ForumGarden

xfrodobagginsx;1518305 wrote: Well, Obviously someone is lying here. Einstein is quoted discretely as saying that He believes in God:

Einstein stated in an interview published in G.S. Viereck’s book Glimpses of the Great, 1930: “I’m absolutely not an atheist. ¦ The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.


I don't see where anyone is lying.

LarsMac;1518307 wrote: I don't see where anyone is lying.


Let's put it this way, I am not saying that Einstein was a Christian or had a right view of God, I am saying that He did believe in God. Your article seems to imply that he didn't believe in God at all.

xfrodobagginsx;1518317 wrote: Let's put it this way, I am not saying that Einstein was a Christian or had a right view of God, I am saying that He did believe in God. Your article seems to imply that he didn't believe in God at all.


You apparently did not ready the article very well.

LarsMac;1518320 wrote: You apparently did not ready the article very well.


Perhaps.

'GOD BLESS YOU' NOW CALLED 'MICROAGGRESSION'



‘God bless you’ now called ‘microaggression’

I would encourage anyone who hasn't read this first post to do so and vote in the poll.

'Please Pray for Us:' Christian Families in Hiding, Fleeing Syrian Town

'Please Pray for Us:' Christian Families in Hiding, Fleeing Syrian Town | CBN News

What's the big deal about Israel's 70th anniversary?

Read more at What’s the big deal about Israel’s 70th anniversary?

The Laws Of The Universe Couldn't Self Exist



What governs fundamental forces of the universe?

xfrodobagginsx;1518401 wrote: The Laws Of The Universe Couldn't Self Exist



What governs fundamental forces of the universe?


WND has had a reputation for being BS news since before the internet.

They almost make the National Enquirer seem like a reliable news source.

LarsMac;1518404 wrote: WND has had a reputation for being BS news since before the internet.

They almost make the National Enquirer seem like a reliable news source.


That's actually not true. They are very reputable. They are Conservative, yes, but they are reputable. Can you name a bogus story put out by them?

xfrodobagginsx;1518411 wrote: That's actually not true. They are very reputable. They are Conservative, yes, but they are reputable. Can you name a bogus story put out by them?


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-kr ... 24286.html

FourPart;1518430 wrote: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-kr ... 24286.html


Huffington Post is a very left wing site. They are going to accuse anything conservative of being false. Huff po makes stuff up, not WND.

xfrodobagginsx;1518411 wrote: That's actually not true. They are very reputable. They are Conservative, yes, but they are reputable. Can you name a bogus story put out by them?


pretty much every one that you've shared

LarsMac;1518448 wrote: pretty much every one that you've shared


So, anything that isn't liberal is false even though it's factually true?

xfrodobagginsx;1518456 wrote: So, anything that isn't liberal is false even though it's factually true?


depends on your definitions of "liberal" and "factually true"

LarsMac;1518464 wrote: depends on your definitions of "liberal" and "factually true"


I thought I posted an article explaining it to you.

LarsMac;1518464 wrote: depends on your definitions of "liberal" and "factually true"


Honestly, you don't know what factually true means?

xfrodobagginsx;1518472 wrote: I thought I posted an article explaining it to you.


Perhaps, but the article is from a source that I categorically dismiss and unreliable.

xfrodobagginsx;1518474 wrote: Honestly, you don't know what factually true means?


Do you?

LarsMac;1518475 wrote: Perhaps, but the article is from a source that I categorically dismiss and unreliable.


Ok, what reason do you have to believe that the information is unreliable? Everything that I read is spot on at least as it pertains to American Liberals vs. Conservatives. This is what I am talking about with Liberals. You dismiss the information in the article if you either don't like it or if you don't like the source of the information. You can't erase facts.

Here is another example, This is an article and exact caption that I recently posted on my Facebook page. It is a FACT that UNEMPLOYMENT claims are the lowest since 1973 and that the economy is exploding since Trump took office. So, do you believe this to be true or do you deny the obvious? O and by the way, the Left wing, politically motivated media in America won't report this stuff because it makes Trump look good. If this were true under Obama, it would be all over the news.

