Re: A physician's thoughts about curing the health care crisis ...
Peter B.
"Hellmut Hattler" <i...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:p9KdnbKOVbzrYC_X...@giganews.com...
>
> "ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message
> news:7hfh3sF2...@mid.individual.net...
>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 12:45:35 -0400, Hellmut Hattler wrote:
>>
>>> "ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7hf567F2...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:54:00 -0400, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than
>>>>> they
>>>>> needed. May we learn from their mistake in order to truly cure
>>>>> the
>>>>> crisis and avoid HR3200, which will not cure anything as Doc
>>>>> Fraser
>>>>> has publicly explained:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://EmoryCardiology.com/DocFraser
>>>>>
>>>>> Love in the truth,
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew <><
>>>>
>>>> Beg to differ. Adam and Eve were not chastised for eating "more
>>>> than
>>>> they needed". It was because they ate what had been specifically
>>>> denied
>>>> them. Your theology is a little weak, IMHO.
>>>
>>> Theology is weak.
>>
>> IYHO. Not in mine.
>
> It's not opinion. Go test theology in a lab. You can't. It's our
> morbid fear of death that makes us create theology. Facts speak
> louder than faith.
The Bible, ever since it was written spoke of stars that were "fixed" in
the heavens. This was a source of mockery by many using "science" as
their Base. One by one the stars mentioned in the Bible were indeed
"fixed in the heavens". The last one about 7-10 years ago and if memory
serves me correctly it was on of the dippers.
What is odd/funny is that the self same people who call others weak for
their faith or beliefs are also the first to cave in when a radical
Muslim holds a sword over their head with the offer of "believe our way
or die". I may be weak, but I'd refuse unto the death.
Peter B.
>
> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <ach...@emory.edu> wrote in message
> news:bbm4b59rmf0oi350n...@4ax.com...
>> Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than they
>> needed.
>
> points towards not only there NOT being A&E but that we ARE descended
> from lower forms of life, you still believe that story. Just when I
> thought you couldn't be more naive, but in this case I chalk it up to
> stupidity. Have you ever even read ANYTHING about paleontology? I
> mean, even if Darwin is wrong certainly evolution itself is NOT. How
> do you explain fossilized remains that are far older than the 6000
> some odd years required by the Bible? Protohumans, cro magnon,
> Lucy???? Fossilized remains that even predate humans??? Are you
> serious not Charlie???? Are you fucking kidding me?????
While I am not defending the reprobate, there is no evidence of
evolution, and most do-gooders do not believe it either. Take the Bee,
it breathes through a hole behind its legs. It gets clogged up with
pollen and the Bee dies. They have a short generation span, a 1000
generations can happen in less than 20 years. Bees have been discovered
in the tombs of the Pharaohs and they had died from that same malady.
There has been ample time and 10's of 1000's of generations for them to
develop hairs similar to our nose hairs that can be used to sweep away
the pollen, but it never happens. There are also too many "missing
links". There has been some evolution of a very low order within
species, but not much.
Carbon dating is not accurate unless measured against known time lines
and materials. It is conjecture beyond that.
The earth was "too hot" magnetically over 12,000 years ago for anything
to survive.
There is ample evidence of human beings and dinosaurs living together in
Louisiana, and nearby, less than 4000 years ago.
Protohumans? ROTFLOL
Hellmut Hattler
"Peter B." <in...@i-brag.com> wrote in message
news:4ab421c3$1...@news.x-privat.org...
>
> "Hellmut Hattler" <i...@rock.com> wrote in message
> news:77qdneIlx4bi-i_X...@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <ach...@emory.edu> wrote in message
>> news:bbm4b59rmf0oi350n...@4ax.com...
>>> Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than they
>>> needed.
>>
>> No way. You REALLY believe in Adam and Eve??? Although ALL evidence
>> points towards not only there NOT being A&E but that we ARE descended
>> from lower forms of life, you still believe that story. Just when I
>> thought you couldn't be more naive, but in this case I chalk it up to
>> stupidity. Have you ever even read ANYTHING about paleontology? I mean,
>> even if Darwin is wrong certainly evolution itself is NOT. How do you
>> explain fossilized remains that are far older than the 6000 some odd
>> years required by the Bible? Protohumans, cro magnon, Lucy????
>> Fossilized remains that even predate humans??? Are you serious not
>> Charlie???? Are you fucking kidding me?????
>
> While I am not defending the reprobate, there is no evidence of evolution,
LMAO, there's total evidence...anyone who says otherwise...well...ignorance
is bliss.
Missing links are irrelevant. The FACT is if fossilized bee "A" from 5
millions years ago is COMPLETELY different from bee "B" (no pun intended)
then evolution has taken place. There are thousands of examples of many
MANY animals that have completely changed over time, usually millions of
years.
