http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian?hl=en
rec.arts.movies.local.indian@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* SHIV SENA CHIEF CRITISES SANIA'S MARRIAGE - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/4ee295dbbbde0bb8?hl=en
* BACHCHANALIA - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/4f0623dd6ffbc762?hl=en
* UK RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS FORCED TO REJECT HATE - 6 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/dcfc2e198d269895?hl=en
* IT'S ABOUT SHARIA'H - The Shoaib-Sania-Ayesha affair tells its own story - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/71f461ca5ebb1d52?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: SHIV SENA CHIEF CRITISES SANIA'S MARRIAGE
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/4ee295dbbbde0bb8?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Apr 8 2010 1:36 pm
From: "Raja, The Great"
On Apr 7, 10:41 pm, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:20:41 -0700 (PDT), "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 7, 6:50 pm, SliceAndDice <visha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 7, 7:38 pm, Joubert <nofunnyexperiments...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > 02/04/2010 13.12, wkhedr:
>
> >> > > she can marry who ever she wants, she is happy and she made her
> >> > > choice.
> >> > > People need to focus on their own business.
>
> >> > Although I obviously agree with you I point out that it is very easy for
> >> > a western relativist who doesn't really care to say that people should
> >> > mind their own business. Indian society however, does have a set of
> >> > values and authorities that actually matter in real life as well as a
> >> > "situation" with Pakistan.
>
> >> Speaking as an Indian, I have absolutely no issues with Sania getting
> >> married to a Pakistani (and why should I, it is her own business). I
> >> only wish, as she is a national icon and female role model that she
> >> had chosen a better Pakistani to get married to. What kind of dumb ass
> >> gets married to someone after seeing her pictures on the internet,
> >> without even meeting her in person, despite being a celebrity
> >> cricketer? What kind of idiot apologizes to "Muslims all over the
> >> world" after losing a match to India? Does he not know that there are
> >> Muslims in the Indian cricket team as well and more Muslims in India
> >> than in Pakistan?
>
> >I like Shahid Afridi, she should have married him. He is at least
> >talented. Who the fuck is Shoaib Malik, some talent tree, ass clown?
>
> Hey Raja why don't you go and rescue her?- Hide quoted text -
I don't like her. She is a loser.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: BACHCHANALIA
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/4f0623dd6ffbc762?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 7:59 am
From: navanavonmilita
> Since newsgroup posts are being removed
> by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
> this post may be reposted several times.
Monkey is Your Uncle: Sid Harth
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/browse_thread/thread/dce0d4821fe42501/44ec2d6fa29b35eb?lnk=raot
Fossil Skeletons May Be Human Ancestor
LiveScience.com
Handout photo shows a cranium forming part of the holotype skeleton of
Australopithecus sediba from the Malapa site in South Africa Reuters –
Handout photo released April 8, 2010 shows a cranium forming part of
the holotype skeleton of Australopithecus …
* Dinosaurs and Fossils Slideshow:Dinosaurs and Fossils
Charles Q. Choi
LiveScience Contributor
LiveScience.com charles Q. Choi
livescience Contributor
livescience.com – Thu Apr 8, 10:10 am ET
A newfound ancient relative of humanity discovered in a cave in Africa
is a strong candidate for the immediate ancestor to the human lineage,
an international team of scientists said today.
The remarkably well-preserved skeletons - a juvenile male and an adult
female that lived nearly 2 million years ago - were found near the
surface in the remains of a deeply eroded limestone cave system.
Scientists don't know how they died, but it's possible they fell into
the cave.
The hominids had longer arms than we do, and smaller brains. But their
faces were human-like, and scientists say the discovery represents an
important look into our pre-human past. Researchers stopped short of
calling the new species, dubbed Australopithecus sediba, a missing
link.
http://www.livescience.com/culture/091030-origins-top10-special.html
Click image to see more fossil photos
AP
Australopithecus means 'southern ape.' Sediba means "natural spring,
fountain or wellspring in Sotho, one of the 11 official languages of
South Africa," said researcher Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist at
the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa. This was "deemed an
appropriate name for a species that might be the point from which the
genus Homo arises," Berger said.
Rich fossil site
The partial skeletons were found near Johannesburg at a site called
Malapa, which means "homestead" in Sotho, in an area named the Cradle
of Humankind.
http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?s=history&c=news&l=on&pic=hominid-skull-100408-02.jpg&cap=The+cranium+of+the+newly+identified+species%2C+Australopithecus+sediba%2C+was+found+at+the+Malapa+site%2C+South+Africa.+Credit%3A+Photo+by+Brett+Eloff+courtesy+of+Lee+Berger+and+the+University+of+the+Witwatersrand.&title=
"This is one of the richest fossil sites in Africa," said researcher
Daniel Farber, an earth scientist at the University of California at
Santa Cruz. Nearly a third of the entire evidence for human origins in
Africa come from just a few sites in this region.
The sex of the fossils was determined from the shape of the jaws and
hips, while analysis of the teeth suggest the young male was about 12
years old and the adult female in her late 20s or early 30s. Since
these specimens apparently died at or about the same time as each
other - anytime from hours to weeks apart - the researchers suggest
they would almost certainly have known each other in life and may very
well have been related.
