The Intergalactic Highway

Razor One wrote:Wonko, I'd be most interested to peruse the source of your info that Christianity/Islam/Judaism had common roots in hinduism. It sounds fascinating.
.

Thank you very much Razor,espcially the song

Most of my arguments is based on my early research from High School.I participated in Anthropology,Philosophy,and World religions heavily and I was curious about the great migration of the African ancestors,and since evolution was able to make them migrate,it also produced them to establish civilization,and of course,many stayed and made oral taditions of how they came and such,with the use of creative imagination.

Since I took those three courses within the same year,I noticed eveything seems related to one another.Then getting to history a year later I knew everything is related.The continents were related,the animals and us share the same chromosones,so I thought 'Can they share the same culture'

In World religions,we studied Hinduism and it is one of the oldest religions in the world,and my teacher showed me a chart on how Hinduism and older religions all migrated to become Greek and Roman religions,and then to Judaism,Christianity,and Islam.

In Anthropology our African ancestors migrated to the world,so I thought of this as a connection.

The early Greek philosphers they establish their views on Life,the Universe,and Everything(lol),until the later philosophers,such as St.Thomas Aquinas adopted and edited his own philosophy using Arisotle.So i too think it was related.


Currently at work I look up stuff at Wikipedia as my base to have a simple understanding of what I am going to research.Today I just researched on the Egyptian Gods,and some of the Gods came from foreign lands and worshipped in Egypt,and their current Gods have been altered many times to fit their 'modern times'.I looked at one of my old books on Egypt and they say a similar view on how the Gods change from marriages,to statuses.Horus was a sky God turned to Sun God in a matter of centuries.Atum went from a name change to make him grow older.Neirth came from a foreign Goddess named Tebit and grew eventually from Creator Goddess to War Goddess.


This reminded me of a documentaries on Greek myths,and how the myths symbolized as soemthing else.Jason's travel to the island of killer women was a symbol to a business deal on a island filled with onion-smelling women(Because the onion was to produce a purple dye)but men were there.The battles between Horus and Set in Egypt symbolized the constant battles between Lower and Upper Egypt,so I thought that myths are related to symbolize something,and how altered they were when passed to other cultures.


Sorry I've rambled on,but I hope this is an idea to support how we humans migrated with our religions and formed to the current religions of now.

I feel I need to warn you about Wikipedia, Wonko. That site cannot be trusted to be totally accurate with anything posted.
Not trying to be a jerk, just giving you a fair warning.

I don't mean to offend, but were they also talking about Manx cats in that show by any chance?

I can't answer that question, Nurann. I didn't see the show myself she just told me about it. I asked her what a cabbit was and she told me. When I asked her if it was real that's what she told me.

Anyways, Artemis, I understand why you got upset. Religion is a topic you're passionate about. You've also had some negative experiences that in the past have made you very uncomfortable discussing this topic. It's alright. Would it be okay for you if this experience went differently than those past experiences?

Thanks for being understanding, Nurann. I seriously don't want a repeat of that discussion.

Also... can I make a suggestion? Ever read a Creation Magazine called Answers? It has a lot of good stuff in it. It'll explain Creation much better than I could.

artemis-lady-warrior wrote:I'm not even going to bother correcting you on anything you said because you'd just defunct it anyway and I don't want to get mad but one thing you said

The cabbit is an urban myth. They exist as readily as the bogey man.

is totally incorrect.

A few years ago my mother saw a cabbit on a(scientific) tv show.

Feel free to correct me on anything you feel is wrong, if you can provide evidence that I am wrong and you are right that I cannot in turn invalidate, I will concede the point.

As for the Cabbit...

Link 1
Link 2

Also: Do NOT compare mentally challenged people with monkeys. That's very diraccative, plus it's rude. I happen to know a mentally handicapt person and I don't like him being compared with apes.

I apologise if you feel that's insulting but it's not the first time such an analogy has been drawn.

