ChocChip

You need to read up on evolution. 54812[/snapback] Man, there are a lot of things i need to read up on and even then, just because i've read a few books i wouldn't claim to be an authority. I can only comment on what little i can understand from what i see and what i think about (occasionaly) and then post an opinion. It's only my view, i wouldn't for one minute think i can change someone else's. Also i feel very free to change my mind if something impresses my limited perspective.

A spot of 'Bedcunting' to describe the act of fornication is my new made up favourite.

And there in lies the problem. And why I despise the fundamentalists on all sides - especially the muslim, jewish and christian zealots who are currently fucking up the world. 54806[/snapback] And the Buddhist's in Sri Lanka, wouldn't want any of the many middle class new recruits who buy into the idea that Buddhism has never started any trouble be mis-informed on that one.

You make some interesting points. The fact that all socieities have a belief in God does not in any way prove that God exists. We have evolved to a social being whose survival depends on mutual co-operation. God is a man-made concept to get people to tow the line - look at the religious rules like don't eat pork - these were all practical advice at the time they were written (although interestingly not all apply now). Also factor in human's terrible fear of death and its not hard to see how the concept of God and heaven arose. I think part of the problem is that human beings have a perception that many unlikely co-incidences would have been necessary to form the world we live in. Not at all, in fact there is no other way it could have happened. The fact we are here to observe the universe means that conditions had to be just right - I think this is called the anthropomorphic principal or something. Once the first living cell was formed, the rest was really inevitable I think. As for the big bang and what created or preceded it, who knows? But to have faith that some kind of higher power with a human-like intelligence or benevolence was behind it is pretty absurd in my book. Anyway, the physicists will have this one sussed in a few decades, removing the need for God completely. What place for God and the Church then? 54792[/snapback] Right there i think you've fallen into the trap, they are typically Judeo-Christian images and ideas that you have been influenced by. You imply judgement and redemption, you call it 'human-like' one thing i sure hope it isn't If everything is exactly how it should be, and i presume that goes down to the molecular level, are you not then suggesting some kind of pre-determinism? A lack of free will? Or are we, just the humans, somehow exempt? Doesn't this pre-coding of everything being the only way it could be start suggesting something to you?

This is some of the Nation of Islam (Black Muslim) theology. You gotta love this.... A.Scriptures The Nation of Islam feels that both the Koran and the Bible have been tampered with. “The Bible and the Holy Qur’an are filled with truth that leads up to the judgment…. The enemy [the white man] has tampered with the truth in both books; for he has been permitted to handle both books” (Muhammad, Message, 90). They are looking for another book, which is forthcoming. “Both the present Bible and the Holy Qur’an must soon give way to that Holy Book which no man as yet but Allah has seen. The teachings (prophecies) of the present Bible and Qur’an take us up to the resurrection and judgment of this world, but not into the next life” (Muhammad, Message, 97). The Bible is refered to as “the Poison Book” (Muhammad, Message, 94). B.Ultimate reality In contrast to biblical teaching, the Nation of Islam teaching that in the beginning a triple blackness of space, water, and divinity existed. C. God/gods Seventy-six trillion years ago God willed himself into existence out of the blackness of space and water. This process took him six trillion years. God is a black man and His name is Allah. There are many gods of varying degrees. No god is eternal; he lives and dies (Muhammad, Message, 9). Allah, who created the universe, was the most powerful god. He is surpassed only by Elijah Muhammad, the god whose coming was prophesied in the Holy Scripture. Elijah Muhammad is wiser than all the other gods. At one time there was a council of 24 black-scientist gods. One of them acted as God while the others worked on getting the future together for the Nation. D. Creation After Allah came into existence, he created the black race out of the black material in the darkness of space. He then created the universe. E.Man The original inhabitants of earth were all black, belonging to the tribe of Shabass. They were divine beings and created good. The black people became divided. An evil scientist named Yacub was born in the dissenting group. From childhood he determined to develop a race that would rule the black people. Yacub and his followers were eventually imprisoned for voicing their dissatisfaction and exiled to the island of Patmos. There he began to develop a new race by experimenting with mutations. In the process he created the red and yellow races and, after 600 years, a completely white race devoid of any of the original, divine substance. This new race of people was neither human nor made by God, but “devils,” without any capacity for good.The white people were released from the island of Patmos. They began conquering nations around the world, making slaves of black people, imposing on them an inferior religion—Christianity, and depriving them of their cultural heritage. Allah allowed this white supremacy to occur for 6000 years, a period that ended in 1914. Now is the time for the Nation of Islam to regroup and regain an ascendant position. F.Jesus From various sources, we find that according the Nation of Islam, Jesus was: -only a mortal man and a prophet, not God (Muhammad, Our Savior, 195), -a black man who tried to redeem the black Moabites and was executed by the white Romans, -a Muslim, not a Christian (Muhammad, Message, 22), and -He did not rise from the dead (Muhammad, Our Savior, 195, 210). G. Salvation Black people can reach perfection and realize their divine potential by doing what is right and forbidding what is wrong (i.e. following the Holy Koran). Eventually they will become a nation of gods and dwell in paradise for all eternity. No possibility exists for reforming white people because they are pure evil. For perfection to occur, they must be annihilated. H. Judgment A great spaceship, the Mother Plane, will carry out Allah’s judgment (Muhammad, The Final Call, 19). This judgment will not only destroy the white race but also Christianity. This stuff is magic imo