Both stood upright a little more than 4 feet high (1.2 meters). "The
female probably weighed about 33 kilograms (72 lbs.) and the child
about 27 kilograms (59 lbs.) at the time of his death," Berger noted.
The male was "right on the cusp of adulthood."
In many ways, the skeleton appears to be a mishmash of features, with
some resembling members of the human family tree and others more like
those of earlier ape-like hominids. (A hominid includes humans,
chimpanzees, gorillas and their extinct ancestors, while hominins
include those species after the human lineage split from that of
chimpanzees.)
For instance, "the brain size of the juvenile was between 420 and 450
cubic centimeters, which is small when compared to the human brain of
about 1,200 to 1,600 cubic centimeters," Berger said. "It would look
almost like a pinhead."
http://www.livescience.com/history/091113-origins-evolving.html
Still, "the shape of the brain seems to be more advanced than that of
australopithecines," Berger noted. Indeed, a number of skull features,
such as certain wide, broad lines in the bone, "are ones you tend to
attribute to early members of genus Homo," Berger told LiveScience -
that is to say, our lineage.
Human-like faces
A number of facial and dental features resemble those of early human
species, such as small teeth and a projecting nose. At the same time,
"it had very long forearms - in fact, as long as an orangutans,"
Berger said, similar to other members of the genus Australopithecus.
Its fingers were curved, ideal for climbing trees, yet relatively
short, like in humans.
http://www.livescience.com/history/091026-top10-origins-mysteries.html
Its legs were relatively long and the ankles seem to be intermediate
between modern humans and earlier hominids. Critically, its pelvis and
hip were more advanced than other australopithecines, approaching the
hip structure of the extinct human species Homo erectus.
http://www.livescience.com/culture/091030-origins-top10-special.html
This indicates that A. sediba was able to walk upright in a striding
manner.
Despite the differences in sex, the male and female skeletons
physically resembled each other, something they seem to have had in
common with the human family tree but not with more distant relatives,
such as chimpanzees. This could mean that A. sediba leaned toward
social behavior "where you don't necessarily have a dominant alpha
male and you are lowering violence between males who are probably
working more cooperatively in a group," Berger suggested.
Time machine
A combination of dating techniques determined the rocks encasing the
fossils are 1.95 million to 1.78 million years old.
"This fits in a critical moment in time," Berger explained. The human
lineage is thought to have originated between 1.8 million to 2 million
years ago, but the hominid fossils unearthed so far from that period
have proven remarkably poor, giving scientists a great deal of room
for speculation as to how our family tree evolved.
http://www.livescience.com/history/091026-top10-origins-mysteries.html
Due to A. sediba's age and physical traits, the researchers believe it
is a convincing candidate for the immediate ancestor to the genus
Homo. Based on its physique, they suggest its appearance signified the
dawn of more energy-efficient forms of walking and running.
Many scientists believe the human genus Homo evolved from
Australopithecus a little more than 2 million years ago, but that
possibility has been widely debated, with other experts proposing an
evolution from the genus Kenyanthropus. This new species might help
clear up that controversy.
"These fossils give us an extraordinarily detailed look into a new
chapter of human evolution, and provide a window into a critical
period when hominids made the committed change from dependency on life
in the trees to life on the ground," Berger said. "Australopithecus
sediba appears to present a mosaic of features demonstrating an animal
comfortable in both worlds."
http://www.livescience.com/history/091102-human-origins-start.html
Not a missing link
Based on its age and overall details of its body, researchers
suggested A. sediba descended from Australopithecus africanus, which
lived between 2 million and 3 million years ago and seemed to have
eaten mostly soft foods like fleshy fruits, young leaves and perhaps
some meat. This new species appears more similar to humans than do
Australopithecus afarensis, most famed for Lucy, or Australopithecus
garhi, which was discovered in 1996.
http://www.livescience.com/history/070717_lucy_link.html
"We are perhaps at the beginning of a more coherent view of the
diversity of the earliest South African hominids," said
paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall at the American Museum of Natural
History in New York, who did not take part in this research. These
specimens provide "a better position to perceive the larger
evolutionary patterns among hominids in a critical part of the
timeframe."
As intriguing as the new fossil is, "it's not everything the rumor
mill said it was going to be," said paleoanthropologist John Hawks at
the University of Wisconsin at Madison. "It's not a missing link."
http://www.livescience.com/health/top10_missinglinks.html
One of the biggest mysteries in human evolution is when the human
genus Homo arose.
"What sets us apart most from the australopithecines is the size of
our brain," Hawks said. With this new fossil, "while it has a somewhat
Homo-like face, it doesn't have a Homo-like brain - it's smaller than
the average for the earlier [Australopithecus] africanus."
"Maybe these findings suggest we look to South Africa for a possible
origin for Homo, but there's not a smoking gun here," Hawks added.
Intriguing fossils have also emerged in East Africa, and even Asia,
and much remains unknown when it comes to Central Africa and West
Africa. All these clues raise the question of which species were our
ancestors and which just evolved similar traits in a parallel manner.
"We just need to find more skulls," he noted.
Regardless of whether they are a side-branch removed from humanity or
whether they are our ancestors, these new hominids are "a time
machine," Berger said, a window into the evolutionary pressures and
processes during that crucial period when the human lineage arose.