The Spanish socialist party, for instance, introduced a parliamentary bill giving "Simians" basic human rights (such as the right to legal defense).

Sources:

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3

If you doubt the first two sources, the third, Reuters, is reliable.

Admittedly I find it a little odd myself. It's a bit too left wing for my taste.

As for memory games. Who cares if monkeys beat people at computer memory games. It doesn't, mean anything. It just means they know where the blinking lights are. Why don't we teach them how to read instead?
My CAT has a better memory than I do. Does that make my Cat a close relative to me? No!

You said monkeys couldnt use computers. Your point was refuted.

Your new point is also refuted. Scientists have taught apes to read and recognise symbols and how to communicate via lexigrams. Lexigrams are symbols that represent words, the language used is an artificial one called Yerkish and was developed in the mid 70's.

Source: Source PDF

and I KNOW that water expands when it's frozen. I'm not a retard. I learned that on Bill Nye.

I did not insinuate nor mean to insinuate that you had a mental handicap of any sort and apologise if you took my statement that way.

This still leaves the question of the flood however. If as the bible states the world was flooded so that even the highest of all mountains on earth were covered with water, where then did this water go?

This topic is making me sick. Ugh. T_T Why are you SO desperate to say we came from stupid apes!? to show a little more emotion here......
THAT IS THE DUMBEST PIECE OR GARBAGE I HAVE EVER HEARD OF! It's all just a lame attempt at disproving a more logical answer. and do not say "EXPLAIN WHAT YOU MEAN" because I'm not a stupid scientist who thinks they know everything. It's totally pathetic and I'm not going to explain about it further, because no matter what I say you won't care anyway.

............. sorry about that. But this is why I hate topics like this. I was once in a Legend of Zelda forum that had a topic like this.

To clarify: I'm not desperate at all to say that humans came from apes, when I write it, I read it in my minds voice with a calm inquisitive neutrality.

I can understand why a debate of this nature can be frustrating but emotion mustn't be allowed to interfere with our arguments nor the debate at large.

I'd like you to know something. Within the scope of this debate at the very least, I DO care about what you write and what you think. I DO want to hear your opinion and the basis for forming that opinion.

You state that evolution is "all just a lame attempt at disproving a more logical answer". I presume you mean Creationism in this context.

Explain to me how creationism is logical. There is no way to logically prove that god exists, just as there is no way to logically prove that god does NOT exist.

Since god can neither be proven to exist or not exist, it falls to faith (or lack thereof) to fill this uncertain void with certainty.

Logic, as defined by the dictionary has no bearing on faith. Logic comprises science, reason, methodology, but not faith.

Faith is illogical, just as humans are illogical, just as You or I am illogical.

There is a science to evolution. There is a method to evolution. There is reason behind evolution.

Creationism is none of these things, because Creationism requires faith.

I am sorry for what you had to go through on the Zelda forum but I ask that you try and not let that tarnish your experience here. Feel free to post links to evidence so long as you make your arguments in your own words and they obey the rules laid out at the start.

SkyxDB wrote:Is this topic hurting anyelse's brain? I'm willing to admit that both sides make good points, but I'm just still just even more confused. No offense to anyone, but I think stuff like this is the reason why I'm Agnostic.

The lack of sleep and hardcore study and work in between is certainly making my head hurt. Caffeine seems to help though.

**spots caffeine**

OMNOMNOMNOMNOM!

Ahem, where was I?

artemis-lady-warrior wrote:Let me tell you... some of those posters( On the zelda forum) were rude as well as retarded. I'd say something to them and they'd be like. "Show me proof" so I gave them poof and they told me not to take the word of someone else.
So I'm like to them. 'What do you want me to do then? "
and they're like. "show me proof but don't post anything from other people or your science book"
and yet... THEY WERE DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY TOLD ME NOT TO DO!
I was thinking. "what I'm not allowed to post proof that I've found supporting my theory but YOU can post everything supporting yours that is quoted and written down by other people?"
I was arguing with a bunch of rude hypocrites and they drove me mad!

