you have arrived at your current political views of the current president then. Or even the last one for that matter. But perhaps your definition of "news" is significantly different than mine.
-
It's simple really. His politics and socialist practices have deflated the dollar worldwide. That is a major contributing factor to our prices going up. The dollar doesn't buy as much as it used to.
ryanb31 wrote:
It's simple really. His politics and socialist practices have deflated the dollar worldwide. That is a major contributing factor to our prices going up.
Utter nonsense. You obviously have no grasp of economics in general nor that of the energy market. You also seem to be lacking in what the real impact of the president is as well as completely ignoring (or lack of knowledge) the impact of congress and the current make up of that body.
-
You claim I do not understand economics with what reasoning? You are the one that posted it is Obama's fault that gas is high. Not I. I pointed out a basic known fact. Supply and demand set the pricing for any commodity. Supply of gas is always getting lower and demand is always getting higher. Logically one can deduce the price will continue to rise. You also claimed Obama did this with his "socialist" ways and yet I pointed out how their are candidates that want to run against him clearly using more socialist ways than he. I am not taking it personally. I am poking and prodding because you start with claims as facts, then when you are proven wrong you say it is opinion. And then when it is shown that you did not claim it as opinion but as fact you go on a uni-vote campaign. It is you who take it too personally
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
I pointed out a basic known fact. Supply and demand set the pricing for any commodity.
Supply of gas is always getting lower and demand is always getting higher. Logically one can deduce the price will continue to rise.That of course is incredibly simplistic and has little to do with the short term price fluctuations (noting of course that there is a difference between absolute supply and limited short term perceived problems with supply channels.)
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I do not even watch or read the news, any news.
Just curious how you have arrived at your current political views of the current president then. Or even the last one for that matter. But perhaps your definition of "news" is significantly different than mine.
I watched the debates and visited his website. I do see articles people post from time to time but I do not visit any news site with any regularity. I actually used to visit CNN from time to time but it was so depressing. Nothing but bad articles. People cutting up their parents and putting them in their freezer, those types of stories. And then a few years back when California was voting on Prop 8, a few hours before polls closed CNN was claiming it was going to fail overwhelmingly and so I happened to check FOX news and they said it was a close race based on exit polls. Anyway, later that day after the polls closed and Prop 8 officially passed CNN did not even have the story anywhere. I searched all over the site. FOX reported it accurately. Anyway, news is depressing and very often incorrect and most often incomplete. Why bother? CP is my news site. :) Pity me.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
It's simple really. His politics and socialist practices have deflated the dollar worldwide. That is a major contributing factor to our prices going up.
Utter nonsense. You obviously have no grasp of economics in general nor that of the energy market. You also seem to be lacking in what the real impact of the president is as well as completely ignoring (or lack of knowledge) the impact of congress and the current make up of that body.
-
Just s SMALL piece of advice. You are not going to find accurate information from people who USED to be Mormons, got offended by something, and now claim to tell the truth. exmormon.org is your source. Just to be fair to you, I actually read almost all of the first 3 paragraphs on that site and there is so much incorrect about it there is no point in continuing. I guess if exmormon.org is your source, I can understand where you come from. I invite you to go to mormon.org instead if you want to know what the Church teaches. And no, the church has not changed.
ryanb31 wrote:
Just s SMALL piece of advice. You are not going to find accurate information from people who USED to be Mormons, got offended by something, and now claim to tell the truth. exmormon.org is your source.
So to be clear... One can't learn anything about communism by talking to someone who used to be a communist? One can't learn anything about Catholicism by talking to an ex-priest? One can't learn anything about heroin addiction by talking to an ex-addict? One can't learn anything about scienctology by talking to ex-members? etc... Or is it just Mormons that have the exalted position that ex-members immediately lose all knowledge of that group when they leave?
-
ryanb31 wrote:
If you do not believe in God you certainly will not be able to understand the answer.
lol. Certainly no solipsism there.
