Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Circumcision and other unique implications pointing to God
All the people of Abraham were told to be circumcised.
Circumcision May Cut Risk of HIV By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer 40 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Circumcising adult men may reduce by half their risk of getting the AIDS virus through heterosexual intercourse, the U.S. government announced Wednesday, as it shut down two studies in Africa testing the link.
The National Institutes of Health closed the studies in Kenya and Uganda early, when safety monitors took a look at initial results this week and spotted the protection. The studies' uncircumcised men are being offered the chance to undergo the procedure.
The link between male circumcision and HIV prevention was noted as long ago as the late 1980s. The first major clinical trial, of 3,000 men in South Africa, found last year that circumcision cut the HIV risk by 60 percent.
Still, many AIDS specialists had been awaiting the NIH's results as a final confirmation.
"Male circumcision can lower both an individual's risk of infection, and hopefully the rate of HIV spread through the community," said AIDS expert Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 2025 Location: NY Highscores:59 Thanks: 560 Thanked: 169 times in 116 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: More proof of God.
Asana you really throw the word proof around recklessly.
What about the many churches who preach using condoms is sinful?
Condoms are known to help stop the spread of aids, yet condoms are still routinely rejected by the Catholic Church, amongst others.
You have again focused on one of the few positives of church ritual and of course given credit to god's wisdom, but also ignored the huge plethora of negatives and false assertions.
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More proof of God.
Quote:What about the many churches who preach using condoms is sinful?
Using condoms are not sinful at all.
Quote:Condoms are known to help stop the spread of aids, yet condoms are still routinely rejected by the Catholic Church, amongst others.
I don't reject the use of condoms at all and that was not the message I was attempting to relay. I was simply pointing out that in the Bible God told Abraham to practice circumcision. I am circumcised and I've never had an infection. I also know people who haven't been circumcised and they have had minor infections. I just thought it was interesting to point that out as more proof of God.
Quote:You have again focused on one of the few positives of church ritual and of course given credit to god's wisdom, but also ignored the huge plethora of negatives and false assertions.
Condoms good. condom and circumcision even better.
Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 185
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More proof of God.
Not proof, evidence, and not particularly strong evidence at that.
Although its interestng I'd been wondering where circumcisions originated and if it serves a useful purpose.
Does anyone know the historical origin of this ritual?
Quote:What about the many churches who preach using condoms is sinful?
Condoms are known to help stop the spread of aids, yet condoms are still routinely rejected by the Catholic Church, amongst others.
True, although as far as I know the word Condom never once appears in the bible. I think the Church needs to seperate the bull shit from the stuff thats actually useful.
For example in the bible it indeed does say sodomy is an abomination, However it also says on the same page that wearing a shirt woven from two fabrics and planting two crops in the same feild are also abominations. I have a feeling that this entire section was just a smear against the romans who: Loved sodomy Wore elaborate clothing (if they were rich) And most likely planted more then one crop in the same feild. And shaved their faces which is another thing which the bible says you aren't supposed to do. Edited by: MaesterAuron151 at: 12/14/06 11:06 am
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
More proof of God!
Who taught the idiot savant? Spirit does exist! God is Real!
What is an idiot savant?
Current research theories show that intelligence is non-local and not bound to the brain. Sometimes nature offers insight into a particular subject by presenting a baffling enigma and contradictory example. Intelligence's contradictory enigma is the idiot-savant.
The word idiot usually refers to a simpleton, in contrast to the word "savant" in French that means "learned one." Idiot savants are a subgroup of a class of people called idiots with an IQ of about 25.
Idiot savants are a group of humans that are incapable of learning, writing or reading, yet they have unlimited access to specific, accurate knowledge in the fields of mathematics, music, and other precise areas. Now the irony of an idiot-savant is that this group of individuals does not acquire knowledge by learning as the average human does. They mysteriously 'know' explicit, exact, correct information. One may wonder: "How do idiots savants know certain information or possess certain skills?" By whatever means they obtain this information, they undermine current definitions about intelligence. Does their knowledge show that a source of intelligence exists? Is it possible to tap into this source and not know of its existence?
Dustin Hoffman made idiot-savants famous in the Hollywood movie "Rain Man." He played the role of a mathematical genius able to keep track of cards at the casino, yet unable to go to the bathroom alone or to make simple decisions about what clothes to wear or foods to eat. Modern science cannot explain this phenomenon.
