• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Plagiarism By OT

Mike

Well-known member
OT wrote:
Oldtimer
Rancher



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 22327
Location: Northeast Montana
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 1:36 pm Post subject: O'Donnell

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Both Mendells genetics work and Darwins work on genetic mutant changes began the work which led to where we are today with the science of genetics, cloning, genetic modification....

I believe in God- and I believe in him as a Creator- but I also believe that He used evolution as a tool in that creation....Too much evidence continually being found supporting the fact that evolution took place ....Most of which theologians have been able to rationalize with the Biblical and ancient writings...

Knowing that scientific evidence shows that the universe was actually formed about 13.7 billion years ago, while the Earth was formed around 4.5 billion years ago and the first humans date back only a hundred thousand years or so. And long before humans the earth was populated by dinosaurs brings into question the literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis in the Bible—on the origin of the universe—which says that God created heaven and the Earth and the species on it in six days... And whether you accept the literal definition of a day.....

To me science and religion can operate in different realms. Science is very good at answering the 'how' questions. How did the universe evolve to the form that we see? But it is woefully inadequate in addressing the 'why' questions. Why is there a universe at all? These are the meaning questions, which many people think religion is particularly good at dealing with.......
No quotes. No links. Not even in a quote bracket.

Now comes an article from National Geographic:
Evolution and Religion Can Coexist, Scientists Say<< Back to Page 1 Page 2 of 2
Still, science does contradict a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis in the Bible—on the origin of the universe—which says that God created heaven and the Earth and the species on it in six days.

Scientific evidence shows that the universe was actually formed about 13.7 billion years ago, while the Earth was formed around 4.5 billion years ago. The first humans date back only a hundred thousand years or so.
P
Adolescence Came Late in Human Evolution, Study Shows Fins to Limbs: New Fossil Gives Evolution Insight Prehistoric DNA to Help Solve Human-Evolution Mysteries? New Theory Drastically Rethinks Evolution of Early Life Earth Gases May Provide Clues to Evolution of Life When Did "Modern" Behavior Emerge in Humans? Like other scientists of faith, Primack, who is Jewish and reads the Bible regularly, argues that the Bible must not be taken literally, but should be read allegorically.

"One simply cannot read the Bible as a scientific text, because it's often contradictory," Primack said. "For example, in the Bible, Noah takes two animals and puts them on the Ark. But in a later section, he takes seven pairs of animals. If this is the literal word of God, was God confused when He wrote it?"

Proving God

Science is young. The term "scientist" may not even have been coined until 1833. Ironically, modern physics initially sought to explain the clockwork of God's creation. Geology grew partly out of a search for evidence of Noah's Flood.

Today few scientists seem to think much about religion in their research. Many are reluctant to stray outside their area of expertise and may not feel a need to invoke God in their work.

"Most scientists like to operate in the context of economy," said Brian Greene, a world-renowned physicist and author of The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality. "If you don't need an explanatory principle, don't invoke it."

There is, of course, no way to prove religious faith scientifically. And it's hard to envision a test that could tell the difference between a universe created by God and one that appeared without God.

"There's no way that scientists can ever rule out religion, or even have anything significant to say about the abstract idea of a divine creator," Greene said.

Instead, Greene said, science and religion can operate in different realms. "Science is very good at answering the 'how' questions. How did the universe evolve to the form that we see?" he said. "But it is woefully inadequate in addressing the 'why' questions. Why is there a universe at all? These are the meaning questions, which many people think religion is particularly good at dealing with."

But is a clean separation between science and religion possible? Some scientific work, including such hot topics as stem cell research, has moral and religious implications.

"Religion is about ethics, or what you should do, while science is about what's true," Primack said. "Those are different things, but of course what you should do is greatly determined by what's true."

Natural Laws

In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer. That is the same percentage of scientists who were believers when the survey was taken 80 years earlier.

But the number may have been higher if the question had simply asked about God's existence. While many scientists seem to have no problem with deism—the belief that God set the universe in motion and then walked away—others are more troubled with the concept of an intervening God.

"Every piece of data that we have indicates that the universe operates according to unchanging, immutable laws that don't allow for the whimsy or divine choice to all of a sudden change things in a manner that those laws wouldn't have allowed to happen on their own," Greene said.

Yet recent breakthroughs in chaos theory and quantum mechanics, for example, also suggest that the workings of the universe cannot be predicted with absolute precision.

