Church Of England Debate Gender Of God

[JDHillFan]

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Fine, but when you have a person, like say a supreme court justice, say she wants to enact the Kingdom of God on earth, it makes religion wide open for discussion, mocking or otherwise 

 

I have very close religious friends and some believe the earth is just like six thousand years old. It's difficult for me not to get sarcastic over that! 

Guess what country is 85% Christian? It begins with Ukrain and ends with e. While you won’t be sending them any prayers and will more likely be mocking them, let’s at least hope their own praying brings them some comfort as the bullets fly. 

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Fine, but when you have a person, like say a supreme court justice, say she wants to enact the Kingdom of God on earth, it makes religion wide open for discussion, mocking or otherwise 

 

I have very close religious friends and some believe the earth is just like six thousand years old. It's difficult for me not to get sarcastic over that! 

Your decision to reject Christianity is because you have a couple of kooky friends? And let me guess, you think Al Gore and his melting planet religion are a better level of kooky? Alrighty then….

[Tiberius]

14 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Your decision to reject Christianity is because you have a couple of kooky friends? And let me guess, you think Al Gore and his melting planet religion are a better level of kooky? Alrighty then….

They are kooky? How come you say that? Lot's of Christians believe that, don't they? 

 

Or is it mocking them to point out certain Christian beliefs? 

15 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

Guess what country is 85% Christian? It begins with Ukrain and ends with e. While you won’t be sending them any prayers and will more likely be mocking them, let’s at least hope their own praying brings them some comfort as the bullets fly. 

They have as much right as you and I to live their lives in freedom and worship however they want. 

 

Are you claiming that questioning the virgin birth is mocking you? So religion is simply not to be questioned? 

[Tommy Callahan]

20 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Fine, but when you have a person, like say a supreme court justice, say she wants to enact the Kingdom of God on earth, it makes religion wide open for discussion, mocking or otherwise 

 

I have very close religious friends and some believe the earth is just like six thousand years old. It's difficult for me not to get sarcastic over that! 

go take a peek at the video word coded shared about paul harvey being god.  

 

fundamentalist in every religion eff up the very basic function of faith and the golden rule. 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Chris farley

[SoCal Deek]

34 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

They are kooky? How come you say that? Lot's of Christians believe that, don't they? 

 

Or is it mocking them to point out certain Christian beliefs? 

 

I don’t know a single Christian that believes or has ever been taught that. Not a single one. You need to get out more. I’d love to have you come to church with me sometime. I think you’d be amazed at how different it is from the place you’ve concocted, and the people you think are in there every week. 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, Chris farley said:

go take a peek at the video work coded shared about paul harvey being god.  

 

fundamentalist in every religion eff up the very basic function of faith and the golden rule. 

agree with you often in this thread.  I also believe that organized religions that support a political agenda should lose their tax free status.  And that Tibs or anyone else has the right to reject belief in God.  They should not be mocked for that anymore than any religious beliefs should.   We can also argue about evolution and fossil records without attacking the person.  But it is tempting...and I believe Al Gore is largely correct on climate change.  Has nothing to do with my belief in God.

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[SoCal Deek]

3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

agree with you often in this thread.  I also believe that organized religion that support a political agenda should lose their tax free status.  And that Tibs or anyone else has the right to reject belief in God.  They should not be mocked for that anymore than any religious beliefs should.   We can also argue about evolution and fossil records without attacking the person.  But it is tempting...

Nobody is mocking Tibs. He can believe whatever he’d like to believe. A few of us  though (including myself) have asked him what he does believe in, if anything. 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Nobody is mocking Tibs. He can believe whatever he’d like to believe. A few of us  though (including myself) have asked him what he does believe in, if anything. 

really? Now what? The Church of Universal Healthcare

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, redtail hawk said:

really? Now what? The Church of Universal Healthcare

Exactly. The question is where does Tibs place his faith? I didn’t start this thread Redtail. 

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

I don’t know a single Christian that believes or has ever been taught that. Not a single one. You need to get out more. I’d love to have you come to church with me sometime. I think you’d be amazed at how different it is from the place you’ve concocted, and the people you think are in there every week. 

What does your church and you believe about how old the earth is? 

 

No need to insult me, I do get out and talk to people. Really surprised you say no Christian are taught science is wrong. 