This kind of topic is extremely sensitive to me because of all those rude and nasty posters on the forum. Plus they acted all high and mighty. ugh..

Hypocrisy will doom us all, mark my words. There are times when I truly do feel the urge to stick my hand through the screen and smack people in the face for their hypocrisy.

I assure you that will not happen here. You are free to post supporting evidence for your arguments if you feel that proof is needed to back up your claims provided their in line with the rules and I encourage you to do so. If there's anything I can do to put your mind at ease that this debate will not become a repeat of that bad experience, let me know.

artemis-lady-warrior wrote:I know I don't want to gain any enemies. This is why I wanted the topic to be dropped before. I hate topics like this to be honest because it's annoying and I hate when my temper gets the best of me. Oh man... I SO want to get rid of what I had said........ I AM SO SORRY FOR LOSING MY COOL!

Ugh.... I can be such a brat sometimes.

It's okay, it's understandable that tempers can fly off the handle a bit. If you wish to step out of the debate, either permanently or temporarily to cool off, I, nor anyone else for that matter, would think any less of you.

I'd prefer you remained however, as I am enjoying the debate thus far despite the loss of sleep

As to the rest, I'll get onto that after work tonight.

Sorry to butt in, seeing as I have taken no part in this whatsoever, but hasn't this veered ever-so-slightly off-topic? I mean, I saw no mention of BW anywhere!

Although I must say, I had a feeling this might be a 'hot topic' as religion has always been a tricky and sensitive issue. I'm having a flashback of a similar discussion on this site about a year or so back. Gah!

I have nothing to add, really, I just thought I'd....intervene....JUST IN CASE. Don't hate me...

Your new point is also refuted. Scientists have taught apes to read and recognise symbols and how to communicate via lexigrams. Lexigrams are symbols that represent words, the language used is an artificial one called Yerkish and was developed in the mid 70's.

Source: Source PDF

so monkeys learn to recognize and remember what symbols looks like. It doesn't mean they can read real words.

sorry. I just had to comment on it because it really doesn't help. They don't know what the word means, do they? Can they actually find some way to tell you what these words mean?
I just looked up Lexigram. It's "a symbol that represents a word but is not necessarily indicative of the object referenced by the word".

XD That should tell ya something right there.

This still leaves the question of the flood however. If as the bible states the world was flooded so that even the highest of all mountains on earth were covered with water, where then did this water go?

I'm not sure where all that water went. Some of it probably went back under the ground. I mean when you dig a well you find water, even in deserts. and some of it evaporated.

You know what. I'm currently reading an article in Answers magazine about this. When I'm done reading this I'll be able to answer this question better.

Explain to me how creationism is logical. There is no way to logically prove that god exists, just as there is no way to logically prove that god does NOT exist.

Since god can neither be proven to exist or not exist, it falls to faith (or lack thereof) to fill this uncertain void with certainty.

Logic, as defined by the dictionary has no bearing on faith. Logic comprises science, reason, methodology, but not faith.

Faith is illogical, just as humans are illogical, just as You or I am illogical.

There is a science to evolution. There is a method to evolution. There is reason behind evolution.

Creationism is none of these things, because Creationism requires faith.

No offense but I know there is no way to prove he does or does not exist but saying there is no reason behind creation and that it is illogical is going a bit too far. There are plenty of scientists who study creation and are very logical in their arguments. I would seriously suggest getting a copy of Answers magazine or something so you can read things from the other point of view. I've read plenty of things about evolution and now I'm reading stuff about Creation.
There are a lot perfectly rational and logical arguments about it. Plus they're not biased about their answers and just like any other science magazine they use quotes from other sources (Faithbased and not faith based) and give the original writer the credit. XD

and no I'm not trying to force you to read the magazine. I'm just making a suggestion.

