Community > Posts By > AdventureBegins

 
AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 10:54 PM
Still, calm, content, eager

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 09:23 PM
Cool... this thread is still active. I think I will Just Say Hi to some folks.
drinker to my friends from down under. drinker for my friends on the mountains, beaches, and playgrounds. drinker for my friend who was in China.
and... drinker If we just said hi in passing.
(if any of you are still here).

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 09:12 PM

I disagree that being a public servant makes one a slave with no say or no right to practice what they believe


stepping aside from a job after years is not a reasonable response either once one has established a career, a retirement,,etc,, and a life that requires that income to sustain


simple fact is there was a MAJOR change to what was expected in her job,, and a change well known to CONTRADICT religious belief,,there should have been some type of accomodation considered when this change went into effect for those whose values do not allow them to condone sodomy,,,


let alone sign off on it,,,

I think a simple compromise would be to have a simple GOVERNMENT STAMP that only indicates that the government has sanctioned it,, without any requirement for a personal endorsement from anyone,,

Quite well said... Kudos on a fine post.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 09:05 PM

Do many people actually use this site ? Or is this a scam ?

Its only a scam if you are here scamming.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 08:47 PM

LOVE + HAPPINESS + SHARING = ?

What do you expect to get with this addition in life?

Thanks for comments :wink:

I am not looking for addition.
Should someone come along that multiplies my (Love + Happiness) (and can handle life's occasional burps)... I will then know what I came back here for.

Other than that... I am here to discuss, learn and perhaps grow.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 08:36 PM

Looking for someone from my own state! What's up with all the emails I get from a the East Coast? California is the closest I've gotten. Nice guys and all, but huge distance. Do people really meet their match from so far away?

lol... they do that because they know you are not likely to actually meet them from so far away (and bust their game).

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 08:29 PM






WHy?

When President OBama made the statement that his son might look like Treyvon,, was it 'divisive' , 'hateful', 'racist'

but when Candidate Trump makes the statement that mexico is sending thieves, rapists and murders and that he at least 'assumes' some of them are 'decent,,,,,is that just 'stating facts'?



When President OBama spoke about himself, even when DIRECTLY asked about himself,, he was a narcisist,

but when Candidate Trump constantly blurts out his Brand and talks about how great he is and how much he has and how his 'women' look, he is just 'stirring things up'?



when President Obama made the statement that A COP going into a mans home ,where that mans pictures are all over the mantles along with his awards and certificates,, to demand he PROVE he lives there,,,,was a STUPID thing to do,,,,, he is branded as 'cop hating' and actually blamed for people choosing to kill cops?


but when Candidate Trump makes repeated statements about womens looks, how his women are so pretty, how ugly Odonnel is, how noone could vote for someone with Clintons face, or even how a Female who questions his is probably 'bleeding from somewhere',,,,,he isnt branded a misogynist, woman hater and he isnt blamed for people harming immigrants even after he responds to an incident where people actually DID beat an immigrant nearly to death by praising the PASSION of his supporters?





,,,,why are such similar behaviors characterized so differently based upon who does them?


Do you forget that Bush was criticized and lampooned for practically everything he said?

No president in history provided more aid to africa than Bush and you had the a$$ clown kanye west publicly say Bush hates black people.

So does that eliminate West when he 'runs' in 2020? haha



1. Bush was mostly criticized for saying 'dumb' things and appearing to be less than intelligent,, I happened to choose the most RECENT president to compare for the purpose of this thread

2. I dont live in Africa,,,I doubt Kanye was speaking about black people in Africa

3. So , no, it doesnt eliminate Kanye,, he never said Bush hated AFRICANS,, most presidents have never been to AFrica ,,,lol

but americans certainly have 'feelings' when it comes to 'black' americans

:wink:


Ok.. Bush loves africans but hates black americans... thats an interesting observation.

If there is such a difference then why african american?

Maybe black american would be better since there is such a difference... haha..

