|
Post by Arlon10 on Feb 17, 2018 17:28:25 GMT
Who if anyone is talking about the end of the world in this thread? There does appear much dispute on the matter. I attempt to solve the issue here. I found the first occurrence at the 11th message. It is from @graham Earlier in the thread, the 6th message, @winterssuicide had mentioned the conditions on Earth about the time of the Tower of Babel. That is shortly after the flood. It appears then that graham and associates mistook comments on Earth shortly after the flood for comments about the end of the world, which it is about as far from as it can get. The confusion then is entirely the fault of atheists with a superficial understanding of the Bible. Ha, to be fair, the conditions just before the Flood are the same conditions before the end of the world (per the scriptures). Unification of humanity is always a harbinger of doom. So maybe the atheists on the board are just really witty. They were not the same conditions. Conditions just before the flood were not at issue here yet. Nevertheless those conditions, and those just after the flood, and those at various times in the end times are all very different. Just before the flood the conditions involved the corruption of humanity by evil angelic intermarriages. That problem is not noted after the flood. Just after the flood the problem was a boldness of mankind due to having no check on its activities. That problem was solved by breaking it up into groups that could not understand each other's language. In the end times he problems were very different in various churches (seven churches are mentioned) caused by different types of people at first. Then Satan is loosed. He then leads a large army against the people of God. Lately there are some Christians who believe that the United Nations and various treaties are becoming a problem similar to just after the flood. Just how similar does not matter, it is not a harbinger of the end of the world, at least not according to the Bible. It indeed could be a serious problem, but not a sign of end times according to the Bible. Erjen 1 Atheists 0 winterssuicide 0 Arlon 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 17:35:54 GMT
Ha, to be fair, the conditions just before the Flood are the same conditions before the end of the world (per the scriptures). Unification of humanity is always a harbinger of doom. So maybe the atheists on the board are just really witty. They were not the same conditions. Conditions just before the flood were not at issue here yet. Nevertheless those conditions, and those just after the flood, and those at various times in the end times are all very different. Just before the flood the conditions involved the corruption of humanity by evil angelic intermarriages. That problem is not noted after the flood. Just after the flood the problem was a boldness of mankind due to having no check on its activities. That problem was solved by breaking it up into groups that could not understand each other's language. In the end times he problems were very different in various churches (seven churches are mentioned) caused by different types of people at first. Then Satan is loosed. He then leads a large army against the people of God. Lately there are some Christians who believe that the United Nations and various treaties are becoming a problem similar to just after the flood. Just how similar does not matter, it is not a harbinger of the end of the world, at least not according to the Bible. It indeed could be a serious problem, but not a sign of end times according to the Bible. Erjen 1 Atheists 0 winterssuicide 0 Arlon 1 You make a lot of hasty mistakes, my friend. For one thing, Jesus himself says that the end of days will be "like the days of Noah." So Bible = 1, Arlon = 0 on that one. For another thing, whilst the conditions of angelic/human interbreeding were done (as far as we know, since we are not explicitly told it never happened again), their results were far from over. Thus, Goliath, thus, the Amelkites, etc. For a third, Jesus' address to the seven churches was a present condition, not a future one. For a fourth, a whole heck of lot happens before Satan is bound and then loosed again. Included in those things is the rise of The Beast, The False Prophet and a one-world government/religion. Per the scriptures. This is another reason Jesus likened the 70th week of Daniel to the days of Noah, for, in fact, complete human unity is exactly what elevates evil to its greatest height in both instances.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Feb 17, 2018 18:09:28 GMT
They were not the same conditions. Conditions just before the flood were not at issue here yet. Nevertheless those conditions, and those just after the flood, and those at various times in the end times are all very different. Just before the flood the conditions involved the corruption of humanity by evil angelic intermarriages. That problem is not noted after the flood. Just after the flood the problem was a boldness of mankind due to having no check on its activities. That problem was solved by breaking it up into groups that could not understand each other's language. In the end times he problems were very different in various churches (seven churches are mentioned) caused by different types of people at first. Then Satan is loosed. He then leads a large army against the people of God. Lately there are some Christians who believe that the United