Stosh

I never said one had to be restricted to just one area. But if there's a sales permit necessary in the neighborhood next door, either pay it or sell something that doesn't need a permit. I don't think any city requires kids to have a permit to mow someone else's lawn. I may be wrong though. Go a few extra blocks and start mowing lawns if that be what's necessary. Also I can't afford to go to Europe for a vacation so I have to scale back my personal program to fit the money I do have or can get, or raise money for a longer period of time to be able to afford it. I have control over that. Stosh

I have a tendency to look to history for certain patterns and generalities that might give evidence of what road we are currently following. People today aren't any different than they were "back then" whenever that was. The over-whelming bureaucracy of the Roman Empire wasn't a whole lot different than what we see today and it doesn't take a historical scholar to see where that got them. But just in the course of our own history: at one point certain peoples were dictated to by certain other elites and our Founding Fathers broke that chain and told King George where to stick it. They set up a government where that process could not happen here. Okay, I'm fine with that. However, they "compromised" the whole issue of slavery which took the sacrifice of 600,000 people to resolve. Not a shining moment in American history by any sense of the word. But there were others as well that were held "captive" until they were rounded up and put on reservations or exterminated. Again one can see when free people are engulfed by a "superior" class of well wishers. Again, not a pretty sight. Then in the early 20th century, rich capitalists took over and everyone owed their soul to the "company store". That got resolved through unionization, and the total collapse of the economy in 1929. Soup lines in America? Yep, could happen again. The next abuse of power had to be settled with the Equal Rights issue of the 60's. The dragon's head thought to be extinct 100 years earlier reared itself back up. Yet with yet another power grab by the government itself, we find ourselves once more into the fray. The entity which was supposed to protect us from such tyranny has tossed out the Founding Father's ideals and now we all owe our souls to the government's nanny program. Slavery in one form or another simply doesn't go way and the idea of equal rights for all once again takes it in the shorts. Cradle to grave government cannot work, it never has and has proven itself faulty every step of the way. But does that stop anyone? Nope. So once again, the people will fall prey to "the powers that be." Amidst that struggle a few have found the American Dream set forth by the Founding Fathers, but that was supposed to be for all peoples, not just the elite few. Now that the US Constitution is open to whatever interpretation seems to be in vogue at the time, the more we can see what was once an ideal as nothing more than a pipe dream. It's going to be painful when this over inflated balloon bursts into flames, but whatever comes from it will be just like any other civilization since day one having to start all over from scratch.... to build a bureaucracy that will do the same thing. Did the Sumaritans think it would happen to them?, How about the Greeks? Romans? British Empire? Naw, they all thought at the time they were invincible to such catastrophes, they had "evolved" into the perfect form of government. They were all going to reign for a thousand years.... Well one almost made it but it was pretty pathetic in the end. How are we going to end up? Handwriting's on the wall. Better take some time to read it. Stosh

It's getting more and more difficult to get legitimate truth out of anyone today. Inside The Belt has become such a snake pit of deception that I don't think they even know what's reality and what's not. This whole morass is going to make history as one of the worst we've had since say the American Civil War when they finally brought out the guns. Not that it couldn't happen again, God forbid! Stosh

I understand what you are trying to say and you and I will both be walking in dangerous territory. However, I would like to add, that regardless of whether or not the idiots were part of any LDS troop, they are and always will be idiots. I don't think it's fair to stereotype the whole LDS into the mix, even if the troops was LDS. The point that needs to be made that due to the process of chartering by any CO, if they do not follow the BSA program and are properly trained in that program, problems like this are going to happen with the same catastrophic conclusions. Just because one degenerate leader in a Catholic troop abuses a boy, doesn't mean all Catholic troops are to be drawn in under the microscope. If it's a Catholic troop and didn't follow YPT protocols and enforce them, then that particular troop CO can be held accountable. Same for any other troop regardless of the origin of the CO. However, a single incident doesn't run any red flags for me, but if over time, more and of this kind of thing came to light, AND a single CO type of organization was a common denominator, then the BSA might want to step in and review the relationship with that organization. Until then, it's an isolated incident involving 2 idiots, and that's as far as I would want to take it. I, too, apologize if my comments may have offended anyone. (except the two idiots, then if I stepped on their toes, I hope it hurt.) Stosh