If the purpose of this is to say that its because Obama is half black and Trump is white with bad hair then just type that.

The point is that regardless of race.. Whether it being mixed as with Obama or white as with Bush the level of respect for the office has diminished.

Clinton was getting blowjobs in the oval office for christ sake.

When the men elected to represent the entire nation sully the prestige of the office by their actions or words then don't be overly sensitive when they get called out for it.

Trump hasn't been elected to s##T yet.. So using him as a comparison is the best route to take.







why the difference? different geography, different culture,, African american keeps the connection to the family that Africans were forced to give up,,,,,


its like the difference between hating Americans and hating southerners,, one is much more specific than the latter

but that doesnt mean the more specific designation has any reason to stop being used,,,


I dont know what hair has to do with this

but, as stated before, character is character,, and if its a character undesirable in a president, than why give support to a presidential candidate that exhibits that undesirable character? let alone cite it as a REASON to support that candidate?


No one has voted yet Ms Harmony.

Just because Trump leads now doesn't mean he will win a single state during the actual process.

Crazy Howard Dean was leading all the polls back in 2003 going into Iowa and didn't win the nomination.

You are putting the cart before the horse here.

lol... H. Dean went away because he gave a beta howl when an alpha shout was needed.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 06:50 PM
Coming across as desperately lonely really won't help much. It attracts flakes.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 05:40 PM

Hmmm, where do you fit if you can not stand facebook?

Were ever you want (they can't apply "scientific" silliness to peg you).

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 05:26 PM
Central Ohio. :) still.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 11:42 AM
drinker waving

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 11:40 AM
Hello. I am dipping my feet back in the pond. :)

AdventureBegins's photo
Sat 09/12/15 11:20 AM
I am back. Been a while. How many of you even remember me?

AdventureBegins's photo
Wed 09/12/12 06:41 PM



Your post is incorrect for a wide variety of reasons. Electromagnetism has nothing to do with it. The relative strengths of the EM field are therefore meaningless. The variation you cite is so small as to be meaningless in the context you are using.


Facts:
Particles from the sun slow down decay.
The magnetic field shields particles from the cosmos.
The magnetic field was 3 times stronger in the past.

You are right that the current fluctuations are minimal, I am referring to the more extreme decay changes with a magnetic shield 3 X stronger.


You apparently missed the point about magnetic fields having nothing to do with it. Solar neutrinos from the Sun's core do not interact this way at all. All of the statements in your post are incorrect.

Solar nutrinos do not. However the solar wind does interact with the magnetic fields. That wind contains many individual atomic nuclei that do interact with the surface of the planet based upon the waxing and waning of the solar constant.


AdventureBegins's photo
Wed 09/05/12 09:06 PM

Guess what? Evolution needs huge time-frames for it to work. Evolution only has the radioactive decay rates of rocks as evidence for these long time-frames. But recent studies have shown that these decay rates are not constant, they are effected by the solar wind. There are a new set of laws:
Old Law:
Radioactive decay is an absolute constant , everything has been tried in laboratories to affect the rate without any detectable changes to decay rates
The age of ancient rocks can therefore be accurately measured based on recently measured decay rates.

Failure of the Old Law:
Two tests they have neglected to apply to decay rates:
1) Although they have played around with electromagnetic force-fields in laboratories, when testing decay rates they have not yet increased or decreased the strength of the entire planet's electro-magnetic force-field (which extends for thousands of miles beyond our atmosphere).
2) They have not consistently tested decay rates against the varying strength of solar flares.

2 Better Laws of radioactive decay rates:
Law 1: radioactive decay rates slow down when the solar wind is stronger (during solar flares) http://phys.org/news201795438.html
Law 2: conversely radioactive decay rates will increase when the solar wind is weaker
The electro-magnetic field protects the earth from the solar wind, so we can introduce two more laws:
Law 3: (based on law 1) The weaker the field the stronger the solar wind that reaches earth, and the slower the radioactive decay.
Law 4: (based on Law 2) Conversely the stronger the field the faster the decay

Knowing that earth's magnetic field was at least 300% stronger in the past, we can apply LAW 4, and we have an easy conclusion, radioactive decay was much much faster in the past. Bye bye evolution! Sorry your old dates have been greatly overestimated.