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More proof of God!
aligning the development of the brain with the development of the body poses a massive problem for evolutionary scientists. Simply looking at a possible evolutionary event brings the dilemma to light. Imagine a mutation, or series of mutations, that improve the eyesight of an organism. For the brain to be able to process this information, it either must evolve after the eye, before the eye, or at the same time.
Evolving the brain after the eye means that the eye's function is not immediately usable, and so cannot be an advantage. Also, the likelihood of a random brain mutation granting use of the new ability is low once, let alone for millions of mutations over billions of years. Evolving before the eye is similar, in that the brain would have wasted time, growth, and resources on something not useable. This would be a disadvantage, which natural selection indicates is a sign of impending extinction.
Evolving the brain at the same time as the eye is the only explanation that allows the function to be an actual advantage. However, simultaneous mutations in the eye and brain that work together to provide an advantage cannot be expected to occur repeatedly in every species on earth. There is no doubt that this would be a useful event, but that is not an explanation for how it could happen.
Even the terminology used by scientists to explain the evolution of the human brain sounds anything but random: The homo sapiens brain evolution was a "special event." Rapid evolution was "needed." The brain evolved "in preparation" for our complex social structure. Even those dedicated to a random, naturalistic explanation for life cannot avoid using terminology that implies purpose, intent, and intelligence.
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 2025 Location: NY Highscores:59 Thanks: 560 Thanked: 169 times in 116 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: More junk from the religious.
Asana
Quote:Now the irony of an idiot-savant is that this group of individuals does not acquire knowledge by learning as the average human does. They mysteriously 'know' explicit, exact, correct information. One may wonder: "How do idiots savants know certain information or possess certain skills?"
First of all savants and the autistic do not learn as we do that is true, but it is not true that their knowledge just appears in their head. Their skills are still learned through exposure to material.
Quote:Evolving the brain after the eye means that the eye's function is not immediately usable, and so cannot be an advantage.
What about other senses? Taste, smell, touch, some animals have these senses at a much higher ability than humans including sight, but still have developed brains.
Some snakes can smell/taste heat and vibrations from several yards away eagles can see far better than humans but have less developed brains. brain development most likely paralleled sensory development (not just sight) because it had to as more information became available.
Quote:Also, the likelihood of a random brain mutation granting use of the new ability is low once, let alone for millions of mutations over billions of years. Evolving before the eye is similar, in that the brain would have wasted time, growth, and resources on something not useable. This would be a disadvantage, which natural selection indicates is a sign of impending extinction.
Again you are misinterpreting the order of natural selection. More intelligence is never a handicap, even without eyes an organism can more rapidly evaluate the information it gets from other senses. Thus increasing its chances for survival and advancement of the new gene.
Quote:Evolving the brain at the same time as the eye is the only explanation that allows the function to be an actual advantage.
Again the other senses are ignored.
Quote:However, simultaneous mutations in the eye and brain that work together to provide an advantage cannot be expected to occur repeatedly in every species on earth.
They haven't. There are very intelligent organisms with poor eyesight and very primitive organisms with superior eyesight.
Quote:There is no doubt that this would be a useful event, but that is not an explanation for how it could happen.
I do not believe that any explanation was given other than natural selection which advances survival endowments in what ever form they appear.
Quote:Even the terminology used by scientists to explain the evolution of the human brain sounds anything but random:
Because it is not random it is natural selection, which is not random.
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More junk from the religious.
If Natural selection is a deterministic process; a beneficial mutation will always reach fixation in an ideal population (i.e., natural selection will cause it to replace all the other alleles), and a deleterious mutation will always be lost.
The problem is that is not the case otherwise cancer and other deleterious genetic anomolies would not reach fixation as they do in some populations.
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More junk from the religious.
Actually placing "if" in front of the statement shows that the statement was put in question. If I would have said "I think" then you would be accurate to state that it is some sort of plagiarism.
Web definition for plagiarism: the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation.
In the case in question it can not be considered unethical . I have been leaving links of my sources. However, I didn't deem it necessary in that case as I was not using it as if it was my own idea. In-fact I objected to it. Also I often Capitalize words that I deem Important so it was no mistake to leave Natural Selection capitalized.
I am never attempting to be unfair or unethical. "material far above your own educational level"? I don't think so, otherwise I wouldn't have used it effectively enough to garner your response.
Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 185
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More junk from the religious.
Quote: He had never seen a piano before!
But had he heard what he was playing before?
