just curious where are you located?
North Carolina |
|
|
|
|
What networks does this work on?
|
|
|
|
|
Up got some bought MPs for above stamp
|
|
|
|
Account made today and Paypal only, nobody that's not trying to scam you will do this  |
|
|
|
do you resale any btc at all? i am looking for $10 worth, with payment of course from paypal.
Nope |
|
|
|
What 2 people say =/= peer reviewed evidence. Neither of those are evidence for a god either, you're just using the god of the gaps. Try using an argument that doesn't rely on the notion of fallacy.You would also do well to understand what Spencer is saying. it is possible that someone created something Stegosaurus-like during the past few years as a joke. Not possible based on overwhelming evidence. This article has discredited itself and shown its prejudice. Why? I'm pointing out obvious gaps in your argument, that's how a debate works. You should try coming up with an argument that's not full of fallacies  Even assuming the carving wasn't added recently, the drawing could have been something else. No fossils have been found indicating that dinosaurs were around during that time period. A carving doesn't prove anything |
|
|
|
f you bought at least one Red Bull between January 1, 2002 and October 3, 2014, the company owes you a $10 check or $15 worth of free Red Bull Products. It’s all due to a $13 million lawsuit the beverage company has decided to settle with Benjamin Careathers. Careathers, a Red Bull drinker, claims that the drink maker misled him and other consumers with its slogan “Red Bull gives you wings.” He says the company advertised some of the benefits of drinking Red Bull include increased performance, concentration and reaction speed. Of course, none of this was ever proven or backed up by scientific evidence. Bevnet.com quotes the lawsuit as determining: A 7 oz. cup of drip coffee contains approximately 115 to 175 milligrams of caffeine, depending on the blend, and a 12 oz. serving of Starbucks coffee costs $1.85 and would contain far more caffeine than a regular serving of Red Bull. An 8.4 oz. can of Red Bull contains 80 milligrams of caffeine. To claim your $10 cash refund, all you need to do is register online at the link below before March 2, 2015. Again, you don’t need any proof of purchase. See the link for further details. http://energydrinksettlement.com/claim(Edit: looks like it's only for US residents. blah) Why would this only be for US residents? Is Redbull owned by different companies in the USA and Canada? Also, what happens if more than 1.3 million people claim, since that will equal more than $13 million? At any rate, I love these lawsuits. I received a settlement as part of the lawsuit again Danone for their Activia yogurt. It's about time these companies are held accountable for their bullshit claims. Then again, I wouldn't mind if energy drinks like Red Bull were banned altogether. Those fuckers are addictive! They are also really bad for your health overall. It was a settlement for US courts, this kind of bullshit would never happen in other countries. No idea what happens if that many people claim it, which could easily happen with just needing to drink one Red Bull in the last decade  |
|
|
|
3 pieces of hard evidence for skeptics to chew on: In 2004, he was called "the most famous atheist of the last half-century". My one and only piece of relevant evidence [for an Aristotelian God] is the apparent impossibility of providing a naturalistic theory of the origin from DNA of the first reproducing species ... [In fact] the only reason which I have for beginning to think of believing in a First Cause god is the impossibility of providing a naturalistic account of the origin of the first reproducing organisms." SourceHe is one of the most significant logicians in history, and his theorem is one of the most extraordinary results in mathematics, or in any intellectual field in the last century. I don’t think the brain came in the Darwinian manner. In fact, it is disprovable. Simple mechanism can’t yield the brain. I think the basic elements of the universe are simple. Life force is a primitive element of the universe and it obeys certain laws of action. These laws are not simple, and they are not mechanical.
The formation in geological time of the human body by the laws of physics (or any other laws of similar nature), starting from a random distribution of elementary particles and the field is as unlikely as the separation of the atmosphere into its components. The complexity of the living things has to be present within the material [from which they are derived] or in the laws [governing their formation].
What 2 people say =/= peer reviewed evidence. Neither of those are evidence for a god either, you're just using the god of the gaps. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/stegosaurus-rhinoceros-or-hoax-40387948/?no-ist |
|
|
|
This thread was about Scientific Proof of a god, still not seen any credible sources to back up the creationists.
It's all a matter of perspective. What would qualify as "scientific proof" should first be described. It's different for everyone. Something from a peer reviewed source. |
|
|
|
|
This thread was about Scientific Proof of a god, still not seen any credible sources to back up the creationists.
|
|
|
|
Insane lawsuit, but not gonna turn down free Red Bull  |
|
|
|
Starting bid: .25 each Shipping: .256 UPS Ground, combine and it will be cheaper Bid increments: .02 End time: Sunday 11:59 AM EST All of these are used and in working condition. Shipping will be done on Tuesday and Thursday, pay fast and get them fast  Escrow accepted through Dannyhamilton or OGNasty. These are being sold for somebody else so I'm allowed to bid too |
|
|
|
|
I disagree with the banning, unless they are multi-accounting then they should be able to share their speculation, good or bad. It's not much of a discussion if only one side is getting to share their views
|
|
|
|
That pisses me off. ANY forum with a trust system where you tried to do that would result in you being instantly slapped down. Buying trust is buying trust on ANY forum with a trust system. Don't whine about the truth.