Nations and various treaties are becoming a problem similar to just after the flood. Just how similar does not matter, it is not a harbinger of the end of the world, at least not according to the Bible. It indeed could be a serious problem, but not a sign of end times according to the Bible. Erjen 1 Atheists 0 winterssuicide 0 Arlon 1 You make a lot of hasty mistakes, my friend. For one thing, Jesus himself says that the end of days will be "like the days of Noah." So Bible = 1, Arlon = 0 on that one. For another thing, whilst the conditions of angelic/human interbreeding were done (as far as we know, since we are not explicitly told it never happened again), their results were far from over. Thus, Goliath, thus, the Amelkites, etc. For a third, Jesus' address to the seven churches was a present condition, not a future one. For a fourth, a whole heck of lot happens before Satan is bound and then loosed again. Included in those things is the rise of The Beast, The False Prophet and a one-world government/religion. Per the scriptures. This is another reason Jesus likened the 70th week of Daniel to the days of Noah, for, in fact, complete human unity is exactly what elevates evil to its greatest height in both instances. Thank you, I appreciate your efforts to make things clear. I do not agree however that things being "like the days of Noah" means the problem has the same cause as in the days of Noah. Evil angelic intermarriage does not at all appear the cause of the trouble in the end times. You might be correct about the effects of evil angelic intermarriage being "far from over" but wouldn't that mean Noah and family were corrupted too? It rather appears they were saved because they were not corrupted that way. The time line of the Revelation remains a matter of great dispute with very different interpretations. Perhaps the duration of the problems in the churches was/is rather long. Nevertheless the problem does not appear evil angelic intermarriage any more. The "one world government" in the Revelation is not one of human origin. It is Satan's temporary victory over the world. People who believe "one world government" is necessarily evil are considered very seriously mentally handicapped and a serious threat to their own safety and the safety of those around them. The achievement of peace in the world is ordinarily much applauded. The formula for world peace is often considered God's laws. A "one world government" based on God's laws would not be evil like Satan's. By the way it happens in Revelation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 18:19:10 GMT
You make a lot of hasty mistakes, my friend. For one thing, Jesus himself says that the end of days will be "like the days of Noah." So Bible = 1, Arlon = 0 on that one. For another thing, whilst the conditions of angelic/human interbreeding were done (as far as we know, since we are not explicitly told it never happened again), their results were far from over. Thus, Goliath, thus, the Amelkites, etc. For a third, Jesus' address to the seven churches was a present condition, not a future one. For a fourth, a whole heck of lot happens before Satan is bound and then loosed again. Included in those things is the rise of The Beast, The False Prophet and a one-world government/religion. Per the scriptures. This is another reason Jesus likened the 70th week of Daniel to the days of Noah, for, in fact, complete human unity is exactly what elevates evil to its greatest height in both instances. Thank you, I appreciate your efforts to make things clear. I do not agree however that things being "like the days of Noah" means the problem has the same cause as in the days of Noah. Evil angelic intermarriage does not at all appear the cause of the trouble in the end times. You might be correct about the effects of evil angelic intermarriage being "far from over" but wouldn't that mean Noah and family were corrupted too? It rather appears they were saved because they were not corrupted that way. The time line of the Revelation remains a matter of great dispute with very different interpretations. Perhaps the duration of the problems in the churches was/is rather long. Nevertheless the problem does not appear evil angelic intermarriage any more. The "one world government" in the Revelation is not one of human origin. It is Satan's temporary victory over the world. People who believe "one world government" is necessarily evil are considered very seriously mentally handicapped and a serious threat to their own safety and the safety of those around them. The achievement of peace in the world is ordinarily much applauded. The formula for world peace is often considered God's laws. A "one world government" based on God's laws would not be evil like Satan's. By the way it happens in Revelation. Guess you'll just have to count me among those who find no controversy in reading Revelation for what it is: a book that contains distant past, recent past, current, near future and far future events. You'll also have to count me among those who think national identity is important and that a unified world is the worst thing that can happen to it. Also, the scriptures say that the one world government is of the world that it is run by a man. Satan's power is behind that man and that unity, but it's still a human body composed explicitly of humans. The infection of the nephilim was almost certainly carried on board Noahs' arc within the genetics of one of Noah's daughters in law.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Feb 17, 2018 18:37:16 GMT
