Tuur said:

Validation and Forecasting Accuracy in Models of Climate Change, Robert Fildes and Nikolaos Kourentzes, International Journal of Forecasting, Volume 27, Issue 4, October-December 2011, pages 968-999. Here's a link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169207011000604

Click to expand...

From the link:

No other researchers found this ancient article worth citing.

Youth

156

to

Zacki said:

I just learned that my niece has "married" another woman. Her sister is also lesbian & "married" to another woman. I've searched the Bible for information on this subject & only found scripture about practicing gay men not going to Heaven. Not sure about women. Any info on this subject is welcome. I can't speak to their mom/my sister on the subject because she hates me for voting for Trump but their salvation matters to me. None of them go to a Christian church.

Click to expand...

Unless your niece comes to Christ, believes the Gospel, accept the Lord as her Saviour and repents of sin, she will go to hell....like every sinner. We all need Christ

Western meddling in the Middle East usually destabilizes nations that might otherwise have worked things out for themselves. Usually Israel gets caught in the middle because they are assumed to be a stooge of the US ( they aren’t but their survival is with the US).

Either by warmongering or concerns over “human rights” the US creates a hornet’s nest in the Middle East. Overthrowing the Shah of Iran in 1979, the Desert Storm war in 1991, the Iraq war of 2003, the “ Arab Spring” debacle etc. etc. Nation states are destabilized, radical Islam ( which thrives mostly on anti Judaism & anti Christianity) fills the vacuum, & perpetual refugee flows of people keeps many NGO human trafficking entities in business.

BlueGreenEarth said:

First of all, AV1611Vet's post was not a relevant response because I wasn't arguing that the peer-review process couldn't be or ever was compromised. I asked you to describe the reasonably obtainable evidence you would expect to find if your claim about the peer-review process for relevant journal articles about the Theory of Evolution is false. Is your claim falsifiable or unfalsifiable?

Click to expand...

I think you are misunderstanding my post. I was just writing about the peer-review process in general, and it had nothing to do with evolution other than that peer-review is not a guarantee that dissenting views have been considered.

Jerry N. said:

I’m not saying that papers are necessarily false or fabricated. I’m sure that most of the writers who get published generally do their best. However, I am saying that peer-review is not a guarantee that dissenting views have been considered. This is in addition to the posting by AV1611Vet.

Click to expand...

Of course it is not guaranteed. Sometimes scientists with dissenting views have to work hard for them to be considered, and endure periods of ridicule and exclusion. But if the idea has merit, the evidence will eventually lead the scientific community to it.

Here, though, I get the impression we are talking about something rather different, that is, dissenting views which have already been given due consideration and rejected due to lack of scientific merit.

Jerry N. said:

I’m not saying that papers are necessarily false or fabricated. I’m sure that most of the writers who get published generally do their best. However, I am saying that peer-review is not a guarantee that dissenting views have been considered. This is in addition to the posting by AV1611Vet.

Click to expand...

First of all, AV1611Vet's post was not a relevant response because I wasn't arguing that the peer-review process couldn't be or ever was compromised. I asked you to describe the reasonably obtainable evidence you would expect to find if your claim about the peer-review process for relevant journal articles about the Theory of Evolution is false. Is your claim falsifiable or unfalsifiable?

Aaron112 said:

Not saying that "these things" as in 'given these things' is truth, or not truth;
the distinction referred to is not something often , nor usually even, seen.
Sticking with Scripture , the realization of what is true in this world of sinful mankind
is not frequent at all, nor is it popular nor sought except by a few.

Click to expand...

I think you are on to something here. I have for a long time thought that people generally do not want to face their own sinfulness. And I wonder about certain theological structures that apparently have been constructed for the specific purpose of insulating man from it.

The other day I was reading Jesus' interraction with Nicodemus and noticed something related to this in two verses: "...the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed" (Jn 3:19–20).

For the first time I saw "motivation" spelled out in the verses -- people prefer to be in the dark about their own sins because they do not want it discovered that they are sinners. As an aside, "lest" in the final phrase is the Greek word, "ἵνα", which is a "marker to denote purpose, aim, or goal, in order that, that" according to BDAG.

The Barbarian said:

The court only found him guilty of lying when he said he didn't sexually assault the female in question. Then, after losing the trial, he slandered her yet again. So she sued him again, and won an even bigger judgement. He's not very bright, you know.