Jobless Claims Drop To Lowest Levels Since 1973 Due To Trump's Capitalistic Policies. But I Thought It Was "Trickle Down Economics" And Doesn't Work?

Jobless claims drop to lowest level since 1973 | TheHill

xfrodobagginsx;1518523 wrote: Ok, what reason do you have to believe that the information is unreliable? Everything that I read is spot on at least as it pertains to American Liberals vs. Conservatives. This is what I am talking about with Liberals. You dismiss the information in the article if you either don't like it or if you don't like the source of the information. You can't erase facts.

Here is another example, This is an article and exact caption that I recently posted on my Facebook page. It is a FACT that UNEMPLOYMENT claims are the lowest since 1973 and that the economy is exploding since Trump took office. So, do you believe this to be true or do you deny the obvious? O and by the way, the Left wing, politically motivated media in America won't report this stuff because it makes Trump look good. If this were true under Obama, it would be all over the news.

Jobless Claims Drop To Lowest Levels Since 1973 Due To Trump's Capitalistic Policies. But I Thought It Was "Trickle Down Economics" And Doesn't Work?

Jobless claims drop to lowest level since 1973 | TheHill


The only thing wrong with that article is to that people like you seems to use it to give trump the credit for a trend that it says has been going for several years.

And of course, the headline belies the conclusions of the article:

"

...

But Trump’s imposition of tariffs on steel, aluminum and other Chinese imports has rattled investors and economists concerned about trade retaliation hampering the global economy. U.S. stocks have swung wildly in 2018 after a year of consistent gains, partly due to Trump’s trade policy."

So, you really should read the whole article, rather than rely on the headlines

LarsMac;1518527 wrote: The only thing wrong with that article is to that people like you seems to use it to give trump the credit for a trend that it says has been going for several years.

And of course, the headline belies the conclusions of the article:

"

...

But Trump’s imposition of tariffs on steel, aluminum and other Chinese imports has rattled investors and economists concerned about trade retaliation hampering the global economy. U.S. stocks have swung wildly in 2018 after a year of consistent gains, partly due to Trump’s trade policy."

So, you really should read the whole article, rather than rely on the headlines


Just to be fair, that article was written by a Liberal source, so yeah, they are going to try and find fault with Trump's policies. The trend you are talking about hasn't been going on for several years. Obama's GDP was half that of Trump's. Obama had the worst economic recovery after a recession of any President in History. So, was there economic growth in spite of Obama, yes, was it slow due to his socialistic policies, yes. Look at the spike in the stock market since Trump took office. Look at the jobless rate since Trump took office. Obama had record high welfare rolls, Trump has record low welfare rolls. It's night and day. Yes there is a temporary shake up due to the Tarriffs, but it will result in economic growth. Europe is charging 4x more tarriffs on US imports than the US is charging for European imports. China is charging even more. The trade war wasn't started by Trump, it was started by Europe and China and other nations.

xfrodobagginsx;1518552 wrote: Just to be fair, that article was written by a Liberal source, so yeah, they are going to try and find fault with Trump's policies. The trend you are talking about hasn't been going on for several years. Obama's GDP was half that of Trump's. Obama had the worst economic recovery after a recession of any President in History. So, was there economic growth in spite of Obama, yes, was it slow due to his socialistic policies, yes. Look at the spike in the stock market since Trump took office. Look at the jobless rate since Trump took office. Obama had record high welfare rolls, Trump has record low welfare rolls. It's night and day. Yes there is a temporary shake up due to the Tarriffs, but it will result in economic growth. Europe is charging 4x more tarriffs on US imports than the US is charging for European imports. China is charging even more. The trade war wasn't started by Trump, it was started by Europe and China and other nations.


You might find this interesting:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2 ... ariffs.pdf

LarsMac;1518553 wrote: You might find this interesting:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2 ... ariffs.pdf


So, should I believe that source or dismiss it if I don't like the facts presented? Because that's what Liberals do, they dismiss any source that they don't like the facts presented by.

xfrodobagginsx;1518575 wrote: So, should I believe that source or dismiss it if I don't like the facts presented? Because that's what Liberals do, they dismiss any source that they don't like the facts presented by.