Jgana wrote:

Sorry to butt in, seeing as I have taken no part in this whatsoever, but hasn't this veered ever-so-slightly off-topic? I mean, I saw no mention of BW anywhere!

Yeah Jag does make a good point there. This was orignally suppose to be about biblical references in Beast Wars, and in yet this somehow turned into a religious debate.

I think that was Wonko's fault, SkyxDB. but I could be wrong. I think I am wrong....

Evolution is also faith-based. You cannot prove evolution. Evolution is a religion of itself, the religion that worships chance and mutations, without being able to prove they exist. Public schools say that they have eliminated religion, but they are actually teaching one. Both creationism and evolution are religions, and both recquire some ammount of faith.

Disposing of bias predilectiosn, which of these sounds better to you? Which sounds better to you, as an individual person, despite what you might call science:

A. The only things that are true can be proved scientifically.
B. If things like love and joy are real but can't be proved, then why can't there by a God who can't be proved?

A. The stories in the Bible just happened to spread over all cultures, and the Bible just happened to be protected for centuries.
B. The events in the Bible are true and that is why so many cultures have similar tales. The Bible is protected by God and that's how it has managed to survive so long.

A. Organisms, even down past the subatomic particles, are uncontrolled and completely held together by chance.
B. An intelligent mind lives in all things, controlling everything, down to subatomic partcuiles and onto infinity.

I think the real reason behind evolution is that, whether or not we're aware of it, all humans are rebellious. We don't want there to be a Creator, because if there is, then he must be greater than us.

SkyxDB wrote:
Yeah Jag does make a good point there. This was orignally suppose to be about biblical references in Beast Wars, and in yet this somehow turned into a religious debate.

We talked about that somewhere in page 2, I think, about NOT having a religious debate. Then Razor One demanded that the Bible was fake and I demanded otherwise, and things went on from there. This is such an interesting topic I'd be sad if it were locked.

Back to Beast Wars, this is not exactly a Biblical allusion but it is generally a Christain-type thing:

Have you ever noticed that the Predacons are like Americans today? Not all of them are terrorsits--but their programming demands that they always follow their own ambitions, no matter how selfish. They are all about competion. Give me one recent movie or book that doesn't have some crap about "always follow your heart!"

The Maximals, however, rebel against everything that makes sense. They are warriors, but they fight to protect things they love. They are deep believers in love and companionship, and their goal is peace, not power. That's how I, and many other Christains, want to be remembered.

Not that it's easy. Our physical makeup makes it impossible not to be selfish. I am very selfish most of the time (but you guys know that by now! ) That's why we've got to have somebody vouching for us...

artemis-lady-warrior wrote:I think that was Wonko's fault, SkyxDB. but I could be wrong. I think I am wrong....

In the odest way I knew someone was going to say I caused this to happen...

Yeah I started it....Artemis deepened it,Razor One went deeper,and I caused it to go super off topic into the 'Debate of all Debates'


Yeah,I started it.

7Knight-Wolf wrote:Have you ever noticed that the Predacons are like Americans today? Not all of them are terrorsits--but their programming demands that they always follow their own ambitions, no matter how selfish. They are all about competion. Give me one recent movie or book that doesn't have some crap about "always follow your heart!"

The Maximals, however, rebel against everything that makes sense. They are warriors, but they fight to protect things they love. They are deep believers in love and companionship, and their goal is peace, not power. That's how I, and many other Christains, want to be remembered.

Oh, dear. Now I just have to say something. You can't really compare real people to CARTOON characters. They've been deliberately cartoonised to show the difference between right and wrong, good and evil etc.

AND you really shouldn't make sweeping generalisations like that. As a whole, and a global opinion of Americans, yes, it seems that way. But lets face it, how many purple guys with rubber ducks and ambitions for global domination are you going to meet walking around Tampa Bay? If I was American, I'd probably object to how they are represented in the media and cartoons. Both mediums are just complete opposing juxtapositions. Not to mention, I'm British, and I resent the entire nation being seen as cockney-speaking, fish-and-chip-eating, tea drinking limeys. Though I'm quite partial to the last two Scottish cod, YUM.