Click to expand...

Civil case no criminal charges were filed. He said she said . All about money nothing else. Trial in NY a gotch Trump state. Trump was sued for defamation over stating "she's not my type" really??? Just a money grab attempt. Defamation case under appeal. Civil case can be appealed to the Supreme Court but is unlikely they would take it. Is this nonsense all you've got? f you worked this hard to expose corruption on your side of the isle we would be getting somewhere. Oh never mind Bondi is on it. Stay tuned.

What you have here is the same nonsense we see in every creationist thread. Creationists are, for some reason, desparate to prove that scientists present their theories, especially the theory of evolution, as absolute truth and won't take "no" for an answer. It's a lie, and I don't see the point of it.

ozso said:

The problem with paid sick leave is too many exploit the system. Employees even go around boasting about how they used paid sick leave to attend a concert or whatever.

Click to expand...

It is possible to address this issue without entirely discontinuing the policy. At my current company, we have separate sick leave for medical reasons, planned medical appointments, and PTO. If an employee calls in sick for fewer than three days, the absence is deducted from PTO, unless a doctor's note is provided. For absences exceeding three days due to illness or medical recovery, a doctor's note is required.

Employees who wish to utilize sick leave must provide a doctor's note. If an employee prefers to attend a concert and calls in sick without a doctor's note, the absence will be deducted from their PTO. While this policy may not be entirely foolproof, it is effective for the majority of employees, as approximately 95% would not be able to obtain a doctor's note without a valid medical reason.

BlueGreenEarth said:

My previous response to your post above was probably not sufficiently clear. So, please consider this response instead:

For reputable peer-reviewed journal articles about various aspects of evolution by natural selection, what evidence would you expect to find if your claim about their unreliability is false? In other words, what evidence would demonstrate to your satisfaction that the claim you are making is false or at least insufficiently supported? Please provide citations for the specific and relevant journal articles you have in mind.

Click to expand...

I’m not saying that papers are necessarily false or fabricated. I’m sure that most of the writers who get published generally do their best. However, I am saying that peer-review is not a guarantee that dissenting views have been considered. This is in addition to the posting by AV1611Vet.

Jerry N. said:

I was looking for a good example that would illustrate the problem. One would be the migration of humans into the Americas. It has taken decades for paleontologists to move the date from 10,000 years ago to 25,000 years ago, even though the evidence was there that the 10,000 year date was probably wrong. The old guard has to retire or die for new ideas to emerge.

Click to expand...

Your response above doesn't answer my question. I'm not asking for the evidence you have to support your claim. I'm trying to understand if your claim is falsifiable or not. What, if any, evidence would falsify the claim you are making to your satisfaction?

rjs330 said:

Yeah he put on quite a show. Now he can do his little routine from behind bars.

Now hes a star in his own play. Good for him. No sympathy from me.


Well, the judge should have kept his mouth shut. He doesn't get to make that claim yet as there has been no trial. If he wants the release that guy until the next hearing, fine. But no commentary.

Click to expand...

It was a legal opinion based on the evidence presented in the charge, and good advice. Felonious assault generally requires intent to kill or inflict serious bodily injury, which they clearly cannot prove.

Always in His Presence said:

The ones Trump is being lauded for overturning or ending.

Click to expand...

One more time, What bills were passed under Biden or Obama had that same misconceived focus? Be specific.

BlueGreenEarth said:

What reasonably obtainable evidence would you expect to find if your claim about the unreliability of the peer-review process is false?

Click to expand...

I was looking for a good example that would illustrate the problem. One would be the migration of humans into the Americas. It has taken decades for paleontologists to move the date from 10,000 years ago to 25,000 years ago, even though the evidence was there that the 10,000 year date was probably wrong. The old guard has to retire or die for new ideas to emerge.

Valletta said:

Branco Cartoon - Pro-Crime Candidate - Comically Incorrect

A.F. Branco Cartoon - Minneapolis Mayor socialist candidate Oma Fateh pledges to protect illegal immigrants and criminals if elected.

comicallyincorrect.com

Click to expand...

Polling says otherwise. Even come immigration.

The Barbarian said:

As you seem to be aware, Trump's people have used it without Trump's knowledge.

Click to expand...

Already addressed, no credible evidence exists that your wild claim is true, but here is a recap for you. All presidents have used it, but Biden's staff abused it. That is a far different matter which you can't seem to address.

