It couldn't possibly be that the skull was designed to protect the brain, oh no.
The moment I read this, I realized it wasn't what they said. Obviously, they KNOW the "Liberator" is safe. So why lie? They were trying to scare others from doing this themselves.
Windows 7, which I'm very surprised was not a choice.
I do note that you prefer insulting someone who disagrees with you to actually having a reasoned response to the points that the person disagrees with. Food from the Civil War? Pfftht! You're on the hook for 47,000,000 years, not 147. Try again with more science, less anger.
Because "human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals" is like a government test, not a science test. Contradict that and fail the interview, so to speak. Everyone knows the "right" answer to that one. Meanwhile, most "religious" people I know are MUCH more science educated than others for the simple reason of having so many disagree with them that they end up needing to do their homework . . . a thing too many simply refuse to do. Looking at the other half of the data? Why would I waste my time doing that when I'm already right?
Yep. The "quick fix" becomes permanent for 1 reason: teach can control the thermostat. I've worked in both building and portable and the portables ALWAYS smell funky.
I continue to be amazed at the blindness of these life-by-incremental-changes folk. Found within THIS set of rock strata or with THESE fossils = 47,000,000 years old, never mind that we found organic material still organic, still intact with it. More willing to say organic material won't decompose over 47,000,000 years than willing to say our dating methods need re-thinking. Couldn't possibly be 47,000 years, oh no, not at all. 4,700 years? Don't be thilly!
"Put more bluntly, 'Does the human brain have similar built-in errors?'" Hoo boy, yes. After working in education a couple of decades, this 1 fact I've seen in almost every student and in many of the teachers, as well (most of us know how to hide this glitch, but not always.)
My favorite was the Kantian notion that the universe is infinte, and therefore allows for all the space and all the time for life-by-incremental-changes to occur. A. Einstein had to point out the obvious: all things moving away from a point = a beginning = a beginner.
The California legislature doing the right thing? Since when? 1977?
I would really like my government to stop throwing money on these ridiculous gambles that their pagan spontaneous-life-by-water conceit might actually find some evidence somewhere in the universe. There isn't any here, that's for sure.
Firefox usage #'s are down because that browser stopped being meaningfully independent like Chrome or Sea Monkey or Pale Moon are. The last time I used Firefox, I got pop-ups like a really good I.E. How 'bout they fix that problem instead of augment them?
I agree. I'm an overt Christian and will respond to overtly ridiculous athesit/humanist claims, insisting the claimants prove it . . . because they cannot. I get lots of negative feedback for not toeing their party line and that not at all deters me because I know the science--the actual totality of the scientific research--disproves them and their negativity is merely igorance of the other half of the data. I respond not at all to the ones who don't respond to me, so the suggestions to merely ignore would definitely shorten these conversations.
Do like schools and get a steel case to bolt the equipment to the furniture. Steal the computer? Only if you're able to walk out with the entire desk.
1970's TV series, "Here Come the Brides" about Seattle. Isn't it time for a reboot?