Umm, ok? if you have a point make it. Seems like you're the one whining about the truth. I never tried to buy trust. i said i thought about it, then i stipulated in my post requesting a trade that we would exchange feedback. that is not the saming thing as "buying trust", you all are trying to find deeper meaning in something as shallow Mozart's grave. You were obviously trying to farm trust from those trades, no matter how many times you try to say you weren't. You tried to game the system, now you are marked as so. You can still get plenty of trades here by using escrow. those trades? it was a singular, one time trade, i'm not here to trade cock sucker. you already knew that, and if you didn't well, you're the one calling me out atleast get it right. i was here to get some bitcoin through the trade, and get a positive trust rating. then i planned to offer my services, using the trust rating to help me attract potential clients. here to try and tap the bitcoin economy for extra work. that way if fiat collapses, i already will have inroads here. Okay, that one trade (although I suspect you would have done the same again or taken up multiple members) You wanted to make a trade for the point of gaining trust, not unlike a rep loan, both of which are scammy behavior. I'm done here, the rating stays. You weren't going to remove it either way. I had already apologized to you and you ignored that post, so it goes without saying that that apology is no rescinded.Continuing, you cannot possibly know i would have done another trade again. That reminds me of that movie with Tom Cruise where they charged people with crimes they would commit in the future, but i will digress and defer on that matter, to the more pressing issue: If this is scammy behaviour, why are Signature Campaign reps not considered scammy? Ive saw plenty of rep loans btw, look at default trust. half the members on the list have questionable feedback. Look at TF, Blazr, and Vod. Far from model citizens. Remember their account farming operation? how about when Blazr got caught and paid his way out of it? enlisting Vod and others to leave negative feedback on the posters who busted them out? there was never any recourse for either of them on the matter. No punishment for the protected, tsk tsk. Reminds me of corporate america. To me, it seems we have a system here designed to protect the interest of a select few, and leave the common user on the outside looking in. We need a clearer guideline. It seems one thing is acceptable until the general consensus changes on the matter. I was thinking of finding reputable hero members and asking them to do trades with me. i would send first, proving i am trustworthy. Really i just want it for bragging rights. My friends at work will be jealous of my green trust rating
Sig campaigns are people providing a legitimate service (advertising) in exchange for BTC. Once the transaction is done people may leave trust. Stunna did not make trusting him a requirement to be part of the sig campaign. |
|
|
|
That pisses me off. ANY forum with a trust system where you tried to do that would result in you being instantly slapped down. Buying trust is buying trust on ANY forum with a trust system. Don't whine about the truth.
Umm, ok? if you have a point make it. Seems like you're the one whining about the truth. I never tried to buy trust. i said i thought about it, then i stipulated in my post requesting a trade that we would exchange feedback. that is not the saming thing as "buying trust", you all are trying to find deeper meaning in something as shallow Mozart's grave. You were obviously trying to farm trust from those trades, no matter how many times you try to say you weren't. You tried to game the system, now you are marked as so. You can still get plenty of trades here by using escrow. those trades? it was a singular, one time trade, i'm not here to trade cock sucker. you already knew that, and if you didn't well, you're the one calling me out atleast get it right. i was here to get some bitcoin through the trade, and get a positive trust rating. then i planned to offer my services, using the trust rating to help me attract potential clients. here to try and tap the bitcoin economy for extra work. that way if fiat collapses, i already will have inroads here. Okay, that one trade (although I suspect you would have done the same again or taken up multiple members) You wanted to make a trade for the point of gaining trust, not unlike a rep loan, both of which are scammy behavior. You said in your other thread that you would make trades with Hero Member S in an attempt to get green trust, which obviously takes more than one. I'm done here, the rating stays. |
|
|
|
That pisses me off. ANY forum with a trust system where you tried to do that would result in you being instantly slapped down. Buying trust is buying trust on ANY forum with a trust system. Don't whine about the truth.
Umm, ok? if you have a point make it. Seems like you're the one whining about the truth. I never tried to buy trust. i said i thought about it, then i stipulated in my post requesting a trade that we would exchange feedback. that is not the saming thing as "buying trust", you all are trying to find deeper meaning in something as shallow Mozart's grave. You were obviously trying to farm trust from those trades, no matter how many times you try to say you weren't. You tried to game the system, now you are marked as so. You can still get plenty of trades here by using escrow. |
|
|
|
Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.
Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows. Close to proof for God: 1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe; 2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random; 3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God. These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations. 1: No it doesn't, if the universe wasn't in a state to support life the way it happened then we wouldn't be here to comment on it. Fine-tuned universe fallacy 2: Doesn't make any sense 3: No they don't, they suggest that we are conscience As long as you keep a narrow mind, or limit yourself to simple thinking, you won't ever understand. Since you obviously don't understand, who is the leader of your religion that has convinced you into believing the things that you DO believe? I mean, you obviously don't know it through understanding it. So you must have someone who has convinced you of it without understanding. Is he/she your high priest(ess) of your religion? Saying atheism is a religion is like saying nothing is a flavor of icecream. Nobody convinced me of anything, I've read up on the science and drawn conclusions |
|
|
|
Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.
Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows. Close to proof for God: 1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe; 2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random; 3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God. These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations. 1: No it doesn't, if the universe wasn't in a state to support life the way it happened then we wouldn't be here to comment on it. Fine-tuned universe fallacy 2: Doesn't make any sense 3: No they don't, they suggest that we are conscience |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