People pose questions in a certain way on a survey so as to get the results they wish. Heck, I learned that 40 years ago in Psych class. They even taught us how to do it. But they also, at least back then, taught us how to do it correctly. A true scientific survey operates far differently than today's media "surveys". Question: Are all the political ailments of today a result of George W. Bush? (Yes/No) Question: Pick only one: The tenets of the Democratic Party The tenets of the Republican Party The leadership of the Democratic Party The leadership of the Republican Party Something else A true scientific survey deals with ideas and one's opinion of those ideas. Personal bashing is not a scientific survey in any sense of the definition. A good criteria of a scientific survey would be that everyone testing a certain hypothesis would garner pretty much the same results regardless of what group or individual was conducting the survey. +/- error would accommodate the slight variances. However, the wildly fluctuation between surveys confirms they are in no way scientific. Knowing this, I simply blow off the results as someone's propaganda agenda looking for some kind of credibility. (And seriously? It doesn't make one bit of difference who's promoting the agenda!) Uninformed listeners are generally unaware of this kind of pseudo-scientific deception. Oops, forgot to mention, they get around this deception by calling them polls and not surveys even though some toss in the +/- to give some kind of false credibility. Stosh

Kinda hard to respect a person who will never take responsibility for the job they've been given. If nothing is Obama's fault, then he hasn't really done anything on his job. Of course it's always good to have the media constantly spinning the faults, too. One scandal got Nixon out of office in a heartbeat, but Clinton and Obama get a pass on multiple scandals. Once one strips morality out of the mix and replaces it with whatever-goes mentality, we're in big trouble. Stosh

As I mentioned and as Barry referred to, it depends heavily on the maturity/beliefs of the adults. Are they willing to help the boys move from light grey to dark grey. I don't think it is a measurable status in any one troop, but a journey of which direction the troop is trying to head. With Barry's point, the real stickler may be the adults and not the boys and all the problems they have to face. It's one thing for them to take on more leadership and yet another to have the adults step back and let them. What is really sad is when the boy are struggling more with the adults than they are on developing a good program for themselves. I learned early on, that if given the opportunity, many youth will literally surprise you with what they are willing and wanting to do. Sounds like you are on the right path and best of luck with your efforts and be sure to congratulate the boys every positive step they make. Ignore most of the stumbles, they are expected and needed to grow. Don't tell them, but you can be a welcomed safety-net for them when they need it. But remember, when they end up in the net, they have to crawl back out and head up again on their own. The net only saves them, it doesn't correct the problem. That's up to them. Stosh

Oh, but doesn't the tenets of liberalism promotes the class warfare of Marxism? It is really irrelevant what the lower classes say as long as the party and it's ideology is pushed forward? By the way, the US Constitution, back when it was still relevant to both parties states just the opposite? The Founding Fathers put the US Constitution and Bill of Rights out there to prevent such an abuse of tyrannical powers? Yep. It explicitly states that the US government has no right to compete with private sector and state decided endeavors and that's exactly what it is trying to do. When the citizenry sees this and says NO, it's an answer those who would like to wield absolute power aren't willing to accept. It's really sad that one wouldn't know the sacrifice of 600,000 Americans off the top of their head. I know it's not on the agenda of the liberal party, but get real, that sacrifice liberated millions of Americans to be able to pursue the American Dream. I'm not crabbing because I can't keep black slaves, I'm ecstatic that the Republicans set the abuse straight! I really don't care what the color of the skin is, the president needs to do the job. Nothing more, nothing less. And drag out your legal dictionary. Do the research, Obama is NOT the first black president, he's the first mulatto president. mu·lat·to audio (m-lt, -lät, my-) KEY NOUN: pl. mu·lat·tos or mu·lat·toes A person having one white and one Black parent. See Usage Note at octoroon. A person of mixed white and Black ancestry. As with Merlyn, one can name call they wish, but it doesn't change the reality. No dialog allowed, simply fall into lock step and follow the agenda of the party. Sorry, I don't buy the program. It's a religious tenent I'm not interested in believing in. The Southern Democrat ideology was the basis for slavery, not the Republican abolitionist ideology which set them free. Can't play the race card, it doesn't apply. Try something else. Stosh