Setting the scene
The sedimentary and geological setting the skeletons were found in
suggests the two hominids died about the same time, shortly before a
mud flow carried them to where they were buried.
"We think the environment [Australopithecus] sediba lived in was, in
many ways, similar to the environment today," said researcher Paul
Dirks, a geologist at James Cook University in Australia. "For
example, one with predominantly grassy plains, transected by more
vegetated, wooded valleys. However, the rivers flowed in different
directions and the landscape was not static, but changed all the
time."
The hominids were found along with at least 25 other species of
animals, including saber-tooth cats, hyenas, a wild dog, a wildcat, a
horse, a species of antelope known as a kudu, and smaller animals such
as mice and rabbits. The fact that the hominid fossils were intact and
well-preserved suggests they were trapped in the cave beyond the reach
of scavengers that could have scattered their skeletons.
All these fossils were preserved in a hard, concrete-like substance
known as calcified clastic sediment that formed at the bottom of what
appears to be a shallow underground lake or pool.
"We believe the cave originally was deep and only accessible through
vertical entranceways, which made it hard for animals to escape once
they became trapped," Farber said.
Cause of death?
The cave would have likely once been some 100 to 150 feet deep (30 to
45 meters). "We are looking at very eroded and denuded portions of
this cave system, where nature has exposed what had once been the deep
reaches," Farber said.
The cave might have acted as a death trap for animals seeking water.
"We would speculate that perhaps at the time of their death, the area
in which [Australopithecus] sediba lived experienced a severe
drought," Dirks said. "Animals may have smelled the water, ventured in
too deep, fallen down hidden shafts in the pitch dark, or got lost and
died."
Although researchers can only speculate on how these hominids died,
Farber speculated that they probably fell into the cave. "Even now,
there are places where you can fall into unexpected cracks in this
landscape," he said.
A deeper understanding of the environment these hominids lived in
could yield critical insights into their evolution. For instance, was
there anything about their surroundings that might have driven them to
stand upright?
"Those were the original questions that we will continue to look at as
part of the broader study," Farber said. The scientists will detail
their findings in the April 9 issue of the journal Science.
A child's discovery
The scientists began the research that uncovered A. sediba in March of
2008, when Berger and Dirks started mapping the roughly 130 caves and
20 fossil sites identified in the region over the past several
decades. By July that year, the 3-D capabilities of Google Earth then
allowed Berger to identify nearly 500 new caves from satellite images,
which further research discovered included more than 25 fossil sites
previously unknown to science.
"It is a powerful, powerful tool for science," Berger said of Google
Earth. "I happen to know paleontologists around Africa who are using
that tool to hunt for fossils."
In late July 2008, using Google Earth, Berger noted a series of caves
running along a fault that pointed to a blank area in the region, an
area that appeared to have clusters of trees that typically marked
cave deposits. On August 1 that year, when Dirks was dropped off with
his dog Tau to map the caves, he almost immediately discovered a rich
new fossil site.
http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?s=history&c=news&l=on&pic=hominid-cave-100408-02.jpg&cap=A+view+of+the+uitkomst+cave%2C+a+well-known+archaeological+site+close+to+the+sediba+site.+It%0D+illustrates+the+broken%2C+diverse+nature+of+the+landscape.+Credit%3A+Paul+Dirks&title=
Two weeks after that, Berger explored this fossil site with his nine-
year-old son Matthew and his postdoctoral student Job Kibii.
"Matthew ran off the site, about 15 meters (50 feet) off-site, and
within about a minute-and-a-half, he said, 'Dad, I found a fossil,"
Berger said. "I thought it would be an antelope fossil, because that's
usually all we find, but as I walked toward him, I found he found a
hominid clavicle (collarbone) sticking out of the rock." That bone was
the first remains found of A. sediba - the collarbone of the juvenile.
Fossil preparators have worked arduously over the last two years to
extract the rest of the bones from the rock. In celebration of this
find, the children of South Africa have been invited to a competition
to decide what the name for the juvenile skeleton will be.
The future of the past
In the meantime, the researchers said there are at least two other
skeletons emerging from the site. He also refused to confirm or deny
whether they might have found any tools these hominids might have left
behind.
"The presence of tools is something that would have enormous
ramifications, obviously," Berger said. "We're treading carefully in
that area."
The skulls from the fossils they have retrieved so far are well-
preserved enough to reconstruct their faces, Berger noted.
"Sometime in the future, we will look into the face of sediba," he
said.
The researchers might even be able to retrieve DNA or proteins from
the site.
"We are seeing some organics preserved in various parts of the
assemblage," Berger noted.
* Top 10 Mysteries of the First Humans
http://www.livescience.com/history/091026-top10-origins-mysteries.html
* Humans Still Evolving as Our Brains Shrink
http://www.livescience.com/history/091113-origins-evolving.html
* Top 10 Things That Make Humans Special
http://www.livescience.com/culture/091030-origins-top10-special.html
* Original Story: Fossil Skeletons May Be Human Ancestor
http://www.livescience.com/history/new-hominid-human-ancestor-100408.html
LiveScience.com chronicles the daily advances and innovations made in
science and technology. We take on the misconceptions that often pop
up around scientific discoveries and deliver short, provocative
explanations with a certain wit and style. Check out our science
videos, Trivia & Quizzes and Top 10s. Join our community to debate hot-
button issues like stem cells, climate change and evolution. You can
also sign up for free newsletters, register for RSS feeds and get cool
gadgets at the LiveScience Store.
