Well then, it's a good thing I didn't do that. Please re-read with your comprehension module loaded.

You mean God? That's how the bible refers to him. Also, Jesus was a "he", and according to my doctrinal position Jesus was God, so it's similarly convenient.

Well, it's a fairly tough question to explain, because I don't necessarily share the opinion. :)

I've found the person who does a fairly good job of representing the young-earth-because-it's-critical-to-doctrine side is John MacArthur. You can watch a couple of his sermons where he elaborates, but here's a quickie article he wrote on the subject: http://www.gty.org/resources/articles/A135/creationism

The relevant quote:

If we wobble to any degree on the truth of this passage, we undermine the very foundations of our faith. After all, if God is not the Creator, then maybe He's not the Redeemer either. If we cannot believe the opening chapters of Scripture, how can we be certain of anything the Bible says?

If you're REALLY curious about the mentality behind it, watch this sermon: http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-359/the-theology-of-creation

(Even as I Christian, I have a hard time watching that because I want to throw things at him. :) )

I've found that I've had some very good conversations with fellow Christians who profoundly believe as MacArthur, and I've been thrilled to hear that many of them at least understand and be able to articulate my position, even if they don't agree.

(Hopefully you catch this; it's been a day and you're AC...)

Why are you replying to me? Or did you miss that the text you're refuting was quoted text?

From a fellow Christian, please take this as nicely as possible:

Please stop trying to defend us; you are making it worse. Spend some time actually understanding your opponent's views (you've mischaracterized both science and the evolutionary process while demonstrating some pretty poor logic.) You sound like you've been reading a Bob Jones University biology textbook as your sole source of understanding of evolutionary process. I know this because I've been there before.

As a Christian (closest to Baptist in my beliefs), I personally believe that God had revealed himself to us to the extent he sees fit and necessary.

See a story that Jesus told in Luke 16:19-31. An excerpt:

“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

“‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

Essentially, Jesus said "They have what they need to believe already." You (and even sometimes I) may disagree with that, but that's the stance that the (Christian) Bible seems to take on the matter.

(I have quite a few more thoughts on this, but unfortunately not the time to commit them to a post at this very moment.)

I used to work at the hospital where I was born. In fact, I found myself in the patient database. I was "SHERIDAN, BOY E." I updated the record with the name that my parents eventually decided upon. :)

That's ok, if yours had been posted it would have been a trip. (as in, triple)

http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/11/15/1635240/nows-your-chance-to-apply-as-an-astronaut

This is silly. Either you do screening, or you don't. Complete ineptness of the TSA aside for argument's sake, if you take the concept of operations for the TSA at its face they're not just looking for active and willing attackers, they're also looking for unwitting attackers. (That's why you screen Grandma in her wheelchair -- How does Grandma know nobody slipped an explosive onto her person or possessions somehow without her realizing it?)

If you're allowing military through, why not the 800,000 people with TS clearances? Or police? Or...? And how do you know that the person is a member of the military? And even if they are, it's not a foregone conclusion that they're automatically safe. (Nidal Malik Hasan? Hasan Akba?)

Screen everyone or screen no one. You're hard-pressed to make a rational risk argument if you're not doing that.

Hey, PerlJedi,

Just thought I'd throw out that I'm happy to see your interaction here. It's always bugged me how little the /. staff is represented in the comments.

"Begun, the Drone Wars have."

I'm not arguing with you, but I'm really quite curious where you found $41 tickets (avg) on a flight. That seems insanely cheap, especially for holiday travel. And does that include the various taxes and fees?

The reason a train trip costs a lot and takes a long time (for most trips outside of the Northeast Corridor) is because we haven't invested in the railways to make it otherwise. I reluctantly agree that long-haul high-speed rail in the United States is probably a pipe dream and will probably never be a sufficiently cost-effective compared to the other options. But regional rail (like the Northeast Corridor) generally is useful and cost-effective (relatively speaking - all transportation infrastructure loses money; that's why the government does it and not the private sector). California is one of the few places where regional rail makes sense in my opinion - there's a lot of churn between the major cities.

(Side note: Please don't start your post in the subject line, it's very confusing to follow)

Huh? Rarely is that the case. You might have hit a peak travel time or something. I pulled a date out of my butt and asked for Philly to Boston on December 1st, and Amtrak's prices were between $88 and $126 (Northeast Regional). There were also Acela Express fares that ranged as high as $245, but that's not apples to apples (Acela Express is all business class.)

Southwest Airlines prices, in the meantime, were $161 flat (Anytime fare).

Regardless, expensive isn't as much my consideration. The train (at least, the Northeast Corridor, along which I am very fortunate to live) is an order of magnitude less hassle than the airplane. And I can get up, walk around, and hang out in the cafe car. And no one yells at you for congregating outside the toilet. And the seats are actually reasonably sized. And along the NEC, the train will drop you off downtown, instead of some airport 10 miles out from the city where you then need to rent a car or take a bus.

Yes, you take the B30 bus from the Greenbelt Metro station to the terminal at BWI. That was tough! :) (http://www.wmata.com/bus/b30_brochure.cfm)

(You could also take a bus to New Carrollton and ride up Amtrak or MARC to BWI.)