I wouldn't expect anything less. As I said, no dialog allowed. Like Creationism, Evolution is a religion and I'm the first to admit I have a solid understanding in what they promote as pseudo-science, but I'm the first to say I don't know the full extent of their teachings, but then I don't know the full extent of the teachings of Islam, Judaism, Hindi or Buddhism either. I can, however, show evidence of the results of their teachings if anyone is interested. Buyer beware and beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. I often wonder who coined these phrases and why they are so popular amongst the more savvy of the world. Stosh

One of the tenets of Darwinism is that humans have evolved into one species, Caucasian, Asian, Australian, and Negroid to name but a few, but all are sub-species to Caucasian. Although I'm Caucasian, somehow I have somehow slipped into the pig-ignorant subspecies? Sorry, your premise of everyone is less intelligent than you are just doesn't carry any scientific proof except in your pseudo-science world created out of the mind of an anti-Christian theologian trying to give some sort of credibility to their beliefs of racism, social order and a number of other tenets that run directly contrary to Christian tenets, especially those which are reflected in the US Constitution. All men are created equal except for those who are pig-ignorant and thus can be discounted. In the humanistic atheistic world in which you seem to subscribe, there are the enlightened gods such as you and then there's everyone else who must be forced to bow to them or be discredited and cast aside as irrelevant and pig-ignorant. Some of Darwin's disciples even carried this one step further, and promoted extermination. And one doesn't have to go very far to see this theological ideology gone awry. Open dialog is not permitted. Sorry, the US Constitution doesn't work for you, until it goes away, I'm sticking with it. The theory of evolution is not scientific, but by claiming it is, it has allowed social Darwinism to become the religion of the land and thus the Negroes can be slaves (Southern Democrats) and Manifest Destiny which mandated "the only good Indian is a dead Indian." I do believe it was the Republicans that came out of the pages of history at just the right time, (Lincoln was the party's first presidential candidate) to bring an end to such bigoted beliefs. One puny experiment with miniscule random results doesn't give one iota of credibility to the movement. One can remain adamant in their messianic complex and live their lives in the fog of their folly, or they can participate in the reality of the real world. Like any religion, it remains a personal choice. Stosh

One test, one strain of E. Coli, one mutation out of how many thousands? And there were 20 other mutations that produced negative results. And you base the complex nature of today's world on that as supporting evidence? I could run one test and come to yet another conclusion, but I'm not going to waste that much time on something to get infanticimal random results to prove a non-scientific theorem. According to the study, there are 20 times more chances for the case of devolution instead. 15 years of grasping at straws is not scientific proof. You really got to do a lot better than that study to "prove" the existence of evolution. Like I said, people have just as much proof of creationism as you do evolution. Just store it away in the back of your mind for future reference. Darwin was a trained theologian, not a student of the scientific world. Evolution is based in religion, not science. Thus like creationism, neither can be proved scientifically. Oh, and Darwin developed heavily into the atheistic beliefs and developed his evolution principles more on anti-Christian concepts, than anything scientific. Do your homework. Stosh

JoeBob, Get serious. It is common knowledge that every evil in the world is Bush's fault. His legacy of evil has been effective that even 5 years later, the administration hasn't made a dent. His reign of terror was so effective that even today, nothing can be done to fix it and probably will take another 3 years and probably another 8 after that, and then another 8 to start getting things back to normal. Even after all these years, people speak of Regan as if he was a god. It's tough to deal with such distractions. Every now and then one of these Republicans gets in office and it sets the liberal agenda back 20 years. It's awful! Stosh