Do as you will.

As for me, I only dismiss a source after realizing that they regularly present data that fails fact-checks, and prove to be biased (Right, left, or otherwise)

LarsMac;1518577 wrote: Do as you will.

As for me, I only dismiss a source after realizing that they regularly present data that fails fact-checks, and prove to be biased (Right, left, or otherwise)


Name a left wing biased source.

xfrodobagginsx;1518587 wrote: Name a left wing biased source.


Mother Jones

LarsMac;1518588 wrote: Mother Jones


Never heard of her.

I can name some Liberally biased sources: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, The Huffington Post and many, many more...

xfrodobagginsx;1518596 wrote: Never heard of her.

I can name some Liberally biased sources: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, The Huffington Post and many, many more...


According to your right - biased sources.

Actually, most of those are pretty close to center. From the far right pretty much every news source seem leftist.

LarsMac;1518597 wrote: According to your right - biased sources.

Actually, most of those are pretty close to center. From the far right pretty much every news source seem leftist.


Name some positive stories these supposed "neutral" sources have ran about Donald J Trump? Those are far left sources and for you to think that they are close to the center shows how far left you are or that you are fooled by them. Foxnews is center right, but not far right. Brietbart is far right. Liberals would look at a source that has balanced news and call it far right because they are so used to all of the coverage being far left. If a company ran 2 positive stories of Trump along side 2 negative stories about Trump, the left would consider it far right. If a company ran 4 negative stories about Trump, Liberals would consider it in the center.

xfrodobagginsx;1518603 wrote: Name some positive stories these supposed "neutral" sources have ran about Donald J Trump? Those are far left sources and for you to think that they are close to the center shows how far left you are or that you are fooled by them. Foxnews is center right, but not far right. Brietbart is far right. Liberals would look at a source that has balanced news and call it far right because they are so used to all of the coverage being far left. If a company ran 2 positive stories of Trump along side 2 negative stories about Trump, the left would consider it far right. If a company ran 4 negative stories about Trump, Liberals would consider it in the center.


Uh-huh.

The one thing in that post that I can agree with you on is the implication that where you sit on the scale affects your definition of the other data points.

To Breitbart denizens, even Fox news seems leftist.

LarsMac;1518608 wrote: Uh-huh.

The one thing in that post that I can agree with you on is the implication that where you sit on the scale affects your definition of the other data points.

To Breitbart denizens, even Fox news seems leftist.


Foxnews leans Conservative, true, but those other places are far left.

You never provided me with a positive story done about Trump from those places. Why? Because they are far left and won't cover anything that makes Trump look good.

xfrodobagginsx;1518624 wrote: Foxnews leans Conservative, true, but those other places are far left.

You never provided me with a positive story done about Trump from those places. Why? Because they are far left and won't cover anything that makes Trump look good.


Because Trump has done nothing positive.

LarsMac;1518625 wrote: Because Trump has done nothing positive.


Here are two articles that prove you dead wrong. He has actually accomplished more in his first year, than most Presidents do it 8 years, but you wouldn't know that because of your Liberal Media choices. These articles are from December and January, so they aren't even current, yet the list is quite long.



Trump’s First Year: His Top 82 Accomplishments



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year ... s-repealed

xfrodobagginsx;1518641 wrote: Here are two articles that prove you dead wrong. He has actually accomplished more in his first year, than most Presidents do it 8 years, but you wouldn't know that because of your Liberal Media choices. These articles are from December and January, so they aren't even current, yet the list is quite long.



Trump’s First Year: His Top 82 Accomplishments



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year ... s-repealed


Well, those are all "positive" or at least "Pro-Trump" but I don't see a lot of actual accomplishments that he can honestly take credit for.

I'd much rather see real data than propaganda, regardless of the political lean.

LarsMac;1518643 wrote: Well, those are all "positive" or at least "Pro-Trump" but I don't see a lot of actual accomplishments that he can honestly take credit for.