To many scientists, their discoveries may not be that different from religious revelations. Science advancements may even draw scientists closer to religion.

"Even as science progresses in its reductionist fashion, moving towards deeper, simpler, and more elegant understandings of particles and forces, there will still remain a 'why' at the end as to why the ultimate rules are the way they are," said Ted Sargent, a nanotechnology expert at the University of Toronto.

"This is where many people will find God, and the fact of having a final unanswerable 'why' will not go away, even if the 'why' gets more and more fundamental as we progress," he said.

Brian Greene believes we are taking giant strides toward understanding the deepest laws of the universe. That, he says, has strengthened his belief in the underlying harmony and order of the cosmos.

"The universe is incredibly wondrous, incredibly beautiful, and it fills me with a sense that there is some underlying explanation that we have yet to fully understand," he said. "If someone wants to place the word God on those collections of words, it's OK with me."

Don't Miss a Discovery
Sign up for the free Inside National Geographic newsletter. Every two weeks we'll send you our top news stories by e-mail.

For more evolution stories, scroll to bottom.

See any similarities?

You're a piece of work, OT. A trashy dishonest piece of work. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:

I don't remember anyone EVER complaining about cutting an pasting. You just intermingled your words into those from another article.

How disingenious to try and make us think they were yours!!!

Like I said, you're a real piece of work that got caught. :mad: AGAIN!!!!!!
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:

Is that why you are always so dissatisfied oldtimer? your pea brain and the fact you are not even close to being perfect except in one area that i won't mention
:wink: :wink:

EH
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer. That is the same percentage of scientists who were believers when the survey was taken 80 years earlier.

But the number may have been higher if the question had simply asked about God's existence. While many scientists seem to have no problem with deism—the belief that God set the universe in motion and then walked away—others are more troubled with the concept of an intervening God.

As long as you posted the article- we might as well show that not all scientists are evil atheists.....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer. That is the same percentage of scientists who were believers when the survey was taken 80 years earlier.

But the number may have been higher if the question had simply asked about God's existence. While many scientists seem to have no problem with deism—the belief that God set the universe in motion and then walked away—others are more troubled with the concept of an intervening God.

As long as you posted the article- we might as well show that not all scientists are evil atheists.....

And the people of Delaware are smarter than not to believe in evolution?

SCUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:

Seems Oldtimer has missed the Moderators sticky; Reminder
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:27 pm

Some of you seem to have forgotten about this fairly simple request from Macon:

M Gravlee wrote:
Let's all try to keep it less about the personal stuff and more about the politics.


In Bull Session and Political Bull, we try to let your own consciences determine what is posted and it is our preference to have very limited moderating. We really don't like any censorship in these two forums, but there have been several requests recently to have more moderating done in PB. But there are also those who would like to have no moderating at all and that's understandable, too. Finding the right mix that pleases the greatest number of people isn't easy and in fact, sometimes it almost seems impossible.

Lately, a small number of posters seem to be more interested in discussing other posters than discussing politics. The personal attacks and vulgar insults are getting out of hand and are turning several posters away. If we have to sacrifice the troublemakers to prevent that from happening, that's what we'll do. Consequently, a couple of you have made it onto the short list to join Pig Farmer unless you change your ways.

Let's try to respect Macon's request to keep it more about the politics..
Oldtimer lasted until Sun Sep 26, 2010 2:02 pm
It is just to bad one of our long time moderators is not willing to LEAD BY EXAMPLE. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:

Seems Oldtimer has missed the Moderators sticky; Reminder

Some of you seem to have forgotten about this fairly simple request from Macon:

M Gravlee wrote:
Let's all try to keep it less about the personal stuff and more about the politics.


In Bull Session and Political Bull, we try to let your own consciences determine what is posted and it is our preference to have very limited moderating. We really don't like any censorship in these two forums, but there have been several requests recently to have more moderating done in PB. But there are also those who would like to have no moderating at all and that's understandable, too. Finding the right mix that pleases the greatest number of people isn't easy and in fact, sometimes it almost seems impossible.

Lately, a small number of posters seem to be more interested in discussing other posters than discussing politics. The personal attacks and vulgar insults are getting out of hand and are turning several posters away. If we have to sacrifice the troublemakers to prevent that from happening, that's what we'll do. Consequently, a couple of you have made it onto the short list to join Pig Farmer unless you change your ways.