25 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Nobody is mocking Tibs. He can believe whatever he’d like to believe. A few of us  though (including myself) have asked him what he does believe in, if anything. 

What do you mean, what do I believe in? That's pretty open ended 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

14 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

What does your church and you believe about how old the earth is? 

 

No need to insult me, I do get out and talk to people. Really surprised you say no Christian are taught science is wrong. 

What do you mean, what do I believe in? That's pretty open ended 

plenty of Christian fundamentalists believe the earth is only 10000 years old.  I've debated it with other doctors.  And I've heard it stated in fundamentalist churches.  Many also don't believe in evolution because they believe that requires a specific time in development that the soul comes into existence.

From your posts, it seems you believe in science, reason and the search for truth.  Is that correct?  So do I but that doesn't mean those are necessarily exclusive beliefs.

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Tiberius]

10 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

plenty of Christian fundamentalists believe the earth is only 10000 years old.  I've debated it with other doctors.  And I've heard it stated in fundamentalist churches.  Many also don't believe in evolution because they believe that requires a specific time in development that the soul comes into existence.

From your posts, it seems you believe in science, reason and the search for truth.  Is that correct?  So do I but that doesn't mean those are necessarily exclusive beliefs.

I do read a lot of evolutionary science, natural history of humanity and astronomy, so yes. 

 

IMO, could there be a God? Sure. But I just have not felt the spirit move me. 

[SoCal Deek]

21 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

plenty of Christian fundamentalists believe the earth is only 10000 years old.  I've debated it with other doctors.  And I've heard it stated in fundamentalist churches.  Many also don't believe in evolution because they believe that requires a specific time in development that the soul comes into existence.

From your posts, it seems you believe in science, reason and the search for truth.  Is that correct?  So do I but that doesn't mean those are necessarily exclusive beliefs.

Once again, I’m not sure what churches you guys have attended but I’ve yet to attend one that spends any time at all on these subjects. 

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I do read a lot of evolutionary science, natural history of humanity and astronomy, so yes. 

 

IMO, could there be a God? Sure. But I just have not felt the spirit move me. 

May I suggest that you find a Church in your area that beats suits you? You seem to be waiting for God to speak to you in your living room. No offense intended. While that’s a strategy, for sure, I think you’ll find that ‘where are two or more are gathered in his name’ to be a better one. 

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Once again, I’m not sure what churches you guys have attended but I’ve yet to attend one that spends any time at all on these subjects. 

May I suggest that you find a Church in your area that beats suits you? You seem to be waiting for God to speak to you in your living room. No offense intended. While that’s a strategy, for sure, I think you’ll find that ‘where are two or more are gathered in his name’ to be a better one. 

There sure are churches pushing an anti-science agenda 

 

 

https://creationmuseum.org/events/presentations/age-of-the-earth/

 

We must accept what God's Word and Jesus taught about the earth's age. We should not fear the radioactive methods geologists use to position rocks as millions of years old, because their methods are based on unprovable assumptions. Many examples of inherited ages, contamination, and non-constant radioactive decay rates demonstrate these assumptions are repeatedly falsified. Instead, there are many scientific evidences of a young earth, such as crumbling comets, the earth's magnetic field losing energy, and rapid salt accumulation in the oceans.

If we cannot trust the Bible about the earth's age, then we cannot trust its gospel message.

In this video presentation, Dr. Andrew Snelling uses the Bible to discuss and refute some of the crucial components of the "Millions of Years" theory.

This presentation is free with paid museum admission or museum membership. Seating is first come, first served.

[All_Pro_Bills]

40 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

plenty of Christian fundamentalists believe the earth is only 10000 years old.  I've debated it with other doctors.  And I've heard it stated in fundamentalist churches.  Many also don't believe in evolution because they believe that requires a specific time in development that the soul comes into existence.

From your posts, it seems you believe in science, reason and the search for truth.  Is that correct?  So do I but that doesn't mean those are necessarily exclusive beliefs.

I think anyone that prefers to apply logic, fact-based techniques of thinking, and things like the principles of physical science would conclude these people are rejecting reality in the face of evidence that renders their beliefs as false.  Yet for some reason they might choose to cling to them.  Why they would do that is something to explore.  Faith is the answer I see most.

