esbo

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal

Avoiding burning in hell is one of my justification for believing in God. But I would still believe in him even if there were no hell. He's just one cool dude. I mean I bet a lot of atheists spend their lives grovelling to authority and their bosses yet they are not prepared to praise God for all he has done for them. I find it strange especially when the bosses will toss you on the scrap heap when they have finished exploiting you. :lol:

<br><br>Well stop complaining the earth is not paradise when you rejected it!!<br><br> <br><br>Jesus preached to adults not children by and large.<br><br>Should we close all the schools then and only teach people when they are adults?<br>

Or that there is a God and nature is ultimately indifferent to us because we rejected the paradise he created for us.

What make you think he will help you in this life? God made a paradise for man but man rejected it so man was cast out of that paradise into the cruel would to fend for himself. Only those who believe in him will enter paradise again. Your concept of God appears to be based on an utter delusion, where did you get it from? YOu seem to part of the something for nothing brigade. Man's own greed play a large part in many of the things you mentioned. His lust for earthly wealth and poverty in the wars and his choice of living in disaster prone areas. His failure to provide sanitary living conditions for his fellow man, some live in luxury others force to live in disease generating conditions.

I am neither of the things you claimed in you ad hominem attack I have not attacked you just made an observation. Perhaps you would like to provide some facts to back up your claims? That would seem to be the best way to go would it not? Otherwise you are basically asking me to act as my own prosecution and I am not going to be very good at that!! :lol::lol::lol: Also the lols are not part of my argument I never said they were and you making out they are is just another false argument. Anway I expect you need a little more time to gather facts!!! You see the is to indicate that you have not actually provided any (valid ones) yet although I have.

Why is there a war there? If there is nobody told me!!! The troubles in Ireland are not over religion but Nationality. You need to do your homework!!! I can list the ten biggest wars none religious - beat that!!! This is gonna be an easy win for me!!

Sorry, but religion creates a sense of one ness, why would people of the same religion fight? It is not disingenuous of me to make that claim, it is rather arrogant of you to suggest that and further more to suggest that you know all the answers and that it is 'indisputable' when you have provided not proof. I mean you are just being arrogant and ridiculous beyond believe tot he point of delusion. ie "it is both established and common sense". No it is not, only in your imperfect mind is it. Show your evidence, establish your claim it should not be too difficult to do given it is "established and common sense" A lot of things which are "established and common sense" turn out to be utter nonsese so you saying that proves nothing what so ever. You have to provide irrefutable evidence and I would advise you that I am pretty good at crushing false and half baked arguments

religion prevents wars. no proof atheism prevents wars, why would it? It has no belief at all. There is no proof in the assertion that religion causes wars so that would have to be established before I am required to show otherwise don't you think? Was not intended to be an insult, just an analogy, nothing wrong with being a homosexual or a national socialist is there? Also the indicated it was intended in a jovial nature. Just pointing out that some atheists spend an indorinate amount of their live talking bout religion. The analogy I shoudl have used is a football fan spending all his time on cricket sites - very odd don't you think? Thus the suggestion that he might be a closet cricket fan seems a fair analogy. I used the Nazi homosexual analogy not as an insult but as an fairly well know analogy. There is a site here:- http://gaynazis.com/

Not sure what the face-palms are for Catholic religion forbid abortion. Pity you have no facts to justify your face-palms!! BUt what about the rest? It's all true most murders and wars are over material possessions not religion. White is a hair colour when all the pigment is gone. Tell me doG (God), assuming you are atheist why are you so obsessed with religion? I have a feeling you are like one of those Nazi gay bashers who turns out to be a closet homosexual, correct? I mean I do not support Man U but I do not devote my life to hurling abuse to their fans!!!

