text:
- Drew B
- New York, NY
- United States
This conversation is closed.
Why don't people believe in God?
if it were even the slightest possible chance that there is a hell and its a place of everlasting torment and hate wouldnt you want to make sure there isnt one by checking every possible source of information and proof that God does not exist or does?
And why do most people who ask themselves this question and go search for answers come back a christian?
yeah the whole idea can be denied with logical reasoning but you got to look at where this idea came from and how much we can trust this information. When you search for those facts they cant be denied and once you experience what God does in your life you will know its real. If you dont believe in it you should have proof andt the strongest possible evidence of everything that cant be denied.
I want to look at what you guys think and why you guys don't. Please dont attack other peoples ideas and thought and be open with every ounce of reasoning you can come up with.
Christophe Cop
Mar 30 2011: 0 I will attack ideas, Drew. As I think there are stupid ideas and wrong ideas and dangerous ideas. If a person feels offended by it: that is not my intention, but might be collateral damage.
- +10
[I know letting go of ideas is hard, and adopting new ones might be hard as well; and I can get emotional in debates,... but I will try and be kind to the person, even when i think his/her ideas are -in my opinion- dead-wrong]
that said:
1) I assume you mean by God the Judeo-christian one (JHWH or EL or Allah)
=> I do think one can prove this god does not exist, as it is inconsistent.
The argument is easy (following the Belgian Philosopher Etienne Vermeersch):
The Judeo Christian God is considered to be "all powerful" "all good" and "knows everything"
Given our earth, there is human misery, disease, random death, loss, depression, war,.... So he is either not all powerful, not all good or not all knowing. Ergo no such God exists
2) If you have another God image in mind: please inform us.
3) concerning "Pascal's Wager"
=> you can turn this around.
- Lets assume that my estimate that God exists is 0
- in probability theory, "surprise value" is 1/x where x is the probability of an event/something
- So, if I die, I don't expect to meet anything like a god, or heaven or hell...
- If that does happen, then I would be (1/0 = infinite) Infinitely surprised
- I consider surprise as a happy emotion
- Even If I would go to hell, I'll be surprised for eternity
=> I don't need to worry about hell
(You might infer that I define god as the ultimate surprise, which I must admit, is correct... meaning I still don't think it does exist)
Mar 30 2011: yes for people like you who undestand the accepting of new ideas and stuff that is fine. I mainly said that to stop people form saying someone is blaintly an idiot for believing in something when i am sure that person has reason to. In no way to I want to start a conversation as a cuss fest and a huge hateful debate.
1) I believe in a God and his son. I do not believe in other denominations of putting Mary as a higher being and other stuff but I follow God's word, The Bible. And your reasoning makes no sense to me. Not because of you but I'm only a teen and what the heck is Belgian Philospher Etienne Vermeersch? And how could God not be all powerful, all good, and know everything.
If my mom said she is going to lose her job and we wont have a home and we would have to eat off the land instead of being spoiled with going to the supermarket, I would be surprised greatly but that does not make anything better. Surpeise can be a happy emotion but not always.
And i dont understand why you wouldnt want to worry about Hell. I t would be the worst thing you can imagine. Dont listen to those false things of Hell being a fireplace and we have to do labor for eternity cause thats not as bad as its going to be. If there wasnt a Hell I would want to make sure there is no possible evidence towards there being a Hell and be able to deny every evidence there is.
Mar 31 2011: "but I follow God's word, The Bible."
Really? You support slavery [1]? Stoning people to death for collecting sticks on the wrong day [2]? Not shaving the corners of your beard [3]?
I believe you're better than that. I believe you're actually a Moralist Christian [4] meaning that you've picked and choose bible passages selectively based on whether or not they contradict with the golden rule. The only thing missing is you explicitly start identifying yourself as such.
And on Pascal's wager, I like Edward Current's take on it best [5]. Basically, if one religion's threat about "what if it's true" is a reason for you, then you need to take precautions just in case other religions are true too, because the chances of them being correct are the same. If you can live what Edward Current shows to be living, then I guess you'll have a point.
"Not because of you but I'm only a teen and what the heck is Belgian Philospher Etienne Vermeersch?"
Not "what" but "who" [6]. "Belgian" means someone from the country "Belgium", "Philosopher", similarly to most English words ending with "er" is a profession. In this case, someone who practices/teaches the discipline "Philosophy". And the other two words are his name.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojj5Trzw_G0
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEqkyTHJUUc
[3] http://www.ted.com/talks/a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.html (4:44)
[4] http://www.ted.com/conversations/901/atheists_you_need_to_rethink.html
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqJpZOljjG8
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etienne_Vermeersch
Mar 31 2011: The Bible does not support slavery, stoning people to death for collectign sticks on the wrong day, and not shaving shaving the corners of your beard. You need to read the Bible much more intensely if you going to make those assumptions.
And yes other religions make valid points but i dont believe in what I believe because it might be true because it is true to my belief.
And yes I realized it was a person I dont know why I put what but I am saying I have no idea who that guy is and thanks for the links.Mar 31 2011: also on Exodus 21. This was Old testament and how the town should have run in its day. But the New Testament is where Jesus fulfilled the old law (Ten Commandments) and made new ones. No longer did we have to sacrifice a lamb or a sheep or whatever it was.Mar 31 2011: "You need to read the Bible much more intensely if you going to make those assumptions."
I could say the same for you.
The quotes in the slavery video were from Exodus 21, the King James Version [1], Old testament, yes, but there are also quotes from Ephesians 6 (they don't say which translation, but regardless...) [2], which is New testament. I searched other translations, and they're just as disturbing. If you doubt the linked online material for being wrong or misleading, open up your paper copy bible, and see for yourself if the same chapters are just as disturbing - that's the reason the exact passages are cited - for verification by anyone who doubts the message. All translations that don't say "slave", use the word "servant" instead.
I don't have a paper copy of any bible with me for the same reason you don't have a Quran with you. But that doesn't mean I haven't read any bible passages.
"This was Old testament and how the town should have run in its day."
You know... if you extend this notion to include all holy scriptures with no exceptions, I think you might be right.
"And yes other religions make valid points but i dont believe in what I believe because it might be true because it is true to my belief."
So... you'd prefer to be deluded because you're deluded? You believe in the bible stories because they're true to the (non bible?) stories you believe in? You'd prefer to believe in unicorns because it's true to your belief that there may be unicorns?
If I'm misunderstand you... Exactly what is your definition of "belief"? Morality set? You can have it without the Christian label and related fairy tales.
You should definitely watch all videos before commenting further. The author of the slavery video addresses all of the defenses you made thus far, coincidently, in the same order too.
[1] http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021&version=KJV
[2] http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%206&version=NIVMar 31 2011: @ Vasil: nice response (though maybe a bit sarcastic I daresay)
@ Drew:
I suggest you buy a copy of Julia Sweeney's "Letting Go of God" Monologue.
It might be a bit hard for you to listen to it completely while trying not to be disgusted about it... but maybe you are up for the challenge...
(here is the link if you want to listen to it for free http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qixXRkCNrtE)
[edit: oh, it is among your favorite talks: please listen to the whole monologue]
I've read the bible, I have a copy, and there are plenty of questionable passages in the new testament too.
Concerning the "why can't something be all good, powerful and knowing?" I'll let you ponder on it yourself... Take the time and energy to figure out where I might think the problems may be... If you guess it correctly I will continue to discuss with you!
Good luck!
Apr 23 2011: already listened to itMay 3 2011: God is all good,all powerful, and all knowing. He is also a God of perfect justice. This world is rough because of the fall of man. Because of this perfect justice, He must punish our sin. How can he be an all good and loving God if he allows this world to decay? He fulfills this charactersitic by sending Jesus Christ as an atonement for our sins.
Austin R
May 3 2011: I'd like to respond to Christophe's initial response.
- +1
"1. I assume you mean..."
-> You're making the assumption that an all-good, all-powerful God does not have the capability to create a separate entity that /does/ have the capacity for imperfection, and therefore evil and harm. If He is truly all-powerful then He should indeed have this ability, correct? Direct creation of evil is different than indirectly allowing for evil acts to occur.
No comment on 2, and I agree on 3.May 7 2011: @Austin
Yes, but he'd also have the power to stop the evil once it occurs. Allegedly, we are the separate entities capable of evil, and if we extend that further to include natural things, we could say Zeus/Lightning is an entity that is capable of evil (in that it kills, or at best, fries, those who are touched by it). God should be able to stop it, just as much he should have been able to "flick Hitler's head off" or other bad entities, including corrupted religious servants.
And if God has delegated the ruling of our universe to a separate semi-God figure... why aren't we worshiping the semi-God figure instead? If your support calls (read: prayers) go to [insert support staff], why do we suck up to the boss who is never hearing those calls?May 13 2011: @ Austin..."Direct creation of evil is different than indirectly allowing for evil acts to occur."
If you believe god created everything, then you must believe that god also created evil.
Harald Jezek
Mar 31 2011: Drew, what would it take to convince you that there ain't any God ?
- +2
Jimmy Strobl
Mar 30 2011: @Christophe: "- If that does happen, then I would be (1/0 = infinite) Infinitely surprised"
- +2
I have not laughed that hard in a long time!
Mar 31 2011: Please feel free to spread it!Apr 18 2011: @ Christophe. GIven free will, it is logically impossible for God to create a world with no evil.
Apr 18 2011: False.
1) Free will is an assumption, (Ihttp://www.ted.com/conversations/1107/there_is_no_such_thing_as_free.html?c=208747)
But, lets assume free will exists.
2) God did not create the world.
But let's assume he did.
3) If God could not create a world without evil and with a free will, he is blatantly stupid. I can imagine worlds where there is free will and no evil...
=> I assume your god-image implies that he is unimaginative and stupid?
Apr 18 2011: "I can imagine worlds where there is free will and no evil..."
And you aren't even a God. WOW! You must be the true new messiah! I'm becoming more and more confused now...
"...he is blatantly stupid."
OK, let's put this a little more politely (and coincidently, a step further)... If God can't do that, he is not "all powerful", therefore he is not really a God per the classical monotheistic definition of an "all powerful supernatural being".Apr 18 2011: Free Will does exist. We can debate that if you like, as well.
Going by your assumptions:
1) Free Will does exist.
2) God did create the universe.
When I say logically impossible, I am referring to impossibilities such as; a square-circle or a married bachelor.
Two Propositions:
1) all-powerful, all-loving God exists
2) evil exists
When you made that claim you are making two assumptions:
3) If God is all-powerful, he can prevent evil.
4) If God is all-loving, he would prevent all evil.
Here you are assuming, that if God does exist, we would be living in a world where everyone would make the right moral choices (freely) and that God would prevent all natural disasters, making the world free of suffering.
However, if creatures have free will, then yor assumptions are not necessarily true. It is logically impossible to make someone freely do something (i.e. always make the right moral choices). Natural disasters could be the work of demons (since, they too have free will). Even though God is all-loving he might have morally adequate reasons for allowing suffering in the world (think back to when your parents punished you as a child).
Also, there is an inconsistency between God and the quality and quantity of evil int he world. People enjoy life. People rather live than die. This is because life is worth living (i.e. there is more good in the world than evil).
5th premise:
God could not have created a world that had as much good as the actual world, both in terms of quality and quantity, but had less evil. Moreover, God has morally sufficient reasons for permitting evil.
This is logically possible. So, premise one and two can coexist.
In this proof, the burden of proof lies wth you, since you are the one claiming that it is impossible for God and evil to coexist. I do not have to present a plausible or likely solution, only a possible solution.
Sky F
Apr 21 2011: Nice^
- +1
What about this one:
All-Powerful is inherently illogical. If one is all powerful it means they are capable of creating an immovable object. If one is all powerful it means the are capable of moving an immovable object.
It's a classic one, but true nonetheless.May 3 2011: Free will is the only way that true love can be real. How can we really choose to love God if we are programmed to love Him? We would be like computers. If I programmed my computer to say "I love you", would I as the creator of the program truly be satisfied by this?
Why would God have to lift an immovable object? God is not of this physical world.
Brent Beach
May 7 2011: "It is logically impossible to make someone freely do something (i.e. always make the right moral choices). "
- +2
So God isn't all-powerful? An all-powerful being could do this, no problem!
So because there MIGHT be a reason for all the suffering of the world, there MUST be reason? This is your logic? I sure hope the child militants in Darfur know that God has a reason for the all the murder, violence, rape, torture and starvation that they have to witness regularly.
While you might hold that this child slavery, torture and abuse is a part of God's plan (akin to punishing a child) I continue to contend that these are horrid acts which serve NO PURPOSE and should be stopped. NOTHING good comes from these things and you saying otherwise shows how twisted your belief is.Apr 19 2011: "It is logically impossible to make someone freely do something (i.e. always make the right moral choices)."
Only if you assume there's always only one moral choice with all else being immoral.
For many situations though, there are multiple morally right things to do, just as there are multiple morally wrong things to do. Ever had a moral dilemma? Yeah, those situations... all options are morally right in a way (if they weren't, there wouldn't be a dilemma; every sane person would do the morally right thing), and yet none feels the best.
Therefore, if God as in "all powerful and loving being" exists, he'll have the power to make a world with free will limited to all morally right things, i.e. a world with no evil. What moral reason could an "all loving" being possibly have by permitting evil? "So that we may know good"? No need for that if all is good.
