Morals, Right vs Wrong, Role Models, Ethics, Scandals, Drugs

[BobraFCD]

Originally posted by KSig RC
did it predict me stealing your tinfoil hat? because that's what happens next

As a matter of fact, it does mention you twice in Proverbs 10:18 and Proverbs 19:1.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by BobraFCD
As a matter of fact, it does mention you twice in Proverbs 10:18 and Proverbs 19:1.

PROVERBS 10:18 - "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." (KJV)

PROVERBS 19:1 - "Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool."(KJV)

PRAGMATISM 9:31 - "Thinketh to thyself: in a book that containeth hundreds of thousands of characters, thinketh perhaps that one could 'proveth' that a sequence exists to 'representeth' anything they wanteth? Then simply runneth an nth-degree regression untileth a 'clean' function is foundeth, then publisheth it under the guise of matheth? this is knowneth as the Treachery of the DaVinci Code, and should be the bane of true believers everywhere." (RCV)

Post a cite of a reputable, major-university Biblical scholar who supports the 'code' as PROOF OF GOD (which is ludicrous - if man found the code, why couldn't he create it?), please.

[lovelyivy84]

CTFU!

*starting a slow clap*

Originally posted by KSig RC
PROVERBS 10:18 - "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." (KJV)

PROVERBS 19:1 - "Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool."(KJV)

PRAGMATISM 9:31 - "Thinketh to thyself: in a book that containeth hundreds of thousands of characters, thinketh perhaps that one could 'proveth' that a sequence exists to 'representeth' anything they wanteth? Then simply runneth an nth-degree regression untileth a 'clean' function is foundeth, then publisheth it under the guise of matheth? this is knowneth as the Treachery of the DaVinci Code, and should be the bane of true believers everywhere." (RCV)

Post a cite of a reputable, major-university Biblical scholar who supports the 'code' as PROOF OF GOD (which is ludicrous - if man found the code, why couldn't he create it?), please.

[BobraFCD]

Originally posted by KSig RC

Post a cite of a reputable, major-university Biblical scholar who supports the 'code' as PROOF OF GOD (which is ludicrous - if man found the code, why couldn't he create it?), please.

Are you suggesting that Moses knew Bill Clinton would be president and that the Kennedys would be assassinated? Yet it's in there in Hebrew. For the record, they used the text from the original scrolls and the Dead Sea scrolls, which were identical to the letter.

Here's what the book says:
The original experiment that proved the existence of the Bible Code was published in the scholarly journal, Statistical Science, a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (vol.9, no.3) in August 1994, pp. 429-438.

The journal editor, Robert E. Krass of Carnegie Mellon University stated in a prefatory note:"Our referees were baffled: their prior beliefs made them think the Book of Genesis could not possible contain meaningful references to modern-day individuals, yet when the authors carried out additional analyses and checks, the effects persisited.

In the years since the Rips-Witztum-Rosenberg paper was published, no one has submitted a rebuttal to the math journal.


If you're so sure man created it the code, read the book and submit a scientific rebuttal that would be acceptable to the Institute.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by BobraFCD
Are you suggesting that Moses knew Bill Clinton would be president and that the Kennedys would be assassinated? Yet it's in there in Hebrew. For the record, they used the text from the original scrolls and the Dead Sea scrolls, which were identical to the letter.

Here's what the book says:
The original experiment that proved the existence of the Bible Code was published in the scholarly journal, Statistical Science, a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (vol.9, no.3) in August 1994, pp. 429-438.

The journal editor, Robert E. Krass of Carnegie Mellon University stated in a prefatory note:"Our referees were baffled: their prior beliefs made them think the Book of Genesis could not possible contain meaningful references to modern-day individuals, yet when the authors carried out additional analyses and checks, the effects persisited.

In the years since the Rips-Witztum-Rosenberg paper was published, no one has submitted a rebuttal to the math journal.


If you're so sure man created it the code, read the book and submit a scientific rebuttal that would be acceptable to the Institute.

A REFUTATION of the witztum, rips, rosenburg experiment was printed in the same frigging journal in may of 99.

AND HERE'S A LINK TO IT!