I'm trying my very best to keep on topic.....how am I doing? *gah*

Actually, it's the same with many cartoons. At least, the older ones. Mostly. "I'm going to rule the world, MWAHAHAHAAAA!" I've only ever met one lunatic who said that, and she's my best friend. XD (In jest, btw)

Okay, so I'm not actually on topic, technically, but I don't know much about the Bible to comment poignantly. Ahem. I wasn't raised like that. I'm either Aethiest or Agnostic, but I can never remember the difference between the two But thankfully, I was raised in a multicultural society and have absolutely no problem with anyone's choice of religion.

....so yeah, this is a bit of an iffy topic for me, input-wise *durrrr*






p.s. I DO like tea, and fish and chips. But I don't speak cockney. My dad would disown me! XD

Janga let me say this. Since I'm an American I don't appreciate how American's are portrayed in the media. While SOME of us act like morons and some of us make and participate stupid reality shows *kicks Survivor and Big Brother around for an hour* we're not ALL like that.
Course none of us are Pure american. My roots can be traced back to like five countries. O.o France, Germany, Scotland/Ireland, and Wales.
I happen to like the British accents. They're cool sounding.

artemis-lady-warrior wrote:Janga let me say this. Since I'm an American I don't appreciate how American's are portrayed in the media. While SOME of us act like morons and some of us make and participate stupid reality shows *kicks Survivor and Big Brother around for an hour* we're not ALL like that.
Course none of us are Pure american. My roots can be traced back to like five countries. O.o France, Germany, Scotland/Ireland, and Wales.
I happen to like the British accents. They're cool sounding.

Can't argue with that.

Step aside with our debate for a while:Americans are not the only ones to be portrayed badly in the media.Canadians have that curse as well,trying to be as 'popular' as America,and,by God I remember back then Americans portrayed us as dwellers of the snow,who have moose all around the corner and Mounties are the superheroes....sure,that was fine in the thirties,but not now....Canada seems to slip from being best country to third or fourth,behind in technological advancement,being one of the first to protect from global warming(And failing at it)....and mainly,having the most retarded,corrupted,and incompetent politicians this year(You should see the election we just had last week)

But in the media we seem to be slow talking white people with tuques on our heads........odd,considering that I live in a multicultural city....well....used to.

Wonko, let's keep this on topic. You've posted twice off-topic in the last three pages or so. If you need to comment on something that someone said and it's off-topic, please PM them.

Okay. So.

So much has been written since I last posted that I’m just going to go through, take notes, and comment on a few of the things and certainly not on all the posts.

Prelude: Atheism doesn’t believe in God, and Agnostic believes quite a few things about God, but not that he was resurrected. If I’m wrong on that, please correct me, because that’s my understanding of Agnostic beliefs.

To start off, there was the comment that someone saw that portion of scripture I used to prove the bible’s authenticity as being noted that it wasn’t part of the original scriptures. There are two main texts that the New Testament is taken from. The Textus Receptus and then texts from Alexandria. Until the 1800s, the New Testament text that had been exclusively used was the Textus Receptus and in 1525, Erasmus compiled the first Greek text using the Textus Receptus, which was from Byzantium. That later became translated into Latin, or the Latin Vulgate, but when the King James version of the Bible was translated (and yes, Shakespeare was one of the translators of Psalms), they used the Textus Receptus of the New Testament.

However, there were other texts found in 1853 in Alexandrian libraries that had been unearthed. Scholars Wescott and Hort compiled them starting in that date, ended 28 years later. The texts they used were the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniaticus. They not only took from early Gnostic teaching, which denied that Jesus Christ actually died, or that he did die and had a physical, real resurrection. Not only did they take from there, but at the same time, they made over 8,000 changes to the traditional Greek. I find that more than a little scary, don’t you?

