zapatos

Sorry, but I'm going to need a citation on that one. Frankly, I'd be surprised if you can come up with anecdotal evidence.

Guess you are not going to answer my question.

I believe you but I haven't seen the lack of a goalie for that reason. My experience is that the only way really young kids stop a goal is if it happens to hit them on the way in. Where my kids played soccer the kindergarten team was the youngest, but they let any kid play as long as they were out of diapers.

The reason they play with no goalie is not because no one wants to play that position, but because they are taking the pressure off a child who might be made to feel responsible for giving up goals. I've also seen youths play with two goalies in each goal to accomplish the same thing. One of the major problems with eliminating the goalie position is that there would be much higher scoring.

I think you are being optimistic even as you narrow the scope of your claim. https://arstechnica.com/science/2007/06/attempts-to-introduce-intelligent-design-in-europe-spark-backlash/

You really believe that?

I've been reading up on it and the church accepts Evolution, and believes god created all things, but I can find no reference to reconciling Genesis and Evolution. The church also seems to allow Catholics to make up their own mind about whether or not they want to believe in Creationism. Catholic schools even teach Evolution. It's as if the church is smart enough to realize that making a definitive statement will only cause them trouble, and so instead metaphorically nod and say 'it's a mystery'.

I'm wondering why the Catholic Church says they have no problem with Evolution. Do you think maybe because they don't take the Bible literally? They certainly 'believe' in the Bible.

Would you mind telling me which part specifically?

But there is real data supporting the fact that people DO believe in the Bible and evolution. The Pope for example. The Bible does NOT contradict evolution unless you interpret the Bible to contradict evolution.

First, I don't know what you mean when you say "the evolution that started at the Big Bang". Nowhere in Evolution does it say you cannot believe in anything supernatural. How would believing in ghosts make it impossible for me to believe in Evolution?

People disagree on whether or not wearing condoms is immoral. Slavery used to be thought of as moral.

Are you saying that if I'm beautiful I'll better understand facial expressions of others? Or that I can better understand facial expressions of beautiful people than of plain looking people?

As iNow has pointed out many times, people never let God's words get in the way of what people think God says.

The Catholic church fully supports Evolution Theory so that is about 1.2 billion people who potentially believe in Evolution and God.

Sure. You should not refrain from asking such questions due to PC. Now how about answering my question instead of criticizing my response to you?

Can't you just ask a question without throwing in a veiled insult?

In 1967 I was in Catholic grade school and the St. Louis Cardinals were in the World Series. Bob Gibson pitched three complete games against Boston, including the final, all three victories. He gave up only seven hits and three runs in his three starts. I remember having a transistor radio in my pocket with an ear bud going up the back of my shirt and into my ear listening to the final game, praying Sister Patrina wouldn't find it and give me a whack on the knuckles with her ruler. Ah, the fond memories of childhood.

I was born in and grew up in the city of St. Louis.

I'd suggest this is the worst thing you can do. No one can plan out everything, and I've never met anyone who had the foresight to know exactly where they want to live and exactly what they want to do for the rest of their life. It's an unrealistic exercise.

I remember as a kid my dad mailing my baby teeth into a study on the effects of nuclear fallout on children. https://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/health/decades-later-baby-tooth-survey-legacy-lives-on/article_c5ad9492-fd75-5aed-897f-850fbdba24ee.html

Over time with Natural Selection I would expect the northern quoll population with limited genetic defenses to decrease, while the northern quoll population with abundant genetic defenses would increase. I would expect the same results using Artificial Selection (a.k.a selective breeding), albeit on a faster time scale. Why is it unreasonable to refer to Artificial Selection as "speeding up evolution"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_breeding

The line extends goal post to goal post. They can move along the line and therefore jump prior to the kick. What they cannot do is leave the line and move toward the kicker prior to the ball being kicked.

The goalie can only move side to side and must stay on the line until the ball has been kicked.

Are you saying people are not prioritizing here? What makes you think that? I see people discussing expanding Israeli settlements all the time.