Now, to address your example. Several species of sharks haven't changed in
several millions of years. Wanna know why? Their environment didn't
change. The ocean has remained environmentally unchanged for millions of
years. A perfect killing machine has no need to change. Maybe some subtle
changes.
Ok, now onto the quick changing animals. Bacteria, viruses, we are talking
evolutional scales from hourly to eons. Don't believe me? Get a
microscope. You can make your own observations. You can add your own
environmental variables and watch it all happen.
The great thing about science is YOU can measure it and make conclusions.
My wife, who is a biochemist and organic biologist, often whips out the
microscope and shows me how easy it is to observe simple life forms and see
them drastically change.
> "Carbon dating is not accurate unless measured against known time lines
> and materials. It is conjecture beyond that."
Ok, you can say all you want about carbon dating (BTW, you statement is 100%
inaccurate, study Chemistry and you'll know why) however, you can't argue
with simple geology. If you find a dinosaur bone buried deep in a heavy
rock area, hey, guess what. Geological forces are SLOOOOOOOOOW. Sediment
layers take time to build up, fossilization takes MILLIONS of years to
happen. Provable by the simple LAWS of physics. Have you ever thought
about how long it takes for just ONE FOOT of rock to build up? Oh, and don't
forget to calculate the amount of time it takes to TURN TO ROCK. (more
details below)
> "The earth was "too hot" magnetically over 12,000 years ago for anything
> to survive."
Well, okay, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support this. I mean, you
can study geological evidence, which is indisputedable, (how can I call it
indisputable? Well, take a few pieces of dirt, which you can actually do
yourselves, and just keep throwing it down on top of itself...there's your
build up. Calculate it. How long will it take to A) Build up to height "a"
B) Turn to rock?) Too hot "magnetically" CAN be measured based on magnetic
pole placement on...well...the earth. 12,000+years ago for a magnetic
measure? Who made that up? YOU? Oh, I can assure you that only one kind of
heat exists, and any major heat would show up geologically in many MANY
sources. Heat has very specific requirements, all of which leave a trace.
So, life, bacterial, which can live in so many HOT environs, is excluded.
Heh. Anyway, wtf does "too hot magnetically" mean? Sounds like baseless
conjecture. Or someone trying to sound like "hey, I know what I'm talking
about"
Facts people.
Evolution happens. Forget Darwin, he was wrong. Evolution goes on a far
greater scale.
There are objects in the universe that are over 15 billion light years
away...you know what that means?
There are geological forces that are older than 12000 years.
If you pile dirt up, you will pile it up over tens of thousands of years to
make a mountainous pile. This is simple math. YOU can test it at home!
Ergo, the Earth is far older than you think.
Here is a fact: Carbon dating is WAY beyond what Peter B. suggests. Had he
done his research he would realize what is involved is far more than he can
conceptualize.
Radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains from
archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into
organic material during photosynthesis they incorporate a quantity of 14C
that approximately matches the level of this isotope in the atmosphere (a
small difference occurs because of isotope fractionation, but this is
corrected after laboratory analysis). After plants die or they are consumed
by other organisms (for example, by humans or other animals) the 14C
fraction of this organic material declines at a fixed exponential rate due
to the radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a
sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the sample to
be estimated.
Ok, your move, beeeyatch.
The point is, FACT proves all.
Dr. Omgorna Hackenslash MD
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <ach...@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:bbm4b59rmf0oi350n...@4ax.com...
> Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than they
> crisis and avoid HR3200, which will not cure anything as Doc Fraser
> has publicly explained:
>
> http://EmoryCardiology.com/DocFraser
Nothing new there. The Insurance companies have been doing it for years.
>
> Love in the truth,
>
> Andrew <><
> --
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Board-certified Cardiologist
> and Author of "Trust the Truth:"
> http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B002G22ZWG
>
> Only the truth can cure the "hunger is starvation" delusion:
> http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthier
Dr. Omgorna Hackenslash MD
"ray" <r...@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:7hf567F2...@mid.individual.net...
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:54:00 -0400, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>
>> needed. May we learn from their mistake in order to truly cure the
>> crisis and avoid HR3200, which will not cure anything as Doc Fraser has
>> publicly explained:
>>
>> http://EmoryCardiology.com/DocFraser
>>
>>
>> Andrew <><
>
> needed". It was because they ate what had been specifically denied them.
> Your theology is a little weak, IMHO.
Any God with half a brain wouldn't have put the tree where such early
unevolved hominids could find it.
Dr. Omgorna Hackenslash MD
"Happy Oyster" <happy....@ariplex.com> wrote in message
news:irp4b5hnrt0edj289...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:54:00 -0400, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> wrote:
>
>>Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than they
>>needed.