Let's try to respect Macon's request to keep it more about the politics..

It is just to bad one of our long time moderators is not willing to LEAD BY EXAMPLE. :roll:

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :???:

:roll: :roll: Tam- I never named anyone-or called anyone a name - but if the description fits --------- :wink: :p :lol:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
It fits my beliefs to a T.. I was going to post the entire article- but then you would whine and beach about cutting and pasting.....

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :wink:

Seems Oldtimer has missed the Moderators sticky; Reminder

Some of you seem to have forgotten about this fairly simple request from Macon:

M Gravlee wrote:
Let's all try to keep it less about the personal stuff and more about the politics.


In Bull Session and Political Bull, we try to let your own consciences determine what is posted and it is our preference to have very limited moderating. We really don't like any censorship in these two forums, but there have been several requests recently to have more moderating done in PB. But there are also those who would like to have no moderating at all and that's understandable, too. Finding the right mix that pleases the greatest number of people isn't easy and in fact, sometimes it almost seems impossible.

Lately, a small number of posters seem to be more interested in discussing other posters than discussing politics. The personal attacks and vulgar insults are getting out of hand and are turning several posters away. If we have to sacrifice the troublemakers to prevent that from happening, that's what we'll do. Consequently, a couple of you have made it onto the short list to join Pig Farmer unless you change your ways.

Let's try to respect Macon's request to keep it more about the politics..

It is just to bad one of our long time moderators is not willing to LEAD BY EXAMPLE. :roll:

Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect..... :???:

:roll: :roll: Tam- I never named anyone-or called anyone a name - but if the description fits --------- :wink: :p :lol:

So in your reality/mind it is not a attack when you include everyone in your
Nothing can satisfy those that in their own little pea brains think they are perfect.....
attack.

Remember this guys:--- when attacking someone just make a general comment about ALL Posters to make your point then it can't be considered a personal attack in our moderator's reality/mind :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mike you have to be the most brainwashed of the bunch on this forum. ot is brainwashed as well but just the other way...but you are a coon hating bigot...maybe you have your reasons living there in alabama or something...you are basically unable to put together two coherent thoughts but you are great like hypocrite and tam at copying and pasting someone else's thoughts...

i hate both dems and reps...i have figured out the game...you still have your head straight up your A$$ and are worried about ot...
 

Tam

Well-known member
shaumei said:
mike you have to be the most brainwashed of the bunch on this forum. ot is brainwashed as well but just the other way...but you are a coon hating bigot...maybe you have your reasons living there in alabama or something...you are basically unable to put together two coherent thoughts but you are great like hypocrite and tam at copying and pasting someone else's thoughts...

i hate both dems and reps...i have figured out the game...you still have your head straight up your A$$ and are worried about ot...

Just how many youtubes and articles have you posted that were "someone elses thoughts" that you happen to believe proves your wack job conspiracy theroies? :roll:

and If the game is being insulting then I think we can all agree you have figured out the game. :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Larrry said:
As soon as the sham learns to read he will start pasting articles, till then enjoy the videos he posts.

:lol: :lol: my bad, I was trying to give him the beneifit of the doubt when I said articles. :wink: :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Angusgord said:
hopalong said:
oldtimer can get by with it because he is a moderator
:mad: :mad:
You get away with it because your Stevie boosin Buddy :D :D :D :D

I don't think Hopy got away with it.. anyone familiar with hopy and his writing style could clearly see the difference writing style and the spacing gap between his comment and the article..

but I do find it funny that you made the same "exact" mistake of not using quotes, when you reprimanded him..

and I wouldn't, and didn't accuse you of plagiarism either, as it was clear there were to few vulgar terms in the unselected quote...

a decent person would see that they are no better and apologize..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Angusgord said:
:D There is NO WAY I'll ever apologize to that idiot on your say Steve ,You don't have to quote on a copy & paste and I at least added the REAL writer ,didn't try passing it off as my own.

When your bud starts apologizing to the ones he stalks on here ,I might follow suit ,no I will follow suit!

The more you post the more your true hypocrite colors show Steve :D :D :D :D :D :D

:D :D :D You accuse me of stalking, yet you do thge same, you accuse Syeve of showing his true colors, but his colors are not YELLOW :wink:
Every one knows who Steve really is, no one knows who you are :wink:
Or I should say pert near noone knows! :wink:
 
Top