[/i]The problem i think is that when someone says i believe in God and he created everything, everyone pictures of baby Jesus and The Spanish Inquisition and all the Religious wars or the down right bizarre ideas that all white people were created by an evil black scientist and pretty soon a spaceship will come and take all us good, righteous brothers and sisters back to Planet X, etc. As a quick aside, were an ethnic person claim to believe in God and they were shouted down and ridiculed it would be said to be cultural intolerance/imperialism but if a western person declares a religious belief they're fair game for all sorts of dissmissive comments and and sarcasm as if they were somehow meant to know better and treated like some kind of social pariah at parties, etc. It's as if the other 'savages' are quite entitled to amuse themselves with these fancy notions. This is my observation of life in general and in no way related to comments on this board. The idea to me that there is some intelligent agent at work with the universe creation makes more sense than the idea that everything is as it is by many, many acts of chance. The idea of the big bang would appear logical, what initiated the big bang? Where did the energy come from to spark the process? Was it a previous collapse? If so, what started the big bang before this one then? How did the matter come to be ther in the first place? Ad infinitum. Someone said that there are evolutioary theories to explain our doubts on evolution, what theories explain every culture's belief in Gods/Deities? Surely such a thought process is counter-productive if it leads one to believe that praying to a rock will help you more than actually dealing/accepting the problem at hand. What the hell kind of gene is that? Why does every (i think) human society have beliefs in 'higher powers' either currently or at some point in their history? Such a thought process would appear to me to be contrary to survival. As does a system of morality. If we animals like everything else then there is no wrong in stealing, lying, cheating, beating, raping and murdering if it makes a life easier and aids the spread of our genes. These things happen, quite a lot actually, and yet why are they disapproved of? If it happens to us, we won't like it, if it happens to someone else, surely that can only help our position because it has made a rival for resources and breeding mates weaker which would be a good thing. The fact that their are ideas of 'God' is very poignant imo. As to the nature of said entity, i have no idea. There is a lack of evidence and yet maybe the structure and beautiful but apparent coincidence of so many events to make the universe we live in will always beg the question, could it be possible that something other than chance has influenced what we see around us? I repeat i am not in any way scientifically hejamucated, just a simple street hustler and these are my occasional muses betwixt crack binges which i humbly submit before my betters on here

you been looking through my porn collection ! 54404[/snapback] I would that i had the time and the diligence 54416[/snapback] to be finished looking through his collection by the time your 90,you'd need to have started 8 years ago. 54418[/snapback] What do you think Jimbo will evolve into?

you been looking through my porn collection ! 54404[/snapback] I would that i had the time and the diligence

oh no it isnt,it's a whole science of evolutionary biology,which accounts for whole molecular evolutionary systems,not just humans,it even gives michael behe's irreducible complexity idea a good kicking.not new either as h.j muller was writing about it betwen the wars.i'll see if i cant find a handy synopsis of it. 54407[/snapback] Apologies, i'm refering to the evolution from apes to humans. Also i'd like to point out that i am not a biologist nor have i studied, just read the occasional book and article. On this basis alone i am sure that the idea that humans came from apes is not a 100% certainty blah, blah, blah as per my earlier post. I'm not oblivious to the similarities but, though it may seem tongue in cheek, my every day observations would lead me to think apes descended from man. I see men/women behaving like monkeys all the time, and though i don't visiti the zoo often, i've yet to see a monkey act like me. Try and restrain yourselves chaps before you respond to that last bit

Just to balance it out here, 'Evolution' is a theory not an established fact i believe. It's based on about a few hundred bone samples. If it was believed to be 100% reliable then certain strains of humans de/evolved back into apes as they went through time (something i consider likely evrytime i leave the house actually!) To take an occasional partial skeleton here and there and say you have the definitive answer is a bit of a jump as any biologist in the field will tell you. It doesn't mean it has to be GOD instead, there could be many answers, it's not just one of two. There's always the alien/ape breeding hypothesis for a start.......... ;-)

Do you know what i mean???? Any excuse to bring my brethren into it

Surely that's not even true of NUFC

Baba Parker Given

Based on what?

Was just thinking of possible formation alternatives that accomadate our players in positions they do well in, thoughts please. ..............................Given.............................. Carr............Taylor.............Boum.............Baba ..............................Parker............................. Solano...........Dyer............Emre.............Luque ..............................Owen.............................. Good protection for the defence. Wouldn't be expecting Owen to hold the ball up but i think we could (instead of lumping it forward) play it through midf or either flank very effectively and Owen would get a lot of support from Dyer and Luque. Wouldn't expose the fullbacks either.

It would be history repeating itself though wouldn't it? Local lad for a manger replaced by dour scotsman who no one likes but makes a couple of decent signings who is then replaced by media friendly ex-chelsea coach

Just might make him less sh*te tbh.

Good defensively but he looks limited going forward. I think he was a bit exposed at times with Nobby tucking in a lot. With regard to the marks, I think everyone is subconsciously a little more generous when we win. 51488[/snapback] I do feel that we would definately benefit from having fullbacks who can bomb down the flanks more. Both Nobby and Zog seemed to tuck in quite a bit yesterday which I think helped us dominate the centre of the park but it also (at times) left us a little narrow. If we had fullbacks who can attack a bit better (Wayne Bridge anyone?) I think it could prove very usefull, especially away from home if we are looking to keep it tight in the middle. Shearer's goal is a perfect example of what we should be looking for from our fullbacks. 51493[/snapback] I think Baba's good enough on the ball if he can just get his head right. I'd be concerned about getting a good attacking RB.

As Alex said, he was exposed a bit because Nobby kept drifting infield with a view to make a link between midf and attack. Ramage is not quick or strong like Taylor nor is he aggressive like Taylor and he hasn't much ability on the ball. He'll have to be an intelligent player to make up for this if he isn't to be discarded. It can happen, Gary Neville has definitely improved over the years, quite a lot actually. I would play Carr over Ramage as it stands.

Given the fact that we haven't got an alterantive for Shola (as back-up to Shearer) then i think he should be used a little differently. It's not a question of playing to his strengths but rather playing him in a way that doesn't so obviously expose his weakness. I think the answer, if you have to play him and Shearer can't be expected to play every game, is to get him to drop deep to get the ball, he's shite receiving the ball with his back to goal and a defender up his jacksy but he's a little better if he has a bit of space to turn with the ball and run. I would then want him to pass it to someone, i.e. Owen, Zoggy, Solano, Dyer or whoever is making a run. I would discourage him from trying to score but rather set up other people. I think he might be a bit more effective this way.

