Syntho-sis

You would benefit from reading about Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity and his thought experiment on simultaneous lightning strikes.

That you are even asking this question shows how little you know about cosmology. Please visit for more information: Why is the sky dark at night? Hubble's Law Redshift

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but this is a very weak argument against Evolution in the sense that: There will always be missing transitional species no matter how many are presented. Imagine two cups on a table top. Each one represents a separate species and if you link these two species with a transitional form what are you left with? You create two more missing links/cups. So you link those. Now you have four missing links. It goes on and on. Eventually you realize how foolish this argument is when the Concepts of gradualist evolution are juxtaposed into this format. I hope that makes sense, I'm half asleep.

Why? Could you elaborate?

Quantum entanglement

I never said anything about that. I just assumed that the universe has always operated on causality. You go back far enough (starting from what we know about the universe) you run into infinite regress. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged^ -no matter what

Probably, I've noticed most people are either not intellectually capable of understanding the ideas or they're just lazy. As evidenced by browsing through any piece of creationist literature. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Well I think that we can all agree that the BB did have a cause...Right? Hello?

Okay then. I had read something on wiki and I must have misinterpreted it.

That doesn't make sense to me. Why would the retina be the same size? It's tissue like anything else, if the eyeball is longer than wouldn't there be more retinal tissue?

For one, there is more than one type of structural defect that can cause myopia. Secondly, Since the eyeball is longer in some cases, wouldn't the retina be longer as well?

I'm horribly near-sighted and everyone in my family has to have me read very small print. I'm sure it's a fairly common by-product. If I'm correct, with myopia the retina is larger than normal and thus light at a distance doesn't get focused correctly. So I assume the closer one is too the source of reflection the better the eye can focus. Since the retina is bigger there's probably more cone cells and thus more detail. It's not all that great trying to read something 15 feet away.

What was their primary concern at that point in time? What were they trying to do?

Isn't that a bit naive?

Why have a religion if the deity/deities you worship can't be truthful and coherent in the first place?

Hmm...That's odd. So what you're telling me is that those verses are in direct contrast with the book of James? And I thought we were just discussing taking verses out of context and whatnot? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Every single concordance I could find says the otherwise. The message was about eating foods with unwashed hands. Not about clean and unclean foods. The Pharisees had a strict practice of washing hands before every meal which was not according to the old covenant law. They were adding to the law thus adding to the burden. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Yes and apparently you didn't finish the book of Acts. In the context the topic was of referring to people as Jews and Gentiles. Showing partiality to only the Jews was wrong. Read the rest of the book, from a scholarly approach it it quite clear.

Where does it say he made certain practices obsolete?

I would really like to see a thread specifically pointed towards alternative renewable resources. Development in this field encompasses chemistry, biology, geology and many other subjects. This is probably the largest problem scientists will be facing in the near future. I also would like to learn more about potential sources of renewable energy.

Well that makes sense. My only question is, does the water that is produced from metabolizing the food products excreted or is it reused by the body?

I pulled that definition out of the air.. Here's a more coherent one: Food: Any substance eaten to provide nutritional support for the body. Back on the wilderness survival note: I would like to mention that there have been reported instances of desert nomads surviving for periods without drinking water by ingesting camel's blood. I don't have any records to provide on that but it does make since imo. A camel's blood cell is oval shaped which helps it retain water and flow a lot easier. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel I thought that was interesting. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged So if my diet primarily consisted of fat then I wouldn't need any water to compensate my nutritional needs (Digestion)? What you're saying doesn't really make sense from a practical standpoint.

I've studied alot into wilderness survival techniques. I even helped teach a class on this very subject. Most of the experts agree that unless you have an adequate supply of FRESH, CLEAN water then you should not ingest anything type of food whatsoever. When I say food, I'm talking about anything that requires you to put it in your mouth and chew. Essentially anything in solid form that would require you to have water to break it down. Such as muscle and fat tissue. Not only that, but generally in the wilderness you are much more physically active than you would be otherwise. Expending a huge amount of calories and drinking upwards of maybe 2 gallons of waters a day. You lose alot of water thru sweat and respiration. Under these conditions, no matter what type of food you were eating (coconuts, berries, oranges) you would still need a regular supply of water to stay properly hydrated. Whether or not you can survive indefinitely without water, I have no idea. But the consensus amongst most wilderness survivalists is that water should ALWAYS be you primary concern. Right after surviving of course I'm sure someone has written in a journal on this very subject.

I get dehydrated very easily. I drink at least a gallon of water a day. That may or may not have something to do with my heavy resistance training and the high-caloric diet that I need in order to train properly. Under normal circumstances I still drink quite a bite of water. I don't think most people get enough water. The rule of thumb is if you feel thirsty, then you are already dehydrated.

I'm not sure. What organizations were they associated with?

What about Mercs?

I don't know. Maybe Hamas was originally headed by Iranian operatives. I strongly believe Iran is deeply involved in Terrorism...

What if they are being supported by certain leaders within a state (i.e. Iran?) Whether it be financially or ideologically? But they are not directly involved with the military. Are they still considered Civilian Combatants?