Quote: Simply put, the savant cannot think or comprehend abstract ideas, even in his field of knowledge. If you ask a savant how he knows the information he conveys, Pearce says he would be confused with the abstractness of the question (Evolution's End, p. 4).
But within his own feild can a Savant gain new knowledge or solve problems?
To me it sounds as if these savants have minds which work more like our computers. Our computers are capable of doing all sorts of complex calculations and solveing complicated problems. Yet they have virtually no other reasoning skills. A computer can't be taught history or psychology, at best it can repeat information which has already been logged into it.
I have no doubt that you could design a machine capable of analyzing an instrument then immediately playing a perfect song which it has previously heard. The machine would not be recieving revelation from god it would merely be doing what its designed to do, no different then a new born human knowing how to breath or eat. Savants are simply such machines the only difference is they occur naturally, there's nothing physically impossible about their abilities.
Joined: May 2002 Posts: 12133 Images: 0 Location: Florida Highscores:145 Thanks: 856 Thanked: 378 times in 300 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: More junk from the religious.
Asana
Quote:Actually placing "if" in front of the statement shows that the statement was put in question. If I would have said "I think" then you would be accurate to state that it is some sort of plagiarism.
Actually, it wasn't a "statement" at all. Your addition of the word "If" made the following words nonsense and grammatically illogical.
Asana, this is a warning. Please think about what I say here and don't argue with me because, quite frankly, most people around here are pissed at me for even allowing you to remain as a part of this community. I've refrained from banning you for a variety of reasons, but I'm not going to accept plagiarism and lying. You plagiarized and are now lying. And I'm not going to debate this with you.
Listen to what I say carefully. And this is not up for negotiation. If you want to copy and paste someone else's words you are welcome to do so, but you must identify the copied and pasted words as a quotation and then tell us from whom you are borrowing. Anything less than this is not acceptable here.
You do not have the right to copy and paste an entire paragraph someone else wrote, then attach the word "If" to the first sentence, and then not tell your audience that the "If" is your own writing, while the remainder of the paragraph is taken entirely from another web site. If you cannot grasp how this is unethical than I truly feel sorry for you. I'd like to think that anyone participating in this community has at least a little bit of common courtesy and common sense.
Quote:Web definition for plagiarism: the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation.
This is precisely what you did. Did you set the quote within quotation marks? Did you use the "quote" button off to the left when composing your post? Did you mention the real authors name in your post? Did you include a link to where you stole the material?
Quote:In the case in question it can not be considered unethical.
Yes, it sure is unethical. Don't do it even one more time on BookTalk. Not one single more time.
Quote:I have been leaving links of my sources.
But you didn't in the post we are discussing. You copied, pasted, added one single word, and then hit the "Add Reply" button. Anyone reading the post assumes you wrote the material yourself as you created that impression.
And it is NOT proper citation to copy and paste another persons writing and then add a link at the bottom of your post to where you found the material. You need to make the copied and pasted material set apart from your own words, and not blended in so that only Allah knows what you wrote and what was written by someone else. Learn to use quotation marks or the quote button or don't quote people. Or at least use the -hr- button to separate the copied and pasted material from your writing.
Quote:However, I didn't deem it necessary in that case as I was not using it as if it was my own idea.
How were we to know your post wasn't your own writing? The fact is your failed to use the common techniques for citing a source and this will not be tolerated.
Quote:I am never attempting to be unfair or unethical. "material far above your own educational level"? I don't think so, otherwise I wouldn't have used it effectively enough to garner your response.
Asana, the reason I spotted your plagiarism is because the sentence doesn't make sense. You didn't use the quote "effectively" at all. I'm calling you on it because the quotation ONLY makes sense as the original author created it and doesn't make sense with the addition of the word "If" at the beginning. Jesus. You can't just add the word "If" and sit back and think you've now challenged a sentence. My God you can't be for real.
I also spotted the plagiarism easily because of the improper use of a capital letter AND a particular punctuation mark, specifically the semi-colon, that you have never before used on any of your previous posts.
Asana, you're pissing me off. Granted, I'm not in a good mood right now anyway, but you're pushing me. My patience and tolerance are the only reason you're still here. Please, do not plagiarize even one more time. And to make this simple let's use my definition of plagiarization and my rules for how to cite sources. Forget Dictionary.com and everything you ever read or dreamed about this matter.