You'll also have to count me among those who think national identity is important and that a unified world is the worst thing that can happen to it. Also, the scriptures say that the one world government is of the world that it is run by a man. Satan's power is behind that man and that unity, but it's still a human body composed explicitly of humans. No, once the laws of God are finally understood the world will be united in peaceful respect for them. That doesn't necessarily mean the end of all the other "religions" or their various traditions. It just means those traditions will be understood in a context of harmony with God's laws. See Revelation chapter 22 versus 3 through 5. I'm not saying a national identity is not important. I believe there can be and ought to be various nations. That is just practical science. The world is a mixture of very different climates and terrain and various bodies of water the best management of which is a local concern. I can see that many people these days do not understand or respect that. I agree that is a terrible problem. That is science though. God's spiritual laws apply equally across all those material conditions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 18:49:43 GMT
You'll also have to count me among those who think national identity is important and that a unified world is the worst thing that can happen to it. Also, the scriptures say that the one world government is of the world that it is run by a man. Satan's power is behind that man and that unity, but it's still a human body composed explicitly of humans. No, once the laws of God are finally understood the world will be united in peaceful respect for them. That doesn't necessarily mean the end of all the other "religions" or their various traditions. It just means those traditions will be understood in a context of harmony with God's laws. See Revelation chapter 22 versus 3 through 5. I'm not saying a national identity is not important. I believe there can be and ought to be various nations. That is just practical science. The world is a mixture of very different climates and terrain and various bodies of water the best management of which is a local concern. I can see that many people these days do not understand or respect that. I agree that is a terrible problem. That is science though. God's spiritual laws apply equally across all those material conditions. The events of Revelation 22 occur after all evil creatures, including evil humans, have been removed from the equation by being cast into the Lake of Fire. I was referring to human unity before this event. Because human unity before that event includes evil humans, and anytime evil humans are part of a structure, that structure rots.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Feb 17, 2018 19:05:16 GMT
No, once the laws of God are finally understood the world will be united in peaceful respect for them. That doesn't necessarily mean the end of all the other "religions" or their various traditions. It just means those traditions will be understood in a context of harmony with God's laws. See Revelation chapter 22 versus 3 through 5. I'm not saying a national identity is not important. I believe there can be and ought to be various nations. That is just practical science. The world is a mixture of very different climates and terrain and various bodies of water the best management of which is a local concern. I can see that many people these days do not understand or respect that. I agree that is a terrible problem. That is science though. God's spiritual laws apply equally across all those material conditions. The events of Revelation 22 occur after all evil creatures, including evil humans, have been removed from the equation by being cast into the Lake of Fire. I was referring to human unity before this event. Because human unity before that event includes evil humans, and anytime evil humans are part of a structure, that structure rots. Thanks again for your contributions to the discussion. I have spent more time than most people studying the problem of evil. I believe that there is such a thing. I believe it is extremely rare though. I suspect most of the "evil" in the world is just misguided, poorly educated, more or less decent human beings who can learn better. I believe in self defense against any real immediate threat no matter how "evil" it is. Most threats are not immediate however. It is a shame how often self defense is incorrectly invoked. I believe it is possible to quickly recognize the cause of trouble. I believe more and more people are learning how. I believe the solutions will be more and more effective before trouble escalates too far.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 19:08:12 GMT
The events of Revelation 22 occur after all evil creatures, including evil humans, have been removed from the equation by being cast into the Lake of Fire. I was referring to human unity before this event. Because human unity before that event includes evil humans, and anytime evil humans are part of a structure, that structure rots. Thanks again for your contributions to the discussion. I have spent more time than most people studying the problem of evil. I believe that there is such a thing. I believe it is extremely rare though. I suspect most of the "evil" in the world is just misguided, poorly educated, more or less decent human beings who can learn better. I believe in self defense against any real immediate threat no matter how "evil" it is. Most threats are not immediate however. It is a shame how often self defense is incorrectly invoked. I believe it is possible to quickly recognize the cause of trouble. I believe more and more people are learning how. I believe the solutions will be more and more effective before trouble escalates too far. Not in the US. We're headed for a civil war and everybody knows it.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 17, 2018 19:23:53 GMT