Ah but you did not carry your reasoning out to its probable conclusion...

Knowing that the earths magnetic field was 300% stronger in the past we can apply reason and chart the corresponding increase in the rate of Evolution between that point and now.

The stronger the Earths EM Field the slower the rate of Evolution. When the field gets weaker over time the rate of evolution would increase when the solar wind is stronger and decrease when it was weaker.

Evolution would follow the same cycles as the Star we orbit.

Increased radiation creates an increase in evolutionary mutation.

AdventureBegins's photo
Sun 08/12/12 07:19 PM

I don't believe in "a god."

I believe in God Almighty, the Lord Jehovah, and his son, Jesus.

Yahova is a name of God.

Yet do you witness for him... Or does he witness through you?

AdventureBegins's photo
Wed 08/08/12 11:54 PM

I have often postulated about a sun wit a gold core instead of an iron one. How would this affect it? It would lack of a magnetic field because gold is not magnetic. How would the visible spectrum be affected?

A stellar object of the mass of a Star has a mass field of such intensity as to break 'gold' into its component atoms.

That stellar mass also has magnetic fields because of the interaction of atoms at the atomic and sub-atomic levels.

Our star is a fusion furnance not a planatary core. If it was impacted by sufficent 'gold' bearing asteroids I suppose that the 'furnace' output would be contaminated by hard radiation caused by the breakdown of the 'gold' in the stars upper atmosphere.

Would really wreak havoc upon a life zone planet.

AdventureBegins's photo
Wed 08/08/12 11:39 PM
Edited by AdventureBegins on Wed 08/08/12 11:41 PM
You have made my point for me.

In order to actually make Jesus God you have to return to the past...

Your premise of translation has linked Genesis to John by a false translation of but one word... "Lord".

the word has a differing meaning in the time of Genesis than that given it in the time of Constantine.

You have traveled to the past in an attempt to prove an ascertation derived from sands heaped upon the word by the scholars.

Now what O' Cowboy of the Nazerene?

You have arrived at the past yet again... Yet Jesus is echoed in the future even in the very book you quote (he returns in the time the Earth is threatened by the Lake of Fire).

Why are you then at Adam once again? Perhaps because you have ignored a warning.

"Thou shalt have no Gods before me"... (with sub set warning that anything fashioned as a man is an idol).

Jesus was fashioned as a man... His mother fashioned him from the Water of Life in the way that men are born since the original conception made by the Virgin Eve. (who knew no man before Adam).


AdventureBegins's photo
Tue 08/07/12 10:27 PM
Edited by AdventureBegins on Tue 08/07/12 10:30 PM
John was not at the begining and so looked back as did Lots woman.

This is why he was not the Rock of Christ.

For the Rock of Christ saw forward...

and Stands waiting for you at the Pearly Gates that open into the Inner Sanctum.

Jesus was born of a Woman.

That makes of him a man. Though he was the Son of God he was still also the Son of Woman...

Jesus would not exist but for the Reality of God.

Jesus would not exist but for the Reality of Adam and Eve.




AdventureBegins's photo
Tue 08/07/12 07:02 PM


I didn't read the whole thread, but got the gist of it. The disagreement could, IMO, be found by consulting the work of St Augustine. He addressed every objection that I read through. drinker

I will deepen upon St. Augustine. Thank you.

An astute man. He trickled back into the Church of the Rock of Jesus that which was removed from it by the Sword of Constantine.

Yet his works are like a small green leaf trapped in a whirlpool in the Temporal Loop that worship of the mediator leads to...

There is but one God (though his names be many).

1 2 11 12 13 15 17 18 19 24 25