Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

672 Excellent

1 Follower

About Zemke

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. So shifting to infrastructure would be the pattern of same old, same old, taking names, writing checks and making phone calls for fund raising. Politics as is and the commentator was just pushing for the good old boys club. Well thanks for the hope.
  2. Just about every presidency I seem to place some hope or optimism in there being a method to their madness. I heard a commentary yesterday about the need for Trump to find victory in something that can get some workability in town. For example infrastructure. Otherwise taking on another mountainous venture such as tax reform can further divide not only capital hill but the republicans even more. From my view this is all boiling up to the same crap we have been dealing with for years, disfunction, and the main reason a populous election came about. So basically I'm wondering once again is there a method or is any hope I may have in a method just as vain as all the others before? As far as I can tell it seems the republicans have been caught with there pants down. Seven years of attacking ACA and we get what? How can this be called anything but incompetence?
  3. Mob mentality is a powerful thing and if I was in the middle of that crowd I most likely would have yelled crucify him. I think most of us would have if we had not had a personal moment with Jesus. Remember there were times most of the crowd would walk away after Jesus spoke something they took offense to or disagreed with and I'm sure there were people walking away that did because most everyone else was. It's only by the grace of God any of us walk in Him. Peter denied Him after all they had been through. Not sure any of us, being one of the people in that crowd would have yelled different, maybe abstained but in all honesty ya I would have most likely yelled crucify him.
  4. That's fine, to me it makes no difference in a way if flat or round. But when I looked at these things objectively I found flat earthers have questions that mostly get ridicule or side stepped for other perspective argument. What doesn't seem to be a popular answer is a simple "I don't know why buildings stay in perspective at far distances and don't lean away." I'm sure there is an answer but I don't know why, that's why flat earthers will answer with, "because the earth just might be flat maybe?" And again of coarse you do because your field of perspective has changed but the horizon has lifted to your place of perspective with you. Another point of interest that flat earthers deal with. Look, I expressed before that I find it interesting people from all walks of life and educational levels are now questioning science and taking heat for it. But believers have had to live with ridicule for believing the bible as true all along. I fully believe the flood happened and Noah built a boat and animals were saved. And the battle of Jericho happened as the bible says it did. I don't believe we came from a single cell squiggly that turned eventually into a creature that eventually turned into a land creature that became a monkey that became a human over billions of years. And it's equally hard to imagine spinning balls circling a massive ball of fire in perfect harmony with the cosmos all hurling through the void of space with exploding stars, radiation belts, comets and black holes for those same billions of years without a hycup to end the process of life. I mean the odds must be staggering. Now, I believe God has everything in control in His time no matter how all this works but how much of science isn't science fiction? Once I took the time and figured what the heart of the rational Flat earth people were talking about, and there is a lot of crazy stuff out there, I understood where they are coming from. I've come up with a few observations myself and, in a way, find a bit of fun and humor in it all.
  5. Of coarse you can't, the eye hasn't the ability to see along the lines of perspective the way we may think. But if you were to take a good video recorder or strong telescope or binoculars you would be amazed what you do pull into range. There's something about the eyes limited perception on a plain of perspective that seems to be interesting. Just looking down a street with electric poles, the distance between the poles about halves the distance to each pole to where you can't even see a difference between them even though we know the distance exists. It's a limited ability for the eye to perceive past a certain point of perspective. Same down a long hall way with doors at even intervals and ceiling lights. It still doesn't answer the question of why are buildings at far distances still in perspective?
  6. Most of us live in hilly country, that's why I said that. And visability needs to be okay along with having binoculars or something to pull the image in. Far distant mountains don't lean back but stand erect before us. Pictures are interesting but people are visibly observing these things and only getting answers like "you would not need a mountain to scope it out", ya if there were no hills and people didn't live in valleys. And your reply doesn't answer the question of why the buildings floors are in perspective if there is a curve. You see how answers deflect the actual question.
  7. People are making observations and asking questions. Like why is it if you telescope sky scrapers from a mountain 40 miles away the floors of the buildings are in perfect perspective? If there is curvature, and the earth is the size we are told it is, 40 miles should show curvature and the buildings would have a leaning away effect but hey don't, they are in perspective. That's all, people are asking questions and are being called nuts and stupid. But why don't things in a distance lean away do to the curve?
  8. When He established the heavens I was there, when He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep, when He made firm the skies above, when the springs of the deep became fixed, when He set for the sea it's boundary, so that the water should not transgress His command, when He marked out the foundations of the earth; Then I was beside Him as a master workman; Proverbs 8 Not to argue for a flat earth but to insist your usage of the words "consistent with how the word is always used in Scripture" isn't as clear as you want to push. And using words like dumb is the reaction flat earthers seem to ignoring anymore. Besides most science and education thinks the bible is dumb without this type of discussion anyway.
  9. A time lapse video of a year of sunrise and sunsets can be interesting. Haven't seen anything like that. The moving south for the winter and back for the summer shouldn't be an even latitude of line sunrise and sunset thru the seasons except for middle of winter and middle of summer. No matter how slight there should be a lower rise and higher set in middle spring and a higher rise and lower set in middle fall. So in time lapse the lowering for winter and the coming north for summer should be a spirogragh type crossing pattern and not an even latitude back and forth from winter to summer and back. Again no matter how slight there should be a difference. That is if we are on a tilted ball, spinning on a axis and circling the sun. So if you are up a ways in the northern hemisphere you should start noticing the sun setting at a higher latitude than the sun rise as we approach spring and most noticeable middle spring. I'm figuring we circle the sun counter clock wise, right? Any model I've seen over the years I believe goes that direction. Otherwise it would be the other way around.
  10. Be practical and responsible. `You're 21, no one needs to tell you what to do with your life. Your mom will always love you especially if you make your own decisions no matter how they turn out. Life is always a learning curve. There is good rebellion and bad rebellion. Good rebellion is making decisions about your future because you know it to be good and a thoughtful decision. Bad rebellion is to make a decision to get back or hurt someone as a motive. You're the one who ultimately losses. Time to grow up. There is so much packed in your post it's hard for me to believe this isn't spam of some sort.
  11. I worked a political party as a teen and it opened my eyes. Ever since none of these things surprise me. I found that it took a fraternity a semester of parties to trash a place the way these finely dressed drunken animals did in four hours. The country club had to replace the carpet from the front door up the stairs through all the halls the main lobby bar and the main meeting. Good thing the ball room was closed off. Ground in cigars, cigarets, food, drinks, busted glasses and the rude jokes and drunken immature stupid people. They're living large and decadent lives at the tax payers expense. If you slip up or cross the line you get caught with a kid in your bed. That's how I see our politicians.
  12. Wasn't much of an issue until some crazy minded people started believing the earth was round. lol tongue in cheek No actually Gods creation plays a part in our being human. And the destruction of such beauty by a flood caused by the sin of man and that fire will destroy it again has much to do with our being christian. This earth was created and considered good. We are the cause of it's past destruction and it's future destruction. Does it matter if we stretch creation to fit billions of years, or that science tells us we came from a ooze that became a sea creature that climbed on to a shore and turned into a monkey that turned into a person. But hey lets believe science this time. I think it's interesting people from all walks of life, educational levels, religions even atheists who some thinking about the flat earth have considered a deity if that is the way it is. So i don't know really about your question but I do find this construct sociologically interesting. Christians have on issues denied what science is telling us and now we have a cross section of society questioning the religion of science.
  13. No more peeing in the river! finally Actually when it comes to taking care of waterways it makes sense. But it will be interesting to see how a person is handled that they believe is abusing the river and what will bring the hammer down. Does the river actually have the same rights as a human being or just a living entity?
  14. Wow that's a list. Theological arguments wrapped in theological arguments. Makes things complicated so we chose the simple way of "give me the rules and be done with it" way. Is this the straight and narrow? Jesus yes but He is not enough? Jesus fulfilling the Law and Him being the word in the flesh isn't enough to possibly be why the law will last forever? I don't know anymore I guess, and am being duped again, over and over. One cult unto another and no one seems to have the truth but this people now claiming to have it. Can't trust a good portion of the New Testament so hey what's the point? I know you pasted the list and I'm not pointing the comment above toward you but I am the one below. A good man is one who finds a woman who isn't looking to outspend his income.
  15. Okay, so the officer reached out of the car window and grabbed Brown by the fore arm and brown did not try to grab the officers gun and no other force was used by the officer to defend the officer and a shot was fired hitting Brown. Brown moved away, stopped turned and headed back toward the officer and was clearly bleeding at that time. With all the exact questions I'm still not clear as to when the officer exited his vehicle and all that but clearly in the testimony it would seem there was not a struggle for the weapon and I'm not clear on why the first shot was fired. It would seem questions where framed to try and confuse testimony but why wasn't more attention payed to the actions leading up to the first shot. The opening of the car door did make contact with Brown but I don't know with all the precisness of court questioning some things still aren't clear. According to this side of the story it was a stop for suspicious activity and a cop seemed it was okay to fire based on a feeling or something. The change in the narrative of importance for me anyway is that Michael Brown did not attempt to take officer Wilsons gun from him. It would seem more activity around the first discharge of the weapon is needed. I'm sure the defense recordings would provide that but MB not going for the weapon is the big admission in this testimony it would seem.