There have been no religious wars, all wars are fought over material things, wealth land power. OK the sides may have different religions or different eye colour, but they are not fighting over that. The yanks are not in the middle east to crush islam, they are there for the oil!! Believe me!! Very few people kill in the name of god and those who do are overwhelmimgly out numbered by those who don't. And that's excluding abortion, a killing in the name of atheism!!!

Religion is not supposed to be a means to worldly wealth, indeed in most vast wealth is considered unholy. The USA handles that hypocrisy fairly well. Another aspect is happiness. Indeed it seems that many of the poorest are also the happiest. If only I were poorer. I'd rather be happy and poor then rich and miserable. Guess I will have to make do with being poor and miserable!! Once you get rich you have to devote your life to staying rich. Incidentally you will see other surveys which show the opposite, but rather than ask people if they were happy, they used other things such as basically wealth health and social security. Unfortunately asking people if they were happy tended to show those thing did not make people happy. The survey which showed the rich were happy was done by Forbes, a business magazine, so they told people what they wanted to hear!! ( in a typically dishonest business man's way!!) http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mef45ejmi/01-norway/#gallerycontent

poor eyes sight may lead you develop mental skilsl to compensate for that, even if being not able to read a solution you might have to work it out for yourself for example thus developing built in skill rather than being a highly trained monkey. On the other hand it is somewhat more easy for your enemy to kill you!!

What makes someone a genius? Anyone know? I don't. Contradiction

Well various types of answers, some people are just healthier than others but health alone will not make you strong, that is more to do with exercise and training so you would need both. However even if you are in poor health exercise and training do help. I went through a period where I did a period of training with fairly light weights, I also played quite a bit of squash rather competitively and boy did it make me a lot stronger and energetic, I could literally leap out of a chair in an instance whereas before it was considerabley slower. Also even recently I did some digging of tree stumps out of the garden with a large heavy axe called a mattock. I was certainly lot stronger after the I was literally pull up tree stumps!! One of the reason you need to sleep a lot is because that is what do perhaps? Rest makes you weaker not stronger generally. Most people pain thresholds are probably the same but if you are big and stronger it takes more to hurt you. But obviously some health conditions affect overall health To grow muscles you have to use them. How you feel pain can also be psychological if you are feeling good and get hurt it will feel less than if you were feeling down. AND things like adrenalin affect it, it's like the body knows when it is not a good time to feel pain, people can get stabbed and not know it!! But when you see the wound you feel pain (happened to me) I cut my hand on a roof nail and did not know untill i saw the blood I just thought I had hit something.

Well you probably do not keep it long enough to go bad. But it would keep longer in a normal fridge. Obviously it will keep a bit longer than outside the fridge. But how does cold air get to the top of the fridge? It is not going to rise up above the warmer air above it, that defies the lays of physics. It will conduct up there eventually but air is a poor conductor, every time you open the door warm air will get in the top and it will take a long time to cool down again. In a normal fridge the top is cold because of the ice box and the cold air will drift down to the bottom giving fairly uniform refrigeration. In yours the bottom could be -60C and the top room temperate!! Maybe yours has separate compartments with two coolers, that would work but it's over complicated. Perhaps that is why they have some many problems according to many reviews I have seen. Doors falling off, big blocks of ice jamming the water cooler, water leaking out etc... Anyway I certainly will not be getting one.

Yes the bottom will be cold, fine, but the top will remain warm because the cold air will stay at the bottom. To get the top cold you will have to turn it up really high. Where are you going to put the thermostat? I could keep my heater warm and efficient by placing it at the top of the room away from the cold air but that would be frigging stupid!! It will last longer at the bottom but unfortunately the food at the top will be warm and go off. That is why the freezer needs to be at the top to avoid making warm area's in the fridge. http://reviews.bestb...ews/reviews.htm

You have no circulation with the freezer at the bottom, cold air falls so the cold air sits at the bottom and stays there. It is different with heating as hot air rises so a heater at the bottom heats the whole room, if you put it at the top the hot air would stay at the top and leave the rest of the room cold. The old engineers solved the issue decades ago. The new rubbish engineers have unsolved it and produce a useless fridge. Don't know whether to laugh or cry, it's a mad world.

