I tend to think things with the word "universal" should work most places in the universe. Coordinated Universal Time should therefore be the standard across the universe. Of course, I also expect a Universal Remote Control to work on an alien device on some distant planet. Otherwise it's just false advertising.
T-Mobile doesn't see that as a problem because it has "amazingly good security."
Only a few months ago T-Mobile's websites had a major security hole allowing hackers to access all kinds of information about users:
I've managed close to that 10 hours/day for years and I still haven't killed anybody.
It's very rare for heavy duty gamers to cause assault to people in the real world because they are rarely in the real world.
Then why do I have this insatiable desire to hurl fireballs at shelled creatures?
Obviously the Intergalactic Police are making sure they do not travel faster than the posted galactic speed limit.
If you define breakfast as the first meal of the day, then if you skip breakfast for a few days you will die.
Not if I eat the second and third meals of the day.
Also, don't you mean Jesus?
Technically, Jesus and God are one in the same. John 1 and Collossians 1 both talk about Jesus as the Creator of all things. He just didn't have the name Jesus until approximately 1AD when He came to dwell among us in the flesh.
Ever since playing Super Mario Brothers I've had this insatiable urge to hurl fireballs at my enemies.
For those interested: Materials science in science fiction
Let the eugenics wars begin!
Rather than worrying about leap seconds all we really need to do is slightly alter the rotation of the earth to make it an exact 24 hour rotation. Problem solved.
I tend to use mnemonic operators (such as GT) for every second operation and symbolic operators (such as >) for every other operator.
Who is "we" in this sentence, and what are they uncovering?
The "we" is us as the human race, and more specifically, scientists.
As for what they are uncovering, I suggest doing some research. Even a simple google search will bring you many results. Here are two examples of some things that still need more study, but are very new and recent:
1. Potential DNA and fresh tissue is being found in dinosaur bones. From what we currently know about DNA and tissue, there is no way it should be able to survive millions of years. The simplest answer is that these bones are not millions of years old. Certainly, because of bias, many researchers would not consider that they could be less than a million years old so will try to come up with new theories that will answer how they could have survived millions of years. There is certainly nothing wrong with coming up with new theories and ideas and I definitely welcome it. The problem is with biases and assumptions as it can certainly stifle the finding of the truth. There are definitely many biases on both the secular and creationist sides of the issue here.
2. Lucy (often deemed as one of the first missing links found) has recently been shown to possibly have at least one bone from a baboon.
Also, this one isn't so new but is often overlooked. The age of rock layers are generally determined by the fossils found in them, and the age of the fossils are generally determined by the age of the rock layers. The fossil layer isn't as clean cut as it shows in the text books and often we find fossils at layers that they should apparently not be in.
Even if there is one true religion (or belief system), that does not necessarily mean the others are "made up" by humans. There are different categories of religions. For example, many religions that are more philosophical in nature have evolved over time and are not necessarily directly "made up" by humans. Of course, there are cults leaders that have made up their own religions, but they are in the minority. Then you have Islam as an example where Mohammad had originally thought that a demonic spirit or the devil gave him the words to write. Assuming that is true, that means it did not come from God or humans.
Now, that leaves us with the one true religion (if it exists) which would have been given by God, but as it was passed down from one generation to another may have been distorted (both intentionally and unintentionally) leading to variations from what God had originally given. Now, if God spoke to His creation at one time, it is also possible He is still speaking to it today. If so, there would be ways to hear His voice. And because this God may operate on a completely different level, it may not be possible to hear His voice scientifically, but spiritually. So, when looking for the evidence of the existence of God, it must be done so through a spiritual paradigm more so than a physical paradigm.
As for which has more soft-evidence, I think the real question is which theory is lacking the necessary evidence to support it. The more details we uncover about evolutionary theory, the more we realize how much is actually missing for it to be true.
Creationists are simply pointing out that there is no hard evidence for evolution. Evolution is an assertion that is not based on facts. This posting which claims that creationists are manipulating search results is also an assertion not based on facts. It would seem that there is a common theme running here.
You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all alike.