Related Searches:
* australopithecus garhi http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=australopithecus+garhi
* australopithecus africanus http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=australopithecus+africanus
* australopithecus afarensis http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=australopithecus+afarensis
* cradle of humankind http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=cradle+of+humankind
* google earth http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=google+earth
2,035 Comments
Show:
Lee J
575 users liked this comment
933 users disliked this comment
Lee J 21 hours ago
IMPOSSIBLE!!!! Earth is only 6,000 years old. Satan put
those bones there to confuse us or God did to test us. I can't
remember which one is right.
Well now that being said we can move on to more comments
about this story.
Replies (181)
*
Infidel
692 users liked this comment
809 users disliked this comment
Infidel 21 hours ago
A nine-year old CHILD found the first of these important
fossils! Fantastic! At least he won't grow up to be deluded by the
bible-believers "young earth" myth. Too bad so many American children
are brainwashed with bible-thumping nonsense, and that with
conservative control over science textbooks, many more WILL be.
Replies (117)
*
Bullwinkle
176 users liked this comment
326 users disliked this comment
Bullwinkle 21 hours ago
Maybe they fell from the moon.
Replies (15)
*
Tony
83 users liked this comment
219 users disliked this comment
Tony 21 hours ago Report Abuse
oh the brain was smaller then the average brain of the ape a
million years before it how does where's the logic lol
Replies (14)
*
Christian
218 users liked this comment
57 users disliked this comment
Christian 19 hours ago Report Abuse
wow very interesting
Replies (3)
*
Daniela
311 users liked this comment
165 users disliked this comment
Daniela 19 hours ago Report Abuse
wow are you serious it could be and ancestor for an ape not
humans!
Replies (17)
*
Jerk
481 users liked this comment
424 users disliked this comment
Jerk 19 hours ago Report Abuse
So if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes?
There's also multiple species of fish... am I supposed to believe
there was 1 original fish and all the others evolved?
Replies (98)
*
John
590 users liked this comment
487 users disliked this comment
John 19 hours ago Report Abuse
Interesting, but I don't buy it. In every species, when one
species evolves into another species, the previous one disappears. So,
if we evolved from monkeys and apes, why are there still monkeys and
apes? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to
believe in creation.
Replies (88)
*
Steve
93 users liked this comment
65 users disliked this comment
Steve 19 hours ago Report Abuse
That's Great....
Replies (7)
*
Edward
238 users liked this comment
251 users disliked this comment
Edward 19 hours ago
It is interesting how the evolutionist continue to insist
man evolved from apes and the earth is billions years old. There are
still no intermediate transitional forms. There is natural selection
and adaptation but no macroevolution. Dogs still beget dogs and cats
still beget cats even though there are different varieties within the
kind.
These scientist have rejected the truth about the Creator
and have chosen to believe in fary tales for grown ups. The key to
true scientific understanding is believe in a recent creation and a
global cataclysmic flood in the days of Noah which would explain most
of the fossil record.
These evolutionist just can't exept the idea that they will
have to answer to the Creator one day for their sin. Jesus himself
attested to the historical accuracy of the Genesis record. I would
rather believe God's Son than athiests with an agenda.
Replies (48)
*
Priscilla
5 users liked this
31 users disliked this comment
Priscilla 19 hours ago Report Abuse
damn dats crazy!!! team kaname!!
Comment hidden due to low rating. Show Comment
Replies (2)
*
Himitsu
106 users liked this comment
34 users disliked this comment
Himitsu 19 hours ago
cool cool cool! I love when they find new stuff! I'm
excited. Kinda makes me want to be an archeologist...
Replies (2)
*
Daniel
3 users liked this commentThumbs UpThumbs Down44 users disliked
this comment
Daniel 19 hours ago
Ho Hum
Comment hidden due to low rating. Show Comment
Reply
*
High
53 users liked this comment
129 users disliked this comment
High 19 hours ago
Peole read your bible !!!
It say that earth had man and likeman !!!
Eva think bones are from like-man !!!
Replies (12)
*
sam
108 users liked this comment
109 users disliked this comment
sam 19 hours ago
lets continue with the discovery of who we are. that is
amazing that we are able to, soon, prove who we are. i hope that child
understands the discovery they made. hopefully we can soon let our
children THINK for themselves an not be forced to belive in a figment
of a 2000 year old mans imagination. why would we want our future in
the hands of people who belive in a tribal view of creation, when
evolution has proved it self true.why should our leaders be people who
wont belive in the realitys of the facts. lets hope that we find the
rest of our past an can soon see the true evolution of man.
Replies (12)
*
wrxacd
98 users liked this comment
80 users disliked this comment
wrxacd 19 hours ago
I just want to make people, who don't already know, aware.
The dates they come up with are not accurate the dating techniques
used to come up with these numbers are VERY inaccurate beyond a few
thousand years. So how can they know it was "2 million years" ago? And
what really bugs me about these articles is how the author tries to
present all the information as "fact" when it is based on theory. The
old saying "Don't believe everything you see on TV" would apply
nowadays. DON"T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ON THE INTERNET.