Dystopian society =/= "the end of the world." You may not like it, but there's nothing you can do about it. Not true. There is something I can do about it: Repost the relevant part of @graham 's post regarding the "end of the world". No, nobody is talking about it. Some people just like to drop hints. Quoted for truth. You can also argue that a table is really a chair because it has four legs and you can sit on it.....if you've nothing better to do with your time and don't mind looking like a fool.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 17, 2018 19:54:02 GMT
The events of Revelation 22 occur after all evil creatures, including evil humans, have been removed from the equation by being cast into the Lake of Fire. I was referring to human unity before this event. Because human unity before that event includes evil humans, and anytime evil humans are part of a structure, that structure rots. Thanks again for your contributions to the discussion. I have spent more time than most people studying the problem of evil. I believe that there is such a thing. I believe it is extremely rare though. I suspect most of the "evil" in the world is just misguided, poorly educated, more or less decent human beings who can learn better. I believe in self defense against any real immediate threat no matter how "evil" it is. Most threats are not immediate however. It is a shame how often self defense is incorrectly invoked. I believe it is possible to quickly recognize the cause of trouble. I believe more and more people are learning how. I believe the solutions will be more and more effective before trouble escalates too far. You have to get through Monday before you can get to Friday. By the same token, the Satanic New World Order will be established before the new earth is created. Revelation tells us right off the bat (Chapter 1, Verse 1) that these things must happen. No fun accepting it, but the Great Tribulation is planned already, and it won't be avoided. Arlon10, you're one of the posters on this board whom I've got a lot of respect for, but I had to shed my new age illusions about six years ago, and I wish I had done it sooner. I don't think we do ourselves any favors when we buy into the establishment propaganda about how we're all going to come together someday and sing Kumbaya and make the world a paradise without any of the bad stuff happening in the interim. It's a beautiful idea, but it isn't realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Feb 17, 2018 23:24:08 GMT
Thanks again for your contributions to the discussion. I have spent more time than most people studying the problem of evil. I believe that there is such a thing. I believe it is extremely rare though. I suspect most of the "evil" in the world is just misguided, poorly educated, more or less decent human beings who can learn better. I believe in self defense against any real immediate threat no matter how "evil" it is. Most threats are not immediate however. It is a shame how often self defense is incorrectly invoked. I believe it is possible to quickly recognize the cause of trouble. I believe more and more people are learning how. I believe the solutions will be more and more effective before trouble escalates too far. Not in the US. We're headed for a civil war and everybody knows it. Well now it appears Mr. "Journalist" is the last to know something. What civil war do you mean? Why didn't my journalism school give me more clues? I am thoroughly acquainted with many problems in the United States. The Republican Party is still searching for its identity. The Democratic Party would be searching for its own too, but isn't aware it needs an identity. More Republicans are aligning closer with Trump now but with much lower expectations than his original supporters. I can see quite much trouble ahead, but I don't believe ""civil war" describes it well. A big mistake some people are making is thinking the Republican Party represents any religion very well. It is essentially a political party with political priorities. For much the same reason the Democratic Party is not religious either. Both parties are mostly atheists, but many of them prefer to maintain a (dubious) connection to religion for the advantages they hope to gain thereby. The Democrats tend to be Christian Atheists. That means they like the teachings of Jesus as they interpret them, but do not believe in any divine being; Father, Son, Holy Spirit or any other. Christian Atheism was a movement in religious education in the 1960s, but continues in an unofficial way. The Republicans tend to be Military Atheists. That means they believe in military power to the exclusion of any god. Most of them believe in doing what they are told to do by what they consider legitimate authority. Some of them confuse that authority with a god, thus the connection of Republicans to religion. You