The amount of money raised is directly proportional to the effort put into it. This is one of the basic tenets of business. Either I set up a trap or I go out and beat the bushes. Everyone needs to decide how they are going to go about that. The second tenet to consider is: Know your market. If one lives in an affluent community, maybe high-end popcorn is the ticket. But in a different neighborhood, those dynamics just aren't going to work. Get out there and market the neighborhoods. Find out what they want and then get it to them. Elderly neighborhood? How's about some snow shoveling, leaf raking, lawn mowing. Older homes may need winter storms put on. Maybe someone needs their house winterized. A 2 day job for them could be done in a couple of hours with enough hands on deck. Shopping for the shut ins? Sure, why not. Oh, but that takes time, effort, and a major commitment. Yes it does. But do you want the money or not? Maybe it's time to seek out something more than the low-hanging fruit. People are willing to pay for things that are necessary for them. Get off the sofa and out of the parlor and find out what that is and get it for them. It's a fundraiser for you, but it's a service project for them. Stosh

Local CO's are autonomous and can decide whatever they want when it comes to the membership of their troops. If BSA wishes to pull their charter, fine, but that slippery slope is not something they are not willing to do. Never kill your Golden Goose. In order to quiet a few distractors, BSA has chosen to cave and thus angered a whole new base of distractors which is in fact larger than the first. Should be interesting next few years in the BSA. One can't sell their soul to the Devil without paying some price along the way. Stosh

That argument only holds true if it's not your ox getting gored. Stosh

Hmmmm, sounds like something the Dems would do... Oh, wait, they did and 600,000 Americans perished. Your argument is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. Just remember, it was Darwinism that coined the phrase "survival of the fittest". This is Darwinism in action. Only those who really don't need medical insurance in the first place will survive, the rest are simply not fit to survive in this world. Stosh

So I assume that no evidence/proof is going to be offered up for the false "science" of evolution? However, one can make the validated premise that evolution is nothing more than attempts by anti-Christians to give false validation to a branch of pseudo-science that does nothing more than create a second "creation" theory based on humanism, pantheism and a dozen other ism's to attack the principles of Christian issues. Creationism and Evolution are both simply faith/belief system based and have no credibility in the world of science. Apples and oranges. The debate rages on and will do so for all eternity. One cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, no matter how much one tries. Do the research, it is quite interesting for those who do. Stosh

They ARE distinct. You are being sloppy with terminology. Definition of Proof: The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true. The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions. A statement or argument used in such a validation. Convincing or persuasive demonstration: was asked for proof of his identity; an employment history that was proof of her dependability. The state of being convinced or persuaded by consideration of evidence. Determination of the quality of something by testing; trial: put one's beliefs to the proof. Law The result or effect of evidence; the establishment or denial of a fact by evidence. The alcoholic strength of a liquor, expressed by a number that is twice the percentage by volume of alcohol present. Printing A trial sheet of printed material that is made to be checked and corrected. Also called proof sheet. A trial impression of a plate, stone, or block taken at any of various stages in engraving. A trial photographic print. Any of a limited number of newly minted coins or medals struck as specimens and for collectors from a new die on a polished planchet. Archaic Proven impenetrability: "I was clothed in Armor of proof" (John Bunyan). American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language I can cite other references 'til the cows come home and it probably won't change your beliefs or agenda.

Gravity is currently provable, just drop a brick on your foot and it will prove itself out. No, that's not "proof", that's evidence. - By definition it's one-in-the-same. Trying to draw some distinction that doesn't exist is really not all that helpful. The brick falling is evidence, but that doesn't even show that the mass of the earth is involved at all. - And evidence of the existing world doesn't show that creationism didn't create it either. So again, the argument isn't very useful. By the way, I've answered your questions, but you haven't answered mine -- how do you explain one strain of e. coli gaining the ability to metabolize citric acid? As a mutant deviation of primordial pond scum, I'm really not well versed enough to ponder the mysteries and myths of the world. Stosh