Replies (8)
*
..::Beautiful::..
139 users liked this comment
175 users disliked this comment
..::Beautiful::.. 19 hours ago Report Abuse
FInally! Actual PROOF is coming out. What kind of "proofs"
does the theory of God have?
Replies (47)
*
Joey
118 users liked this comment
162 users disliked this comment
Joey 19 hours ago
HAHAHAHAHAHA there is so little evidence for evolution every
new find lends us some supposed new clue. These losers just dont want
to admit there is a God. This is honestly to funny.
Replies (11)
*
Eric
97 users liked this comment
89 users disliked this comment
Eric 19 hours ago
In about a year, a very small article will appear(not on the
front page of Yahoo), stating that this hominid is not an ancestor of
us. Happens every time. And there are some of us who believe that the
universe is about 15 billion years old, and the earth is about 4
billion years old...Old Earth Creationists. Not to mention there are
Thiestic Evolutionists. So don't let that stop you from loving and
serving Jesus.
Replies (7)
*
AustinR
50 users liked this comment
107 users disliked this comment
AustinR 19 hours ago
Small brain and in Africa. Really, do I need to go there?
Replies (7)
*
JeremyJ
88 users liked this comment
101 users disliked this comment
JeremyJ 19 hours ago
I agree completely, If we all evolved from apes, why are
there still apes? Same applies to fish, etc... People who believe in
evolution are looking for a way to fill the gap that not believing in
God creates in their lives.
Replies (6)
*
Rev Mike
47 users liked this comment
17 users disliked this comment
Rev Mike 19 hours ago
Of course there is only one type of human left! We ate all
the others! LOL Hope they find more and I hope we get to read about
it!!
Replies (1)
*
ONE TIME
47 users liked this comment
46 users disliked this comment
ONE TIME 19 hours ago
First, we find something and title it "May be a human
ancestor." Step two, say that it is and get it published in a school
text book. Step 3, after some 25 years we learn that it wasn't what we
thought it was and keep publishing that textbook as if it is true. ...
Replies (4)
*
jake
93 users liked this comment
134 users disliked this comment
jake 19 hours ago
Wow, people still believe in evolution? Religion has more
facts this this crap.
Replies (13)
*
Charles Webb
87 users liked this comment
101 users disliked this comment
Charles Webb 19 hours ago
Ancestors? Really!!? Its an Ape or monkey Specie that`s it.
We were created. We didnt evolve. Scientists will be looking for the
missing link for eternity,because it doesnt exist.
Replies (4)
*
Shay
86 users liked this comment
108 users disliked this comment
Shay 19 hours ago
How do you know its that old? The answer is you don't. It is
wrong to say something is that old when you have no idea. And as for
this "missing link" you will never find it. God created the world. Its
as simple as that. We did not evolve from a monkey.
Replies (7)
*
Shaun S
49 users liked this comment
109 users disliked this comment
Shaun S 19 hours ago
HAHAHA!!! Stupid atheists... the earth is only 10,000 years
old. There is no "human ancestor", we are now as we have always been!
Replies (8)
*
Mat
56 users liked this comment
25 users disliked this comment
Mat 19 hours ago
This is not the forum for a religious debate; feel free to
blog or chat elsewhere if you have theological issues on this.
It really is amazing that a child made such a find; or is
it? Children do tend to dig, quite a bit. The surprising part may be
that the child notified the correct people without continuing to dig
and causing serious damage to the discovery.
Replies (5)
*
Mark
74 users liked this comment
25 users disliked this comment
Mark 19 hours ago
when one species evolves into a new species it does not
automatically mean the elimination fo the old species.....I don't mind
a person choosing the bible over science but I find it troubling how
many anti-evolutionists clearly don't understand the theory in the
slightest
Replies (7)
*
Stephen K
7 users liked this comment
19 users disliked this comment
Stephen K 19 hours ago
HAHAHA.... @ Lee
Surely you don't believe that nonsense, right? lol
#
Lee J
4 users liked this comment
9 users disliked this comment
Lee J 19 hours ago
Tig....Tig........Tig Chill out.......Don't you know sarcasm when
you read it?
Replies (1)
#
steph8208
17 users liked this comment
53 users disliked this comment
steph8208 19 hours ago
Dont Buy into it folks! Either is A.) a species that has went
extinct B) deformed animal we already have as a species or C) a
"deformed" human. This is hilarious!
Replies (3)
#
Ruth
45 users liked this comment
68 users disliked this comment
Ruth 19 hours ago
Ya'll are a mess.. Its just a species in the monkey family..
Humans did not evolve from apes.. smh
Replies (4)
#
Michael
50 users liked this comment
97 users disliked this comment
Michael 19 hours ago
The earth is only 6000 years old. About 4500 years ago there was a
catastrophic global flood, which changed things quite a bit. However,
there are no "human ancestors". Humans, and all animals originated at
the same time........the sixth day.
Replies (10)
#
__A_YAHOO_USER__
60 users liked this comment
47 users disliked this comment
__A_YAHOO_USER__ 19 hours ago
how would it take more faith to believe in evolution that is
backed by tangable facts, than it would to believe in creation that is
backed only by man written books, stories, and flintstones cartoons?