Is that thorough enough? I can go ahead and repeat their work if you'd like me to submit my own rebuttal - but why reinvent the wheel? The WRR theories have been decimated, and Drosnan's book has been dismissed as drivel by the scientific, intellectual, AND religious communities.

But you can believe whatever you want, it's cool with me. Just follow the advice of KRS-1: "Do your homework."

RC

[BobraFCD]

You asked for citation and I gave it to you-word for word from the book itself which was written in 1997.

The scientists you cite didn't support the consistency of the code, but they didn't deny what Drosnin wrote and found either. If you want to go tit for tat, there are many scientists, language and culture experts who have supported the book.

I compared their specific findings to an actual Hebrew-written Torah. Everything they showed in the book was in the Torah.

But thank God we live in America where you have the choice whether or not to believe in God.

I respect your choice, even though you chose to belittle mine with your little flippant remark about tinfoil hats.

Have a blessed day.

[The Grapist]

BobraFCD just wants to love!

Why won't you all let BobraFCD love?

[cash78mere]

classic. a truly perfect post.

Originally posted by KSig RC
PROVERBS 10:18 - "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." (KJV)

PROVERBS 19:1 - "Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool."(KJV)

PRAGMATISM 9:31 - "Thinketh to thyself: in a book that containeth hundreds of thousands of characters, thinketh perhaps that one could 'proveth' that a sequence exists to 'representeth' anything they wanteth? Then simply runneth an nth-degree regression untileth a 'clean' function is foundeth, then publisheth it under the guise of matheth? this is knowneth as the Treachery of the DaVinci Code, and should be the bane of true believers everywhere." (RCV)

Post a cite of a reputable, major-university Biblical scholar who supports the 'code' as PROOF OF GOD (which is ludicrous - if man found the code, why couldn't he create it?), please.

[Imthachamp]

i wasted 3 minutes reading this stupid post.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by BobraFCD
You asked for citation and I gave it to you-word for word from the book itself which was written in 1997.

The scientists you cite didn't support the consistency of the code, but they didn't deny what Drosnin wrote and found either. If you want to go tit for tat, there are many scientists, language and culture experts who have supported the book.

I compared their specific findings to an actual Hebrew-written Torah. Everything they showed in the book was in the Torah.

But thank God we live in America where you have the choice whether or not to believe in God.

I respect your choice, even though you chose to belittle mine with your little flippant remark about tinfoil hats.

Have a blessed day.

No chance, babs - you claimed the work was without disproof. I showed a disproof of the work, FROM THE SAME PUBLICATION! You were wrong; suck it up like a big girl.

It has nothing to do with not believing in God - it's about not believing in unfounded works by mislead men.

Also, don't get all indignant about the tinfoil hat comments, when you rocked back with scripture insinuating that I'm an idiot. I think you may have aimed that at the wrong side of the table.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by KSig RC
A REFUTATION of the witztum, rips, rosenburg experiment was printed in the same frigging journal in may of 99.

AND HERE'S A LINK TO IT!

Is that thorough enough? I can go ahead and repeat their work if you'd like me to submit my own rebuttal - but why reinvent the wheel? The WRR theories have been decimated, and Drosnan's book has been dismissed as drivel by the scientific, intellectual, AND religious communities.

But you can believe whatever you want, it's cool with me. Just follow the advice of KRS-1: "Do your homework."

RC

I'm sorry, I have to step in and tell you to change that to KRS-ONE.

-Rudey
--Knowledge Reigns Supreme Over Nearly Everyone

[hoosier]

the New York Times reports:

Edward Greenwood IX was fired Jan. 30 from his job as an assistant in the city's lobbying office in Albany, not long after the mayor spied the game on his computer screen during a Jan. 4 visit to the state capital._._._.

Mr. Greenwood said that he had left the solitaire game on his computer while going to pick up tickets for the mayor and other city officials to attend the governor's annual address to the state. When he returned, Mr. Greenwood said, the mayor had arrived and was posing for pictures with other office workers.

Mr. Greenwood said that he asked for a picture with the mayor, too, and that was when Mr. Bloomberg went into his office and saw the solitaire game.

"I don't have any real animosity towards the guy," he said. "He's the boss, so if this is the way he wants it handled, there's nothing I can do about it. But am I happy about it? No."