Apr 19 2011: In response to your last point:
Have you ever heard the expression: "It takes two to tango?"
Similarly, to have a genuine love relationship it takes the free cooperation of two persons. It is logically impossible to make someone do something freely. If you make the person do it, then that person didn't do it freely because it wasn't up to him; but if that person does it freely, then it's not up to you whether he did it. We need only add that genuine love must be freely given. (Think of the story of Pinocchio: Giapetto could have made his puppet move its mouth and say "Father, I love you," but Giapetto wanted a real boy, not a mere puppet, even though that entailed the risk of rebellion.) So a genuine love relationship entails the freedom of both parties to give and receive love. Even omnipotence cannot do the logically impossible. God could produce certain chemical reactions in our brains that would issue in what we'd normally describe as loving behavior toward Him, but it would be a sham, a puppet-like response. To have a genuine love relationship with us, God must put up with the possibility of rebellion. Of course, that doesn't mean that the lover is impotent to woo his beloved and so elicit a free response of love. A serious lover isn't passive but tries to think of ways to win his beloved's affection. He may try to learn her "love language" along with her likes and dislikes and to act accordingly. In effect, he'll contemplate the truth of various subjunctive conditionals, like "If I were to do x, then she would respond by doing y." He'll try to bring about the circumstances in which his beloved will freely give her love to him.Apr 19 2011: God cannot make you love Him, but He may be able to do something even greater, namely, arrange the circumstances in which you would freely respond to His love. In a nutshell, the answer is that it may not be within God's power to create a world of free persons (without generating overriding disadvantages) in which everyone freely comes to love God. It's not enough that there be circumstances in which each individual would come to freely love God; these circumstances must be compossible, and that just may not be the case. God still extends sufficient grace to every person He creates to come into a loving relationship with Him, but some people may be implacable and reject Him.
So in God's case, too, it still takes two to tango.Apr 19 2011: In response to your initial point:
I agree with you about the moral dilemmas. However, I never made such an assumption about only being one correct moral choice. I said "It is logically impossible to make someone freely do something" (i.e. always make THE RIGHT MORAL CHOICES). No where in this sentance is such an assumption made.Apr 19 2011: @Colby
"n this proof, the burden of proof lies wth you, since you are the one claiming that it is impossible for God and evil to coexist. I do not have to present a plausible or likely solution, only a possible solution."
Colby: how dare you: You make the assumption of a god in the first place... So the burden of proof lies with you...
I simply state that I can imagine a world where there is free will, but no harm or evil. It is a place that gives the living creatures ever growing feelings of fulfillment, joy and choice of what to discover first and imagine next.
I simply point out that EVEN when your assumptions are not questioned, your logic is flawed, and the conclusions don't follow from the premises...
* you are adding demons to the equation now
* you assume free will implies free will of moral choice
* you assume that freely choosing the right thing all time is impossible
* ...
P.s. I will not further reply on your further comments. I let it to the reader can judge whether your arguments are valid or not.
I'm human, and prone to flattery, so don't say such things too much or I'll start to believe it.
Apr 19 2011: Well Chris, that is you free choice to make. No one is going to make you respond. However, I am going to make the free choice to respond.
The burden of proof always lies on the person making a claim. This was not about whether God exists, where the burden of proof would be with me. It is about whether it is possible for God (if he exists) to create a world with no evil. This was your claim, not mine. Therefore, the burden of proof lies with you.
"I can imagine a world where there is free will, but no harm or evil."
How can there be FREEDOM OF CHOICE (in other words, the ability to choose whatever you want) and no evil? I would like to hear your explanation. In a world of humans, who have free will, there will always be the option to murder an innocent person (for example).
Choosing the right thing all the time is impossible for humans. We are not perfect beings. We have flaws in us.Apr 19 2011: "Even omnipotence cannot do the logically impossible."
Interesting... and a baby being born out of a virgin mother and dying so that his father may forgive sins he could've forgiven anyway is logically possible... interesting. And other events that happened in contrast to any logic and laws of nature (a.k.a. miracles) are out of omnipotence's scope despite being logically impossible... so... are you saying SOME logically impossible things are out of omnipotence's scope? Under what premise does one logically impossible concept qualify over another?
I'm human, and prone to flattery, so don't say such things too much or I'll start to believe it."
Apr 19 2011: As far as the material world is concerned (i.e. the universe), God can do whatever he wants. He created it. The laws of nature are not binding to Him as they are to us, since He created them and He is outside of time ans space.
You must not have read what I meant by logical impossibilities. When I say, or anyone for that matter, that God cannot do logical impossiblities that means that God cannot contradict Himself. If He contradicted Himself, He would not be perfect. A logical impossibility would be a square-circle, for example. A shape cannot have four corners and no corners at the same time.Apr 19 2011: Colby,
If god cannot be explained or defined or understood your whole argument becomes invalid think about it god can contradict himself because he is god you just limited god.
this is why I like to say God is love because love is a force that could lead the human race together ultimately, not irrational depictions of something that goes beyond thought itself.
stop arguing now, there are miles of logic that disprove any religious based god. but almost none that could disprove god being chance. Believing chance exist and placing it into the equation allows unlimited possibilities.
Consider the following, if you were born with a mental handicap, bare with me, you now can barely feed yourself, you cannot conclude that 2+2=4, simple common sense does not apply to you. How could you now find room enough in your mind to consider god as anything? god would be as small as the food you eat. My point is, due to intelligence we are allowed to create ideas that go beyond comprehensible notions, but it doesn't make them correct it makes them an idea.
Stop arguing with people who have made it a point that they cannot be converted into the ideas of god being the answer or greater anything and this goes for you to Drew B, go on a search engine and type in "does god exist?" "proof of god" "do people need god?" "who invented god?" any other question, but question. Don't stop questioning ever and i promise you the idea of god will become nothing in comparison to what is fact and real that humans have established in thousands of years of thinking. And if you do not find such, I know for a fact you didn't ask enough questions.Apr 19 2011: @Colby McGrevey
"As far as the material world is concerned (i.e. the universe), God can do whatever he wants."
OK. Point taken.
But our morals have an effect on the material world. And he can affect it any way he likes. Therefore, he could have a material/natural law that doesn't let us commit evil in the material world, but still gives us free will to make choices between the morally good things to do in this material world... sort of what he had in the garden of Eden... minus the fruit (a material object that gives access to non-material thing he doesn't want us to have... he has the power to not put it in the material world in the first place... why did he left it then?).
Apr 20 2011: Hi Vasil
"still gives us free will to make choices between the morally good things to do in this material world... sort of what he had in the garden of Eden."
You got it ! That will be the eternal state, evil will be impossible. First you've got to get a crowd of people together who totally reject evil & agree to be ruled by God. Christians make that choice; ie a choice to have their choice restricted. Free choice in both instances. Think carefully before you make yours.
:-)Apr 20 2011: "You got it ! That will be the eternal state, evil will be impossible."
Does that mean that God is imperfect because he made the mistake of putting the fruit there? That is, he made the mistake of putting an evil thing in an otherwise good world WITH free will?
If having evil in a material world was some sort of a non-material requirement he couldn't have broken, then he could've made evil unreachable by putting it deeply into the ground or something ("-1st floor, worms; -2nd floor, oil; -3rd floor, evil; -infinite floor, hell;").
"First you've got to get a crowd of people together who totally reject evil & agree to be ruled by God."
Adam and Eve weren't "ruled" by God, were they? They were just created in the garden, allowed to do anything they please. Since they didn't had the knowledge of good and evil yet, they were not ruled by anyone. It was a state of anarchy without the evil parts (like in Japan, but pretty).
I therefore see no point in being ruled by God if I can reject evil and go back to that eternal state without him.
Apr 20 2011: Peter is right. That is the idea. The eternal state is heaven, where there is no evil. We will freely live forever.
No, God did not make a mistake, because He gave Adam and Eve a commandment and they disobeyed the commandment. They disobeyed God and were punished, accordingly.Apr 20 2011: Colby!!! STOP IT.
you said you were no fundamentalist! that is nothing but!
believe in god as the ultimate answer fine, but do not restrict answers to one book, one religion, and one ideology. Keep god as free as possible. Then no one can deny that God exist if you are never limiting the idea of God.Apr 21 2011: Hi Vasil
The tree in the garden was not an evil thing. It contained the 'knowledge' of good & evil. Evil is only evil if we know it is evil, otherwise we are innocent. Adam & Eve had the choice of whether to obey or not. As with most bad choices it had bad results, they lost their innocence, & died as a result. They had the choice of being ruled by God, but chose not to be. I have made the choice to be ruled again, & will be.
You cannot go back to the innocent state any more than I can. Only God has that kind of clout.
:-)Apr 21 2011: why you say evil not exist?
God created Adam and Eve and said:
"O Adam! dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden, and enjoy (its good things) as ye wish: but approach not this tree, or ye run into harm and transgression." Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, bringing openly before their minds all their shame that was hidden from them (before): he said: "Your Lord only forbade you this tree, lest ye should become angels or such beings as live for ever."
We said: "O Adam! dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden; and eat of the bountiful things therein as (where and when) ye will; but approach not this tree, or ye run into harm and transgression." [٢:٣٥]
Brent Beach
May 7 2011: It was unfair to punish Adam and Eve because they didn't understand good and evil prior to eating the fruit. They didn't understand what they were doing was "wrong" because they didn't have the concept! Seems mighty unfair to punish someone without first giving them the knowledge.May 8 2011: there was no good and evil but Adame and Eve disobeyed God:
- +1
"but never approach this tree "
actually good is nothing but obeying God and evil is nothing but disobeying God.
and from other view of point that was the scenario of God to humans can know God in earth and made such scenario to human come in earth and know God.
God can not be known in a all good medium (Heaven).May 13 2011: @Birdia...."Nobody in history has ever sinned over eating a piece of fruit, Peter. That is senseless talk"
BEST ARGUMENT EVER!!!! I'm not joking. I think this is my all time favorite statement! you rock!Apr 20 2011: Yes. Adding to what Nicholas said, all that Etienne Vermeersch's logic, along with all others we've presented suggests, is that the Judeo-Christian God does not exist AS DESCRIBED. It does not speak of "God" in general or of "Judeo-Christian God, but not exactly as described". If you unshackle God from the bible or other holy scriptures, none of our arguments so far are applicable.
But if you want to go on the fundamentalist road further, here's one more thing...
"No, God did not make a mistake, because He gave Adam and Eve a commandment and they disobeyed the commandment. They disobeyed God and were punished, accordingly."
God is our creator, right? Our divine father. Am I right? Well... does that mean that when a child commits a bad deed, it's the child's responsibility? Or if God is our shepherd... does that mean that when a sheep commits a bad deed, it's the sheep's responsibility? In both cases, doesn't the authority figure (father, shepherd) take the blame? Blaming "our" mistake on us as opposed to God is like taking a kid to jail as opposed to the parent. And if the only reason it's our mistake is because God says so, then that's like a father who makes his kid feel miserable... and we still call this father "all loving"?Apr 21 2011: "You cannot go back to the innocent state any more than I can. Only God has that kind of clout."
Sounds like one more reason not to be ruled by God then. I mean what's the point if there's no way I could go back to that innocent state? Be closer to that state? I can go closer without the Christian God. And if that state is heaven, I should be going there whether I believe in God or not, as long as I'm trying to be as close to that state. If God does not accept good people who don't believe in him, he's not "all loving".
"Evil is only evil if we know it is evil, otherwise we are innocent."
They didn't knew disobeying God was evil (if we still follow the literal bible interpretation and take it as true...) => they were innocent when disobeying him. God was not innocent (he knew what was good & evil) and he did not make them aware that disobeying him was evil => he is imperfect.
"It contained the 'knowledge' of good & evil."
Same deal. God could've hidden the knowledge of good & evil deep underground or something, locked into a material form. Same way he did it with the tree, but unreachable by Adam and Eve.
If he didn't, he was a bad parent/shepherd for not taking precautions in regards to his innocent children/sheep, therefore imperfect. Our mistake being that he didn't take precautions and we didn't know better doesn't make it our fault. Imagine the following scenario:
A parent tells his kid not to drink a bottle that is on the table, and that it contains poison that will kill it, but the bottle is still reachable by the kid. The parent leaves the kid to do whatever it wants while the parent does something else (also never clarified: If God is all knowing, why did he not overheard the snake conversation and just intervened, reminding Eve she should actually follow his one and only rule?). The child drinks the bottle, and after some time dies. Are you saying the parent is not responsible? Jail-free? Not even by "murder by carelessness" sentence?Apr 21 2011: Dear Christophe Cop,
"The Judeo Christian God is considered to be "all powerful" "all good" and "knows everything"
Given our earth, there is human misery, disease, random death, loss, depression, war,.... So he is either not all powerful, not all good or not all knowing. Ergo no such God exists"
yes, God has unlimited power and knowledge. much more than we need in earth. but God not want to clear misery, disease, random death, loss, depression, war in earth.
God made world in such situation knowingly, purposely, wittingly.
God purposely wants war in world:
you have power to cut your hand, but you do NOT want to cut your hand. this means you do not have power to cut your hand?