 

This leads me to ponder the belief system of current social movements.  I propose applying the same criteria to the American Woke movement, which after examination I conclude is a belief system that meets the criteria of a religion.  Namely, dismissing scientific fact and logic.  Start with the concept that they believe a man can be a women simply by believing.  And attack anyone that disagrees.  But genetic and biological facts invalidate their belief.  Yet they cling to them.  For me, that's consistent with a Christian cited in the example above believing the Earth is 10,000 years old when confronted with geological and scientific facts.

 

So why do some that reject traditional or unique religious beliefs because they can be factually disproved believe in or fail to critique woke religious beliefs that can also be factually disproven?  

 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[SoCal Deek]

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

There sure are churches pushing an anti-science agenda 

 

 

https://creationmuseum.org/events/presentations/age-of-the-earth/

 

We must accept what God's Word and Jesus taught about the earth's age. We should not fear the radioactive methods geologists use to position rocks as millions of years old, because their methods are based on unprovable assumptions. Many examples of inherited ages, contamination, and non-constant radioactive decay rates demonstrate these assumptions are repeatedly falsified. Instead, there are many scientific evidences of a young earth, such as crumbling comets, the earth's magnetic field losing energy, and rapid salt accumulation in the oceans.

If we cannot trust the Bible about the earth's age, then we cannot trust its gospel message.

In this video presentation, Dr. Andrew Snelling uses the Bible to discuss and refute some of the crucial components of the "Millions of Years" theory.

This presentation is free with paid museum admission or museum membership. Seating is first come, first served.

And Redtail wants to attack me for mocking your beliefs? Yeah….right! 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

And Redtail wants to attack me for mocking your beliefs? Yeah….right! 

you really oughta listen to more NPR.  Rich in science and debate:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/04/271648691/watch-the-creationism-vs-evolution-debate-bill-nye-and-ken-ham

 

There are definitely people that mold "history" to fit a literal reading of the bible.  Heck, there's a reproduction of the ark in Kentucky, I think, visited by thousands yearly.

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, redtail hawk said:

you really oughta listen to more NPR.  RTich in science and debate:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/04/271648691/watch-the-creationism-vs-evolution-debate-bill-nye-and-ken-ham

Thanks Redtail…..I’m fine. The last thing I need is another liberal media outlet telling me to put all my faith in government. 😉

[Joe Ferguson forever]

23 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think anyone that prefers to apply logic, fact-based techniques of thinking, and things like the principles of physical science would conclude these people are rejecting reality in the face of evidence that renders their beliefs as false.  Yet for some reason they might choose to cling to them.  Why they would do that is something to explore.  Faith is the answer I see most.

 

This leads me to ponder the belief system of current social movements.  I propose applying the same criteria to the American Woke movement, which after examination I conclude is a belief system that meets the criteria of a religion.  Namely, dismissing scientific fact and logic.  Start with the concept that they believe a man can be a women simply by believing.  And attack anyone that disagrees.  But genetic and biological facts invalidate their belief.  Yet they cling to them.  For me, that's consistent with a Christian cited in the example above believing the Earth is 10,000 years old when confronted with geological and scientific facts.

 

So why do some that reject traditional or unique religious beliefs because they can be factually disproved believe in or fail to critique woke religious beliefs that can also be factually disproven?  

 

 

I've already given examples where gender is biologically ambiguous.  Parents and doctors decide what the gender will be in those cases.  Do you reject the reality of this?  I think the gender issue has swung too far towards questioning genetics but there is definitely a spectrum of phenotypic maleness vs femaleness in genotypic males and females.

 

It's far from the simple issue that so many make it out to be:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.701017/full

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[All_Pro_Bills]

16 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

I've already given examples where gender is biologically ambiguous.  Parents and doctors decide what the gender will be in those cases.  Do you reject the reality of this?  I think the gender issue has swung too far towards questioning genetics but there is definitely a spectrum of phenotypic maleness vs femaleness in genotypic males and females.

I'll concede there are exceptions but as a matter of practice they are also driven by science.  In this case inconclusive science.  But woke religion doesn't address ambiguous cases but rather people that reject their biological gender for a belief in something else.  In these "I think I'm a women therefore I am" cases the gender is not ambiguous and the biological gender is clear yet people ignore reality.  Just like those 10,000 year old Earth folks the left loves to snicker at.  Its the same denial of reality at work.