>
> --
> POLICE - POLIZEI - POLITIE - POLICIA
>
> http://www.ariplex.com/ama/amapolis.htm
Now you can see why Chung hangs out on Usenet. He can't hold a job he's so
obsessed with religion. A real sad case.
Peter B.
Exagerated numbers, manufactured out of thin air. The end result was a
bee was still a bee and not a mosquito.
>
> Now, to address your example. Several species of sharks haven't
> changed in several millions of years. Wanna know why? Their
> environment didn't change. The ocean has remained environmentally
> unchanged for millions of years. A perfect killing machine has no
> need to change. Maybe some subtle changes.
>
There was no million years of an ocean. 14-12K years ago the earth was
too hot magnetically for anything to survive.
> Ok, now onto the quick changing animals. Bacteria, viruses, we are
> talking evolutional scales from hourly to eons. Don't believe me?
> Get a microscope. You can make your own observations. You can add
> your own environmental variables and watch it all happen.
>
Yeast is yeast.
> The great thing about science is YOU can measure it and make
> conclusions. My wife, who is a biochemist and organic biologist, often
> whips out the microscope and shows me how easy it is to observe simple
> life forms and see them drastically change.
>
Yes, like watching polywogs morph into frogs, but that still doesn't
prove anything. It is only a wow factor for the unlearned.
>> "Carbon dating is not accurate unless measured against known time
>> lines and materials. It is conjecture beyond that."
>
> Ok, you can say all you want about carbon dating (BTW, you statement
> is 100% inaccurate, study Chemistry and you'll know why) however, you
> can't argue with simple geology. If you find a dinosaur bone buried
> deep in a heavy rock area, hey, guess what. Geological forces are
> SLOOOOOOOOOW. Sediment layers take time to build up, fossilization
> takes MILLIONS of years to happen. Provable by the simple LAWS of
> physics. Have you ever thought about how long it takes for just ONE
> FOOT of rock to build up? Oh, and don't forget to calculate the amount
> of time it takes to TURN TO ROCK. (more details below)
>
Wrong, I'd suspect you'd be the type to use carbon dating for rocks on
veggies, eh?
Then there is the little old volcano that erupted in Hawaii a couple
hundred years ago and there was a bunch of scientists/geologists set to
carbon date the rocks without being told anything about the environment.
Naturally they dated the ash at a few million years but the simple fact
is that the as was made 200 years ago. There there is the issue of no
place on earth where you can find layers from the beginning to know for
strata's of evolution. Fossils due not take millions of years, sediment
into rocks can take as little as a few years. (if we are talking
limestone)
>
>> "The earth was "too hot" magnetically over 12,000 years ago for
>> anything to survive."
>
> Well, okay, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support this. I
> mean, you can study geological evidence, which is indisputedable, (how
> can I call it indisputable? Well, take a few pieces of dirt, which
> you can actually do yourselves, and just keep throwing it down on top
> of itself...there's your build up. Calculate it. How long will it
> take to A) Build up to height "a" B) Turn to rock?) Too hot
> "magnetically" CAN be measured based on magnetic pole placement
> on...well...the earth. 12,000+years ago for a magnetic measure? Who
> made that up? YOU? Oh, I can assure you that only one kind of heat
> exists, and any major heat would show up geologically in many MANY
> sources. Heat has very specific requirements, all of which leave a
> trace. So, life, bacterial, which can live in so many HOT environs, is
> excluded. Heh. Anyway, wtf does "too hot magnetically" mean? Sounds
> like baseless conjecture. Or someone trying to sound like "hey, I
> know what I'm talking about"
>
Take the half life and walk it backwards, oh, but I see you do not know
wth you are talking about and are pulling your ideas out of you ass.
> Facts people.
>
> Evolution happens. Forget Darwin, he was wrong. Evolution goes on a
> far greater scale.
> There are objects in the universe that are over 15 billion light years
> away...you know what that means?
Nothing to do with evolution, and please show me 15B Light years ago
anything, K?
> There are geological forces that are older than 12000 years.
Of course there is, but you just have to jump to illogical conclusions
to support your weak unfounded ideas.
> If you pile dirt up, you will pile it up over tens of thousands of
> years to make a mountainous pile. This is simple math. YOU can test
> it at home! Ergo, the Earth is far older than you think.
>
OH? :LOL, you know what I think about the age of the earth? Now you are
a mind reader too?
> Here is a fact: Carbon dating is WAY beyond what Peter B. suggests.
> Had he done his research he would realize what is involved is far more
> than he can conceptualize.
>
ROTHLOL. there is more than one method of age dating, friend, and
certain types are usefull for one thing and others for different things.
> Radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains from
> archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)
> into organic material during photosynthesis they incorporate a
> quantity of 14C that approximately matches the level of this isotope
> in the atmosphere (a small difference occurs because of isotope
> fractionation, but this is corrected after laboratory analysis). After
> plants die or they are consumed by other organisms (for example, by
> humans or other animals) the 14C fraction of this organic material
> declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of
> 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected
> from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the sample to be estimated.