The bibles that use the Wescott and Hort translation of the New Testament claim that portions of the Bible aren’t in the “oldest and best” texts are usually the newest Bibles, such as the NIV, NASB, et cetera. And something else: These two were atheists. They didn’t believe in God, but they were translating and compiling the Bible. As an individual who loves authenticity, not even speaking as a Christian, that really makes my blood run cold. I’m not asking you to believe me on this. If you want to see this for yourself, open up a King James Version, or a New King James Version, open it up and compare it with the NIV or any new Bible. They deleted and/or changed the following scriptures: Mathew 6:9-13, 18:11, 25:13; Mark 1:1, 2:17, 9:4, 11:26; Colossians 1:16-17; Acts 8:37; 1 Peter 4:1; Ephesians 3:9; Revelation 11:17; Luke 2:33, 4:4; John 3:15.

As for the flood:

Water exists in three forms, as we all know. After the flood, it did three things: It froze at the poles, evaporated into the air to become the atmosphere that we now are living under, and it went back underground. I say “back,” because the Bible says in Genesis 7:11 “. . . the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.” That’s another part of the Creation story: The atmosphere itself had been different, and it supported giants, and animals of great size and shape . . . aka, Dinosaurs, which means that man and dinosaurs co-existed. There’s fossil evidence at the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose in Texas. I can’t get into details about this because I honestly can’t recall everything my teacher said. It’s required that we take the Creation Science class for first year at my school. It’s a great class, explains a lot of myth away. (Heck, my school bookstore even sells books that the professor wrote.)

Anyway, the waters receded back to where they came from. That means under the ground and back into the atmosphere, for the main part. (ref: Genesis 8:3)

Also, every single culture, without one exception, has record of a “great flood.” Bar none. Aztecs, Egyptians, Chinese, West Indian, Native American, many of the African tribes and nations, and so on. Shouldn’t that tell you something? And whoever claimed that it had only been a “localized” flood, could you please find me a civilization that doesn’t have a Great Flood story, backed up with evidence?

Hey, Razor! My turn!

NEXT! (lol)

7Knight-Wolf:
Allah is a demanding and I think the word is capricious god. I’m studying the religion of Islam from a former Muslim right now as an elective, and it’s a really, really interesting course.

The differences between the Muslim Allah and the Judeo-Christian Jehovah are vast and irrefutable. Allah demands those who adhere to his will to die for him; Jesus died for us so that we wouldn’t have to go to hell, and God often spared His people. Allah weighs your good and bad deeds on a scale when you die, and if your good outweighs the bad, even then he might just end up saying, “I don’t feel like letting you in,” and throw you into hell anyway; Jesus affirms us a non-negotiable ticket into heaven so long as we believe in him and try to keep from sinning.

Next . . .

Razor:
Why do I believe that I didn’t evolve from an ape?

Because I have more respect for my Creator to have formed us in His image. This also ties into the “whole mind” partial-debate that went on in the forums. If we have evolved from apes, then why do we only have thick hair on certain areas of our bodies, unlike apes who have thick hair on the majority of their bodies? We can’t evolve out of that, can we? Furthermore, I don’t even hesitate to stick with my view that when Adam and Eve were chased out of the Garden of Eden, sin caused their bodies and minds to decay. People who are prodigies, and those with autism and some of the other mental “afflictions” are truly gifted with insight that the “normal” humans don’t have. Have you ever noticed a child with Down’s Syndrome see the bright side of a situation, something good that will happen that we, ourselves, aren’t able to see because of grief or turmoil? God works with and through those people who don’t, can’t, or won’t shut Him out of their minds.

I’ll leave you that to think upon.

Nextie-poo . . .

Artemis!
Everything was always connected in the beginning! The Bible says so! (that’s kinda up there to annoy people . . . totally having fun, please, people . . . I’m just having fun!) BUT. Scripture says in Genesis 10:25 “. . . the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided.” I so would have loved to have been there and seen the reactions on people’s faces when the continents started to run away from each other. *chuckles* seriously, that would have been a Kodak moment.

