Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Real witches are in cahoots with someone you deny even exists; and in Old Testament times, they could conjure things you deny exists, from places you deny exists.
So you send us out to hunt down fictional characters ... what else is old?Yea. Exactly as I thought, AV. Those aren't real witches at all. Those are fictional characters one can read about in fairy tales.
Like I said, they're a shell of what they used to be.We know witches are real, they are in the God's Holy word and God does not change.
and God still has not said not to Hunt them down. Evil is Evil and must be exterminated.Like I said, they're a shell of what they used to be.
Like I said, they're a shell of what they used to be.
Well, like I said, I'm too busy right now on a crusade.and God still has not said not to Hunt them down. Evil is Evil and must be exterminated.
I'll issue you the same challenge I issued MoonLancer (I believe it was):That's all that's standing between you and burning a lot of innocent women?
Gladly:I'll issue you the same challenge I issued MoonLancer (I believe it was):
... and I'll accommodate you.
- You find 'burning witches' in the Bible.
- You go out and get me a bona-fide New Testament witch and bring her to me, along with a court order for her execution.
So am I, to be honestYup. Genetics is fascinating, but I'm out of my depth!
Since I work on a polychaete worm, my two main go-to genomes are currently these two lophotrochozoans. Eventually I'll expect to make use of all kinds of creatures with hard parts, though I'm kind of stranded without my own sequence data to compareWhich ones are those?
That's a good point.I think position effects are pretty common in gene expression, so I would expect at least some genes to have altered expression levels simply because of the new location of the centromere and the loss of two telemeres. But that's very general and vague, and I have no clue about what the specific effects would have been.
Haha, good one!How can you tell an intelligent gene from a dumb gene? Do they get more A's? Sorry I could not resist.
Well I searched on google for "why We didn't evolve from monkeys" and was surprised to find a lot of evolutionist stuff and not creationist stuff as expected. Along with that horrible guy Dawkins I found this (Google "Why We Did Not Evolve from Monkeys: Human Common Ancestry explained" - I can't link to it for some reason) where the guy amazingly claims that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that scientists have never said that! He (Connor Davidson) claims this is a misconception. Is that true? OR is that just scientists having different ideas and this guy just having his own interpretation.
Dawkins isn't a horrible personFirst of all I am not a scientist - so don't get all that technical with me.
Well I searched on google for "why We didn't evolve from monkeys" and was surprised to find a lot of evolutionist stuff and not creationist stuff as expected. Along with that horrible guy Dawkins I found this (Google "Why We Did Not Evolve from Monkeys: Human Common Ancestry explained" - I can't link to it for some reason) where the guy amazingly claims that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that scientists have never said that! He (Connor Davidson) claims this is a misconception. Is that true? OR is that just scientists having different ideas and this guy just having his own interpretation.
Though the thing I want you to help me debunk is the bit about the genes joining up. I know evolution can be disproved by complexity of life and the eye etc but I don't have a response to the genetic arguments. I was hoping someone could explain the truth about this so I can have something to argue against the evolutionists with. I don't want to look stupid.
Though I have to say he is quite polite until the end where he makes fun of Sheri Sheppard and creationists by implying that we are stupid. Jesus teaches us to be tolerant of others and not to call people stupid because we disagree with them. He is just a little bit better than Dawkins at this in my opinion.
Basically what I am saying is what is wrong with the arguments? What response could I give to people who agree with this?
May god bless you and guide you on your quest for knowedge and truth
[BIBLE]Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.[/BIBLE]
- Kerry Ann
Ah, but if they can prove that he is, that would mean that atheism/evolution/abortion is wrong!Dawkins isn't a horrible person
That's a nice human-inspired idea... If only there was a way to see if it's true or not or even more valid than any other human-inspired idea.
Have to say that part of my dislike of almost everything outside Ensembl was probably an effect of my newbieness. I can actually navigate other interfaces without getting totally confused now, but Ensembl is still the prettiest
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?