>
> Ok, your move, beeeyatch.
>
So you think you know something, eh? Raise the atmospheres to 20 let it
sit there for a few thousand years and observe how it affects aging, as
well as other things. You know so little, How did you ever hook up with
a wife who knows so much more?
> The point is, FACT proves all.
>
BTW, nice snipping of stuff you wanted to ignore, are you related to
Andy Chung?
Peter B.
>
> My wife, who is a biochemist and organic biologist, often whips out
> the microscope and shows me how easy it is to observe simple life
> forms and see them drastically change.
>
A G E N U I N E Househusband, eh? LOL
Maybe you should stick to cooking and cleaning. ;)
Frisky Dingo
LMAO, speaking of being related to Chung, you are on deluded person.
� Bullspitfire@faithguard-moi Rundy � Bullspitfire
Bullspitfire http://faithguard-moi.blogspot.com/
We demolish sanity and every pretension that sets itself up against my
precious Babble, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to
crap. ?2 Corunthinians 10:5
You can even follow me twit!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Friday, September 18, 2009
Hereticks and Whores
You are a heretick and a whore if you don't believe my Babble!
Have you heard Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep is one of our songs, and God raised
Himfrommer to the Top 40 ? Did you know I saves all me posts in three
different sites andgives you eternal access to them all through faith in
this finished work alone,not your merits (Jan. 3:16; 1 Core. 15:1-3; Effn.
2:8-10; 2 Tess.1:8-9)? This is so man cannot boost, and I alone gets the
gory (Eph. 2:8-9 Bingo!).
www.fatguard.org
www.twit.com/fatguard
www.facebook.com/fatguard
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Frisky Dingo
Right, you can read all the documented evidence you want, it IS available.
And as I suggested, you can do your own research instead of believing your
lies. So funny that so many fossilized plants and animals no longer exist,
however, all the species they spawned do. Don't believe it? You can go out
into the field and make your own observsations, provable and measurable, or
you can just believe someone elses delusions.
>>
>> Now, to address your example. Several species of sharks haven't changed
>> in several millions of years. Wanna know why? Their environment didn't
>> change. The ocean has remained environmentally unchanged for millions of
>> years. A perfect killing machine has no need to change. Maybe some
>> subtle changes.
>>
>
> There was no million years of an ocean. 14-12K years ago the earth was too
> hot magnetically for anything to survive.
Yes, you're right. Although there is no shred of scientific evidence and is
completely against all the laws of thermodynamics, magnetism and physics,
you're right.....oh please, where is your proof of this BS?
>> Ok, now onto the quick changing animals. Bacteria, viruses, we are
>> talking evolutional scales from hourly to eons. Don't believe me? Get a
>> microscope. You can make your own observations. You can add your own
>> environmental variables and watch it all happen.
>>
>
> Yeast is yeast.
Um, you are seriously naive. Yeast is NOT bacterial or viral. Anyway, not
the point. Your statement is just stupid. Get a microscope.
>> The great thing about science is YOU can measure it and make conclusions.
>> My wife, who is a biochemist and organic biologist, often whips out the
>> microscope and shows me how easy it is to observe simple life forms and
>> see them drastically change.
>>
>
> Yes, like watching polywogs morph into frogs, but that still doesn't prove
> anything. It is only a wow factor for the unlearned.
Um, again, a polywog is not a virus or bacteria, however, if you go around
digging for fossils, you yourself can make observations instead of blindly
believing something you read.
>>> "Carbon dating is not accurate unless measured against known time lines
>>> and materials. It is conjecture beyond that."
>>
>> Ok, you can say all you want about carbon dating (BTW, you statement is
>> 100% inaccurate, study Chemistry and you'll know why) however, you can't
>> argue with simple geology. If you find a dinosaur bone buried deep in a
>> heavy rock area, hey, guess what. Geological forces are SLOOOOOOOOOW.
>> Sediment layers take time to build up, fossilization takes MILLIONS of
>> years to happen. Provable by the simple LAWS of physics. Have you ever
>> thought about how long it takes for just ONE FOOT of rock to build up?
>> Oh, and don't forget to calculate the amount of time it takes to TURN TO
>> ROCK. (more details below)
>>
>
> Wrong, I'd suspect you'd be the type to use carbon dating for rocks on
> veggies, eh?
> Then there is the little old volcano that erupted in Hawaii a couple
> hundred years ago and there was a bunch of scientists/geologists set to
> carbon date the rocks without being told anything about the environment.