: Gravity is currently provable, just drop a brick on your foot and it will prove itself out. Is it measurable? Yep, is it repeatable? Yep, but I wouldn't suggest it. How old is the Earth? Take a guess. Yep, your right. Guess again, yep, you're right. Try it again, yep, you're right. There's no way of proving it. So you're guess is just as good as the next guy's. Now if you want to go down to the mat on your opinion, fine, but it doesn't prove anything. Stosh

Had they not chiseled the faces into Mt. Rushmore and painted them instead it would have been graffiti. Of course putting a highway through a National Battlefield site is always a good thing. Stosh

Screwing up is a human trait that some take to extremes. If I do it, no big deal, but when governments or businesses do it, it's going to leave a mark someplace. Stosh

Basement, Maybe you'll have some answers for me. Adaptation to environment isn't always a clear indicator of change. Just because it's cold outside and I put a coat on doesn't mean I have adapted to the change in environment. No, when it's cold, my body adjusts within certain ranges. My blood thickens and I consume more energy in the cold, etc. I also sweat more when it's warm. I do not evolve to adjust to these changing environments, i just adapt or die. We have tons of species that fit that bill as being unable to adapt, even over supposedly billions of years to do so. Healthy species that simply en mass disappeared because they couldn't adapt. That doesn't explain how thousands of others did survive. Unique species of mosquitoes? Well, we have one from 46 million years ago fossilized to compare it to. A comparison of one example doesn't mean there weren't multiple species of mosquitoes 46 million years ago. It's this kind of jump to conclusion to support evolution that keeps me skeptical to the whole notion. If we can do that with one mosquito, why am I to believe we don't do it regularly with other issues. We have tons of "evidence" that supports the issue of evolution, but we also have the same amount of "evidence" that supports creationism, for example, or any other conclusion that we start with as an agenda to prove. When we look at pure scientific evidence/proof it is woefully lacking when it comes to providing us with unbiased, real answers. Notice I stick to the subject and don't ridicule to pose my questions or to justify my beliefs. Stosh

o you are assuming the "evidence" provided is correct? You might not have noticed all the cites. - Citing bogus references doesn't display proof any kind. But that's okay, a lot of evolution "science" is based on assumptions. As well as that round-earth "science" and thermodynamic "science" (which does not contradict evolution, by the way). - Thermodynamic "science" is only a theory, but it supports the discussion as well as any other theory including evolution. So you have no answer other than personal ridicule? You missed my answers? Look, I HAVE been replying to your ignorant questions. I've also been pointing out that your questions are ignorant. If that hurts your widdle feelings, that's too bad. - back to personal attacks. I hope you aren't a school teacher, your students wouldn't learn a thing under that assumption. Of course it's easy to compare apples to oranges. Natural laws vs. speculative pseudo-science. Works for me too. Evolution is standard science, your willful ignorance notwithstanding. If you want pseudo-science, I'm sure creationism fits the bill. - Just as much "evidence" for creationism as there is for evolution... Of course that isn't provable, just like any other evolutionary "evidence". So observed evolution doesn't count now? - So where's the scientific proof? Observation and random hypothesis doesn't fall under the accepted definition of scientific method. Evolutionary theory assumes the betterment of species over time. Nope. That just shows you don't know what evolution is. You ought to at least learn about something before commenting about it. - I've been a student of evolutionary "science" for years and I'm still waiting for any real scientific method proof of its validity. Like any scientific theory vs. scientific law One's measurable, repeatable and will always remain the same. Guess which one that applies to. Thermodynamics and evolution are both scientific theories, and thermo does not contradict evolution. - It doesn't contradict a lot of things, doesn't make it valid or invalid. Looking for that evidence. So far no evidence, but as an inquisitive person, I'll keep looking. No, you are studiously ignoring evidence. That's what keeps you ignorant. - No, I'm just waiting for proof. Until then I'll just settle for the random speculation posing as valid science. Again, the decline of species is far more evident than that of the incline of species. I was just pointing out the obvious. No, you were just babbling. - It would be refreshing to stick to the topic instead of simply redundantly attacking others. Beginning to sound a bit like Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtain. Of course we have no idea what the % is, but one can "assume" (something that people often are inclined to do) there is more evidence against evolution than for it. No, evolution has been observed. You've come up with no evidence against it. Thermo isn't against it, extinctions certianly aren't evidence against it. I don't have an objection to evolution, I just don't see it as any valid form of science to explain anything. Then explain this, not using evolution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escheri...ion_experiment Like Wikipedia is the be-all, end-all source of scientific validity? Simply put? Yes, tens of thousands of people can be duped by the "theory" and it happens over and over again with predictable certainty. That evidence of it's potential is widely known, but it doesn't evolve, it simply stays the same as the last time. So explain the above evolution experiment. - 4.6 billion years of "evolution" summed up in a "long-term" experiment conducted over 15 years, and all it proves is mutation is possible if genetically engineered. And dealing with E. Coli bacteria vs. humans? Purely speculative of course, but maybe humanoids are more like mosquitoes and don't mutate. Of course, if I'm going to go with the mutation theory, we're back to primordial pond scum basis for humanity. Oh, but of course there's a reason for it. I am fully aware of it. What's the reason? - Why in the world would you be interested, seeing how you have all the answers anyway? - Riddle me this. How does anyone know that the mosquito fossil is 46 million years old? And somehow we're supposed to accept this as fact.