Edited February 10, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[Joe Ferguson forever]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I'll concede there are exceptions but as a matter of practice they are also driven by science.  In this case inconclusive science.  But woke religion doesn't address ambiguous cases but rather people that reject their biological gender for a belief in something else.  In these "I think I'm a women therefore I am" cases the gender is not ambiguous and the biological gender is clear yet people ignore reality.  Just like those 10,000 year old Earth folks the left loves to snicker at.  Its the same denial of reality at work.

I added the neuroscience article later.  There can certainly be a biochemical explanation in some of the cases you are citing.  I think it's very likely.

[L Ron Burgundy]

51 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

And Redtail wants to attack me for mocking your beliefs? Yeah….right! 

I mean....a lot of this is from the bible right?  I'm surprised you're not aware of the masses that believe in this manner.  You should check out the debate redtail posted, if just to see that pov.  I personally enjoy the science/religion debates.

[sherpa]

Here's a thought.

If a being was so enormously powerful that he (pronoun of your choice), could create our universe, it is likely we could not understand him.

Correct?

 

Now if that being created the universe and its laws of science to sustain it, all science, he is probably capable of doing other things we are not capable of understanding, or in some cases even considering.

If those laws of science that the universe he created were to operate, they would require a functioning universe on day one, ie., fossils, fires, decaying plant matter, rivers and all manner of natural phenomena, because the universe would not work without everything working on day one.

 

So, this being we don't understand creates a universe that is operating on day one as if it were created millions of years ago.

He says, "Here you go. Now use my laws of science and evolve."

[Tommy Callahan]

3 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

agree with you often in this thread.  I also believe that organized religions that support a political agenda should lose their tax free status.  And that Tibs or anyone else has the right to reject belief in God.  They should not be mocked for that anymore than any religious beliefs should.   We can also argue about evolution and fossil records without attacking the person.  But it is tempting...and I believe Al Gore is largely correct on climate change.  Has nothing to do with my belief in God.

I do think there is an issue with churches and politics. But its hard to just say, remove tax status if a political agenda.  As those churches are often the first line helping the people most in need.  And those inner-city churches that are usually the first to help at that level. and a braud approach could hurt them as well. when I think most peoples issues are with the mega churches.  

 

I don't think anyone should be mocked for their FAITH. I also feel that atheism/agnostic is a faith/belief system of what happens after death. 

 

 

 

But at the same time. if an individual insults or belittles someone, they as an Indvidual have every right to toss it right back.

 

The person you are mentioning has tossed plenty of stones.

 

I don't believe a thing GORE says because his record of being wrong, and his lack of integrity.  But that has nothing to do with religion or faith.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

There sure are churches pushing an anti-science agenda 

 

 

https://creationmuseum.org/events/presentations/age-of-the-earth/

 

We must accept what God's Word and Jesus taught about the earth's age. We should not fear the radioactive methods geologists use to position rocks as millions of years old, because their methods are based on unprovable assumptions. Many examples of inherited ages, contamination, and non-constant radioactive decay rates demonstrate these assumptions are repeatedly falsified. Instead, there are many scientific evidences of a young earth, such as crumbling comets, the earth's magnetic field losing energy, and rapid salt accumulation in the oceans.

If we cannot trust the Bible about the earth's age, then we cannot trust its gospel message.

In this video presentation, Dr. Andrew Snelling uses the Bible to discuss and refute some of the crucial components of the "Millions of Years" theory.

This presentation is free with paid museum admission or museum membership. Seating is first come, first served.

In every religion, even the small ones.

 

Do we attack natives for their awesome beliefs in where they came from and where we go?  Cause their are so many amazing stories in those creation stories.  

 

Even though it doesn't jive with CURRENT science. 

 

Every minute something that used to be a scientific fact, is disproven by another scientific fact. Science never stops evolving, or its not science.

 

Ever head the story of Yakub?  

 

Muslims/Islam again state around 5-6K years ago. but that's fundamentalist. Doesn't mean the Muslim Scientist believes the earth is 500 years old. same with a Christian scientist, or Agnostic scientist.  

 

The current scientific agenda (debatable) is that we are in this 6th mass extinction event caused by us.  

 

one does not have to believe everything in a book wrote by men to have faith in a supreme being. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

I've already given examples where gender is biologically ambiguous.  Parents and doctors decide what the gender will be in those cases.  Do you reject the reality of this?  I think the gender issue has swung too far towards questioning genetics but there is definitely a spectrum of phenotypic maleness vs femaleness in genotypic males and females.