The Barbarian said:

Which isn't as bad as what happened to him in his first attempt to be a president:

Trump’s aides stole his papers ‘to protect the country’ ​

President Donald Trump’s closest aides have taken extraordinary measures in the White House to try to stop what they saw as his most dangerous impulses, going so far as to swipe and hide papers from his desk so he wouldn’t sign them,

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/04/politics/bob-woodward-book-donald-trump-fear/index.html

Click to expand...

Nice pivot and diversion from the auto pen issue. I treat your source as bull hockey from a trump hater. Not reliable , but it does serve your purpose well.

Jerry N. said:

What you wrote is true, but my point was that peer-review is not sufficient evidence that a particular paper should be taken as fact or even sufficiently vetted. “Publish or perish” is a very strong incentive to write what supervisors and colleagues agree with to keep or advance one’s career.

Click to expand...

My previous response to your post above was probably not sufficiently clear. So, please consider this response instead:

For reputable peer-reviewed journal articles about various aspects of evolution by natural selection, what evidence would you expect to find if your claim about their unreliability is false? In other words, what evidence would demonstrate to your satisfaction that the claim you are making is false or at least insufficiently supported? Please provide citations for the specific and relevant journal articles you have in mind.

stevevw said:

I sense in Pauls writings especially that he was constantly worried about individuals and groups rising up to undermine the teachings he is often is reminding them of.

Like it was the same battle of the individual between the flesh and the spirit. Like the church itself is fighting the battle as a community and has to always be ready to defend itself from the wolves.

Even moreso today as I think in Pauls time they were clear because they did not allow the outside world to come into the church. But today for a growing number of churches its hard to tell the difference.

Thats why I think more than ever we need to be cautious. The problem is the idea of truth itself, that there is one unified truth is seen as controlling. So its a cultural wide shift into postmodernist thinking that has encroached on the church. That it is wrong to declare and stand on a single truth and this is oppressing others.

Which then makes those churches the bad guys and others the good guys. Thats why the church should have nothing to do with the same political games that are happening in mainstream society. Just stick to what they are to do best which is being Christlike. Helping the poor and being good examples in behaviour.

Click to expand...

I know it's hard for many, and I know that it is impossible... I use the word impossible, not because each individual cannot observe it, but because the heart refuses to let the individual observe it... it is impossible for many to see what is clearly written - the truth, which states that only few find the narrow door that opens to the narrow path leading to life. While the masses flood through the broad road leading to destruction, because they have itching ears, for what the many false prophets who have turned away from the truth, tells them.

I said a mouthful there, but one who knows the scriptures well can pinpoint the five scriptures I referred to in my comment.
Can you connect the five verses?
Matthew 13:15 For the hearts of these people are hardened, and their ears cannot hear, and they have closed their eyes - so their eyes cannot see, and their ears cannot hear, and their hearts cannot understand, and they cannot turn to me and let me heal them.’
2 Corinthians 4:4 the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they will not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
Matthew 7:13, 14 Enter through the narrow gate for wide is the gate and broad the way leading to destruction, and many are those entering through it. For small is the gate and narrow the way leading to life, and few are those finding it.
2 Timothy 4:3 For there will be a time when they will not endure sound teaching, but according to the own desires, having an itching ear, they will gather around them teachers to suit themselves,
Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets will rise up and mislead many people. (1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.)

While there are sincere people out their, whom have not hardened their heart, while turning their ears to what they want to hear, these will come to know the truth eventually, because their heart will lead them to it, due to humbling themselves.
I should rather say, God will lead them to the truth. John 6:44
Some who right now have itching ears for the watered down word of God, will also find the truth, because their heart will soften.

However, there are many, many, many... who will not soften their heart, and they will remain blind, because God knows their heart, and he lets them remain blind. The Bible says he gives them a strong delusion, so that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

So, while there are many who cannot see that Satan has his own organized religion, made up of thousands of divisions, while Christ has one united body of organized worshippers.... not fighting among themselves, it is not something I am concerned about, and expect to change, or be "rectified", because I see what the scripture say... Not just I alone, because it is written clear for all to see... those who have eyes to see.
The Divisions will continue to grow, as more and more people.... or should I say, as Satan forms more churches to gather those who have itching ears, and refuse to believe the truth.