stand how the mind works). When you look for and increase the goodness of a person, you can help them improve. From that starting point can man be bettered. The way to improve conditions is to put attention on increasing the goodness, the health, the production,
ks for listening. >> >>Erling >> >>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> skrev i en meddelelse >>news:47e1929b$1@linux... >>> >>> Sorry, I misread your question. >>> >>> Jesus taught that all are lost and all are doomed by their >>> sins. He never ever said people are basically good and >>> this position is against everything he stood and died for. >>> >>> We can pursue this further if you like, but it is very clear. >>> >>> DC >>> >>> >>> "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote: >>>>>Did Jesus say all people are not basically good? >>>> >>>>No. >>>> >>>> >>>>>I agree with Hubbard: what's real for you is real for you. I think that >>>> >>>>>is as fair and true a statement as can be made. Make your own decisions >>>> >>>>>and keep your own counsel. >>>> >>>> >>>>Some things may be simply real. >>>> >>>>best, >>>> >>>>DC >>>> >>>>> >>>>>DC wrote: >>>>>> But, (and I am speaking to you and Erling here), both the >>>>>> "myth making" view of faith and the opinions of Hubbard (and >>>>>> many others) about human nature became moot if the evidence for >>>>>> Jesus is compelling. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> DC >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote: >>>>>>> By the way, belief or non-belief in Jesus has absolutely nothing to >>> do >>>> >>>>>>> with Scientology. Scientology is not "faith-based". It is entirely >>>>>>> empirically derived and the technologies of Scientology are >>>>>>> experienced >>>>>> >>>>>>> daily by Scientologists. Hubbard was trained as an engineer and he<
say Exxon is a tofu burger. Alright? Let's just say they are both inconsequential, however you want to visualize that, so we can let all of that go and talk about something more fundamental. What if the scientists are right that the greenhouse gases (which actually DO help keep the planet warm enough for human habitation or we wouldn't be here talking about it - those gases) what if they DO retain additional heat when we add to them faster than natural cycles can mitigate? That's a reasonable possibility. Retaining heat is what greenhouse gases do. As a simple analogy, put on a more insulated blanket at night and you're likely to be warmer, overall. Possible changes in the atmosphere and the likely repercussions are what many professional and reasonably sane scientists are reporting and discussing. There is a real chance something is happening in the atmosphere due to human contributions to greenhouse gases. Which means there's a real chance we have to deal with it one way or another. Proactively or reactively. And it's very likely to be easier to deal with sooner than later. When a Michigan congressman who is one of the main defenders of the auto industry in Washington starts talking plainly about the ramifications of human contributions to greenhouse gases, that's news. It's not enough to merely tar him as a Democrat. This is the guy who held up updating CAFE. He has not been shy about representing the auto industry. Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com James McCloskey wrote: > This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for ten cents > and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! > Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to make > it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government > gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be paying it > for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing this > bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, it's > a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats and their > friends get wealthy doing it. > > > > "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.html >> >> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a while. More > >> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just been >> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing > you >> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas usage > >> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates is > >> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, we're going > >> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking about >> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American >> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go elsewhere > >> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >> >> Gimme some
d gawd, gimme a break with the "plicka-pl