and Erjen have beliefs remotely similar to Military Atheism except with a better connection to religion. They consider the military the foremost legitimate authority. They believe might is right. The believe power comes from the barrel of a gun. They believe they can do whatever they like because they kill people who disagree with it. Neither political party is very religious. The Democrats believe in forcing people to be nice. The Republicans believe in forcing people to be mean. Government is about forcing people to do things, religion is not. That's why neither political party has been able to solve any problems for several decades. What is needed is religion, not political prowess, not for the problems today. What is also needed is a better understanding of science. Science doesn't force anything either. It explains. The "science" dominating the scene today is not explaining anything very well, rather it depends on the "majority" it still claims. That is not really science.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 17, 2018 23:26:39 GMT
Would you be opposed to prisoners having these implanted if it meant prison violence was severely reduced? Or it would mean making it much easier to capture prison escapees? How about soldiers? If they were inured, lost, or captured, wouldn't it be good to know where they are?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 17, 2018 23:38:14 GMT
Not true. There is something I can do about it: Repost the relevant part of @graham 's post regarding the "end of the world". Quoted for truth. You can also argue that a table is really a chair because it has four legs and you can sit on it..... if you've nothing better to do with your time and don't mind looking like a fool. Coming from someone who believes that "Revelations" from the Bible contain real prophecies, I take it as a compliment.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 17, 2018 23:41:46 GMT
Would you be opposed to prisoners having these implanted if it meant prison violence was severely reduced? Or it would mean making it much easier to capture prison escapees? How about soldiers? If they were inured, lost, or captured, wouldn't it be good to know where they are? Excellent questions, and I'm a little surprised, considering the source of them. Yes, I would be opposed to it. Proponents of the implantable RFID say it's only for identification, not for locating someone. Your question implies a disagreement of this. In a prison, the whereabouts of prisoners are known (or should be known) at all times. Even if the whereabouts of an inmate is not known, as long as he/she is somewhere on prison grounds it shouldn't take very long to locate him/her. If I were an escaped prisoner with a locating device implanted under my skin, one of the first things I would do after escaping is cut it out and stash it on an 18-wheeler that was going in the opposite direction from me. I would think that anyone who is smart enough to escape from a prison these days would do something similar. As for soldiers, identification has traditionally been done by means of dog tags. They have other equipment that allows them to be located if they are separated from the chain of command.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 17, 2018 23:42:38 GMT
You can also argue that a table is really a chair because it has four legs and you can sit on it..... if you've nothing better to do with your time and don't mind looking like a fool. Coming from someone who believes that "Revelations" from the Bible contain real prophecies, I take it as a compliment. Do you regard any prophecies as real?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 17, 2018 23:47:20 GMT
Would you be opposed to prisoners having these implanted if it meant prison violence was severely reduced? Or it would mean making it much easier to capture prison escapees? How about soldiers? If they were inured, lost, or captured, wouldn't it be good to know where they are? Excellent questions, and I'm a little surprised, considering the source of them. Yes, I would be opposed to it. Proponents of the implantable RFID say it's only for identification, not for locating someone. Your question implies a disagreement of this. In a prison, the whereabouts of prisoners are known (or should be known) at all times. Even if the whereabouts of an inmate is not known, as long as he/she is somewhere on prison grounds it shouldn't take very long to locate him/her. If I were an escaped prisoner with a locating device implanted under my skin, one of the first things I would do after escaping is cut it out and stash it on an 18-wheeler that was going in the opposite direction from me. I would think that anyone who is smart enough to escape from a prison these days would do something similar. As for soldiers, identification has traditionally been done by means of dog tags. They have other equipment that allows them to be located if they are separated from the chain of command. "In a prison, the whereabouts of prisoners are known (or should be known) at all times." Not really, prisoners have more freedom than you realize. It's not like they're in cells all days, there's a reason stabbings/beatings/rape is so rampant in prison. Not to mention drug distribution/use is incredibly widespread in prison. "They have other equipment that allows them to be located if they are separated from the chain of command." But the equipment could get lost, damaged, stolen, etc, having chips implanted would almost guarantee they could be traced anytime and less prone to getting lost/taken prisoner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 23:50:11 GMT