Really cannot believe what I am reading!! Well actually in this corrupt upside down world I can. I don't need to know anything about market economies because we certainly do not live in one. We have a corrupt oligipoly not a market economy buy and large. And listen to his piece of bull you quoted " Everybody knows that warm air rises, so it just makes sense to have the coldest items at the bottom of the unit." A fridge does not work by warming air, it does the opposite, it works by cooling air. Cold air falls, and if you put the freezer box at the bottom all the cold air stays at the bottom, there is no circulation of cold air and the temperature at the top of the fridge becomes dangerously high. Things like heating systems do the opposite, that is why your radiators are not on the ceiling, if they were the top of the room would be warm and the bottom cold. The people who designed those things are idiots!! You see the problem with having the freezer at the bottom is the cold air never gets to the top and it can get warm up there, dangerously warm allowing bacteria to breed. It is obviously not efficient because you can't get the top of the fridge cold because the cold air stays at the bottom. You can't rely on circulation because all the cold air is stacked up at the bottom so you can only get the top cool by conduction and that is going to take a lot of energy. It's just crazy - technology going backwards. That review is genuine and the first I found, the fridge will never work no amount of repairs will fix the fact the freezer is in the wrong place, the top of the fridge will always be warm. That is why the fridge will always be on because I presume the thermostat is at the top where it will never get cold. Te only solution is to stick an electric fan in the fridge to try and blow cold air up, but it is gonna fall back down of course but it is better than nothing. I would take it back and demand a refund, it is not fit for purpose.

but no warm is is taken from the poles at the surface. slowing the wind warms the surface of the earth globally including the poles. That's why they are melting. Prove it!!! It will only work if it has a fan to circulate the air as natural currents will not work in the top unless the coolest part of the top is at the top. Seriously do you really have a fridge like that? Does it have a fan to stop all the cold air staying at the bottom? It must have or it won't work properly

don't buy one of those it won't work!!!! here is proof!! http://www.retrevo.c...614ci664/t/1-2/

And if you do not believe me take a look in your fridge and you will find the ice box is at the top not the bottom of the fridge. |f the ice box was at the bottom all the food at the top would rot because it would be too warm as the air would not circulate. It take the air up where it radiates out into outer space.

No I think you have got it wrong there, as had the video on my post 91 at the bottom. In the video the ice bag is placed at the bottom of the tank. This as you know is wrong, for it to be an accurate representation the ice bag should be at the top. There is no warm air going to the poles at the surface. Note it is not a real experiment because real water is not circulating, it is a computer graphic. It has to be a computer graphic because a real experiment set up like that would not work for the simple reason you will not get warm air to sink at that end of the tank. That is just not going to happen so I don't know why they put out bad science like that, it just seems to have confused some people. So yes you can defy the laws of gravity in a computer simulation however doing that is a real experiment just ain't gonna happen. That is why you won't see a real experiment showing what is supposed to be happening in the video.

It may be #small' but it will me measurable by measuring the wind speed before and after the farm. The wind must be slowing down otherwise the turbines would not turn. In fact if you know the amount of energy the wind farm generate then it is fairly simple calculation to calculate (approximately) how much the wind has closed down as the power of the wind is proportional to the cube of the speed IIRC. So you then just need to know the density of the air and it is a fairly straight forward calculation. Then perhaps you can go on to calculate the warming effect of that loss of cooling power. Then you just need to compare he small amount of energy generated to the warming produced by the slowing of the wind. If you think about it it must take a hell of a lot of energy to produce the warming seen on the satellite pictures. How many electric fires on the ground would you need to produce that? Millions I would imagine. I am not aware of any air currents which heat the Poles. The sun heats the polesand the wind takes the heat away up into the atmosphere and into outer space. That's how I understand it.