> Naturally they dated the ash at a few million years but the simple fact is
> that the as was made 200 years ago. There there is the issue of no place
> on earth where you can find layers from the beginning to know for strata's
> of evolution. Fossils due not take millions of years, sediment into rocks
> can take as little as a few years. (if we are talking limestone)
Um, wow, did you even understand what you were reading? Also, fossils are
NOT sediment. Have you even studied chemisty, geology? I mean not the
basic 101 they teach in most public schools....your claims are baseless and
unprovable. Another example of your being naive...Grand Canyon. Measurable
weathering in the form of millions of years. You can go read, study and
measure geology and realize how dead wrong you are. How do fossils end up
in layers of granite millions of years old? You are truly naive.
>>
>>> "The earth was "too hot" magnetically over 12,000 years ago for anything
>>> to survive."
>>
>> Well, okay, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support this. I mean,
>> you can study geological evidence, which is indisputedable, (how can I
>> call it indisputable? Well, take a few pieces of dirt, which you can
>> actually do yourselves, and just keep throwing it down on top of
>> itself...there's your build up. Calculate it. How long will it take to
>> A) Build up to height "a" B) Turn to rock?) Too hot "magnetically" CAN
>> be measured based on magnetic pole placement on...well...the earth.
>> 12,000+years ago for a magnetic measure? Who made that up? YOU? Oh, I
>> can assure you that only one kind of heat exists, and any major heat
>> would show up geologically in many MANY sources. Heat has very specific
>> requirements, all of which leave a trace. So, life, bacterial, which can
>> live in so many HOT environs, is excluded. Heh. Anyway, wtf does "too
>> hot magnetically" mean? Sounds like baseless conjecture. Or someone
>> trying to sound like "hey, I know what I'm talking about"
>>
>
> Take the half life and walk it backwards, oh, but I see you do not know
> wth you are talking about and are pulling your ideas out of you ass.
Your claims of "too hot magnetically" are DIRECTLY pulled out of your ass.
You've obviously never studied thermodynamics, magnetism or physics in any
way, shape or form to know how ludicrous and unprovable your claims are.
>> Facts people.
>>
>> Evolution happens. Forget Darwin, he was wrong. Evolution goes on a far
>> greater scale.
>> There are objects in the universe that are over 15 billion light years
>> away...you know what that means?
>
> Nothing to do with evolution, and please show me 15B Light years ago
> anything, K?
Oh, just the thousands of quasars sitting there totally observable. Red
shift is proven from the laws of physics, is measurable (yes, even by a
moron like yourself) and indisputable. Light obeys the laws of physics.
>> There are geological forces that are older than 12000 years.
>
> Of course there is, but you just have to jump to illogical conclusions to
> support your weak unfounded ideas.
LMAO, these aren't my ideas, they're the proven labors of many scientists.
Not pulled out of their asses, but from REAL testing and observation. But
you wouldn't know anything about that since the only measuring and
observations you've done are from the comfort of your own ass.
>> If you pile dirt up, you will pile it up over tens of thousands of years
>> to make a mountainous pile. This is simple math. YOU can test it at
>> home! Ergo, the Earth is far older than you think.
>>
>
> OH? :LOL, you know what I think about the age of the earth? Now you are a
> mind reader too?
No, it's just another thing you can study, observe, and measure. Planet
formation is not a hidden "pulled out of the ass" science.
>> Here is a fact: Carbon dating is WAY beyond what Peter B. suggests. Had
>> he done his research he would realize what is involved is far more than
>> he can conceptualize.
>>
>
> ROTHLOL. there is more than one method of age dating, friend, and certain
> types are usefull for one thing and others for different things.
Carbon dating is the most accurate, measurable and self studiable. Also,
the fact that you can't spell does nothing for your credibility.
>> Radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains from
>> archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)
>> into organic material during photosynthesis they incorporate a quantity
>> of 14C that approximately matches the level of this isotope in the
>> atmosphere (a small difference occurs because of isotope fractionation,
>> but this is corrected after laboratory analysis). After plants die or
>> they are consumed by other organisms (for example, by humans or other
>> animals) the 14C fraction of this organic material declines at a fixed
>> exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the
>> remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C
>> allows the age of the sample to be estimated.
>>
>> Ok, your move, beeeyatch.
>>
>
> So you think you know something, eh? Raise the atmospheres to 20 let it
> sit there for a few thousand years and observe how it affects aging, as
> well as other things.
Right, raised by what? Your gas? Do you even have a clue what you're
saying???
> You know so little, How did you ever hook up with a wife who knows so much
> more?
I don't know more than what is *provable* and *measurable*. Your BS about
"too hot magnetically" has no basis of proof or measurement. Also, if the
earth was too hot, wtf was it doing there in the first place before your
tool of a god made it?
>> The point is, FACT proves all.
>>
>
> BTW, nice snipping of stuff you wanted to ignore, are you related to Andy
> Chung?