Did you even bother to read your "evidence"? I've read through some of talkorigins.org before, yes, and I was around for the original talk.origins on usenet. So you are assuming the "evidence" provided is correct? But that's okay, a lot of evolution "science" is based on assumptions. And by the way, you haven't addressed my questions either. Your questions are about on par with "If the earth is round, why don't the people on the bottom fall off?" So you have no answer other than personal ridicule? Of course it's easy to compare apples to oranges. Natural laws vs. speculative pseudo-science. Works for me too. Why hasn't the mosquito "evolved"???? On what basis do you say it hasn't? It isn't possible to check if a fossil mosquito can interbreed with a living mosquito (which is typically how living species are divided). Of course that isn't provable, just like any other evolutionary "evidence". One would think that after 46 million years there should be some change... And on what basis do you say there "should" be some change? Do you even know how evolution works? Why no, you don't. Evolutionary theory assumes the betterment of species over time. So, with the lack of such evidence, let's attack yet once again. Nope, the theory is just a guess at best No, it isn't. Like any scientific theory, it's a model of how the real world works, and makes falsifiable predictions. Like any scientific theory vs. scientific law One's measurable, repeatable and will always remain the same. Guess which one that applies to. Somethings evolve and others don't? On what basis do you say that? I didn't say that. Check out the "?" mark at the end, it was a question which is not answered. And that's a reliable conclusion we all need to buy into. Like I keep saying, you can remain ignorant if you like. Didn't answer the question and instead attack the questioner. Or in this case maybe evolution hasn't been observed correctly . Certainly not by you. Did you look at any of the observed instances of evolution? Looking for that evidence. So far no evidence, but as an inquisitive person, I'll keep looking. On the other hand the decline of nature is obvious to anyone who has vividly observed that 99.9% of all species have NOT evolved, but become extinct. On what basis do you tally that percent? Rectally? Again, the decline of species is far more evident than that of the incline of species. I was just pointing out the obvious. Of course we have no idea what the % is, but one can "assume" (something that people often are inclined to do) there is more evidence against evolution than for it. Of course, I sleep at night really well knowing that I am a mutated form of primordial pond scum. I see, you have some bizarre "icky" objection to evolution. That's real science-y of you. I don't have an objection to evolution, I just don't see it as any valid form of science to explain anything. Do you also think there's some worldwide conspiracy keeping the "fraud" of evolution afloat, for some nebulous reason? Do you think tens of thousands of people worldwide are committing a scientific fraud for no reason at all? Simply put? Yes, tens of thousands of people can be duped by the "theory" and it happens over and over again with predictable certainty. That evidence of it's potential is widely known, but it doesn't evolve, it simply stays the same as the last time. Oh, but of course there's a reason for it. I am fully aware of it. Stosh