The Return of My Apple Challenge

[Soul Searcher]

Can you provide evidence such a tree would cause Noah to be sure it was no OK to leave the ark? Or how such trees or plants could feed all the animals and people on the ark?? We need real live trees with fruit for that.

I do not think anyone can provide such evidence which in itself is pretty good evidence that the Noah story is at best very exagerated and at worse total fiction.

Yes, a combination of hibernation, semi hibernation, and fast gwoth rates still in effect. A few seeds in the planter in fron of the cows room, and voila! All the grass one could stuff themselves with. Piece of cake.

Of course these fast growth rates are just something that you or someone else imagioned into existance to make a story that is logically impossible make some sort of sense.

Yes, the fast evolution rates in effect mean just a sampling of the animals needed to be there. Or a kind.

More of the above imagionary data to try and make sense out of that which is clearly in error.

Visible doesn't do anyone any good. Alive and well is needed. Growing fast too, I might add, or there is no way to feed all creatures.

Again imagionary data abotu these supposed fast groth rates and evoultion rates. Wasn't it you that just a few pages back said man should stick to what he knows? Perhaps you should heed that advice as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Another evidence of this is the tree of life, it grows fruit every month of the year. That is different. Another evidence is that plants were made (planted, in the case of Eden) only days before we ate them.

Of coruse the tree of life is not a tree at all but I wouldn't want to spoil your fantasy any more than I have already so whatever you say

Games aside, you just can't invent reasons God said there was a flood. He said it in many places, and Jesus also talked of it. No way round it.

You did, not only that you invented reasons for pretty much every law of nature to be warped to try and make it make a little sense. The logical and rational and most likely accurate thing is that God never said nor did any such thing but men wrote about it anyway and greatly exagerated it [assuming of course that is was based on a real flood and not just fiction] as well.

Yes. How a bout a little freedom!!?? let the local population decide. If it is Christian, then let them teach that.

Why.. if we have a community of people who have no knowledge of the world around us would it be wise to have them teach others? I think not, in fact I am sure of it ignorance leads only to more ignorance when left unchecked. What we need to do is educate those who believe this should be taught so that they too will start to have some idea about reality rather than imagionary rules of nature that exist only in the mind of a few.

 

[dad]

Context? I do not consider ignoring what it says as context but rather willfill blindness on your part. It clearly states in Matthew that the earth will pass away, which means to perish, to cease to exist, to be gone. Then later in revelation before the new earth [note new earth not same earth] that the former has passed away. It could not be more clear.

No, the earth is forever, as the verse I gave makes clear. God will dwell here forever as the bible makes clear and so will we. The meaning of the heavens and earth that will pass away is clearly only the state of the universe. We still have the same people on the new earth, plants, lakes, rivers, etc etc. There will still be the sun, and stars, and seasons, etc. What there will not be is death and decay, and the spiritual is right here together with the physical.

Yes says me and I would imagion that anyone with an once of logic would agree in part. It may seem strange to you but the earth is not a flat stationary object setting on a huge stone foundation with the heavens spread out above it.

No, but deep below the surface is the etarnal part of the earth. We call it the foundations.

IF there you have it. If he gave eternal life that might settle it. I don't know about you but I stood by my mothers side and saw her die as I did also with my sister and I assure thier life was far from eternal. My sister was barely over 30 when she took her last breath.

And Jesus was about the same age! So??? he that believe th on me, said Jesus, shall never die. Only our PO bodies, till they are raised from the dead one day.

Now the Spirit is what is said to be eternal it comes from God, is part of God and is in each and everyone of us. To be spiritually dead to to be physically totally and permanetly dead. The notions otherwise are laughable.

Well though he were dead, yet shall he live again, if they believe, Jesus said. To be absent from the body is merely to be present with the Lord. And that absent from the body bit is only temporary, we will come back and get it, and be raised incorruptible in a new body, physical and spiritual, like Jesus was. He was the first One to rise from the dead, to get His new body. And, and He said, 'behold, I am alive forevermore'

As usual you haven't got a clue do you These things were signified and John wrote what he saw. It was a vision, of symbols and signs. God is not going to literally take a candlestick from the church. There is no literal dragon perched to take over, almost nothing there is literal at all. It is all symbols and if you can not see that then I would think that it is a total waste of time to even attempt to discuss any of it with you.