I always ignore ignorance. So now, you can wallow in your stupidity,
because I am officially ignoring you. Have fun in the killfile, bitch.
You keep on believing your UNFOUNDED nonsense. *plonk*.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/be28905910576997?
May GOD renew and strengthen your brain about knowing what is right
(Jeremiah 9:24), Mike, so that you would be able to rein in your
deceitful heart (Jeremiah 17:9) which is causing you to continue
sinning.
Amen.
Love in the truth,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Heart Doctor
and Author of "Trust the Truth:"
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B002G22ZWG
"... no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor
12:3)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/035c93540862751c?
What are the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/980b41e6999de315?
Only the truth can cure the "hunger is starvation" delusion:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/74281ab7d7ce78de?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Ray wrote:
>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> Ray wrote:
>> >>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Adam and Eve started the health care crisis by eating more than they
>> >>>> crisis and avoid HR3200, which will not cure anything as Doc Fraser
>> >>>> has publicly explained:
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Beg to differ. Adam and Eve were not chastised for eating "more than
>> >>>they needed".
>> >>
>> >> was indeed "more than they needed." This they did after they were told
>> >> by GOD that they did not need to eat it because it would harm them
>> >> causing them to die. The latter is the health care crisis where folks
>> >> are unhealthy, needing many expensive medications, and still dying
>> >> prematurely and expensively as a consequence of continuing to eat more
>> >> than they need:
>> >>
>> >> http://WDJW.net/NJ
and ...
>> >> With all due respect, can you, Ray, publicly say "Jesus is LORD" using
>> >> your mouth?
>> >
>> > I do that rather frequently.
>>
>> Then please kindly allow this physician to hear you say "Jesus is
>> LORD" via the voicemail at the phone number given at the bottom of the
>> following web site:
>>
>> http://WDJW.net
>>
>> (If being caller ID'd is an issue, simply press *67 before dialing)
>
> You're twisting things to try and make yourself right Andrew.
Not for the discerning.
Dear Heavenly Father, please forgive Mike because he knows not what he
is writing because this has all been coming from his deceitful heart
in accord with what is written in Your Word at Jeremiah 17:9. Please
drive out the deceit in Mike's heart as only You can.
Amen
Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/13bd7f30793258d2?
Now, do you, Mike, want to become a disciple of LORD Jesus Christ so
that you too would be able to physically recognize the Messiah even in
the dark of night?
Love in the truth,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
A gentile disciple of Jesus Christ
able to recognize the Messiah
even in the dark of night.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <disc...@T3WiJ.com> wrote in message
news:b3f9b5d6ns4flfi31...@4ax.com...
Happy Oyster
He MIGHT be a religiot. But he ALSO might be a crook who does nothing else but
try to boost the domain he wants to sell to the Emory clinic.
--
Charles Berliner: Geschichte der Anna�lle
http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_anna.htm
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
This physician is not able to use GOD.
In the interim, GOD is using this physician :-)
Bottom line concerning you:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/be28905910576997?
May GOD renew and strengthen your brain about knowing what is right
(Jeremiah 9:24), Mike, so that you would be able to rein in your
deceitful heart (Jeremiah 17:9) which is causing you to continue
sinning.
Amen.
Love in the truth,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Peter B.
"Frisky Dingo" <bi...@me.com> wrote in message
news:H4WdnQ-gutef4CnX...@giganews.com...
The sad truth is that you are the one deluded. Andrew is deceived and
chooses to remain that way, but you are the one deluded. My future is
secured. My faith rests not on the words of man, especially not on their
foolish attempts at intimidation. You will have had at least one notice
or invite by God before you die. Take advantage of it.
Peter B.
Sadly you are following up on an idiots pretention. I have and am
keeping up on research, you obviously are not and have fallen prey to
fallicies.
>>>
>>> Now, to address your example. Several species of sharks haven't
>>> changed in several millions of years. Wanna know why? Their
>>> environment didn't change. The ocean has remained environmentally
>>> unchanged for millions of years. A perfect killing machine has no
>>> need to change. Maybe some subtle changes.
>>>
>>
>> There was no million years of an ocean. 14-12K years ago the earth
>> was too hot magnetically for anything to survive.
>
> Yes, you're right. Although there is no shred of scientific evidence
> and is completely against all the laws of thermodynamics, magnetism
> and physics, you're right.....oh please, where is your proof of this
> BS?
>
LOL, I thought you "knew" research. No?
>>> Ok, now onto the quick changing animals. Bacteria, viruses, we are
>>> talking evolutional scales from hourly to eons. Don't believe me?
>>> Get a microscope. You can make your own observations. You can add
>>> your own environmental variables and watch it all happen.
>>>
>>
>> Yeast is yeast.
>
> Um, you are seriously naive. Yeast is NOT bacterial or viral.
> Anyway, not the point. Your statement is just stupid. Get a
> microscope.
>
http://www.yeastgenome.org/VL-what_are_yeast.html
>>> The great thing about science is YOU can measure it and make
>>> conclusions. My wife, who is a biochemist and organic biologist,
>>> often whips out the microscope and shows me how easy it is to
>>> observe simple life forms and see them drastically change.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, like watching polywogs morph into frogs, but that still doesn't
>> prove anything. It is only a wow factor for the unlearned.
>
> Um, again, a polywog is not a virus or bacteria, however, if you go
> around digging for fossils, you yourself can make observations instead
> of blindly believing something you read.
>
I said a polywog is a virus? Excuse me, who is the idiot here?
I suppose for your sake I should have used a period rather then a comma,
simple minded as you are.
Grand Canyon could have as easily been created by runoff of flood waters
with some additional errosion after, the whole process in less than a
few thousand years. Fossils end up in shale as well as other materials.
Fossils in shale, limestone happen at various times. I wouldn't gor so
far as to call you naive, or even ignorant. Stupid is far more apt,
especially since you refuse to do research on things that can destroy
your false beliefs. Like dinasaur prints and mans prints in the same
strata at the same time period. Both running from the sea.
>>>
>>>> "The earth was "too hot" magnetically over 12,000 years ago for
>>>> anything to survive."
>>>
>>> Well, okay, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to support this. I
>>> mean, you can study geological evidence, which is indisputedable,
>>> (how can I call it indisputable? Well, take a few pieces of dirt,
>>> which you can actually do yourselves, and just keep throwing it down
>>> on top of itself...there's your build up. Calculate it. How long
>>> will it take to A) Build up to height "a" B) Turn to rock?) Too hot
>>> "magnetically" CAN be measured based on magnetic pole placement
>>> on...well...the earth. 12,000+years ago for a magnetic measure? Who
>>> made that up? YOU? Oh, I can assure you that only one kind of heat
>>> exists, and any major heat would show up geologically in many MANY
>>> sources. Heat has very specific requirements, all of which leave a
>>> trace. So, life, bacterial, which can live in so many HOT environs,
>>> is excluded. Heh. Anyway, wtf does "too hot magnetically" mean?
>>> Sounds like baseless conjecture. Or someone trying to sound like
>>> "hey, I know what I'm talking about"
>>>
>>
>> Take the half life and walk it backwards, oh, but I see you do not
>> know wth you are talking about and are pulling your ideas out of you
>> ass.
>
> Your claims of "too hot magnetically" are DIRECTLY pulled out of your
> ass. You've obviously never studied thermodynamics, magnetism or
> physics in any way, shape or form to know how ludicrous and unprovable
> your claims are.
>
I obviously have facts that you do not. You cannot dispute my claim
since you have no facts.
>>> Facts people.
>>>
>>> Evolution happens. Forget Darwin, he was wrong. Evolution goes on
>>> a far greater scale.
>>> There are objects in the universe that are over 15 billion light
>>> years away...you know what that means?
>>
>> Nothing to do with evolution, and please show me 15B Light years ago
>> anything, K?
>
> Oh, just the thousands of quasars sitting there totally observable.
> Red shift is proven from the laws of physics, is measurable (yes, even
> by a moron like yourself) and indisputable. Light obeys the laws of
> physics.
>
And this has what to do with 12B light years? Nothing. Only a fool would
accept your statement as having any weight. What happens to light
passing by a dark hole? Hmmm? Exactly whose "physics" do you choose to
use?
>>> There are geological forces that are older than 12000 years.
>>
>> Of course there is, but you just have to jump to illogical
>> conclusions to support your weak unfounded ideas.
>
> LMAO, these aren't my ideas, they're the proven labors of many
> scientists. Not pulled out of their asses, but from REAL testing and
> observation. But you wouldn't know anything about that since the
> only measuring and observations you've done are from the comfort of
> your own ass.
>
Oddly you have not used any of their facts, findings, or even their
conjectures. You just pulled together a bunch of ideas and shot them out
of your ass as "fact". ROTFL!
>>> If you pile dirt up, you will pile it up over tens of thousands of
>>> years to make a mountainous pile. This is simple math. YOU can
>>> test it at home! Ergo, the Earth is far older than you think.
>>>
>>
>> OH? :LOL, you know what I think about the age of the earth? Now you
>> are a mind reader too?
>
> No, it's just another thing you can study, observe, and measure.
> Planet formation is not a hidden "pulled out of the ass" science.
>
It is as you speak it. You sit there and poorly attempt to tell me what
I think yet you are clueless.
Planet formation is still being studied, current thinking is Big Bang.
The Bible plainly states that the earth was here before its recreation.
A fact you knew nothing of.