I'd much rather see real data than propaganda, regardless of the political lean.


Lowering taxes cause GDP to go UP. Cutting regulations caused GDP to go UP. They caused employers to give large bonuses to millions of workers many around $1000. They caused wages to go up at these large "Greedy" corporations and they said it is specifically because of Trump's tax cuts. The stock market is at an all time high because of his policies. He is fixing the trade imbalance with China and the rest of the world. He is standing up to North Korea which is a good thing. They will use nuclear weapons if they get a chance and he is stopping them. He is building up the US military, which is a good thing. He pulled out of the Paris accord because the only country that would be hurt by it is the US. The list goes on and on. Those are just a few good things that he has done from an economic perspective.

xfrodobagginsx;1518649 wrote: Lowering taxes cause GDP to go UP. Cutting regulations caused GDP to go UP. They caused employers to give large bonuses to millions of workers many around $1000. They caused wages to go up at these large "Greedy" corporations and they said it is specifically because of Trump's tax cuts. The stock market is at an all time high because of his policies. He is fixing the trade imbalance with China and the rest of the world. He is standing up to North Korea which is a good thing. They will use nuclear weapons if they get a chance and he is stopping them. He is building up the US military, which is a good thing. He pulled out of the Paris accord because the only country that would be hurt by it is the US. The list goes on and on. Those are just a few good things that he has done from an economic perspective.


Yes, I see that you have enjoyed the kool-aid.

I suggest that you actually research those items for yourself using independent sources.

But I doubt that you will.

Have a nice day.

LarsMac;1518650 wrote: Yes, I see that you have enjoyed the kool-aid.

I suggest that you actually research those items for yourself using independent sources.

But I doubt that you will.

Have a nice day.


I did research it for myself and I was posting articles on here, which were being consolidated into one thread. Are you saying that the Businesses are lying about the reason that they gave $1000 bonuses to hundreds of thousands of their employees which equals out to millions when you consider all of the ones who are doing it? They are lying? And Comerica Bank, 5/3 Bank, Wallmart and all of the other employers that raised their minimum starting wage at their respective businesses and they specifically said that it is because of Trump's tax cuts, they are lying also? So, then could you tell me the real reason that they did these things or is everyone lying? This is what I am talking about with Liberal people, they utterly refuse to accept anything as fact doesn't go along with their agenda. It's pretty simple. Unless you can show me that these businesses didn't really give these bonuses, raises, ect. and that the employers didn't really say it was because of Trump, then you need to just admit that these things happened because of Trump. It's pretty simple. Can we establish that little bit of truth?

xfrodobagginsx;1518669 wrote: I did research it for myself and I was posting articles on here, which were being consolidated into one thread. Are you saying that the Businesses are lying about the reason that they gave $1000 bonuses to hundreds of thousands of their employees which equals out to millions when you consider all of the ones who are doing it? They are lying? And Comerica Bank, 5/3 Bank, Wallmart and all of the other employers that raised their minimum starting wage at their respective businesses and they specifically said that it is because of Trump's tax cuts, they are lying also? So, then could you tell me the real reason that they did these things or is everyone lying? This is what I am talking about with Liberal people, they utterly refuse to accept anything as fact doesn't go along with their agenda. It's pretty simple. Unless you can show me that these businesses didn't really give these bonuses, raises, ect. and that the employers didn't really say it was because of Trump, then you need to just admit that these things happened because of Trump. It's pretty simple. Can we establish that little bit of truth?


You have a very interesting sense of reality.

I certainly did not say anyone is lying.

I do, however suggest that you don't get the whole story when you limit your sources.

LarsMac;1518671 wrote: You have a very interesting sense of reality.

I certainly did not say anyone is lying.

I do, however suggest that you don't get the whole story when you limit your sources.