Replies (7)
#
Paul
54 users liked this comment
82 users disliked this comment
Paul 19 hours ago
God has complete control over everything including time, you
should read "The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and
Biblical Wisdom," Gerald L. Schroeder, I'm frankly tired of atheistic
comments against Christians, our founding fathers were Christian and
the reason this country is going down is because of people like you
that have no concept of sin. So instead of attacking me back, go read
something Mr. and Mrs. scientist.
Replies (6)
#
Justin
73 users liked this comment
64 users disliked this comment
Justin 19 hours ago
I swear to god (haha a pun), you religious people are all idiots
in denial. The Earth is certainly more than a measly 10,000 years old.
Heck that was the last ice age! Life began on this planet 4 BILLION
years ago. Finally more proof of evolution. Science. Facts. Take that
in your little "belief system". We have facts, you have random ideas.
Replies (13)
#
dennis
49 users liked this comment
80 users disliked this comment
dennis 19 hours ago
Here is a thought... Jesus Christ died for ALL OF US, AND ALL OF
OUR SINS, this skeleton may be an extinct species but NOT a human
ancestor. I firmly believe in the Bible, that being said, we
Christians NEED TO LOVE THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE; NOT ATTACK THEM!
Evolution is WRONG, ---IF WE ARE DESCENDANTS OF APES THEN SCIENCE
WOULD BE ABLE TO MIX HUMAN EGGS WITH PRIMATE SPERM OR VICE VERSA
PRODUCING OFFSPRING. THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DO SUCH A THING.----
Horses and donkeys produce (sterile) mules.... therefore (IF)
evolution was right and it is NOT, but if it was then there should be
an offspring which would be produced via the same technique... We are
to tell the world about Jesus, not attack the Lost or belittle them.
you will win the lost with love not hate or anger.
Replies (4)
#
Christian
53 users liked this comment
15 users disliked this comment
Christian 19 hours ago
I find it funny how these sort of articles always result in
religious lashing out.
Replies (3)
#
Chris
36 users liked this comment
67 users disliked this comment
Chris 19 hours ago
It is a FACT that Darwin himself changed and believed in Creation
not Evolution before he died!
Replies (12)
*
KB
3 users liked this comment
18 users disliked this comment
KB 19 hours ago Report Abuse
Poor stupid Lee J. Severe head injury... or just born
retarded?? Geez...
Comment hidden due to low rating. Show Comment
*
Marko
31 users liked this comment
62 users disliked this comment
Marko 19 hours ago
I'm sure it was the first Democrats. You can tell by the
small brain.
Replies (5)
*
Tom
13 users liked this comment
39 users disliked this comment
Tom 19 hours ago
Wow, Cool, another shape of a human skull...you know we all
are so much the same now. Have a little faith you amiba's Genesis
explains it all, Faith baby Faith!
Replies (2)
*
John
17 users liked this comment
31 users disliked this comment
John 19 hours ago
God made these creatures and they must be however remotely
related to our first parents. We will not gain more understanding
beyond the literal details of the Genesis creation accounts by hurling
insults at each other.
Reply
*
Gray
65 users liked this comment
33 users disliked this comment
Gray 19 hours ago
These religious people are really starting to piss me off.
Religion is fine and all I don't care if you are. Quit trying to
sholve it down peoples throats. It makes you looks ignorant.
Replies (7)
*
JimmyJam
84 users liked this comment
7 users disliked this comment
JimmyJam 19 hours ago
Judging by some of these comments, it's obvious that the
human brain is shrinking once again.
Replies (4)
*
Loratta
26 users liked this comment
6 users disliked this comment
Loratta 19 hours ago
i think this is an extrodinary find maybe one day with
discoverys like this we can put the debate of whether we discended
from apes or created by god can be put to rest
Replies (4)
*
Michael
15 users liked this comment
53 users disliked this comment
Michael 19 hours ago
The earth is only 6000 years old. About 4500 years ago there
was a catastrophic global flood, which changed things quite a bit.
However, there are no "human ancestors". Humans, and all animals
originated at the same time........the sixth day.
Replies (3)
*
NathanA
34 users liked this comment
18 users disliked this comment
NathanA 19 hours ago
One can be a believer and believe in evolution as well. The
concepts are not mutually exclusive.
Replies (3)
*
Gonzo
4 users liked this comment
13 users disliked this comment
Gonzo 19 hours ago
if this is all so then what explains ghost and spirits....
life is so crasy confuseing
Replies (1)
You get the picture...
Dr Jai Maharaj is a sad Monkey: Sid Harth
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian/browse_thread/thread/778f6f077f33363b/bf1af43c5f2c24fa?lnk=raot&pli=1
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian/msg/d407520db5c5719f
...and I am Sid Harth
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 12:17 pm
From: SuryaArya
http://www.angelfire.com/oh/Monkeys2/images/NGMonkey.jpg
==============================================================================
TOPIC: UK RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS FORCED TO REJECT HATE
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/dcfc2e198d269895?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 3:41 pm
From: "regn.pickfod"
Ray Fischer wrote:
> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So Homosexuals care nothing for the truth and care only about
>>>>>>>>>> rationalising their insane hatred.?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, that's still you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only Queer here is you, girly-boyo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And yet you're the one who thinks about gay sex so much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not the one dishonestly snipping the posts in defense
>>>>>> of Homosexuality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither am I, bigot. But you are the one who cares deeply about
>>>>> the sex lives of homosexuals.