The candlestick represents something real. To explain things that involve the spiritual as well as the physical, require more than a physical, carnal explanation. But the reality is every bit there as much or more than just the physical.

I guess only you know what you were trying to get at since there is no mention of faith at all in the sheep and the goats story. Then again if having faith means to blindly accept whatever you imagion as truth then I guess yoru faith would rank up there much higher than mine.

Blather. I described a weak and a strong faith, the rest is in your bean.

I tend to use reason, logic facts and faith to put together the most accurate picture that is possible which is always subject to change based on new information. You on the other hand start off by believing something then changing all the rules to make your preconceived fantasy look true to you.

Is that how things go round in your head? Thanks for sharing.

But there world has changed in billions of ways, things awlays change and eventually they all but dissapear.

No, I will not disappear. The eternal earth won't go anywhere. God will not disappear. The bible will be available to look at long after the present earth surface is burned, and made new, and the new heavens are here.

Or a more revelant question.. Do you know what you mean?

Yes, I mean you do not know what a created apple would look like, or not.

 

[dad]

I do not think anyone can provide such evidence which in itself is pretty good evidence that the Noah story is at best very exagerated and at worse total fiction.

I'll take that as a no. The evidence then, is on my side. It makes sense that the fast growth rates were just as indicated in the bible. That is why the animals were fed, and why the tree grew in a week.

Of course these fast growth rates are just something that you or someone else imagioned into existance to make a story that is logically impossible make some sort of sense.

I did not imagine the bible into being. It was here before I was born. You are getting silly.

More of the above imagionary data to try and make sense out of that which is clearly in error.

Give it a shot, you should be good at it, of you had any science at all.

Again imagionary data abotu these supposed fast groth rates and evoultion rates. Wasn't it you that just a few pages back said man should stick to what he knows? Perhaps you should heed that advice as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Part of what we know is the written ancient records, especially the book of God.

Of coruse the tree of life is not a tree at all but I wouldn't want to spoil your fantasy any more than I have already so whatever you say

It grows by a river bank, has fruit, and leaves, and a growing season. Not chopped liver, that.

You did, not only that you invented reasons for pretty much every law of nature to be warped to try and make it make a little sense.

They make biblical sense. How much sense it makes in a dying, warped, partial reality temporary state is not a big issue.

The logical and rational and most likely accurate thing is that God never said nor did any such thing but men wrote about it anyway and greatly exagerated it [assuming of course that is was based on a real flood and not just fiction] as well.

No, that is trying to weld what is rational to this temporary state only. What is really rational is to believe God. Not just follow your PO nose, or look as far as the PO eye can see.

Why.. if we have a community of people who have no knowledge of the world around us would it be wise to have them teach others?

That is what I would like to stop happening. Let people who do not deny the better part of the world around us do the job! Move over, Rover, and let them that know what they are doing take over!

I think not, in fact I am sure of it ignorance leads only to more ignorance when left unchecked. What we need to do is educate those who believe this should be taught so that they too will start to have some idea about reality rather than imagionary rules of nature that exist only in the mind of a few.

To talk of nature in the future or far past, you need to know what you are talking about. Thanks for making it painfully obvious that you don't.

 

[Soul Searcher]

No, the earth is forever, as the verse I gave makes clear. God will dwell here forever as the bible makes clear and so will we. The meaning of the heavens and earth that will pass away is clearly only the state of the universe. We still have the same people on the new earth, plants, lakes, rivers, etc etc. There will still be the sun, and stars, and seasons, etc. What there will not be is death and decay, and the spiritual is right here together with the physical.

What may seem clear to you is fiction to most and a lie to others. BTW When does forever begin? It should be crystal clear to you that the word translated as forever does not literally mean forever. You choose to believe it means the earth will never cease to exist despite both bible verses which state that it will and the common knowledge that all things do in fact end in time. You hold you beliefs above reality and refuse to see truth. I will grant you that it is not unreasonable to interpret the word as forever in some cases but in light of other verses this is not one of those cases.

No, but deep below the surface is the etarnal part of the earth. We call it the foundations.

We? I guess you mean you and maybe a handfull of others who share you odd beliefs. Foundation means many things and the one thing that is clear to me is that if in fact the word was intended to mean foundation as in what the earth rests upon then it is an error. If however the intention was to refer to the beging, creation, formation there is no problem. So as I see it either your interpretation is wrong or the bible is wrong because there is no foundation to the earth it hurls through space at an amazing rate of speed spinning rapidly and gently wobbling as it goes.

And Jesus was about the same age! So??? he that believe th on me, said Jesus, shall never die. Only our PO bodies, till they are raised from the dead one day.

Jesus did die, remember? Or are you saying that it was a lie and he never really died at all.

Well though he were dead, yet shall he live again, if they believe, Jesus said. To be absent from the body is merely to be present with the Lord. And that absent from the body bit is only temporary, we will come back and get it, and be raised incorruptible in a new body, physical and spiritual, like Jesus was. He was the first One to rise from the dead, to get His new body. And, and He said, 'behold, I am alive forevermore'

Do you beleive that Jesus was a man or God or both? Did the man die or did God die or both. What raised, the man, the spirit of the man, God, all three? If you believe Jesus to be God and man and the man died then how does this relate at all to your claim about granted eternal life God already had this so there was nothing to grant in this case.

The candlestick represents something real. To explain things that involve the spiritual as well as the physical, require more than a physical, carnal explanation. But the reality is every bit there as much or more than just the physical.

Something real? That's rather vauge either it literally means a candle stick or it symbolizes something else. Why would God threaten to take a candlestick? It like all of revelation is symbolic and as I said before this was clear to me even as an 8 year old reading the text for the first time.

Blather. I described a weak and a strong faith, the rest is in your bean.

The sheep and the goats refers to a specific bible passage and has nothign to do with faith. If your intention was to describe faith then you did a very poor job of it.

Is that how things go round in your head? Thanks for sharing.

Pretty much this is the way to decern truth from fantasy. When wee ignore logic, reason, the world around us we will almost always find ourselves in error. I choose truth over blind faith in what some man made up as an explanation with no evidence behind it.

No, I will not disappear. The eternal earth won't go anywhere. God will not disappear. The bible will be available to look at long after the present earth surface is burned, and made new, and the new heavens are here.

If you do in fact live on forever there will come a time when you will see that you are wrong. Until then there is little point in my telling to point out the obovious to you as you do not seem to want truth.

Yes, I mean you do not know what a created apple would look like, or not.

What? I am not that stupid my man. It would look like an apple and that has nothing at all to do with anything we have been talking about.

 

[Soul Searcher]

I'll take that as a no. The evidence then, is on my side. It makes sense that the fast growth rates were just as indicated in the bible. That is why the animals were fed, and why the tree grew in a week.

No there is no evidence on your side at all other than that which you imagion in your own mind. Where do you see fast growth rates in the bible? What makes you think that aging processes of everythign except man would be faster yet man would be 1/10 the norm? It is foolishness to even suggest such a thing. All evidence points to plants and animals maturing at pretty much the same rate as they do today and there is nothing outside your words that indicates what you claim.

I did not imagine the bible into being. It was here before I was born. You are getting silly.

If such a thing exist in the bible it has eluded me and most others who have studied it. In fact to this day you are the "only" person I have ever heard make this claim. I think you must be reading between the lines and making it up as you go. Just like you are with the forever earth that ends but don't end.

Give it a shot, you should be good at it, of you had any science at all.

Give what a shot? Are you asking me to use my imagionation to try and fill in blanks and make a story seem true which I can already see is at best very exagerated? Sorry but I perfer truth over fantasy.

Part of what we know is the written ancient records, especially the book of God.

The book of God? Which book would that be? Are you referring to one of the many translations of the documents we call the bible, or a specific translation or something else?
A lot of what we know is what has been learned since those books were written and we have learned that much of what was written in acient times was not true. Even some of the books in the bible refer to problems with the writtings though indirectly. Jesus came down hard on the scribes, The OT prophets refered to the scribes as having a lying pen and that they thought they had the law but it was held falsely. Now if the scribes penned every word correctly would the prophet accusing them of having a lying pen? Would Jesus have came down so hard on them if they were right. Paul even complained a bit about old myths and endless genealogies being taught.

It grows by a river bank, has fruit, and leaves, and a growing season. Not chopped liver, that.

Again you fail to see the sybomlism in the bible. The tree of life is often interpreted as Jesus as is the living water. He is the life and will grant that water of life freely to any who is a thrist. This is not talking about a actual tree nor water any more than he actually meant that they should eat his flesh and drink his blood. You really don;t seem to have much understanding of what you preach.

They make biblical sense. How much sense it makes in a dying, warped, partial reality temporary state is not a big issue.

So what you are saying is that you did indeed invent these to make the bibilical story try and make sense and you think you have succeed but at the same time are not concerned that they contradict reality? Hmm.. have fun in your fantasy.

No, that is trying to weld what is rational to this temporary state only. What is really rational is to believe God. Not just follow your PO nose, or look as far as the PO eye can see.

It is called using common sense, you should try it sometime.

That is what I would like to stop happening. Let people who do not deny the better part of the world around us do the job! Move over, Rover, and let them that know what they are doing take over!

So you want people who have really studied the world and see that there is no evidence of a golbal flood, nor of the sun ever standing still nor of the earth being on a foundation and such to do the teaching. Or do you mean those who withdraw from the world around them and make up stories to attempt to exaplain how the stuff in the bible may have really happened? The first would be a wise choice the second would be foolish.

To talk of nature in the future or far past, you need to know what you are talking about. Thanks for making it painfully obvious that you don't.

I take it that you are sayign that you do. Yet ever post I have seen from you which talks about this stuff is so far from fact that it is almost unimagionable to me. Clearly you would not recognize the truth if it hit you over the head so I will take your statement as a compliment meanign that I oboviously am much closer to the truth than you are.

 

[NailsII]

Can you provide evidence such a tree would cause Noah to be sure it was no OK to leave the ark? Or how such trees or plants could feed all the animals and people on the ark?? We need real live trees with fruit for that.

[BIBLE]Genesis 8:11[/BIBLE]
No mention of a flowering tree or fruit, just one with leaves.
There is, and i repeat this, no indication that it was a young tree or super-matured.
I must confess I had never even contemplated the idea before you mentioned it, and it sound absurd. Sorry.

Yes, a combination of hibernation, semi hibernation, and fast gwoth rates still in effect. A few seeds in the planter in fron of the cows room, and voila! All the grass one could stuff themselves with. Piece of cake.

Conjecture.
A better answer would be one based around the story being a myth - it makes much more sense.

Yes, the fast evolution rates in effect mean just a sampling of the animals needed to be there. Or a kind.

This is ludicrous.

Visible doesn't do anyone any good. Alive and well is needed. Growing fast too, I might add, or there is no way to feed all creatures.

Exactly my point. So why complicate things any more by adding in a magical increase in growth rates, of which there is even no biblical evidence?

Another evidence of this is the tree of life, it grows fruit every month of the year. That is different. Another evidence is that plants were made (planted, in the case of Eden) only days before we ate them.

The tree of life is again only present in mythology.
And there is the possibility that, if genesis 1 is literal truth (which I very much doubt) then the plants were made fully mature, ready to eat and reproduce.
In my opinion, that is more logical than a temporary increase in growth rates - especially without the sun being present in the beginning.

Games aside, you just can't invent reasons God said there was a flood. He said it in many places, and Jesus also talked of it. No way round it.

Jesus would have known about the teachings in the OT, as would virtually everyone else (maybe excluding the romans).
Still doesn't provide evidence of a flood, only a myth.

Yes. How a bout a little freedom!!?? let the local population decide. If it is Christian, then let them teach that.

If you study other religions (even other versions of christanity, such as mormans) would you like to live under their rule and have your children educated that way?

School is not the only place non Christians could learn the gospel.

True, but if they are not taught it at home......

Because God's people are always here. The universe change that resulted from the sins of man can't be dismissed willy nilly. Far as I can tell, there even was a 120 year warning leading up to it. Changing the universe back would affect all men, not just His people, and maybe they again would live a thousand years. That will have to wait till His rule comes.

?
What warning?
Who lived a thousand years?

I must confess we can't see the heart. Some of us take people's word at face value. Obviously a mistake for politicians. Especially ones that have murderous fruits on their tree. If I see a thorn, I know it is a thorn bush.

I must confess that it is never productive to slur any group with a few examples, there are planty more good people to outnumber the fundamentalist idiots who give humanity a bad name.
It just appears that many of these people hide uder the cloak of religion and work to preach their filth to the masses.

No, I can't make much of it either. Must have been written in haste. I think the gist of it has to do with a different past.

I was kind of hoping you would have attempted to debate the issue, but it seems you are too wise for a little trick like that.
After all, Abraham's tone changes dramtically later:
[BIBLE]Genesis 22:10[/BIBLE]
Despite this:
[BIBLE]Exodus 20:13[/BIBLE]
The stories are so contradictory (and so absurd) it is hard to imagine they are the same person, or even the same god.

Gravity as it is in this state universe, but not in the future or past.

Now this is touching on something I really don't understand - I assume you mean the concept that the laws of physics are not fixed, and have varied at different times in the history of the universe.
If you could provide some hard evidence, it is an interesting hypothesis.
But until then, it is merely conjecture, I'm afraid.

Don't think so. Unless they hid it.

I'll give this up as a bad job, it's going nowhere.
My own experience of devil worshippers is totally non-existant, and I assume yours is too.

No chance involved.

If abraham can barter with god, maybe I will try the same. This is one of the core problems with all religion in my opinion; the damnation of all non-believers for that reason alone.
It is hard to fathom how my lack of belief is any worse than some religious people who spout hatred to the masses or rape children.

No, look at the billions around now. The act will be played out right here as scheduled.

Ah yes, the six billion people who could not be here if the earth was 6,000 years old and started again with one family approx. 2,000 years later - just do the maths.

The stars are mentioned, and the moon.

Agreed.

The ancients considered almost any light in the night sky a star. But there is an added depth to stars modern stoned age men do not know.

Yes, many of them are not stars. Or at least, not sinlge stars.

That is because we only are aware of the present temporary physical stars.

Which will one day become a nova or a red giant etc.

They actually have influence on men, and other significances than we know.

No, they don't - I hope you're not going all astrological on me now! Horoscopes are total [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth], I hope you realise this.
And I can assert that quite confidently.
The only effect that stars really have on humans is that of awe when we look at them.

So, what we call a star is merely a limited and temporary classification.

Maybe you need to look at space in a new way:

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-7367794459123820452

 

[Grega]

I create an apple ex nihilo into the palm of your hand.

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

Do you know how to create apples ex nihilo?
How is this question any less meangless than:

I create a banjo ex nihilo and it turns into a turnip right infront of your 3 eyes (I created an extra one for you (temporarily that is...you now have two again) ex nihilo)

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Do you know how to create apples ex nihilo?
How is this question any less meangless than:

I create a banjo ex nihilo and it turns into a turnip right infront of your 3 eyes (I created an extra one for you (temporarily that is...you now have two again) ex nihilo)

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

I would think Moses/Aaron were pretty good Magicians

[Rotherham]Exodus 7:11 Then called Pharaoh also for the wise men and for the magicians,--and they too, the sacred scribes of Egypt with their secret arts, did in like manner; 12 yea they cast down each man his staff, and they became sea-serpents,--but Aaron's staff swallowed up their staves.

http://magic.about.com/b/2006/09/19/top-ten-magicians-of-all-time.htm

Looking back on 50 years of his "It’s Magic" theater show, Milt Larsen, the founder of the The Magic Castle, named the greatest magicians of all time.

1. Harry Houdini
2. Dante
3. Harry Blackstone Sr.
4. Doug Henning
5. Richiardi
6. Tihany
7. Mark Wilson
8. Siegfried and Roy
9. Lance Burton
10. Dai Vernon
Looking at the list

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you know how to create apples ex nihilo?

Well --- uh --- let's see ---

I create an apple ex nihilo into the palm of your hand.

--- ummmm --- yes, I do?

How is this question any less meangless than:

I create a banjo ex nihilo and it turns into a turnip right infront of your 3 eyes (I created an extra one for you (temporarily that is...you now have two again) ex nihilo)

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

You're funny.

 

[Grega]

...------ ummmm --- yes, I do?...

