http://www.textfiles.com/sex/E...

Are dolphins fish,

I'm not sure why the aren't building the tidal pools on land anyways. Find low lands, dredge it, run a pipe iut into the ocean and build condos around new lagoon.

Great. Now that we know you can look stuff up, and assuming there is not a comprehension problem hiding within you, where in law does it give this person the powers in question?

You did see the parts about granted by law and the provisions of this act right? Of course you did and since you posted the declared purpose, i'm sure you will be able to post the provisions in law allowing it.

Yes, one like it except for it would actually allow the things being done.

Lol.. i bet your teacher marked you down for not following directions quite a bit. Not only doed you logical fallacy (appeal to authority) miss the point, your hatred for christians seems to make you think christians is all religions and therefore _all_religious_websites_.

Take a deep breath and think before you reply.

You have heard or heard of christians claiming either their god or the devil made it appear that way though. If you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

No, there is not. For everyone you think there is, any religion can simply claim it was created that way or the supernatural will of some supernatural being and you have absolutely no way to factually test or refute that. Note, unless it is a matter of some religion saying X and the sites saying Y, any injection of your beliefs is only your opinion not fact. Now this does not mean any religion it true, its just that you have no factual basis to say it is not.

You are simply wrong.

Eh.. wont work. They will just tag you as the dork with the hot chick for easy reference to find the hot chick to show thier buddies. You will eventually have to list it as an alias if ever investigated for antthing.

That likely could have been stopped before poland was even invaded had the allies from WWI enforced the provisions of the versailes treaty and did something when germany remilitarized the rhine.

But yes,we often forget that Russis was aiding germany at the start of WWII.

Its interesting that you brought up the foreing aid aspect of military spending. Its also world security as most of Europe has demonstrated through history that whenever they have large armies, they tend to use them against each other. But your point is proven recently as Itally made a few threats against ISIS and had to walk them back when they realized ISIS forces outnumbered their own troop strength significantly. While not a permenant problem, it shows how little concern they had for their national protection because of the strength of allies.

There is not a mountain of facts that show religios rrvelations to be false. And you are the one being intelectually dishonest here.

In order to say one is not true, you have to posit something that is and prove it which cannot be done factually. You can state your beliefs but that is your opinion not fact. You can pretend science overrules religion but that again is your opinion not fact. Science cannot test the supernatural, at best it can say it isn't neccessary but it cannot even rule out the findings are not the results of the supernatural event/process.

But more importantly, you cannot paint all religious websites as the same. Lexicons for instance focus on the origin or words and accepted translated meanings given the time and manner used. That certainly can be factual. Online searchable bibles like bible gateway gives exact passages from a number of different bibles and translations. That certainly it factual.

Well it is true, you can even read about its creation or question its creator directly.

Or was you trying to be faceatious and your knee jerked so hard it hit you in the head and lowered your IQ to the point you think one specific example is all possible examples as was stated?

Well, maybe you are a true believer or is it posdible you are just a manga fan with a fetish for tenacle monsters?

You are not envisioning a fact based result but a "your opinion" based result. Not really what is discussed here. Fox News for instance, gets more facts right then wrong even though they are selected to shill for the republicans. You have no facts stating that _ALL_religious_websites are wrong.

Not in science. A fact is an observation or evidence that has been repeatedly observed to be true. It doesn't mean always true or only true.

The problem is when existing theories compete. OR more precisely points within large theories compete. Take relativity for instance, gravitational waves help explain the big bang but not all observations support the big bang model. But gravitational waves are considered fact for the purpose of the theory even though it has never been directly observed because it can be explained in mathematical computations that explain observations.

So what happens when we actually detect them for real and they operate slightly different than we think? Does this new observation or fact get pushed to the front of the line or is it buried because the fact engine hasn't updated yet or the wikipedia article it is referencing is in a mod battle. How about if something else is found to explain the theory concerning gravitational waves but lives in the same limbo as gravitational waves in which it hasn't been directly observed but can explain observations with math also.

It reminds me in the 80's when (and I forget who) some doctor was claiming most stomach ulcers were the result of bacteria. Turns out that is a fact but he was originally ridiculed because the fact at the time was that no one believed that bacteria could survive in the stomach's acidic environment longer than it takes to pass through it. Now the fact is that it's cheaper to just giving a couple antibiotics and seeing if the ulcer disappears than to test if the ulcer is bacteria related or other. But it was indisputable at one time, then someone disputed it and now it is indisputable again. Facts change.

He did_not_say hell existed. He said might exist. Go ahead and go back and read it. His exact words was

there might be a hell

As I said, this is as much a religious argument as it is a scientific argument. All it is doing is asking if someone is concerned there might be consequences for actions.

If he said this guy was going to hell, or hell has a special place for him or similar, I can agree with you. But he did not say that and words impart thoughts which we can understand by the use of the words involved and might does not in any way signify there is, it only acknowledges that some think there is.