>>>>
>>>> Of course you do.
>>>
>>> Nope. Still you. In fact you care so much that you're wanting to
>>> ignore Christ's teaching in order to have the government inflict
>>> your hatred upon them.
>>
>> No hatred.
>
> Your wish to persecute other reveals your hate.
>
You go round in circles. I want laws preventing unsafe sexual
acts that facilitate the spread of disease.I am not targetting
Homoexuals and it is really juvenile to keep claiming it is hate
based.
You are inferring Homosexuals can only be Homosexuals if they
engage in unsafe sexual acts. now that is a prejudiced and
hatefull thing to say
>> just some particular health and safety laws that would see
>
> That's a stupid lie, asshole.
what is it you are calling a lie? and don't call me asshole.I'm an
Australian.
It's Arsehole in Australian. Asshole is a stupid Yankee insult.
== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 4:21 pm
From: "W.T.S."
"regn.pickfod" <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote in message
news:4bbfad06@news.comindico.com.au...
> Ray Fischer wrote:
>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> So Homosexuals care nothing for the truth and care only about
>>>>>>>>>>> rationalising their insane hatred.?
>>>>>>>>>> No, that's still you.
>>>>>>>>> The only Queer here is you, girly-boyo.
>>>>>>>> And yet you're the one who thinks about gay sex so much.
>>>>>>> I'm not the one dishonestly snipping the posts in defense
>>>>>>> of Homosexuality.
>>>>>> Neither am I, bigot. But you are the one who cares deeply about
>>>>>> the sex lives of homosexuals.
>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>> Nope. Still you. In fact you care so much that you're wanting to
>>>> ignore Christ's teaching in order to have the government inflict
>>>> your hatred upon them.
>>> No hatred.
>> Your wish to persecute other reveals your hate.
> You go round in circles. I want laws preventing unsafe sexual
> acts that facilitate the spread of disease.I am not targetting
> Homoexuals and it is really juvenile to keep claiming it is hate
> based.
> You are inferring Homosexuals can only be Homosexuals if they
> engage in unsafe sexual acts. now that is a prejudiced and
> hatefull thing to say
>>> just some particular health and safety laws that would see
>> That's a stupid lie, asshole.
> what is it you are calling a lie? and don't call me asshole.I'm an
> Australian.
> It's Arsehole in Australian. Asshole is a stupid Yankee insult.
If we outlaw unsafe sexual acts, we'd have to outlaw any form of sex between
husband and wife, even for the purpose of pro-creation. After all, you
don't know where a husband/wife has been when you're not around.
Church, bad. Sex, good. Medical science, good too.
----------------------------------------
http://folding.stanford.edu
Save lives, visit today!
== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 6:32 pm
From: "regn.pickfod"
W.T.S. wrote:
> "regn.pickfod" <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote in message
> news:4bbfad06@news.comindico.com.au...
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> So Homosexuals care nothing for the truth and care only
>>>>>>>>>>>> about rationalising their insane hatred.?
>>>>>>>>>>> No, that's still you.
>>>>>>>>>> The only Queer here is you, girly-boyo.
>>>>>>>>> And yet you're the one who thinks about gay sex so much.
>>>>>>>> I'm not the one dishonestly snipping the posts in defense
>>>>>>>> of Homosexuality.
>>>>>>> Neither am I, bigot. But you are the one who cares deeply about
>>>>>>> the sex lives of homosexuals.
>>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>>> Nope. Still you. In fact you care so much that you're wanting to
>>>>> ignore Christ's teaching in order to have the government inflict
>>>>> your hatred upon them.
>>>> No hatred.
>>> Your wish to persecute other reveals your hate.
>> You go round in circles. I want laws preventing unsafe sexual
>> acts that facilitate the spread of disease.I am not targetting
>> Homoexuals and it is really juvenile to keep claiming it is hate
>> based.
>> You are inferring Homosexuals can only be Homosexuals if they
>> engage in unsafe sexual acts. now that is a prejudiced and
>> hatefull thing to say
>>>> just some particular health and safety laws that would see
>>> That's a stupid lie, asshole.
>> what is it you are calling a lie? and don't call me asshole.I'm an
>> Australian.
>> It's Arsehole in Australian. Asshole is a stupid Yankee insult.
> If we outlaw unsafe sexual acts, we'd have to outlaw any form of sex
> between husband and wife, even for the purpose of pro-creation. After all,
> you don't know where a husband/wife has been when you're
> not around. Church, bad. Sex, good. Medical science, good too.
> ----------------------------------------
> http://folding.stanford.edu
> Save lives, visit today!
heard of chastity belts?
-true love is blaming it on a public toilet seat.
Athiest, no moral compass.
== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 8:51 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So Homosexuals care nothing for the truth and care only about
>>>>>>>>>>> rationalising their insane hatred.?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No, that's still you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only Queer here is you, girly-boyo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And yet you're the one who thinks about gay sex so much.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not the one dishonestly snipping the posts in defense
>>>>>>> of Homosexuality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neither am I, bigot. But you are the one who cares deeply about
>>>>>> the sex lives of homosexuals.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course you do.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Still you. In fact you care so much that you're wanting to
>>>> ignore Christ's teaching in order to have the government inflict
>>>> your hatred upon them.