How?...I like apples!...please tell me how you create apples ex nihilo so that I can mimic your actions and have myself a delicious apple whenever I please!

 

[pgp_protector]

Well --- uh --- let's see ------ ummmm --- yes, I do?
...snip....

Is that an answer or a question ?

 

[AV1611VET]

How?...I like apples!...please tell me how you create apples ex nihilo so that I can mimic your actions and have myself a delicious apple whenever I please!

I got a better idea.

How about you either answer the OP or, if you don't have anything to say, don't say anything?

 

[AV1611VET]

Is that an answer or a question ?

That was a [sarcastic] question.

 

[Grega]

I got a better idea.

How about you either answer the OP or, if you don't have anything to say, don't say anything?

You tell me how to create apples ex nihilo and I'll gather evidence to convince my friend that you created an apple ex nihilo in the palm of my hand

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I create an apple ex nihilo into the palm of your hand.

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

Have you ever done that?

[you must spread some reputation around before giving it to AV1611VET and Grega again!]

 

[pgp_protector]

I create an apple ex nihilo into the palm of your hand.

What evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?

None, I'd call you a liar.

 

[484]

First off, the apple was not created ex nihilo, since in the challenge you admit that there are inputs into the creation process

Secondly, you are engaging in a burden of proof fallacy, not necessarily in the challenge itself, but in your references to this challenge. If I wish to prove to a friend (anything at all), I must provide evidence for my positive assertion. Similarly, if you wish to assert that your deity of choice created the world in whatever manner you propose, YOU must provide evidence for it.

The simplest explanation for the stunt is that the apple was not created, ex nihilo or otherwise, but pre-existed and was placed into my palm via slight of hand. This explanation is correct since it accurately models the given data, and is more parsimonious that the ex nihilo explanation. Failing that, the next best explanation is that a pre-existing apple quantum tunneled into my hand.

You're challenge is invalid due to you not having defined your terms. If you can provide me with an in-depth written description of exactly HOW the apple was created as well as all relevant mathematical formulae, then perhaps it can be answered. As it stands the best I can do is to have you create another apple for my friend. If you claim that you are unable to, then this video explains the paradox quite nicely First off, the apple was not created ex nihilo, since in the challenge you admit that there are inputs into the creation process

Secondly, you are engaging in a burden of proof fallacy, not necessarily in the challenge itself, but in your references to this challenge. If I wish to prove to a friend (anything at all), I must provide evidence for my positive assertion. Similarly, if you wish to assert that your deity of choice created the world in whatever manner you propose, YOU must provide evidence for it.

The simplest explanation for the stunt is that the apple was not created, ex nihilo or otherwise, but pre-existed and was placed into my palm via slight of hand. This explanation is correct since it accurately models the given data, and is more parsimonious that the ex nihilo explanation. Failing that, the next best explanation is that a pre-existing apple quantum tunneled into my hand.

You're challenge is invalid due to you not having defined your terms. If you can provide me with an in-depth written description of exactly HOW the apple was created as well as all relevant mathematical formulae, then perhaps it can be answered. As it stands the best I can do is to have you create another apple for my friend. If you claim that you are unable to, then Aron Ra's 4th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism (Youtube) explains the paradox quite nicely. To summarize the video, seeing is believing, but believing isn't knowing and seeing isn't knowing.

 

[AV1611VET]

First off, the apple was not created ex nihilo, since in the challenge you admit that there are inputs into the creation process

Secondly, you are engaging in a burden of proof fallacy, not necessarily in the challenge itself, but in your references to this challenge. If I wish to prove to a friend (anything at all), I must provide evidence for my positive assertion. Similarly, if you wish to assert that your deity of choice created the world in whatever manner you propose, YOU must provide evidence for it.

The simplest explanation for the stunt is that the apple was not created, ex nihilo or otherwise,...

Okay, 484, I stopped reading right here. I don't need two screens of "I can't answer your OP, therefore your OP is flawed." It makes me go 404, if you know what I mean.

But thanks for [not] trying!

 

[Nathan Poe]

Okay, 484, I stopped reading right here.

Should he retype it with simpler words?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by AV1611VET Okay, 484, I stopped reading right here.

Should he retype it with simpler words?

Perhaps he just dropped his reading specs and they broke.