If you did not believe in the wind how could you understand air currents, weather patterns, etc? It's the same thing. You can't understand the more concepts if you first do not have an understanding of the basics. You mock what you do not understand. That shows your level of ignorance. Instead of politely disagreeing, you mock.
-
The real issue is Obama is not even (likely) a citizen of the United States which goes against our constitution. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwhKuunp8D8&feature=player_embedded[^] The first clip may be doctored but most of them are not. And, the main point still stands even if Obama did or did not admit it himself. He is not eligible to be the President, yet there he is. That is what is most messed up.
ryanb31 wrote:
The real issue is Obama is not even (likely) a citizen of the United States which goes against our constitution.
Nonsense.
ryanb31 wrote:
And, the main point still stands even if Obama did or did not admit it himself. He is not eligible to be the President, yet there he is. That is what is most messed up.
The good ol' US, where any crackpot can spout any ridiculous theory regardless of how outlandish it might be. How many magic crystals are in your wallet?
-
He was born on US soil, as I understand it. However, if that does not qualify then of course he should not be able to run as president. I am not a lawyer nor an expert on what qualifies on natural born but I do believe our constitution needs to be upheld, regardless of who it is.
-
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
I pointed out a basic known fact. Supply and demand set the pricing for any commodity.
Supply of gas is always getting lower and demand is always getting higher. Logically one can deduce the price will continue to rise.That of course is incredibly simplistic and has little to do with the short term price fluctuations (noting of course that there is a difference between absolute supply and limited short term perceived problems with supply channels.)
Sure is. Is it really much more simplier than blaming the President for price changes though? :-\ I just think people that gripe about gas prices and then blame it on the president have no clue. So 'simplifying' in such a matter atleast gets them off that topic, cause clearly they have no clue and it is pointless banter. Same people that call Obama a socialist and gripe then support Newt's $2.50 plan :wtf:
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Just s SMALL piece of advice. You are not going to find accurate information from people who USED to be Mormons, got offended by something, and now claim to tell the truth. exmormon.org is your source.
So to be clear... One can't learn anything about communism by talking to someone who used to be a communist? One can't learn anything about Catholicism by talking to an ex-priest? One can't learn anything about heroin addiction by talking to an ex-addict? One can't learn anything about scienctology by talking to ex-members? etc... Or is it just Mormons that have the exalted position that ex-members immediately lose all knowledge of that group when they leave?
No, that is not clear. You can learn some things but how much truth are you going to learn from a disgruntled ex? You have millions of active members and the church continues to grow. So, it would be foolish to use a few disgruntled ex's as your ONLY source.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
The real issue is Obama is not even (likely) a citizen of the United States which goes against our constitution.
Nonsense.
ryanb31 wrote:
And, the main point still stands even if Obama did or did not admit it himself. He is not eligible to be the President, yet there he is. That is what is most messed up.
The good ol' US, where any crackpot can spout any ridiculous theory regardless of how outlandish it might be. How many magic crystals are in your wallet?
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I am not a lawyer nor an expert on what qualifies on natural born...
What a surprise.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I am not a lawyer nor an expert on what qualifies on natural born...
What a surprise.
-
If you did not believe in the wind how could you understand air currents, weather patterns, etc? It's the same thing. You can't understand the more concepts if you first do not have an understanding of the basics. You mock what you do not understand. That shows your level of ignorance. Instead of politely disagreeing, you mock.
ryanb31 wrote:
Then again, if you do not believe in the Bible one would assume you believe everything was created from nothing. Now there is a story to make fun of.
ryanb31 wrote:
You mock what you do not understand. That shows your level of ignorance.
Indeed it does.
ryanb31 wrote:
If you did not believe in the wind how could you understand air currents, weather patterns, etc?
Please explain what "believe in the wind" means.
Use carrots and sticks to force the little fish into the big tent - Anon