>>>
>>> No hatred.
>>
>> Your wish to persecute other reveals your hate.
>
>You go round in circles. I want laws preventing unsafe sexual
>acts that facilitate the spread of disease.
That's an obvious lie.
>I am not targetting
>Homoexuals
Yes you do, bigot.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 9:37 pm
From: SuryaArya
http://www.angelfire.com/oh/Monkeys2/images/NGMonkey.jpg
== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 11:43 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> regn.pickfod <regn@mysoul.cop.au> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Nope. Still you. In fact you care so much that you're wanting to
>>>> ignore Christ's teaching in order to have the government inflict
>>>> your hatred upon them.
>>>
>>> No hatred.
>>
>> Your wish to persecute other reveals your hate.
>
>You go round in circles. I want laws preventing unsafe sexual
>acts that facilitate the spread of disease.
Quite the anti-sex fascist, aren't you? You want to impose a
dictatorship where people's private sex lives are monitored for
state compliance. And why? Because you think that you know what's
best for people?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
==============================================================================
TOPIC: IT'S ABOUT SHARIA'H - The Shoaib-Sania-Ayesha affair tells its own
story
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/t/71f461ca5ebb1d52?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 9 2010 6:03 pm
From: usenet@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)
It's about sharia'h
By Anuradha Dutt
Op-Ed
The Pioneer
Friday, April 9, 2010
The Shoaib-Sania-Ayesha affair tells its own story
It turned out to be a storm in a teacup when, after stridently
denying that he had married her some years ago, former Pakistani
cricket captain Shoaib Malik suddenly capitulated and divorced
Hyderabad-based Ayesha Siddiqui. Community elders claimed to have
negotiated the parting of ways, as per Islamic law.
While Indian tennis star Sania Mirza can now seal her union with
Malik, as planned, this should not be treated as the end of the
matter. This is because the acrimonious dispute over the cricketer's
marital status, with the man and his fianc�e denying that he had a
wife, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, focuses attention
on some unsavoury aspects of celebrity culture. The compulsions of
glamour and success eclipsing normal human responses and concerns,
the two sports stars behaved as if they were a law unto themselves
until Malik was forced to buckle down under public pressure.
Worse, as a foreign national, one might have expected him to be more
circumspect on alien soil. But he continued to lie through his teeth
almost till the very end. And Sania, considered to be an icon for
teenage girls, lost much of her lustre through her complicity in his
play-acting. As a prospective power couple, which could win lucrative
endorsement contracts across continents, and remain in the spotlight,
Sania and Shoaib are seen to have thrown all caution to the winds.
The affair also raises questions about the implementation of Muslim
personal law, with respect to marriage, in India and Pakistan. While
Muslim men in India are accorded the right to take four wives freely,
in Pakistan, for the man to marry again, the first or other
wife/wives apparently need to formally grant consent. And in the
matter of divorce, a period of reconciliation, involving the couple,
is mandatory. Here, the man can divorce a wife simply be pronouncing
talaq three times.
The most offensive aspect of the episode is the humiliation suffered
by his first wife, who not only publicly suffered his rejection but
had to explain why he had abandoned her. Apparently, after the nikaah
in June 2002, he began to berate her for being too over-weight and
ungainly. This would be ludicrous if it were not so overtly sexist.
In his own defence, Malik vilified Ayesha for being a terrible
letdown after alluring him with photographs of a presumably slender
female. Ayesha's mother stated on television that her daughter even
went under the knife to have some of the fat removed surgically, at
great peril to her life. It is not a far-fetched claim but a fairly
common situation, with partners' taunts forcing many women in the
West, and now, increasingly, here too among the urban upwardly mobile
section, to resort to plastic surgeons for a boost in self-esteem.
Since females are commodified more than males, they tend to be more
sensitive to taunts about appearance. Thus traumatised, she tried to
make herself more acceptable to Malik though to no avail.
Apparently, a simple apology from the player and pronouncement of
divorce would have been sufficient for Ayesha and her parents to
agree to his marrying Sania. But his refusal to acknowledge the
marriage raised their hackles and goaded them to confront him. They
finally filed a case against the cricketer under Section 506
(criminal intimidation); 420 (cheating); and 498(A) (dowry
harassment). While the cases have now been withdrawn, the public spat
has left an ugly impression, to the discredit to the celebrity duo.
One of the mediators in the dispute stated on television that they
forced a truce in the interests of relations between India and
Pakistan, among other reasons, as the situation seemed to be
spiralling out of control. There is truth in the assertion as tempers
on both sides of the border had begun to flare up over the issue.
Here, women activists had also jumped into the fray on Ayesha's
behalf; a Kolkata imam was reported to have come out against Malik's
denial of his marriage; and Sania was being castigated for her
complicity.
The one worthwhile lesson to be drawn from the affair is that the
Indian understanding of Muslim personal law with respect to marriage
and divorce is much more liberal here than in some Islamic countries.
The laxity in rules may be the reason why Malik and Sania chose to
get married in India, taking advantage of the liberal application of
Muslim law.
More at:
http://www.dailypioneer.com
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.arts.movies.local.indian"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.arts.movies.local.indian+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.local.indian/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment