[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

One thing for sure, with all of his mistakes, he does keep his staff busy.

But MIT scientists said that Trump had “badly misunderstood” their study. In response Friday, EPA administrator Scott Pruitt said there were other studies to back up the president’s position.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-s...14240.html

[The Urban Sombrero]

"Ice melts in my glass. Hell, what's that prove." Attributed to Bob Segar, BGR curmudgeon

(Of course, it proves that frozen things will thaw under warmer conditions).

[TheRealThing]

"Ice melts in my glass. Hell, what's that prove." Attributed to Bob Segar, BGR curmudgeon

(Of course, it proves that frozen things will thaw under warmer conditions).

Genesis 8:20-22 (KJV)
20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.


Global warming is a hoax. Got a counter?

[The Urban Sombrero]

Genesis 8:20-22 (KJV)
20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.


Global warming is a hoax. Got a counter?

Let's say that climate change produces seedtime and harvest in what is now desert, and a huge tidal bay where folk now rent condos and hotels and lounge on the beach. Would winter and summer continue to occur? Would seed time and harvest? Would cold and heat? Now, let's say that, before human beings completely destroy the earth, God intervenes. Exactly how would your prooftexted verses be violated? They wouldn't.

[TheRealThing]

Let's say that climate change produces seedtime and harvest in what is now desert, and a huge tidal bay where folk now rent condos and hotels and lounge on the beach. Would winter and summer continue to occur? Would seed time and harvest? Would cold and heat? Now, let's say that, before human beings completely destroy the earth, God intervenes. Exactly how would your prooftexted verses be violated? They wouldn't.

Let's just say your equivocating malarkey is offensive. God does not speak in the ambiguous vomitings of your taste.

Why don't you just admit you do not accept the infallibility of God's Holy Word? To your taste the Bible is loaded with allegory. Further, you no doubt believe a heretical view of the creation, in which evolution is mixed with The Lord's speaking the universe and all life into existence. That about right?

[The Urban Sombrero]

Let's just say your equivocating malarkey is offensive. God does not speak in the ambiguous vomitings of your taste.

Why don't you just admit you do not accept the infallibility of God's Holy Word? To your taste the Bible is loaded with allegory. Further, you no doubt believe a heretical view of the creation, in which evolution is mixed with The Lord's speaking the universe and all life into existence. That about right?

It seems to me that infallibility is not one iota violated by climate change/global warming. To say that human beings could wipe out civilization with nuclear weapons is not to deny God. To compare ice shelf photos over the last fifty years and see plainly that some phenomenon is rapidly happening is not to deny God. And, newsflash, to disagree with you politically, and, at times, theologically is not to deny God.

[TheRealThing]

It seems to me that infallibility is not one iota violated by climate change/global warming. To say that human beings could wipe out civilization with nuclear weapons is not to deny God. To compare ice shelf photos over the last fifty years and see plainly that some phenomenon is rapidly happening is not to deny God. And, newsflash, to disagree with you politically, and, at times, theologically is not to deny God.

That was quite a lot sidestepping even for you. You won't answer those questions directly because you're guilty as charged.

[The Urban Sombrero]

That was quite a lot sidestepping even for you. You won't answer those questions directly because you're guilty as charged.

"Guilty as charged"

That's above your pay grade, friendo. "Either you love ol' Ken and his parks, or you don't." Do I believe human beings evolved from apes, except at a moment in time God intervened and put in a soul? No. Question for you: was the post-flood world exactly the same as before? Or, did the flood event change climate? Why do servicemen stationed in Minot, North Dakota, come back to Kentucky and wear shorts and t-shirts when its 35 degrees? Adaptability seems a part of God's handiwork, doesn't it?

[TheRealThing]

"Guilty as charged"

That's above your pay grade, friendo. "Either you love ol' Ken and his parks, or you don't." Do I believe human beings evolved from apes, except at a moment in time God intervened and put in a soul? No. Question for you: was the post-flood world exactly the same as before? Or, did the flood event change climate? Why do servicemen stationed in Minot, North Dakota, come back to Kentucky and wear shorts and t-shirts when its 35 degrees? Adaptability seems a part of God's handiwork, doesn't it?

No, it isn't either. You do not accept the infallibility of God's Word, which you believe is full of allegory, and you believe evolution played a part of the development of creation.

[The Urban Sombrero]

No, it isn't either. You do not accept the infallibility of God's Word, which you believe is full of allegory, and you believe evolution played a part of the development of creation.

I accept the infallibility of Christ as Savior and Lord. I believe that God's creative genius and power had to include built in adaptability, as "all of creation groans in travail," meaning that sin warped the cosmos. Let's say God created an otter with the built in survival mechanism to adapt and become what man calls a platypus. Who, then, would be the Author of that adaptation? The Creator, the Divine Architect who built it in.

[TheRealThing]

I accept the infallibility of Christ as Savior and Lord. I believe that God's creative genius and power had to include built in adaptability, as "all of creation groans in travail," meaning that sin warped the cosmos. Let's say God created an otter with the built in survival mechanism to adapt and become what man calls a platypus. Who, then, would be the Author of that adaptation? The Creator, the Divine Architect who built it in.

Flattering the Almighty will get you exactly nowhere.

You don't accept His Word as infallible because you need room to equivocate and compromise to suit your liberal palate. Further, evolution is a lie and I still say you believe the Bible is filled with allegory.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Flattering the Almighty will get you exactly nowhere.

You don't accept His Word as infallible because you need room to equivocate and compromise to suit your liberal palate. Further, evolution is a lie and I still say you believe the Bible is filled with allegory.

"Flattering the Almighty"

You don't know the difference between nuance and equivocation. I know this: Matthew 25:31-46 isn't allegory. I know this: Christ and him crucified isn't allegory. I know this: if it turns out a platypus is an otter with God-given adaptability, or if it doesn't, salvation isn't riding on it.

[TheRealThing]

"Flattering the Almighty"

You don't know the difference between nuance and equivocation. I know this: Matthew 25:31-46 isn't allegory. I know this: Christ and him crucified isn't allegory. I know this: if it turns out a platypus is an otter with God-given adaptability, or if it doesn't, salvation isn't riding on it.

I don't think you have the first clue about any of it. And I know this, God's Word is infallible down to the point of one jot or one tittle. You're an equivocating compromiser of God's Word, which means that you only accept It with the limitations you place on It. The Bible says that puts you in jeopardy because friendo, salvation IS riding on it.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I don't think you have the first clue about any of it. And I know this, God's Word is infallible down to the point of one jot or one tittle. You're an equivocating compromiser of God's Word, which means that you only accept It with the limitations you place on It. The Bible says that puts you in jeopardy because friendo, salvation IS riding on it.

Ah, friendo, don't you fret 'bout poor old Sombrero's salvation. Christ beat you to that by a couple thousand years, and, really, before the foundation of the world.

[TheRealThing]

Ah, friendo, don't you fret 'bout poor old Sombrero's salvation. Christ beat you to that by a couple thousand years, and, really, before the foundation of the world.

Not if you like your friend Jefferson cannot accept the full revelation of God. He is Lord of all or He is not Lord at all.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Not if you like your friend Jefferson cannot accept the full revelation of God. He is Lord of all or He is not Lord at all.

Christ is all and in all. That does not mean you can eradicate Islam, bar an atheist from being a Senator, forbid evolution being taught in schools. The Constituion is not just for Christians. It's principles and safeguards are for all its citizens.

Now, as for your concerns for ol' Sombrero's relationship to Christ?
I find that awful touching. John 3:16 is not allegory.

[RunItUpTheGut]

Just a daily reminder that Trump is still potus and Islam needs eradicated.
We've already ridded ourselves of the global warming hoax

[TheRealThing]

Christ is all and in all. That does not mean you can eradicate Islam, bar an atheist from being a Senator, forbid evolution being taught in schools. The Constituion is not just for Christians. It's principles and safeguards are for all its citizens.

Now, as for your concerns for ol' Sombrero's relationship to Christ?
I find that awful touching. John 3:16 is not allegory.

I knew there was something greatly afoul with the Sombrero act and his continual defense of all things which virtually scream antichrist. Now we know.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I knew there was something greatly afoul with the Sombrero act and his continual defense of all things which virtually scream antichrist. Now we know.

What is "greatly afoul" is your continual know-it-all assuming.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I knew there was something greatly afoul with the Sombrero act and his continual defense of all things which virtually scream antichrist. Now we know.

All things were made by and for Christ, and without him nothing that was created would have existed (Colossians).

Now, to God, "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day." God exists above and beyond the space-time continuum. We do not. For God to explain Himself, His ways to us, there has to be reduction, else we could not understand even a little bit. So, in Genesis, is a "day" as we understand a day? I do not know. Is it your contention that salvation depends upon a person believing it was 7 days as the space-time limits of our minds understand them?

[TheRealThing]

All things were made by and for Christ, and without him nothing that was created would have existed (Colossians).

Now, to God, "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day." God exists above and beyond the space-time continuum. We do not. For God to explain Himself, His ways to us, there has to be reduction, else we could not understand even a little bit. So, in Genesis, is a "day" as we understand a day? I do not know. Is it your contention that salvation depends upon a person believing it was 7 days as the space-time limits of our minds understand them?

My contention is man has no right or leave, for that matter, to add anything to or take anything away from that which The Lord has said. God lives outside of time, ABTW I guarantee you picked that up from me, a day is 24 hours long and He wouldn't have referred to a six day creation period if it had instead been eons. Evolutionists such as yourself, need impossibly long periods of time in which to reconcile Darwin's pipe dream notions of man's origin. Wrap yourself up in that warm fuzzy blanket it you like. I prefer to take the Lord at His word.

[The Urban Sombrero]

My contention is man has no right or leave, for that matter, to add anything to or take anything away from that which The Lord has said. God lives outside of time, ABTW I guarantee you picked that up from me, a day is 24 hours long and He wouldn't have referred to a six day creation period if it had instead been eons. Evolutionists such as yourself, need impossibly long periods of time in which to reconcile Darwin's pipe dream notions of man's origin. Wrap yourself up in that warm fuzzy blanket it you like. I prefer to take the Lord at His word.

Frankly, I think there is a huge difference between the label you throw out ("evolutionist") and the idea that a God who exists beyond and above the space-time continuum, a God who "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day" just might be misunderstood. In Isaiah this: "Thou art a God who hidest thyself." To suggest that an all wise and knowing Creator would build in adaptability to his creations does not seem far-fetched. In fact, it seems fairly obvious. Additionally: "you got that from me": surely you don't mean the concept that God exists above and beyond time? First, that didn't come from you, as it is widely held (see fluffed up peacock reference); second, "there is nothing new under the sun," so the concept is eons old.

Lastly, I am willing to continue this discussion, but it belongs in the Religion" forum.

[TheRealThing]

Frankly, I think there is a huge difference between the label you throw out ("evolutionist") and the idea that a God who exists beyond and above the space-time continuum, a God who "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day" just might be misunderstood. In Isaiah this: "Thou art a God who hidest thyself." To suggest that an all wise and knowing Creator would build in adaptability to his creations does not seem far-fetched. In fact, it seems fairly obvious. Additionally: "you got that from me": surely you don't mean the concept that God exists above and beyond time? First, that didn't come from you, as it is widely held (see fluffed up peacock reference); second, "there is nothing new under the sun," so the concept is eons old.

Lastly, I am willing to continue this discussion, but it belongs in the Religion" forum.

It did on this forum friendo, and quite a long while ago to be sure. Do I really need to call up the first time I posted it for you?

This is not a discussion. Like all manifestos, it is a rambling rant in which somebody who has deviated far from the truth seeks to justify himself. And it's meaningless because even if you get a hundred likes out of Gitback and NEWARK, you'll never talk your way out of a thing with the Lord, and my mind is made up on the matter. Don't waste your time trying another series of mind numbing rehashes of this thing. I asked you several questions and I had you just right on every single one of them.

[The Urban Sombrero]

It did on this forum friendo, and quite a long while ago to be sure. Do I really need to call up the first time I posted it for you?

This is not a discussion. Like all manifestos, it is a rambling rant in which somebody who has deviated far from the truth seeks to justify himself. And it's meaningless because even if you get a hundred likes out of Gitback and NEWARK, you'll never talk your way out of a thing with the Lord, and my mind is made up on the matter. Don't waste your time trying another series of mind numbing rehashes of this thing. I asked you several questions and I had you just right on every single one of them.

As I've said many times, you are a self-aggrandizing, legend-in-your-own-mind, now hypocritical, self-celebrater. At least as you appear here on BGR. You folk, it seems, got used to a sort of bullying behavior on this board, and now you're whining and calling "nasty person" and all that. What a load of rot. Very disappointing. Except Bob, who just rolls with it and enjoys the ride.

[TheRealThing]

As I've said many times, you are a self-aggrandizing, legend-in-your-own-mind, now hypocritical, self-celebrater. At least as you appear here on BGR. You folk, it seems, got used to a sort of bullying behavior on this board, and now you're whining and calling "nasty person" and all that. What a load of rot. Very disappointing. Except Bob, who just rolls with it and enjoys the ride.

Just because you get nasty when you lose a debate point, which is often, doesn't carry any weight on here as far as I'm concerned. I was speaking of your causticisms directed at Granny and Ballmom1.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Just because you get nasty when you lose a debate point, which is often, doesn't carry any weight on here as far as I'm concerned. I was speaking of your causticisms directed at Granny and Ballmom1.

It would seem you'd get tired of crowning yourself the champion of nothing. It only goes to prove the lengths to which your pseudo intellect will go to reinforce its own delusions.

As for Granny and Ballmom, when they enter the arena, it's rough and tumble back and forth. It would be sexist to engage differently simply because they are female, at least by screen name.

[TheRealThing]

It would seem you'd get tired of crowning yourself the champion of nothing. It only goes to prove the lengths to which your pseudo intellect will go to reinforce its own delusions.

As for Granny and Ballmom, when they enter the arena, it's rough and tumble back and forth. It would be sexist to engage differently simply because they are female, at least by screen name.

Yeah, you pajama-boy types are hard to clean after. :hilarious:

[The Urban Sombrero]

Yeah, you pajama-boy types are hard to clean after. :hilarious:

Speaking of tough to clean after, White House staffers would sure echo that phraseology.