Also, since the Bible records the continents moving AFTER the flood, don’t you think that Mount Everest could have been slapped up during that shifting? Because if the earth was all one continent, that means that there would only be hills and foothills, nothing absolutely crazily huge like the highest points of the earth. Even geologists and evolutionists will agree that large mountain ranges happen when two tectonic plates slap up against each other with force.

Next-indeedy!

For Everyone:
Carbon-dating issue: Just a thought, but the material that’s around the former plant material is tested, right? They don’t test the actual material, because of archaeological worth. Sooo, what’s the carbon-dating on the dirt outside on your front lawn? And what’s that saying about being “older than dirt”? Why don’t we date the material itself, and take the first answer that the machine gives us?

How many times do you carbon-date the rock around a fossil before you’re satisfied with the date?

And why is radio-carbon dating the end-all argument that a lot of people give? Is the thought that a Creator out there just so happens to really make them angry that they’re not in charge of the past, or that the “illogical behavior” of the Creator in question happens to have a very logical answer that you don’t want to hear?

Just food for thought.

Neeeeext!

. . .

Just kidding. I hit the end of the thread. Hehehe . . .

And as always, PM me with questions or your anger at anything I've said. Let’s keep this thread as emotionally-level as possible. I say “as possible” because no matter what, I do understand that a lot of what people say (including myself), is hard to digest and often offensive to someone’s belief system. It’s okay to get angry and feel anger about a lot of what’s going on, and that’s natural and human of you. One great thing to do is to take a deep breath, go read a fanfic or write something out, and reply later, once your emotions have cooled and your mind has worked out why you were angry in the first place. I’m not pointing fingers, because then I’d have to point first of all to myself as guilty for anger-posting. But it’s just general advice that you can find anywhere. Love you, people! C’mon and debate with me! I want to hear your side!

Can't argue with that. Step aside with our debate for a while:Americans are not the only ones to be portrayed badly in the media.Canadians have that curse as well,trying to be as 'popular' as America,and,by God I remember back then Americans portrayed us as dwellers of the snow,who have moose all around the corner and Mounties are the superheroes....sure,that was fine in the thirties,but not now....Canada seems to slip from being best country to third or fourth,behind in technological advancement,being one of the first to protect from global warming(And failing at it)....and mainly,having the most retarded,corrupted,and incompetent politicians this year(You should see the election we just had last week)

But in the media we seem to be slow talking white people with tuques on our heads........odd,considering that I live in a multicultural city....well....used to.

lol. I never thought of canadians like that. I just always thought you all liked Hockey.
lol moose! moose are in alaska too, I think. I'm not sure cuz I don't live there. BTW, wonko, how is canada?

O.O I'm sorry sinead. I wasn't aware you had posted.

Artemis!
Everything was always connected in the beginning! The Bible says so! (that’s kinda up there to annoy people . . . totally having fun, please, people . . . I’m just having fun!) BUT. Scripture says in Genesis 10:25 “. . . the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided.” I so would have loved to have been there and seen the reactions on people’s faces when the continents started to run away from each other. *chuckles* seriously, that would have been a Kodak moment.

Also, since the Bible records the continents moving AFTER the flood, don’t you think that Mount Everest could have been slapped up during that shifting? Because if the earth was all one continent, that means that there would only be hills and foothills, nothing absolutely crazily huge like the highest points of the earth. Even geologists and evolutionists will agree that large mountain ranges happen when two tectonic plates slap up against each other with force.

Sinead. I'm currently reading an article about this in Answers magazine and it's very interesting. You're right about plates smacking together creating mountains because it's mentioned in there as well.
It also shows a picture of what the earth might have looked like before the flood. Some landmass called Rodinia.
Rodinia supposedly broke up during the flood then went back together, forming Pangaea. I'm still reading the article so.. I'll get back to you.