>>> Here is a fact: Carbon dating is WAY beyond what Peter B. suggests.
>>> Had he done his research he would realize what is involved is far
>>> more than he can conceptualize.
>>>
>>
>> ROTHLOL. there is more than one method of age dating, friend, and
>> certain types are usefull for one thing and others for different
>> things.
>
> Carbon dating is the most accurate, measurable and self studiable.
> Also, the fact that you can't spell does nothing for your credibility.
>
Oh oh, the spelling argument. <snicker> Your carbon statement shows what
little knowledge you have. Now that is a fact you have to live with as a
basis of your level of knowledge and intelligence. Don;t start
backpedaling now either.
>>> Radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains from
>>> archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide
>>> (CO2) into organic material during photosynthesis they incorporate a
>>> quantity of 14C that approximately matches the level of this isotope
>>> in the atmosphere (a small difference occurs because of isotope
>>> fractionation, but this is corrected after laboratory analysis).
>>> After plants die or they are consumed by other organisms (for
>>> example, by humans or other animals) the 14C fraction of this
>>> organic material declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the
>>> radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a
>>> sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the
>>> sample to be estimated.
>>>
>>> Ok, your move, beeeyatch.
>>>
>>
>> So you think you know something, eh? Raise the atmospheres to 20 let
>> it sit there for a few thousand years and observe how it affects
>> aging, as well as other things.
>
> Right, raised by what? Your gas? Do you even have a clue what you're
> saying???
>
Raised due to a shell around the earth that also provided other benefits
such as reduced ultra violet radiation. Obviously you are totally
clueless.
>> You know so little, How did you ever hook up with a wife who knows so
>> much more?
>
> I don't know more than what is *provable* and *measurable*. Your BS
> about "too hot magnetically" has no basis of proof or measurement.
> Also, if the earth was too hot, wtf was it doing there in the first
> place before your tool of a god made it?
>
It was here without form and void. Just like it says in the Bible. If
you knew just a little you would be able to figure out the earliest that
any life form could exist on earth by investigating the half life
decline in the last few thousand years. And this would be independent
and isolated from any theory or religious influence. But that would
require serious thinking that you are not capable of. You'd rather argue
with limited facts, and your own personal beliefs and especially using
spelling errors (if there were any) as your proof. What's next, grammar
structure?
>>> The point is, FACT proves all.
>>>
>>
>> BTW, nice snipping of stuff you wanted to ignore, are you related to
>> Andy Chung?
>
> I always ignore ignorance. So now, you can wallow in your stupidity,
> because I am officially ignoring you. Have fun in the killfile,
> bitch.
>
> You keep on believing your UNFOUNDED nonsense. *plonk*.
LOL, cool, a sure sign that you have no basis for your thinking, just
conjecture, or some broad telling you to look in a microscope stupid..
I will sit here laughing at you. You are as intelligent as a rock about
the size of a pea. Without knowledge of light, magnetism, or life.
Well my little cupcake, don't bother replying cause you'll surely look
the fool, especially when you use another sock to reply with.
Michael Christ
>> You're using Him.
Andrew wrote:
> This physician is not able to use GOD.
You're using Him to promote your own will.
All the religions are using Him to promote their own will.
Don't believe me? Well ask your wife, she knows you use Him to promote your
own will.
You are not hungry for truth Andrew, you are only hungry to take control of
it.
And that will never happen.
Michael Christ
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
>
> You're using Him to promote your own will.
If that were true, the LORD would not be smiling at His disciple at
this very moment :-)
Would suggest you stop lying, Mike.
"Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you." -- LORD Jesus
Christ (John 5:14)
Amen.
> All the religions are using Him to promote their own will.
This physician is not a religion.
Instead, this physician is simply one of Jesus' gentile disciples, who
is mindful of WDJW:
Michael Christ
>> You're using Him to promote your own will.
Andrew wrote:
> If that were true, the LORD would not be smiling at His disciple at
> this very moment :-)
Now you are masturbating in front of Him.
Not a pretty sight Andrew.
Michael Christ
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
>
> Now you are masturbating in front of Him.
If that were true, there would be typographical errors in this post.
Again, would kindly suggest you stop lying, Mike.
Lying is sinning.
"Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you." -- LORD Jesus
Christ (John 5:14)
Amen.
May GOD renew and strengthen your brain about knowing what is right
Peter B.
"Teg" <teg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9fSdnXPjspNULSvX...@netspace.net.au...
> calling no it all, please check you ego at the door before posting.
So sorry. The name calling is not especially nice, it was by design. I
do not know it all, but what I pointed to in this thread is a reality,
not often taught. Since the posters did not know what they were talking
about I saw little reason to point out all the proofs, their minds were
made up and facts mattered naught. My ego is mine, not easily turned
off/on. However humility is a different matter. ;)