When they had their good spell after we scored i thought all the danger was down our right, i.e. Ramage's side. Also his passing is atrocious. He doesn't get good grades just for being a Geordie surley?

I saw it on Sky. Given..................8 Couple of great saves, good all round. Baba...................8 Best i've seen him in a while, good tackling, good passing. All their attacks down that side struggled. Boum..................7 Managed to out muscle the burly duo of Kanu and Earnshaw!! Not bad though. Taylor.................8 Was better than Boumsong though '8' seems generous. Ramage..............5 A couple of dodgy moments when defending, sh*te on the ball for the most part. Looks like an average CB playing at FB. Don't think he has a great future ahead of him tbh. Zoggy.................7 Got closed down very quickly, always willing, did ok, couple of great moments of skill and a great cross for the goal, again Emre..................7 Looked good when they gave up, decent though. Lost the ball needlessly once or twice in dangerous areas. Will get better with fitness. Parker................8 Very good i thought. Tackled, passed, intercepted. Keeps the ball very close which is a good skill in centre mid. Solano................6 Kinda quiet i thought. Needs matches. Drifted inside alot but rarely wasted a pass. Owen..................8 Quiet in 1st half, took his chances. You get what you pay for. Ameobi...............6 CANNOT control a ball with his back to goal. Won a few headers for a change, much better when he turns with the ball. I think he play deeper so he gets the ball to feet and has a bit of time to turn. Shearer.............7 Showed Shola how to hold the ball, good goal. Looked sharper than usual. Bramble............6 Loves to play football and very good at it however he nearly scored, for them Dyer.................7 Looked good, made a difference. Souness............8 Have to say well done. We looked sharp, controlled the game except for the usual shakiness after we score and we go to pieces. We also looked motivated. Away support.....9 Sounded LOUD on the telly.

1. Want to make quite clear that I've never used stats to judge a player. However, as it is a stone cold fact that one player scored and created more goals than the rest of our midfield put together I'd suggest a good manager would try to get more from that player. It seems to be accepted by most that Mr Souness had it in for Robert and Bellamy the day he walked in the door. That's a lot of our attacking threat facing being booted out of the club. 2. It can be said that Owen is a replacement for Shearer on the basis that Owen is a goalscorer just as Shearer is. Owen is definitely not a replacement for Bellamy. 3. Clubs didn't 'figure us out' by getting to grips with Robert. What happened last season was that Mr Souness got rid of the pace and movement up front, which made it almost impossible for the midfielders to create anything. That's why we temporarily looked better when Dyer went up front ( example would be away to Sporting ). 4. The decline in our ability to break teams down started when Robson fell out with Solano. Again, nothing to do with Robert. 50701[/snapback] They're all good points. Re: (3) I thought that other teams looked like they figuring out Robert's game in his 2nd season with us tbh. He seemed to lose the ability or confidence to skip past a player if closed down quickly. I still think his movement off the ball was poor for a player of his ability.

Statistics can prove that Jesus was, in general, a very sad guy....

Alex, we all know that this comment is good craic anaral but lets be honest it is the best argument against how even a football expert can get it so wrong. If a manager like SBR of impeccable credentials can be wrong just what does it say about someone like Souness and some of his decisions. 50656[/snapback] By football expert you mean Blaydon, right? 50658[/snapback] Yeah because Blaydon picked the starting 11 for what, at least the last 4 years, prior to Souness and he often told the press how Viana was a DM. 50660[/snapback] Did SBR ever say Viana was a DM? I thought when said 'replacing Speed' he just meant left side of central midf. 50661[/snapback] Sorry CC but what do you think SBR regarded Speeds position as??? When Rob Lee was ushered away his replacement according to SBR was ... yes you guessed it DM or as it use to be known, the holding midfielder.. 50664[/snapback] I thought he would play Viana on the left side and Jenas on the right side with Jenas being more defensive minded. I have to say, imo, this would have been incredilbly lightweight but that's what i thought SBR's plans were. I get the impression this is a discussion that's been done to death on this board already