Ok, then explain the rest of the story. I do look at both sides and the liberal sources leave out anything that makes Trump look good and focus only on what makes him look bad. Do you look at both sides? Most Liberals do not. It's the same way when trying to discuss the Bible or Creation vs Evolution, ect.

xfrodobagginsx;1518674 wrote: Ok, then explain the rest of the story. I do look at both sides and the liberal sources leave out anything that makes Trump look good and focus only on what makes him look bad. Do you look at both sides? Most Liberals do not. It's the same way when trying to discuss the Bible or Creation vs Evolution, ect.


The fact that you continue to focus on the the Liberal vs Conservative slants tells me you have not gotten a thing I've been saying.

LarsMac;1518675 wrote: The fact that you continue to focus on the the Liberal vs Conservative slants tells me you have not gotten a thing I've been saying.


Liberals tend to have a certain way of thinking about things. The more Liberal, Left wing a person is, the more they will agree with the Liberal side of the equation. I am sorry if you don't understand that, but even most US Liberals understand that much.

Liberal/Progressive and Socialist are closely related here in the US. They all pretty much mean the same thing here. Classic Liberals are rare here anymore.

xfrodobagginsx;1518677 wrote: Liberals tend to have a certain way of thinking about things. The more Liberal, Left wing a person is, the more they will agree with the Liberal side of the equation. I am sorry if you don't understand that, but even most US Liberals understand that much.

Liberal/Progressive and Socialist are closely related here in the US. They all pretty much mean the same thing here. Classic Liberals are rare here anymore.


Well, this is rich.

A right wingnut explaining Liberals to a conservative.

LarsMac;1518679 wrote: Well, this is rich.

A right wingnut explaining Liberals to a conservative.


You are not a Conservative.

Here is a list of things that Conservatives in America believe:

Abortion should be Illegal

Small Government

Low Taxes

Strong Military

Right to bear arms (Guns)

Pro Traditional/Biblical values

Trump is very conservative in his Governing. You have made it clear that you don't think he has done anything good. An American Conservative recognizes that Trump is doing an excellent job. An American Liberal things Trump is a horrible President.

A Liberal would thing that the traitor Obama did a great job. A true Conservative would recognize that he did everything he could to destroy America and Traditional/Christian values.

You might be Conservative by the European standards but by American standards you are very liberal. Yes, I can admit that I am very Conservative.

xfrodobagginsx;1518690 wrote: You are not a Conservative.

Here is a list of things that Conservatives in America believe:

Abortion should be Illegal

Small Government

Low Taxes

Strong Military

Right to bear arms (Guns)

Pro Traditional/Biblical values

Trump is very conservative in his Governing. You have made it clear that you don't think he has done anything good. An American Conservative recognizes that Trump is doing an excellent job. An American Liberal things Trump is a horrible President.

A Liberal would thing that the traitor Obama did a great job. A true Conservative would recognize that he did everything he could to destroy America and Traditional/Christian values.

You might be Conservative by the European standards but by American standards you are very liberal. Yes, I can admit that I am very Conservative.


You have proved beyond any reasonable doubt that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, or, you are a very talented troll.

LarsMac;1518691 wrote: You have proved beyond any reasonable doubt that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, or, you are a very talented troll.


I know exactly what I am talking about. I follow politics in the US every day. You don't know what you are talking about.

Mystery 'trumpet sounds from sky' in Hawaii

Read more at Mystery ‘trumpet sounds from sky’ in Hawaii

Plesiasaur Washes Up On Beach. Evolutionists Won't Admit It Is One Because They Were Supposed To Go Extinct 200 Million Years Ago And It Proves Creationists Right



Mystery Sea Creature Washes Up on Georgia Beach

xfrodobagginsx;1518714 wrote: Plesiasaur Washes Up On Beach. Evolutionists Won't Admit It Is One Because They Were Supposed To Go Extinct 200 Million Years Ago And It Proves Creationists Right



Mystery Sea Creature Washes Up on Georgia Beach


Fascinating.

I think I might enjoy reading your explanation of how a rather poor photograph of a carcass of an undeterminable species, might disprove the entire Darwinian line of thought.

Even if that creature were proved to be a once living creature that had been around for 200 million years without our knowledge, that would only actually prove Darwin's theories.