Would you be opposed to prisoners having these implanted if it meant prison violence was severely reduced? Or it would mean making it much easier to capture prison escapees? How about soldiers? If they were inured, lost, or captured, wouldn't it be good to know where they are? That's a "no" for me across the board.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 17, 2018 23:50:31 GMT
Excellent questions, and I'm a little surprised, considering the source of them. Yes, I would be opposed to it. Proponents of the implantable RFID say it's only for identification, not for locating someone. Your question implies a disagreement of this. In a prison, the whereabouts of prisoners are known (or should be known) at all times. Even if the whereabouts of an inmate is not known, as long as he/she is somewhere on prison grounds it shouldn't take very long to locate him/her. If I were an escaped prisoner with a locating device implanted under my skin, one of the first things I would do after escaping is cut it out and stash it on an 18-wheeler that was going in the opposite direction from me. I would think that anyone who is smart enough to escape from a prison these days would do something similar. As for soldiers, identification has traditionally been done by means of dog tags. They have other equipment that allows them to be located if they are separated from the chain of command. "In a prison, the whereabouts of prisoners are known (or should be known) at all times." Not really, prisoners have more freedom than you realize. It's not like they're in cells all days, there's a reason stabbings/beatings/rape is so rampant in prison. Not to mention drug distribution/use is incredibly widespread in prison. "They have other equipment that allows them to be located if they are separated from the chain of command." But the equipment could get lost, damaged, stolen, etc, having chips implanted would almost guarantee they could be traced anytime and less prone to getting lost/taken prisoner. So, may I take it that you do believe the real purpose of the implant is for tracking people? You know, kind of like an I-phone that you can't misplace?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 17, 2018 23:51:14 GMT
Coming from someone who believes that "Revelations" from the Bible contain real prophecies, I take it as a compliment. Do you regard any prophecies as real? The weather forecast (in the short term), or the prediction of sunrise and sunset times, and of the Moon phases, are usually pretty accurate. Prophecies in books written centuries ago? Not so much.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 23:51:20 GMT
Not in the US. We're headed for a civil war and everybody knows it. Well now it appears Mr. "Journalist" is the last to know something. What civil war do you mean? Why didn't my journalism school give me more clues? I am thoroughly acquainted with many problems in the United States. The Republican Party is still searching for its identity. The Democratic Party would be searching for its own too, but isn't aware it needs an identity. More Republicans are aligning closer with Trump now but with much lower expectations than his original supporters. I can see quite much trouble ahead, but I don't believe ""civil war" describes it well. A big mistake some people are making is thinking the Republican Party represents any religion very well. It is essentially a political party with political priorities. For much the same reason the Democratic Party is not religious either. Both parties are mostly atheists, but many of them prefer to maintain a (dubious) connection to religion for the advantages they hope to gain thereby. The Democrats tend to be Christian Atheists. That means they like the teachings of Jesus as they interpret them, but do not believe in any divine being; Father, Son, Holy Spirit or any other. Christian Atheism was a movement in religious education in the 1960s, but continues in an unofficial way. The Republicans tend to be Military Atheists. That means they believe in military power to the exclusion of any god. Most of them believe in doing what they are told to do by what they consider legitimate authority. Some of them confuse that authority with a god, thus the connection of Republicans to religion. You and Erjen have beliefs remotely similar to Military Atheism except with a better connection to religion. They consider the military the foremost legitimate authority. They believe might is right. The believe power comes from the barrel of a gun. They believe they can do whatever they like because they kill people who disagree with it. Neither political party is very religious. The Democrats believe in forcing people to be nice. The Republicans believe in forcing people to be mean. Government is about forcing people to do things, religion is not. That's why neither political party has been able to solve any problems for several decades. What is needed is religion, not political prowess, not for the problems today. What is also needed is a better understanding of science. Science doesn't force anything either. It explains. The "science" dominating the scene today is not explaining anything very well, rather it depends on the "majority" it still claims. That is not really science. Yikes.
|
|