It is times like this when I am reminded that morality and religious belief are not necessarily linked. Or at least the relationship is not positive and might even by inverse. Here you are a "witness" of "the real" and you're lying to me. Why is it that a bunch of heathen atheists can cite their sources and be far more honest than you? Think about it. Edited by: Chris OConnor at: 12/18/06 10:18 pm
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 195
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: More junk from the religious.
Quote:But within his own feild can a Savant gain new knowledge or solve problems?
To me it sounds as if these savants have minds which work more like our computers. Our computers are capable of doing all sorts of complex calculations and solveing complicated problems. Yet they have virtually no other reasoning skills. A computer can't be taught history or psychology, at best it can repeat information which has already been logged into it.
I have no doubt that you could design a machine capable of analyzing an instrument then immediately playing a perfect song which it has previously heard. The machine would not be recieving revelation from god it would merely be doing what its designed to do, no different then a new born human knowing how to breath or eat. Savants are simply such machines the only difference is they occur naturally, there's nothing physically impossible about their abilities.
You are still not understanding that a computer has been filled with information from a programmer, it is programmed to compute data. The "Idiot Savant" has no programming unless you consider that God programmed them to know certain things as a sign of God existing.
There is no computer anywhere that can do anything at all without a program in it. All computers work according to the information that has been programmed in it's memory.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.
Support BookTalk.org
BookTalk.org is being upgraded to a totally new design. This upgrade is expensive. Any support would be VERY helpful! See who supports us.
Make a donation
PEOPLE PAYING FOR OUR UPGRADE:
• afv - $10 May
• LevV - $50 March
• Dexter - $10 March
• supernova38 - $25 March
• Oblivion - $20 March
• jheimlich - $20 February
• Robert Tulip - $50 February
• giselle - $50 January
Children here need worming
regularly, and I think I
need to buy more worming
tablets, so while my friends
sit on the beach, I have to
catch bush taxis up to the… more
The children have a long way
to walk to the nearest primary
school. At the moment they are
in temporary accommodation,
with volunteer teachers. There
is community land available,
a… more
The price of The 12th Disciple
has been updated to $3.99 for
Kindle readers. The book is
still available for free to
borrow for Amazon Prime
members. To be
competitive, and s… more
The 12th Disciple has been
reviewed by two different
people on Amazon. They
purchased the Kindle edition;
one in the US, one in the
UK. One review was
5-stars (US) and the oth… more
I'd like to say I've
been reading Harry Potter
since the day the world renown
series appeared on the
scene. Unfortunately,
the truth is I began reading
Harry Potter… more
Easter teaches many of us the
importance of redemption and
resurrection. Regardless of
what faith people follow, the
story of Jesus Christ has been
told in many languages in many
c… more
Our Book Talk will begin on
Wednesday, May 2nd. I look
forward to hearing about your
learning and classroom
experiences with Number Talks
as it all unfolds...
NONOPPOSITIONAL NONVIOLENCE
“The minute you conquer the
fear of death, at that moment
you are free. I submit to you
that if a man hasnÂ’t
discovered something that he
will die f… more
Yesterday, when I went to feed
Jeni the donkey, I noticed
swarms of bees entering
EbrimaÂ’s house through the
cracks in the door. We both
had a look, but he didnÂ’t
open his door… more
Whether you want to implement
number talks but are unsure of
how to begin or have
experience but want more
guidance in crafting
purposeful problems, this
dynamic multimedia resourc… more
Do you feel entitled? For
years I have listened to and,
in some instances, complained
that some people in America
feel entitled. For years I
have watched as these people
are portra… more
On Fat Tuesday and Ash
Wednesday of 2012, The 12th
Disciple was free to Kindle
users on both days. In all,
about 550 worldwide Kindle
users downloaded a copy of the
book.
‘Sacred Are the Brave’ a
collection of short stories
about the nonviolent
revolutions 1986-1989 is now
available in Kindle. Each of
the nine stories has
characters who are just
… more
The Weekend TrippersÂ’ is the
true story of Rfn Ted Taylor
and his part in the heroic
last stand in Calais May 1940.
The Weekend Trippers is based
on TedÂ’s diaries written at
the… more
Tell your friends when to meet you in the BookTalk.org Chat Room.
If you enjoy business bestsellers and would like to expand your business knowledge check out the quality book summaries offered by the world's leading book summary company.
BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.
Tweet This Topic
You can't just add the word "If" and sit back and think you've now challenged a sentence. My God you can't be for real.
at: 12/18/06 10:18 pm