 

It's far from the simple issue that so many make it out to be:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.701017/full

very interesting. its a very small sample size to make a lot of it. 

 

So, in the future babies could get a serum test at birth to identify if they are trans or sic?  then a DNA test to verify sex vs DR assigned?

 

is this caused by the stresses of the 6th extinction event. as those stresses are what leads to evolution.

 

Do trans reproduce at the level of CIC?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, sherpa said:

Here's a thought.

If a being was so enormously powerful that he (pronoun of your choice), could create our universe, it is likely we could not understand him.

Correct?

 

Now if that being created the universe and its laws of science to sustain it, all science, he is probably capable of doing other things we are not capable of understanding, or in some cases even considering.

If those laws of science that the universe he created were to operate, they would require a functioning universe on day one, ie., fossils, fires, decaying plant matter, rivers and all manner of natural phenomena, because the universe would not work without everything working on day one.

 

So, this being we don't understand creates a universe that is operating on day one as if it were created millions of years ago.

He says, "Here you go. Now use my laws of science and evolve."

Bill Nye is quite a thinker:  As for his answer, Nye said, "This is the great mystery; you've hit the nail on the head. What was before the Big Bang? This is what drives us, this is what we want to know. Let's keep looking, let's keep searching."

32 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

very interesting. its a very small sample size to make a lot of it. 

 

So, in the future babies could get a serum test at birth to identify if they are trans or sic?  then a DNA test to verify sex vs DR assigned?

 

is this caused by the stresses of the 6th extinction event. as those stresses are what leads to evolution.

 

Do trans reproduce at the level of CIC?

 

 

 

 

 

 

obviously trans do not reproduce unless a XY male remains relatively "unaltered". i don't see there being a test like that anytime soon.  They're just possible markers for the trend.  When proven more definitively they could probably be measured and used like the brca genes for breast ca.  As far as why there are these variants, mutations/randomness would be my guess.

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

Bill Nye is quite a thinker:  As for his answer, Nye said, "This is the great mystery; you've hit the nail on the head. What was before the Big Bang? This is what drives us, this is what we want to know. Let's keep looking, let's keep searching."

obviously trans do not reproduce unless a XY male remains relatively "unaltered". i don't see there being a test like that anytime soon.  They're just possible markers for the trend.  When proven more definitively they could probably be measured and used like the brca genes for breast ca.  As far as why there are these variants, mutations/randomness would be my guess.

from an evolutionary theory. if this world is really overpopulated and the people are what's killing the earth. They say this is the 6th mass extinction event. AOC says 6 years to live. .  like in past mass extinction events that created caused the stresses that forced evolution. Is that what we might be seeing with gene mutations?  Actual clinical Gender dysphoria was like 1 in 5 million rare just 10 years ago. Now according to UCLA, 1.6 M Americans.   

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Chris farley

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

I mean....a lot of this is from the bible right?  I'm surprised you're not aware of the masses that believe in this manner.  You should check out the debate redtail posted, if just to see that pov.  I personally enjoy the science/religion debates.

May I suggest you read the teachings of Christ? They’re aren’t very long or complicated or confusing. Sounds to me like your debate is with the Old Covenant. 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

40 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

from an evolutionary theory. if this world is really overpopulated and the people are what's killing the earth. They say this is the 6th mass extinction event. AOC says 6 years to live. .  like in past mass extinction events that created caused the stresses that forced evolution. Is that what we might be seeing with gene mutations?  Actual clinical Gender dysphoria was like 1 in 5 million rare just 10 years ago. Now according to UCLA, 1.6 M Americans.   They say this is the 6th mass extinction event. AOC says 6 years to live.   

 

 

 

 

nope.  did AOC really say that?  Might have to amend my opinion of her.

 

presumably this is what you're referencing:  https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/426353-ocasio-cortez-the-world-will-end-in-12-years-if-we-dont-address/.  to me she's pointing out the findings of a UN study that claims irreversibility of climate change in 12 years if nor mediation.  Seems to have some consensus.  

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[JDHillFan]

2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

nope.  did AOC really say that?  Might have to amend my opinion of her.

Still 8 years left so we can all breathe easy. Beats the hell out of 6. 
 

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/426353-ocasio-cortez-the-world-will-end-in-12-years-if-we-dont-address/

[Joe Ferguson forever]

12 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

Still 8 years left so we can all breathe easy. Beats the hell out of 6. 
 