sorry for that Belgian Philosopher.
if here is war in world, its for human option.
humans are not like animals. human can decide to do good or bad.
if there is no option, so human would be like animal and it is not intend of God for creating human.
life of world is mixed with problems.
it is impossible any human live in earth and not have problems.
life at earth is for testing that which humans has better manner.
http://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qaribullah/67:2Apr 28 2011: Dear Christopher:
To your first point: Look up this vid :) http://vimeo.com/13122183May 7 2011: "1) I assume you mean by God the Judeo-christian one (JHWH or EL or Allah)"
your define has conflict:
Judeo-christian=Judeo+christian and not Islam.
"JHWH or EL or Allah"
JHWH=God in the Hebrew language
EL= God in Northwest Semitic language
Allah= God in Arabic language
Allah is Arabic name of God not only in Islam:
and has many attributes that only 99 of them has mentioned in Koran:
please clarify your definition of God.
"3) concerning "Pascal's Wager""
he was very clever. but had a mistake:
if y=1/x then the type of y will be the same as type of x. the "surprise value" you defined is independent of time and shows the value, not the time. if you want to describe this value in time it should be in two dimension that the y scale is surprise value and x value is time. like this:
and after some hours/days/weeks/months/years finally the "surprise value" will decade from infinite and then the "pain value" starts to increase like this:
(the time x=0 the death time)
=> I and you Need to worry about hell
Comment deleted
Jun 16 2011: Dear Iqbal.
according to Christopher argument if Hell exist after death the surprise value will be infinite and this cause we do not sense pain of Hell.
but I said yes it will be infinite but not for always. after some time the surprise value will decline and our pain sense starts working and so will sense pain.
this is like when you hear a surprise news. the surprise value does not remain in a high value and decline after some time.Jun 19 2011: If you can show me how surprise behaves in hell, and suffering and pain for the same matter, we can start to discuss the mathematics.
until then, one can also assume infinite surprise might be so strong that it would actually mean heaven to me...Jun 20 2011: "If you can show me how surprise behaves in hell"
its like this world but more. but not infinite. infinite is for life time of humans.
for example the pain and enjoy in that other universe is 10 times more than enjoy and pain in this world.
that universe is like current universe but higher in quality of enjoy and enjoys are with no work or pain or worry. and higher in pain sense.
and also endless.
also the body in that other universe is similar to this body but with sense 10 times more and also all who enter Heaven will become a human at age of 40.Jun 20 2011: You seem to have a lot of declarative knowledge about heaven and hell...
Sure the factor is only 10? not 100? why not ever increasing? why 40 year old body? why not 25? (rhetorical questions, no need to respond)
I suppose you base yourself on some scriptures written in the 7th century?
That would truly be a source of scientific knowledge I'm ready to accept!
(sorry for my sarcasm S.R., but such truth-claims are totally nonsensical to me, and I can't distinguish them from truth-claims made by madmen)Jun 21 2011: "You seem to have a lot of declarative knowledge about heaven and hell..."
I say from Koran and from sayings of prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
if I say some thing from myself it is lie and lie is Great sin.
religion has 3 pest:
1- evildoer spirituality
2-cruel leader
3- ignorant saint
"I suppose you base yourself on some scriptures written in the 7th century? "
firstly I based myself on wisdom and rational and then found Koran not from any human and then accepted it as truth.
"That would truly be a source of scientific knowledge I'm ready to accept!"
this is correct. Koran is also a source of science. medicine, chemistry and ...
please do not say anything about Koran before you be sure.
"(sorry for my sarcasm S.R., but such truth-claims are totally nonsensical to me, and I can't distinguish them from truth-claims made by madmen)"
any wise human should say this.
I ask you research more about Koran. if you could prove any kind of error in Koran I doubt Koran. using: rational argument/certain accepted science/logic/mathematics or any other valid way. but not hypothesis.
the only difference of me and you is Koran.
please reconsider about Koran and do not give it up quickly according what you hear.Apr 10 2011: "yeah the whole idea can be denied with logical reasoning but "
Apr 10 2011: And there's the answer for "why do most people who ask themselves this question and go search for answers come back a christian?" right in the above statement. Because logic doesn't work on most Christians.
Apr 11 2011: It's like this, prove there was a George Washington?
Apr 13 2011: The first US constitution, still a present document, along with other historical documents (previous versions of most, if not all, laws, logs and notes) and artifacts (3rd parties' books, portraits, etc.) are all evidence for George Washington's existence and accomplishments (being a president is still a human accomplishment... for example if I claimed I've won a tournament, having a Cup is a good evidence, and the only better evidence is to ask the tournament organizer for confirmation).
If Washington claimed to be (the son of) God, those wouldn't be enough to say Washington was indeed (the son of) God. If Washington claimed to be... let's say a black person (I'm just making stuff up)... portraits of him, along with notes that say he's white would be evidence for this not being the case.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - Carl Sagan.Apr 28 2011: Become a Christion is the most logical thing you can do. Why? You will no longer fear death, you will be sure that your life has a purpose, even though you are not rich as Bill Gates or wise as Albert Einstein. You will get rid of insecurities in your life. When you become Christian, you believe in pure love, forgiveness, human's good, eternal life and in God who is almighty, fair, good and eternal.
And it's not like you're trying to fool your mind. It's just a lifestyle - the best one you can possibly have.
I know this sounds subjectively and it also is subjective. But I think I can't lose anything, I can only gain.Apr 10 2011: I think we're done here. QED.
Drew B
Apr 16 2011: Vasil,
- +2
Exactly, you are accepting documentation of George Washington. When there is just as much documentation of the Bible. Dead Sea Scrolls for example. You know there is way more evidence that the Bible is real and truth telling than the Roman Empire.
Also, "The crucifixion was recorded by the Roman historian Tacitus, who wrote less than a hundred years after Christ. Writing about the Roman Emperors from Nero to Trajan, Tacitus mentions the Great Fire of Rome in A.D. 64 and Nero's attempt to place the blame for it on the Christians.
Tacitus then wrote that "Christus [the Latin spelling of Christ], from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition [referring to Christianity], thus checked for the moment, again broke out only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome..." (Annals, XV, 44).
Here is historical evidence Jesus Lived! This was not a Christian writing, but a Roman historian who abhorred things Christian! Tacitus had access to the records. He had the proof Jesus was crucified!
Suetonius, another Roman historian and a contemporary of Tacitus, tells us that about A.D. 49 the Emperor Claudius banished all Jews from the city of Rome (an incident also mentioned in Acts 18:2): "He expelled the Jews from Rome, on account of the riots in which they were constantly indulging, at the instigation of Chrestus [generally understood as a misspelling of the name of Chirst]" (The Lives of the Caesars, Book V, 25).
Reference to Jesus is also made by the Jewish historian, priest and general Flavius Josephus, who was born about A.D. 37. Writing about the death, in Jerusalem, of James, Josephus casually speaks of him as "the brother of Jesus who was called Christ" Antiquities of the Jews, XX: 9,1)."
Apr 16 2011: Read the rest of your own topic:
I already said that the fact Jesus existed and was crucified doesn't prove he's the son of God (and inherently, God's existence), and neither does the count of his followers. Even Tacitus, per the note you quote calls it "mischievous superstition". They treated Jesus the same way we'd deal today with cult leaders (well... minus the death penalty)... so where's the evidence that makes Jesus right and everyone else (including the roman Gods because of which they crucified Jesus) wrong?Apr 17 2011: Those writers didnt want to believe that Jesus was the Son of God. Thats why the bible is full of people writing about Jesus and why they believe. They didnt believe it so they wrote it from a diffrent standpoint. Even the Roman Gods, Scientist have studied the way it was brought up and have concluded that they made it up. But Our God has been here since the beginning of time not made up on the spot, and the bible is documentation for that.
Apr 17 2011: "Those writers didnt want to believe that Jesus was the Son of God."
And we don't want to believe in Bin Laden or Scientology... does that mean we're wrong and they're right?
"They didnt believe it so they wrote it from a diffrent standpoint."
Again, we do the same thing towards other religions today. Does that make us wrong and them right?
"But Our God has been here since the beginning of time not made up on the spot,"
According to the claim. But there's no evidence of that.
"and the bible is documentation for that."
No, it's not. It's a documentation of someone's claims. That doesn't make the claims true. It only means there were such claims.
In the case of the old testament, it's a documentation of the writer's claims on what is the word of the being they claim to have aided them in writing the documentation.
In the case of the new testament, it's a documentation of the claims of a person who claimed to be the son of said claimed being.
The bible in both testaments is a thesis, not evidence. Me writing out something in a book that I persuade people to believe in without evidence doesn't make anything I write true.
"I'm the true son of God. Jesus was just a trickster. I was born out of a virgin mother."
There. I'll publish that in a book, and I'll persuade people who don't know better to believe me without evidence. There's no evidence of Jesus being such while I'm not. There's also no verifiable evidence of my mother giving me birth while not being virgin. You can't prove me wrong. Am I the son of God, the true messiah? Or... let's say it's not me, it's a friend of mine who you don't know. Is he the son of God?Apr 17 2011: Yet did you perform miracles and have many people write about it? Yes I can prove that your not because you said you didnt believe in God in earlier statements.
Apr 17 2011: Like I said, let's say it's not me. It's this friend of mine who you don't know. And yes, he claims he performed miracles, and I'm going to write about them, because I too claim he performed miracles, or rather, I believe he performed miracles. Me writing about them is going to cause others to write about them. He also claims he is the true son of God. Is he the son of God just because I believe him and I'll make others believe in him as well?
You might say I've spoken against such things in the past. Well, I claim I've changed.Apr 17 2011: Drew,
My biggest problem is if Jesus is so right and the rest is so wrong, why is he in only one set of stories in one book?
Why did no historians write about Jesus outside of Christianity?
I do not dislike the idea of God as love, or Jesus as a prophet (I hate the rich just as much, and think we should all help one another constantly) but I cannot accept a library of stories of having any fact in it, it is impossible. If Christians used the bible as a story book for preaching great ideas of love and togetherness, boy would anyone have a rough time bashing Christians, but that is not the case. Prime example lies with the Vatican City.Apr 17 2011: People wrote about what the overlord Xenu was up to trillions of years ago, it's an official religion (scientology). By Drew's logic it MUST be true!
If I've learned anything from Uri Geller it's that people are so easily fooled in believing extraordiary lies.
Drew B
Apr 23 2011: Many people saw Jesus' miracles. Many people saw them and if jesus was just another cult leader then why has every cult died out except this one. People died for Jesus. I dont know about you but i would only give up my life if I truly believed.
- +1
Apr 23 2011: Not every other cult has died out. Look at Muslims for example. The same thing you said can be applied for them, and they'll be just as wrong as you are:
Many people saw Mohamed's miracles. Many people saw them and if Mohamed was just another cult leader then why has every cult died out except this one. People died for Mohamed. I dont know about you but i would only give up my life if I truly believed.
The same thing can also be said for pretty much every other of today's religions by simply using the name of the prophet.
The fact they truly believed the claims doesn't make the claims true. I truly believe there's an invisible pink unicorn right now behind you, and I'll persuade many people to just "have faith" that there is an invisible pink unicorn behind you. I could die for this claim if someone decides to kill me for it (though I'm not willing to kill myself for it), but I still believe it... does that mean there is an invisible pink unicorn behind you?
The fact they gave up their life because of the claims doesn't make them true. Otherwise, Bin Laden's cult is right and everyone else is wrong.Apr 23 2011: What about Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, scientologists and all the regional smaller cults of the world? And since when is the survival of a cult an argument for its veracity?
People have given up their lives for many causes, true or otherwise. I think Vasil's example of Osama Bin Laden's followers is a perfect example of that. That's what religious certainty does to you, makes you think you're justified into running planes into buildings for the glory of a God. That's not something to be proud of.Apr 23 2011: Dear Matthieu Miossec,
survival of a cult is not an argument for its veracity. maybe child follow theirs fathers with no think.
do you consider Osama Bin Laden religious? why? how you know him?Apr 23 2011: Are you serious? Is this a serious question? Are you really asking us how we know Osama Bin Laden is religious? That's like asking me if the pope is religious! I don't know either of these guys but its pretty damn obvious as religion is what they use to justify their actions.
"maybe child follow theirs fathers with no think." Funny you should say that, that's exactly what I think religious people do. It's interesting how people of a particular religion hold on to that particular religion so much, to that particular denomination. I bet your family is Muslim and Drew's family is Christian.Apr 23 2011: Dear Matthieu Miossec,
I mean how much you are sure your image of osama is true?
not any one with a long beard and Arabian clothing you see just in TV is really Muslim.
anything any TV channel show is truth? who is at the back of most large media?
TV not say any lie?
please research who has given fighter air plains to Osman to bombard Afghanistan people?
osama is like Mubarak and Ghazafi supported by US
Muslim has definitions and terms.
not all child following his father has not researched religion.
but most follow father's beliefs with no research including Muslim countries.
few human really research religions and select best of them.
God says:
"Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are people of understanding."
(saying is better translation than speech)
have you listened this speech?:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/lesley_hazelton_on_reading_the_koran.htmlApr 23 2011: Dam Drew you are easy to convince then.
BTW 2012 is real, end of the world, do some drugs.
Sky F
Apr 23 2011: Matthieu, ever consider that Osama exploits Muslim's religion to pursue his own agenda? I believe that many of his followers are religious, but I don't believe he himself is actually doing what he is doing out of religion. It's a facade to gain followers.
- 0


text:
Search over 133,500 listings in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine and Rhode Island
Relocating for business or personal reasons, whether across the country or overseas, can be an exciting yet challenging experience. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Relocation Services provides a wealth of resources and expertise to facilitate the different aspects of moving domestically or internationally. A team of Relocation Consultants is available to assist you, providing the information and guidance needed to make timely, informed decisions. A dedicated Consultant will ensure that your needs are met, serving as an informational resource before, during, and after the move. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Relocation is with you every step of the way, from making the decision to move until the last picture is hung in your new home.We have put together the following information to serve as a guide and answer common questions about relocation.
No matter how compelling the opportunity, you need to consider the impact relocation will have on you and your family; weigh the benefits carefully. A Relocation Consultant can help you to begin the decision-making process by conducting a thorough needs assessment, ultimately offering pertinent area information and helpful suggestions. Once you've made the decision, your Consultant is with you every step of the way, coordinating services and managing the process.
Timing is a key factor in effectively planning your move. Once you have established a time frame, you can begin to plan the move in detail. A Relocation Consultant can help answer these questions and assist with the details of your move.
Each real estate company and agent are unique. Engaging the right real estate firm and agent to sell your home is key to a successful move. To provide an advantage when selling your home, Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Relocation Services has designed a specialized marketing assistance program. Your Relocation Consultant will help you select the most qualified sales agent to represent your interests. Together, your Consultant and sales agent will evaluate market conditions, develop a detailed marketing strategy, make recommendations for a timely sale, and guide you through the entire home sale process.Some Important Issues To Consider:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
In October of 2012, Alfresco announced the availability of the public Alfresco API. This simple RESTful API makes it possible for developers to build exciting custom applications with your choice of programming language and tools.
Come to this tech talk to hear Peter Monks and Greg Melahn explain how Alfresco is expanding this API and see examples of the API in action.


text:
Enlarge / Alternate Images
This product is great!!!
I love BioTone, BUT this dual purpose crème has been a complete bust. My chiropractor bought me this for work, and I felt bad because I literally told him sorry but I cant work with this. For one, the smell is horrid, two, the viscosity is just plain weird. It feels super cheap like something you would get from Walmart. Its very sticky yet overly greasy. I will apply it to the back for example, and ill start a slow stroke going down the back and all of a sudden my hand stops, It gains to much friction with the skin and I love my slide. With other lotions if this happens, I just shake my hands a little and the inertia is enough to continue the stroke. But with this crème, its like it jumps a coupe inches and then my hands sticks to the skin again. Its extremely hard to deliver a nice flowing massage with this crème. I much prefer BioTones "Cocoa-Comfort" for my clients. They also like the lotion MUCH better than this crème.
love Biotone!!
Massage Warehouse offers competitive pricing and quick shipping. Highly recommend - a pleasure to do business with.
Not enough for the price. Poor quality for what you need it to do which it didn't do. Buy Versa instead.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration requires that MSDS be available to employees for potentially harmful substances handled in the workplace under the Hazard Communication regulation.
MSDS BIOTONE Dual Purpose Creme


text:
Capri Palace Hotel-Spa (5 Star Luxury Hotels) Anacapri
This hotel is no longer part of the
Capri.com collection
Via Capodimonte, 2/b - Anacapri Tel. +39 081 9780111 , Fax +39 081 8373191
The art of luxury, in Anacapri
Three reasons why you'll love it here
- The Beauty Farm, home to the famous Leg School
- The Olivo's marvelous Michelin starred cuisine
- Modern art, greek gods and style icons - in your room!
It's hardly surprising if Capri Palace Hotel & Spa is one of the island's most sought after properties. In the peaceful town of Anacapri, at the foot of Monte Solaro, this 5 star luxury hotel combines contemporary art, gourmet cuisine, world-class spa facilities, Mediterranean architecture and cosmopolitan glamour to polished perfection.
Olympic, Art and Star: luxury, Capri Palace style
At Capri Palace Hotel & Spa guests stay in suites inspired by the Gods of Olympus; by artists such as Mondrian, Magritte, Picasso and Warhol; or by divas of the silver screen, the likes of Maria Callas, Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn and Isabelle Adjani.
Penthouse: 150sqm of luxury complete with hanging garden, swimming pool and a panoramic terrace with view of the Bay of Naples
State-of-the-art spa
The hotel's "Capri Beauty Farm" is no longer the well kept secret of a few celebrities, and is now the declared favorite of many of the best known names in the world of art and show business, all eager to spend a week following the spa's Leg School or Metabolic Response programs.
Inspired by ancient spa philosophies, complemented by today's most innovative treatments, the Capri Beauty Farm is one of the most fully equipped spa facilities in the whole of Europe.
Dining with the stars
A restaurant more than worthy of its two Michelin Stars, "L'Olivo" serves delicious gourmet Mediterranean cuisine created by the talented Chef, Andrea Migliaccio.
The less formal Bistrot Ragù, situated on the terrace facing the Bay of Naples, provides the perfect venue for a romantic, al fresco dinner for two.
If you like the idea of eating fabulous fresh fish within steps of the sea, you'll love Capri Palace's "Il Riccio": an exclusive beach club and restaurant, just meters away from the Grotta Azzurra.
Luxury at sea: a Baia 50 motor boat and a spectacular 65ft sailing boat are available for individual transfers, tours around the island and longer excursions
Art, craft and ...shopping!
Part luxury hotel, part art gallery, Capri Palace is home to a fabulous collection of contemporary artworks, by artists the caliber of De Chirico, Schifano, Paladino, Pomodoro, Jones, and Plessi. Paintings and sculptures are distributed throughout the hotel and not just in the aptly-named Bar degli Artisti.
If you fancy an island shopping spree, just outside the hotel you'll find Mariorita: Capri Palace's stylish Concept Store, which stocks both Italian designer fashions, Capri sandals and the Capritouch sartorial collection.


text:
Count Jarkeice Davis among those not intimidated by Holmes County's state ranking.
The sophomore Davis rumbled for 285 yards and three touchdowns, and Port St. Joe manhandled the previously unbeaten Blue Devils' high-powered offense for the bulk of a 28-20 victory over Holmes County at Shark Field on Friday night
PSJ evened its record at 2-2 with the non-district victory. Holmes County, the state's third-ranked team in Class 1A, suffered its first defeat in five games.
"We had people in our hometown doubting us," Davis said. "We wanted to prove them wrong,"
The game proved to be more lopsided than the score would indicate. PSJ's defensive line seemingly pitched a tent in the Blue Devils' backfield, and Holmes County couldn't run or throw the ball with any success consistently.
Davis' two touchdowns in the first half spotted the Tiger Sharks a 14-0 lead. He overpowered one would-be tackler before racing 49 yards for a touchdown just over 3 minutes into the game for a 7-0 lead. He later added a bullish 12-yard romp for another score and a 14-0 lead 2 minutes into the second quarter.
The Tiger Sharks extended their lead to 21-0 when freshman quarterback Troy Williams fired a perfectly placed throw to receiver Rammelo Zaccarro for a 15-yard touchdown.
PSJ outgained Holmes County 236-62 in the first half. Davis carried the ball 12 times for 154 yards, and Dusty Richter added four rushes for 64 yards.
Conversely, Holmes County punted on five of six possessions in the first half, and the other drive resulted in an interception.
"We came out, and it was all about playing together," Richter said. "Coaches tell us that practice during the week is like work, and Friday is pay day. Today we got paid."
Davis and Richter stressed the importance of camaraderie on the Tiger Shark football team, and they have drawn strength from each other in recent weeks. Davis' uncle died two days ago. Richter's uncle committed suicide weeks ago, Richter said.
"We put Christ first and pray every day," Davis said. "We go hard every day in practice. It paid off."
The Blue Devils found some traction offensively in the second half, but the Tiger Sharks' 28-point lead was too much to overcome.
HolmesCountygot on the scoreboard in the middle of the third quarter with Kodi Russ' 1-yard touchdown run. That capped a seven-play, 63-yard drive, by far the Blue Devils' most successful possession of the evening to that point.
HolmesCountyclosed within 28-14 with Jacky Miles' 1-yard touchdown run with 10½ minutes left in the contest. Russ added a two-point conversion.
A fumble by the Tiger Sharks set up Holmes County's third touchdown, a 1-yard scramble by Ty Russ that trimmed his team's deficit to 28-20 with 3 minutes remaining. Russ missed the extra point, however, and PSJ recovered the ensuing onside kick and drained the clock.
HolmesCounty got the ball back at its own 27 after a Davis' fumble with 48 seconds left in the game. The Blue Devils advanced the ball to the PSJ 42 before Miles was sacked as time expired. That was the fifth sack of the night for the PSJ defense.
Miles came into the game the area's leading passer, but he was held to 3-for-7 passing for 13 yards and an interception. Similarly, Kodi Russ entered as the area's top rusher, but he was largely corralled and finished with 110 yards on 20 rushes. Ty Russ completed all six pass attempts for 74 yards in the second half.
Holmes County 0 0 6 14 — 20
Port St. Joe 7 14 7 0 — 28
PSJ: Davis 49 run (Hites kick)
PSJ: Davis 12 run (Hites kick)
PSJ: Zaccarro 15 pass from Williams (Hites kick)
PSJ: Davis 81 run (Hites kick)
HC: K. Russ 1 run (kick failed)
HC: Miles 1 run (K. Russ run)
HC: T. Russ 1 run (kick failed)
RUSHING — Holmes County: K. Russ 20-110, Miles 9-33, T. Russ 12-32. Port St. Joe: Davis 24-285, Richter 6-64, Williams 4-6, Zaccarro 3-4, Lee 1-(minus-3), Team 1-(minus-1).
PASSING — Holmes County: Miles 3-7-1 13, K. Russ 1-1-0 16, T. Russ 6-6-0 74. Port St. Joe: Williams 1-2-1 15.
RECEIVING — Holmes County: K. Russ 3-25, F. Russ 2-22, Janas 1-18, Miles 2-16, Wilson 1-12. Port St. Joe: Zaccarro 1-15.


text:
Author of the Month
Images from the Gulf of Cambay, India
The artefacts in these images were dredged up in the Gulf of Cambay, off the North West coast of India, in operations conducted in November 2001. They are among thousands of other objects and artefacts recovered in the same locality, identified by India's National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) as the site of two flooded prehistoric cities. A piece of wood amongst the artifacts (photographs below) was carbon dated at two different laboratories - one giving a date of 8500 years ago and the other of 9500 years ago.
Possibly the arm of a figurine with a bracelet placed on the wrist section adjacent to the presumed now missing hand.
These images are Copyright © 2002 Santha Faiia. None of the images may be reproduced without the prior written permission of the copyright holder.
Site design by Amazing Internet Ltd, maintenance by Synchronicity. G+. Site privacy policy. Contact us.
Dedicated Servers and Cloud Servers by Gigenet. Invert Colour Scheme / Default


text:
|Home Page
Pictures Post
Hook Up With Large Boobs Horny Singles Right HERE!
Recommended Porn Sites With Large Nude Boobs
Guaranteed Date With Large Boobs Escorts!
Check Out The Best Porn Pass Deal On The Net!
Copyright © 2007 to Present Large Nude Boobs All rights reserved.
Exemption Statement: All visual depictions hosted or displayed on this site are exempt from the provision of 18 U.S.C. §2257 and 28 C.F.R. 75 because said they do not portray conduct as specifically listed in 18 U.S.C §2256 (2) (A) through (D), as amended, but are merely depictions of non-sexually explicit nudity, or are depictions of simulated sexual conduct, or are otherwise exempt because the visual depictions were created prior to July 3, 1995.


text:
Share your comments on Shoot Free Throws Like The Pros below back to the article page.
This will help. I was are 2nd best freethrow shooter on are team last year but I shoot FT with horrible form and hoping this will help..
im hopin diz actually werkz, i dnt wanna make muhself look afool. itz gonna werk, i believe i hoops
i hop dis work 4 me because i am trying out 4 basketball next year 4 my skool
hope this works. I'm a pretty good shooter but when it comes to free throws, its not good.
I need help on FT, this will help.
yea im always gettin to the line i could draw fouls i just cant make the freethrows
yea im always gettin to the line i could draw fouls i just cant make the freethrows
im a good freethrow shooter but when it comes to the fourth quater clutch i can only make 1 of 2
I can make any shot in the clutch except a freethrow, I hope this works, and I am going to go watch tons of Regie Miller and Ray Allen freethrow footage.
already being a good ft shooter this will help even more.
never thought about it like that... thanks ihoops...
I really hope this works cuz im on a tournament team nd we just finished our first tournament nd i shot 1-out-of-6 on free throws but 6-out-of-8 from the field
im a excellent free throw shooter just like your boy dirk......
This should help me with my freethrows. I'm a post and I only made less than half of my freethrows in my season.


text:
If you haven't taken advantage of our furniture sale yet, don't wait until tomorrow to order stunning replicas of antique furniture and other unique furniture items because the sale ends today! This is the last day to get 20% off of the regular price of any of our beautiful furniture so don't wait around to buy magnificent medieval home decor like the Effingham Gryphon Library Table. As with several of our tables, this heirloom furniture item is crafted from solid, gorgeous mahogany. This is a stunning sculptural piece that can be used as a writing table, hall table, or for other purposes, and will last for generations.
It's also the last day to get 20% off any of our beautiful chairs. When you put something into your house that is as stunning and comfortable as the San Lorenzo Renaissance Cross-Frame Chair, guests will spend just as much time admiring it as sitting in it (if they can pry you out of this beautiful, cozy seat).
Egyptian tables are also on sale and include such functional works of art as the Royal Egyptian Cheetahs Sculptural Glass-Topped Console and even a detailed, stunning replica of King Tutankhamen's Egyptian Throne Chair.
Order these beautiful items and any of our furniture by the end of today, January 14th, and get 20% off the regular price.


text:
To/Die/For (often abbreviated TDF) is a gothic metal band from the town of Kouvola in southeast of Finland, assembled in 1993 as a hard rock band under the name Mary-Ann. In 1999, they decided to change their musical style to gothic metal, resulting in that they also changed the band name.
In 2000, the band toured Europe together with Dark Tranquillity, Sentenced and In Flames. Bassist Miikka Kuisma quit the band and was replaced by Marko Kangaskolkka, who had played with the band in its early years. "Epilogue", the successor of "All Eternity", was released in 2001, and was followed by a tour with Lacrimosa.
On October 4, 2006 To/Die/For released their fifth studio album, entitled "Wounds Wide Open". After the promotional tour that stretched to October 2007, the band decided to take a break.


text:
Better Than Ever!
- New Look
- New and improved stronger laminated material
- New reinforced side seams which creates a smooth bore inside seam like a barrel of a tank gun
- Grid stitched glute panel of suit
- No expansion panels like the competitors
Constructed from our laminated BOSS fabric this is the heaviest, strongest unlimited poly suit in the lifting world. But we didn't stop there. We also included our patented built in harness system. The 3cm seams create an anatomically precise harness system for extra support and bigger squats. Not enough? How about Aplix straps which are 30% stronger than Velcro and proven performance in 1,200lb + squats. The suit truly is unlimited!
Available in:
Regular Stance - for narrow to moderate stance squatters
Wide Stance - for wide to extra wide stance squatters.
All Boss Suits Feature:
- Patented harness system (patent #5,046,194)
- Like the Centurion, the BOSS is composed of 11 different panels. When combined they form a harness system within the suit to provide more support and power than any other suit on the market. Not simply a suit with extra strips of fabric sewn on top. Harness seams are the equivalent thickness of 5 plies of NXG Super Plus fabric! The sum of its parts makes the BOSS the strongest, unlimited poly suit in the lifting world!
- Unlimited performance powered by the use of BOSS fabric - the world's first laminate fabric! Created and introduced by Titan.
- Features synthetic, high tech, super high tensile strength thread. A single thread has tested to a load of 3.75 kg while a looped thread has tested to a load of 10kg! Costs up to 3 times more than regular thread!
- Entire suit is constructed using commercial satin stitching, no straight stitching on any part of the suit. This is a more costly time consuming process, but performance and durability are our first priority.
- Features more thread than any other suit in the lifting world. Every suit uses an average of 8,448cm per suit. That's 3,326 inches or 277 feet of thread. Nearly the length of an American football field! Over the course of a production year that really adds up. In 2008, Titan used over 6,000,000 yards of thread. That's over 3,400 miles!
- Features Aplix straps, a military grade of hook an loop - 30% stronger than Velcro!
- Takes up to 6 times longer to construct than a conventional pattern suit ...a devotion to craftsmanship, not mass production.
- Used by champions such as Oleksandr Kutcher, Steve Goggins, Gerry McNamara, Mike Griffin and Jill Mills!
- Backed by the most outrageous product performance guarantee in the business: 2 years on blowouts and 1 1/2 years on runners!
You May Also Like
Atlas Powerlifting Shoes
THP Knee Wraps 2.5 m
Out of stock
Olympian Powerlifting Shoes
THP Knee Wraps 2.0 m
Out of stock


text:
Resilience® Exterior Acrylic Latex Paint
Dont let weather worries ruin your painting schedule. Resilience® Exterior Acrylic Latex paint gives painted exteriors exceptional moisture resistance in half the time as conventional paints. Select Product
Save 10% Every Day with PaintPerks™
- List Price: $61.99 – $67.99 / Gallon
- **
All prices displayed are for U.S. Sherwin-Williams locations and are in U.S. Dollars.
Prices do not include taxes or other fees as applicable.
- Not all colors are available in all product lines. See store for details.
- Due to individual computer monitor limitations, colors seen here may not accurately reflect the selected color. To confirm your color choices, visit your neighborhood Sherwin-Williams store and refer to our in-store color cards.


text:
Indio > Indio Drawstring
Indio Drawstring
model #: 104468
Our signature drawstring shape in soft textured leather. Easy to wear with no fuss, features drawstring closure and tons of interior function.
No Reviews
- special web price $99-$114, regular price $139-$159
- Exterior: Leather, Trim: Polyurethane
- Interior: Nylon
- Antiqued silver tone hardware
- 11in L x 8in W x 12.75in H Drop 12.5in
- Magnetic closure
- Signature crochet printed lining features two multi function pockets and a zippered back wall pocket
- Clean with a water-based leather cleaner and moisturizer. ;;;;;;;;; Use a protective spray to protect the leather surface.
- Origin: Imported
There are no reviews for this product
You must be logged in to write a review.


text:
Newsletter Sign-Up
"The Shelter is to be applauded for the work it's doing — developing new theatre and building creative relationships at a time when small theatre companies are dropping like flies. Its approach to making theatre is both practical and optimistic."
© Copyright The Shelter NYC, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Site design by Dave Lankford.


text:
Produced by the Islamic Bibliograhy Unit at Cambridge University Library, the Index Islamicus Indexes literature on Islam, the Middle East and the Muslim world. Material cited in the Index Islamicus includes not only work written about the Middle East, but also Muslim areas of Asia and Africa and Muslim minorities elsewhere. Included in the index are journals, conference proceedings, and monographs.
Guest curated by graduate student Katie Wills
Stories from people who were children during World War II and the objects in this exhibit animate the past and inform us of a time when war took over daily life. "Retrospect is a very interesting thing," says Ruthie Kallnder. "At the time I don't recall any of the information we got as being propaganda," but the government tried to influence children to make "necessary" sacrifices. Propagandists made the war a battle between good and evil, democracy and fascism. They also asked children to share in the war effort. In response, many children took on more responsibilities. Ruthie explains that boys and girls felt "if that's what it was going to take" to win they "were willing to do it." The memories of the people in this exhibit and their wartime actions show the power of propaganda's messages and its lasting affect on their lives. Propaganda posters, children's books, and classroom assignments demonstrate how propagandists reached children and involved them in the national war effort.
More Options:
Browse | Classic Catalog | OhioLINK | Lane Public | WorldCat |
More Options:
Research by Subject |
Databases A-Z
More Options:
OhioLINK Home |
OhioLINK Catalog |
Research by Subject |
Databases A-Z
More Options:
Online Journals : A-Z
| Subject List
More Options:
Miami University Search |
Miami University Directory
B.E.S.T. Library services limited Saturday June 27 by building power outage
Need to relax before your next exam? Try Amos Music Library's playlist.
Stats Help Desk - hours during finals week
Trial Access to eMarketer Database


text:
- Will True
- Brooklyn, NY
- United States
Product Development, TED Conferences
This conversation is closed.
Do you have a suggestion for TED? Something we could do better?
Have an idea for the website? Maybe a suggestion to improve TED Conversations?
We would like to use this space to hear and discuss your ideas for TED and TED.com.
Please note: If you wish to suggest a speaker please use the following link: http://www.ted.com/nominate/speaker
George Spilkov
Jun 11 2011: The act of deleting comments, you do not "like", is undemocratic, manipulative, limiting, etc.
- +13
Many may not agree with certain positions especially about delicate, taboo, controversial subjects presented on TED or expressed in comments by some users. It is very annoying and wrong tendency to delete comments when you in TED do not share or like them.
The voice of the "minority" or the "unorthodox thinkers" has to be heard also if TED is to be believed to uphold the values it promotes.
Here is my proposal for TED:
INSTEAD REPLACE THEM WITH A LINK. You might be surprised how many people would click on those links and would want to read those "condemned" comments or have something to say about them.
"Idea WORTH spreading"??? It seems you in TED have a tight grip on what to be considered "worthy" of spreading. Why not let the people say what they really think about the ideas you present? Moderate what appears but do not Delete - let the people have the means to read, reply to, rank the "condemned" comments.
Jimmy Strobl
Jun 12 2011: I totally disagree! There are a lot of F*****-** things that people say that are not worthy of sharing. Now, you might be under the impression that the opinion you have is the correct one and what you are saying is "the truth" but that, George, is very unlikely!
- +6
Go here to speak freely! http://www.ted.com/conversations/3273/nothing_s_off_topic.html
Edit: have you read http://www.ted.com/pages/conversations_terms ?
Tim Colgan
Jun 13 2011: No more. TED just killed the conversation. So much for transparency and free speech.
- +5
@Jimmy: Two days remaining. If it goes, I go.
Jun 14 2011: I'm sorry to hear that Tim!
Edit: seems to be back.Jun 15 2011: "@Jimmy: Two days remaining. If it goes, I go."
Jim Moonan
Jun 15 2011: Transparency and free speech YES!
- +3
But slanderous statements and personal attacks NO!
There's got to be a line somewhere.
I was the recipient of just such attacks here in a TED conversation and it was more than offensive - it was hurtful.
TED can be faulted for being big brother, but when it comes to personal attacks, what would you propose TED do?
Debra Smith
Jun 15 2011: I am supporting Jim on this one.
- +1
We need a balance.
I absolutely value Tim and his contribution and it is strange that he is the one who ends up in this confrontation for I have never seen him treat anyone without consumate respect and all of his comments are on point and often deeply insightful as well. The problem is that does not apply to everyone.
When my comments have been removed- they deserved to be in most cases.
I am surprised that TED did not leave Tim's thread alone as it was a happy little cul de sac for people - it was tactically a poor manoever but TED has to have the right to prevent threads from dissolving into chaos.Jun 15 2011: Can we request that there be a review of the terms and agreement policy and that we, the users, have input? I really do think the process would benefit from a more formal review. For our part, if as a group we formulated new guidelines we think would be more fair for removal of a comment?
It may not satisfy everyone's every wish, but it likely will result in something better than what we are tied to now.Jun 16 2011: this^^
Jim Moonan
Jun 16 2011: EA
- +2
5.TED is seeking to foster a grown-up conversation about ideas that matter. When conversing with other members, engage in a reasoned exchange of ideas -- avoiding flaming, name-calling, obscenities and insults.Jun 16 2011: Well Kathy,
I have to admit that I have read some things in the last day or so that have shocked me and are causing me to rethink my position.
Tony Sanchez
Jun 18 2011: TED is not about free speech. It's about spreading ideas "they" agree on. We should be aware of it, accept it, or refrain from posting. I do enjoy some of TED's contents but I do not share the "pedestal" statues some users seem to have given to the brand name. When you look at the speakers, it is quiet clear the direction TED is moving forward to, and it ain't free-speech. Some speakers are in fact invited for their notoriety rather than for the content of their speech. It's a shame that in many cases, the speakers are people that have more than one platform to express their ideas/interests to the masses. TED should allow more "out of the dark" speakers, and focus more on the life's experience of the speaker rather than on their academical bureaucracy or the amount of books they have published; or even worst, their celebrity statues.Jun 14 2011: They may not be worth sharing, but certainly they're not worth censoring. Mr Spilkov presents a seemingly perfect solution.
- +1
Tim Colgan
Jun 14 2011: @Birdia: They apparently decided it wasn't serving their interests.
- +2
Will True
Jun 15 2011: Hi all -- the purpose of TED Conversations is to provide a deeper and wider discussion amongst the TED community, to hear voices and meet people that you otherwise wouldn't have interacted with; there is no 'interests' that are being served. The Admins don't have an agenda they are serving besides doing their best to host engaging and productive conversations.
- +6
Every single comment doesn't need to be perfectly on topic, but if you want an example for the reasoning behind comment removal, take a look at this very sub-thread within the suggestions thread. It has grown with many topics that I myself might consider off-topic to a point that suggestions for TED.com are being pushed down 'below the fold' and those users aren't getting their voices heard. In my opinion, off-topic comments and sub-threads provide a barrier to the original poster's discussion and have the potential to derail entire conversations.Jun 15 2011: "TIM, YOU STOP THAT CRAZY TALK RIGHT NOW!"
Good one Jimmy! But you know there are certain causes which justify martyrdom. Free speech is one of them.
Jimmy Strobl
Jun 15 2011: Yeah, I know Tim.
- +2
Talk to the admins, I really think you guys can come to a solution that works for all!
Comment deleted
Tim Colgan
Jun 15 2011: Jim Moonan: RE: "I was the recipient of just such attacks here in a TED conversation and it was more than offensive - it was hurtful."
- +2
Don't take it seriously Jim. Here on TED conversations I've been called an ignorant stalking rapist. Actually, I wish that comment wasn't deleted. It was really pretty comical.
Jun 15 2011: Really?! It's re-assuring to hear that coming from you... the attack on me felt more outrageous and sinister than comical. But if it were to happen again I suppose my skin is thicker now. It happened while I was rather new to the TED conversations and I was frozen by it because I think of TED as being a place were that kind of behavior is non-existent. But now I know it's not...Jun 15 2011: tim, birdia, teach me how to get that kind of hate mail. i always get boring attacks only.Jun 15 2011: I'm in good company then…
But I don't think this is about what we get in terms of hateful, slanderous personal emails. We have protection against that if we want. We can protect our privacy as many do in this forum.
What I think this is about is what the limits are to free speech in this public forum. Are there any??? I totally agree that TED needs to take a hard look at their rationale for removing comments and take what so many of us are calling for seriously. It is in the spirit of what is best about TED to do so.
There's a music artist I enjoy that I think is a genuine musical genius and from time to time I find something on youtube by him and his band. The comments left are often supportive, but it's not unusual for ignorant, vicious people to spew their racist, bigoted, hate-filled venomous beliefs as well. My point is that's apparently ok to a large degree on youtube – although there are times when the entire comment stream has been disabled and I assume that the speech got too far out of hand even that forum.
But this is TED. I have been following this conversation closely enough to know that I may have to re-adjust my understanding of what TED conversations are and are not, but for now at least I see this forum as something of a safe-haven from that very small element of people that are so common across the internet... Is removing that type of comment so bad? Doesn't removing that type of comment re-confirm who we are as a group?? A diverse group, but a respectful group as well.
Btw, I'm always up for a good argument (Kristian, we have one going right now and your not playing fair). It's half the reason why I enjoy TED conversations.
Comment deleted
Comment deleted
Bran Corvus
Jun 12 2011: I totaly agree with you sir:)Jun 12 2011: I disagree with George.
- +1
TED Conversations is not just another bulletin board. Here admins must delete comments to maintain the standard and most importantly the mere goal of this online conversation project.
And in the conversations terms there are few adjectives repeated: mature, constructive, civil, relevant
So, anything that does not comply with these adjectives should be removed.
And radical openness in discussions never leads to anything constructive, even in your everyday meetings, you may try, it always leads to chaos and talking in vain for hours.
Bran Corvus
Jun 13 2011: Realy, here are some people who are very sophisticated radical and nobody deletes them. I believe that i have any rights to say when in disagree whit somebody, and not being deletedJun 12 2011: This would allow people to see who posts these uncouth comments so as to know if they the would like to engage these posters in other conversations.
- +1
Comment deleted
Jun 13 2011: I'd so red flag you right now, haha.Jun 13 2011: I agree with that suggestion Birdia. The report of abuse can be misused
Jun 13 2011: I disagree with Birdia. Personally, I wouldn't use the flag feature if my name was showing up next to the flag. Besides, flagging a post doesn't automatically mean it will be deleted, just that the staff will look into it. A certain degree of anonymity is necessary to protect those who report abuse. I also can't quite imagine a mature community like the TED community would abuse the flag system. Don't tell me I'm wrong! :)
Jimmy Strobl
Jun 13 2011: How about having the option to put your name next to the flag?Jun 13 2011: I like the system the way it is, it allows me to express what I like without having to explain myself why I like a controversial comment or why in one talk I agree with x and in another talk, I disagree with a similar opinion (I'm not talking about flagging it). I like the fact that I can raise my thumb for a comment which I find inspiring. I don't care much about my credit, but I like being identified as a translator. It motivates me to think twice about what I write.Jun 13 2011: Ok then - you are not right :)
- +1
You can't quite imagine a mature community like the TED community would abuse the flag system but what about imagining a mature community like the TED community would abuse the terms? If you can imagine that then perhaps you could imagine the latter also.
Jun 13 2011: I agree with Richard...anything is possible Simone...Jun 13 2011: @ Cathy- what do you mean?
You mean saying 'Naner, naner, I'm telling the teacher!" Isn't OK?
(or maybe its me letting it get to me- OK, I agree!)Jun 13 2011: Isn't that a bit too pessimistic? Anyways, let's not lose track of the topic. Discussions about the right way how to moderate online communities will always be a part of the whole thing.Jun 16 2011: I agree the red flags should appear in the conversation..maybe even with a counter so the commenter knows how many have taken issue.
Since Red flags are invisible at the moment we can't know which are pending PED review. So as far as I know we have no knowlledge on the pattern of use of red flags.
We only get to see the outcome , a notice "this post was removed by admin".
In the few conversations I have been involved in I have never once seen a comment removed by admin that was simply an opposing view point. That is simply not a a truthful portrayal, Birdia, of what I have seen.
In every case it has been about removing inapparopriate comments by members that breech the terms of use agreement. In one conversation sveral members got into a bitter relentless personal harangue with one another right in the middle of a conversation on transforamtive expetreiences, of all things. The moderator repeatedly asked them to stop. They continued really ruining the whole conversation. By the time admin removed all the posts it was too late.the entire conversation was ruined. That was the most dramatic one I have witnessed. Same people involved in all the others i have seen. Same issues..
I have not personally ever ever ever seen deletion of a comment that is simply expressing a different opinion. That is simpy not a true statement from my observations.
Jun 16 2011: I can vouch for this statement:
"I have not personally ever ever ever seen deletion of a comment that is simply expressing a different opinion. That is simpy not a true statement from my observations."Jun 16 2011: I think the flags should be visible and that there should be a counter so the commenter has a sense of how a comment is received by the community
.I am all for transparency. I think TED's guidance to "abusers" should appear publicly right in the context of the conversation. That way we would all learn. And that would certainly curb these tedenciesand self correct our community..
.Didn't there used to be at thumbs down? Maybe that should be bright back?
In another conversation I just saw three thumbs up on a comment that suggested that the appropriate response to a statement that "The holocause was a lie" is to present videos and documentation that holocaust did actuially happen if you disagree.
Is red flagging a statement that " the holocaustis a lie" suppressing opinion? censorhip?
I think not.
In some parts of the world that is actually a crime. All over the wolrd in civilized and intelligent compamy that kind of thing just isn't said
There are myths being spread here about censorship and repression and manipulation that really don't tell the underlying story. These are just the wounded little boys and girls who through rocks through the window and then wailed when they were caught.
Emo Bear
May 2 2011:
- +10
Lower the volume of the intros and outros to the talks, they are waaaaay too loud; especially on headphones.
Tofig Ahmed
May 2 2011: Strongly agreeMay 3 2011: Yes!May 4 2011: Oh, yessss..May 6 2011: It scares me every time! Especially, when I've just finished watching a previous TED Talk and am all reflective, and then BOOOOOOM! Geez.
- +1
Bart Jenkins
May 6 2011: Add my name to the list of people that things the intros and outros are TOOO loud.May 9 2011: I would be willing to assist in turning down the volume. Just let me know how to access the sound files and I'll edit them to be a better intro volume.
- +1
Bernd Fesel
Jun 12 2011: What about ideas worth realizing?
- +7
Why not have TED Community vote each month on an idea / talk they like best and offer a crowd-funding for this idea. If 5.000 persons vote to have an idea realized and each person is giving 50 Dollars - a lot can be done.
TED FUTURE could be more than ideas, it could be a community for change - for action. Then TED has the potential to be an even more influential international avantgarde which is socially interactive. It transforms ideas in some cases to reality - and in many societys you need just a little help for a first mover to start a movement for change.
Jun 12 2011: I really like the crowdfunding idea. It already works for projects such as Philantropher where every day, a new non-profit is introduced and people can decide to fund it with $1 (it's just $1 so you can give $1 for the next project on the next day as well - which I think is a great idea). Kickstarter has a similar approach (however without the vote system): every project has its own page, people can decide to "follow" projects and the initiator can post updates on the page to inform about the progress he has made. I think this would be a great experiment, especially for projects like building schools or improving healthcare.Jun 13 2011: This is a really great idea!May 11 2011: I don't know if its already been suggested, but just in case how about a TED follow up. Y'all bring in some amazing speakers that talk about cutting edge stuff or fantastic design, etc. and then Poof. I never hear about it again. I want updates! I want to be able to keep tabs on progress or failure!
May 11 2011: Ted follow ups sound like a great idea,I think a lot of people have a continuing interest in the amazing talks that they've seen on TED,
Will True
May 11 2011: Hi Meher -- I know what you mean! One of the first talks I saw was the demo of Sixth Sense technology, I would love to get updates on the research and progress. What form do you picture this taking?
- +1
May 11 2011: +1 Updates would be great. Maybe speakers should be allowed to edit the "About this talk" sidebar with useful links and news. A more social approach would be to ask the viewers to find updates and related content and edit the "About this talk" like a wiki.May 12 2011: The sixth sense tech was exactly what i had in mind when i posted this. Pranav Mistry demonstrated the amazing tech, and made some great claims about cost and what not, and alluded to the the simplicity of the design. He suggested making it sort of open source, well, now i want my blueprints and programs!
what I had in mind was allowing speakers to maybe do follow-up talks, not necessarily on the big stage, but self made sort of things. They could do audio recording, or audio visual or downloadable or broadcast-able presentations or something that could be linked to the speeches they give so we can watch the progress and development and also so they can reach out to the TED community for support if they hit road blocks.
or you can set up like micro TEDS, little studios where the presenters could just come and present updates to small audiences or no audience at all, the use of TED facilities would just be so that the follow-ups have consistency in audio visual production. but all follow-ups should be directly linked to the original talk, I want to see flow, hear about the hold ups and success, I want the process of development to be more transparent so that the world can see how stuff gets done! (or not done)May 15 2011: The Speaker pages already have an 'On the web' section for links - example http://www.ted.com/speakers/pranav_mistry.html - and I would generally include Wikipedia and Worldcat id links, for speaker and/or topic. The point is, don't replicate something already being done elsewhere. If there's a excellent bibliography on a person or topic, link to that rather than to each link individually.May 15 2011: Couldn't you just search engine said technologies and/or break throughs?May 20 2011: How about an option to be sent notifications via TED or email about a subject? The obvious downside is more work for the speaker/organisation?!May 19 2011: Starting from TED Global 2010, during the conference hosts give updates about past speakers. Also sometimes some posts are published in TED Blog - http://blog.ted.com
Ryan Lum
May 19 2011: I totally agree that there should be a better more organized follow-up feature. I mean, it's not just about listening to talks...it's about creating action, right?
- 0
It would be nice to have on the actual talk video page a follow-up section if there are any video follow-ups. Or even a progress bar or a section for the original speaker to update on the talk. It's definitely nice to know if the idea is still in forward motion. If not, what we can do to help.
Dana Retová
Jun 8 2011: I think that requiring organizers of TEDx events with more than 100 attendees to attend a TED conference is very limiting. I understand that it is of great importance to ensure the quality of TEDx events but I believe you could think of some alternatives that do not require spending $6000 (which is a great deal of money in most places in the world) and traveling around the globe.
- +5
Will True
Jun 15 2011: Hi Dana -- For a more detailed response to this I would recommend reaching out to the TEDx team (contact info is available in the ted.com/tedx sub-page), but my understanding of that rule is to ensure that the larger events reflect the 'feel' of a TED conference. The TEDx program gives out the TED name at no cost to organizers all over the world, but my understanding is there has to be some limitations along the way to ensure the overall quality of the events.Apr 30 2011: It may exist already, but I can't find it... I would like the option of CHANGING the dates for a conversation / debate. I think it would be neat to extend / reduce the dates depending on how things are going. I have a talk that I feel has run its course and would liek to close early. As I can't, I feel that I need to keep reading it so that I don't appear rude and miss questions being asked.
- +1
Also, a Collapse option. There can be a lot of comments to scroll down and if each comemnt was collapsed, with just the posting name and date/time, it would be much easier to oprn up the recent comments.
May 2 2011: LOVE the collapse option
Al Vitale
May 21 2011: Thanks for the opportunity to make suggestions. I discovered TED about a year ago and typically watch TED Talks while eating breakfast and dinner.
- +4
My suggestion is to turn down the volume of the introduction to each talk The sound is so loud that after listening to one talk at a comfortable level I have to adjust the volume down when starting another talk, otherwise the intro blows me out of the room. Could these intros be adjusted to a lower level so they would match the listening level of the pieces they are introducing. I understand the producer of this piece meant it to be very dramatic and it is but it is also inconvenient to be constantly adjusting my volume.
Al Vitale
St. Louis MO
May 21 2011: I agree, the opening and closing volume needs adjustment.May 21 2011: This should of been addressed ages ago.May 23 2011: Hi Al -- Alway good to see a fellow St. Louisan out there! (born and raised in South St. Louis, moved out to the county for middle school and high school).
We've heard the feedback on this, and is a more complicated fix than it would seem. We're looking at it though and hope to have it resolved soon.
May 23 2011: Can you add the sound track to an audio program like adobe audition and just adjust the volume level of the intros? Then re-import it into the video track. This is how I would go about it, also how I am willing to assist.May 1 2011: Why TED Talks must be in English? I think nothing happens if the English-Speaking Peoples watch the talks with subtitles as it has always been possible for the rest of the world. Further there are a lot of amazing people out there with brilliant ideas who have not been able to spreading only because of non-English speaking.
Debra Smith
May 1 2011: Hi Ana Maria! I would love to see TED talks in other languages with subtitles but I recognize that most of us who speak English as a first language are not able to speak other language and that probably applies to the TED hierarchy. They are responsible for the content of the talks and they may be wrestling with how to vett such talks when they do not really know what they say. The other problem is that there is no mechanism for the very best nonEnglish speaking thinkers do not have direct access to the TED decision makers one on one.
- +1
I sure hope that something will develop to permit talks from other languages because I think we will all be enriched!
Comment deleted
May 14 2011: Jaime, You are doing just fine. Your points are understandable and you should remember that most of us cannot even speak a few words of another language. The least we can to is the small work of adjusting the words of a non- native English speaker!
Will True
May 2 2011: Hey Ana -- The language of the conference itself is English (which is why all of the TED Conference talks are), but many of our TEDx events around the world feature other languages. As you can imagine we view a lot of talks and curating/translating additional languages adds a level of difficulty. That being said, stay tuned :-)
- +2
May 4 2011: I think it should be much more enriching to have conferences in all other languages with subtitles, at least, in English. This would enable us to reach many more fascinating ideas as well as peen in different cultural narratives that are limited by language constraints.
I just think it should be possible for those non-English TED conference organizers to find someone for a quick English translations....
May 4 2011: Or we could just do it. I don't see any reason why TED translators shouldn't be able to write English subtitles for Talks in their native languages. That said, the subtitles in the native languages would have to be written first, but that can't be so hard either. Will, if you're one day betatesting this feature, count me in :)


text:
The title of this post is not original. As a former radio boss once told me, 99-percent of great ideas are stolen, and the title was sto..., errr, borrowed from a Tweet posted by the best wrestling announcer not calling matches right now, Joey Styles (well, the best announcer not calling matches until halfway through this week's Raw, anyway.) It took me until the last week or so to discover for
Much media attention has been given to the protests over lack of jobs and "corporate greed" labeled Occupy Wall Street. Like the protest itself, some of this attention is legitimately warranted, while a lot of it is manufactured. Garnering virtually no attention from the traditional media, however, was another protest over jobs, working conditions, and an unresponsive corporation; the