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/426353-ocasio-cortez-the-world-will-end-in-12-years-if-we-dont-address/

I just read it.  that's not what I took from it.  again thematic and abstract versus literal and concrete.  If anything, what she said here raised my opinion of her intellect.  I'm beginning to think that left and right politically correlates with right and left brain dominance.

 

Do mtg or Boebert even possess a 4 syllable vocabulary?

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Tommy Callahan]

10 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

I just read it.  that's not what I took from it.  again thematic and abstract versus literal and concrete.  If anything, what she said here raised my opinion of her intellect.  I'm beginning to think that left and right politically correlates with right and left brain dominance.

All of it is based on us being in the 6th extinction event and the amount of flora/fauna loss and the speed of it.   from that, they formulated the climate models of increased CO like the 

 

Biggest extinction in Earth’s history caused by global warming leaving ocean animals gasping for breath | UW News (washington.edu)

[Joe Ferguson forever]

7 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

All of it is based on us being in the 6th extinction event and the amount of flora/fauna loss and the speed of it.   from that, they formulated the climate models of increased CO like the 

 

Biggest extinction in Earth’s history caused by global warming leaving ocean animals gasping for breath | UW News (washington.edu)

huh?

[SoCal Deek]

20 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

I just read it.  that's not what I took from it.  again thematic and abstract versus literal and concrete.  If anything, what she said here raised my opinion of her intellect.  I'm beginning to think that left and right politically correlates with right and left brain dominance.

 

Do mtg or Boebert even possess a 4 syllable vocabulary?

I believe you’re correct on the left and right brain hypothesis. It doesn’t make one good or evil. It just speaks to the way we process information. 

[JDHillFan]

20 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

I just read it.  that's not what I took from it.  again thematic and abstract versus literal and concrete.  If anything, what she said here raised my opinion of her intellect.  I'm beginning to think that left and right politically correlates with right and left brain dominance.

 

Do mtg or Boebert even possess a 4 syllable vocabulary?

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/545908-hypocritical-hilarious-aoc-says-calling-border-crisis-a-surge-invokes/

 

Is your opinion of her intellect higher, lower, or unchanged after reading this? 
 

Like every other Washingtonian she’s a hypocrite 24/7. Doesn’t walk the walk on her climate claims nor on her kids in cages drama. Two easy examples among many. 
 

Has anyone on this board ever gone to bat for MGT?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/545908-hypocritical-hilarious-aoc-says-calling-border-crisis-a-surge-invokes/

 

Is your opinion of her intellect higher, lower, or unchanged after reading this? 
 

Like every other Washingtonian she’s a hypocrite 24/7. Doesn’t walk the walk on her climate claims nor on her kids in cages drama. Two easy examples among many. 
 

Has anyone on this board ever gone to bat for MGT?

Unchanged.  I think you don't like what she said here.  I'm ambivalent.  I think a strong argument could be made for border xenophobia being rooted , at least for some, in white supremacy thought.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

24 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

All of it is based on us being in the 6th extinction event and the amount of flora/fauna loss and the speed of it.   from that, they formulated the climate models of increased CO like the 

 

Biggest extinction in Earth’s history caused by global warming leaving ocean animals gasping for breath | UW News (washington.edu)

wasn't familiar with the term.  Doesn't look like these serious scientists are talking a few years.  More like 10,000.  That doesn't r/o irreversibility in 12 years, however.  https://news.mit.edu/2017/mathematics-predicts-sixth-mass-extinction-0920

Edited February 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[JDHillFan]

6 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

Unchanged.  I think you don't like what she said here.  I'm ambivalent.  I think a strong argument could be made for border xenophobia being rooted , at least for some, in white supremacy thought.

There’s almost no topic that AOC can’t weave a racism/white supremacy thread through. It’s an easy out for her. To me that signals intellectual weakness rather than strength. Left brain/right brain. 

[L Ron Burgundy]

40 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

There’s almost no topic that AOC can’t weave a racism/white supremacy thread through. It’s an easy out for her. To me that signals intellectual weakness rather than strength. Left brain/right brain. 

I wish she'd stop that.  She actually says some good things when she doesn't go off in that direction.   People would be surprised if they listened to more than the spicy soundbites.  And I'm not a fan just have seen her not be a moron occasionally.