Let's Fling Some [Bigfoot] Poop

So Wood Natural Selection:

the process by which forms of life having traits that better enable them to adapt to specific environmental pressures, as predators, changes in climate, or competition for food or mates, will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers than others of their kind, thus ensuring the perpetuation of those favorable traits in succeeding generations.

Ok so please explain why then Homosexuality has not been breed out of us? Homosexuality does nothing to improve or advance the species
Since we know that Science states that:

Biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or asexual orientation include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure.

So Homosexuality is Genetic. So why do we have more Homosexual people now then ever before? Since reproduction is needed for Natural Selection why do we have so many people who are Homosexual? In Natural selection the Gene that causes this would have been wiped out by now.


P.s.
I am not Homophobic. I am making a point based on Woods belief that Natural Selection, evolves the species forward.

Not all mutations are beneficial. Non beneficial mutations will be retained if there is no cost to an organism.

Next on Evolution:

If we are decendent from Apes...Natural selection and mutation evolved us.
Why have not all apes that we came from have not died out. We would be the superiour form and the others would have been inferior for life and would have become extinct.

Woodwose wrote:Not all mutations are beneficial. Non beneficial mutations will be retained if there is no cost to an organism.

Homosexuality is a Mutation? Really?

Again not according to NS it would and should have been breed out by now.

Look it up its new Thought on the orginal TOE of a single organism...

Yes TOE does believe and state that we evolved from a common ancestor.
Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.[1]

Life on Earth originated and then evolved from a universal common ancestor approximately 3.7 billion years ago. Repeated speciation and the divergence of life can be inferred from shared sets of biochemical and morphological traits, or by shared DNA sequences. These homologous traits and sequences are more similar among species that share a more recent common ancestor, and can be used to reconstruct evolutionary histories, using both existing species and the fossil record. Existing patterns of biodiversity have been shaped both by speciation and by extinction.[2]

So did we evolve from a Single cell organism or what you seem to change the Idea of what TOE Says.

Now science is saying this.

Instead of one universal evolutionary tree, picture a three-trunk stand sharing a communal root system. A new theory of cellular evolution published in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences rejects Charles Darwin¿s Doctrine of Common Descent—the idea that all organisms are derived from a single primordial ancestor. Instead, Carl Woese of the University of Illinois-Champaign proposes that the three cell types that comprise life on earth arose from three forms of proto cells that swam together in a dense genetic soup, freely sharing their DNA.

Only if homosexuality is unbeneficial on a large scale. We see homosexuality in other species and yet it does not hinder prolifiation in those species.

The TOE takes account of this, however ID proposes that evolution is purposefully guided by an intelligence. Why would a designer allow individuals to occur that cannot proliferate?

I'm going to have to bite my tongue with regard to your comment about other ape species and I've reached a point where I realise that you are beyond reasoned discourse.

In the future I will however take you to task if you speculate about BF in terms that rely upon taximony, definitions and evidence derived from the TOE.

LOL yea what ever your a big man aren't you!!
You don't even know the correct things about Taxonomy.

How many times can you change the goal post or play your word play

As I have explained previously the TOE is not immutable. It absorbs new evidence and criticism, and the TOE has changed over time in the face of criticism and falsifiction.

I will no longer respond to your straw man arguments as you are not open to reasoned debate.

LOL your a jerk
cause you are not reasonable either.

I gave you an Out to agree that we see 2 different working theories but you are the one who would not accept it.
ID and TOE are current Theories.
But now science is Now disagreeing with the TOE / NS

Instead of one universal evolutionary tree, picture a three-trunk stand sharing a communal root system. A new theory of cellular evolution published in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences rejects Charles Darwin¿s Doctrine of Common Descent—the idea that all organisms are derived from a single primordial ancestor. Instead, Carl Woese of the University of Illinois-Champaign proposes that the three cell types that comprise life on earth arose from three forms of proto cells that swam together in a dense genetic soup, freely sharing their DNA.

So yea what ever your Just so much smarter than anyone else on this board...

So yea what ever you say their Dude.

If proven Woese' hypothesis represents a reason to revise the TOE. The TOE has been revised numerous times in the ast 150 years.

Revisions are not refutations. Even if there is a refutation that undermines all aspects of a theory, you also need to provide an alternative explanatihon, which is something ID does not offer. Again you need to look at the Dover trial.

I've already said more than I should have and more than I meant to. You are never going to debate this in terms that are verifiable, so further discussion is futile.

Woodwose wrote:Only if homosexuality is unbeneficial on a large scale. We see homosexuality in other species and yet it does not hinder prolifiation in those species.

The TOE takes account of this, however ID proposes that evolution is purposefully guided by an intelligence. Why would a designer allow individuals to occur that cannot proliferate?

I'm going to have to bite my tongue with regard to your comment about other ape species and I've reached a point where I realise that you are beyond reasoned discourse.

In the future I will however take you to task if you speculate about BF in terms that rely upon taximony, definitions and evidence derived from the TOE.

Because I.D. Designer/Desiner's were not "God". We could just as easily been some kids science project on a petri dish. Going by Sitchin's account of Sumerian creation, We (Humans) were created for the sole purpose of mining gold, after the natural inhabitants were found difficult to work with. And they mixed their own DNA with that of the top Hominid and created us to look like midget versions of "Them". Then they found us, too much like them for some unknown reason (Rebellion or as Sitchin suggested, we built our own space craft.) So they retarded our development, shortened our life span and either intentionally or accidentally added all these genetic diseases to us. (No other creature but Humans have this much variety of genetic disease. (Natural selection weeds them out.)

While you can make the evolution argument in almost every organism on earth. (Note: that your view of evolutionary proof is not my own. Subspecies is still Species to me. You take a duck, and from it make a green duck, it is still a duck. I want to see a duck made into an elephant... or at least an eagle.) I will admit that the Homo line (Though there are many missing links) evolving into the next Homo looks probable. Humans are the exception. No creature on Earth is like us. Physically we are tropical grassland creatures. So you would think that any link to us would have also been. The landscape that is ideal for fossils was OUR intended habitat. Yet where are the links to us?

We get sick easily, we are killed easily, we have no fur, our bone mass is pathetic compared to apes and the other Homo-Hominids. By all rights, Natural selection should have weeded us out thousands of years ago. Our feet absolutely make no sense. Our very locomotion tares us down. heel strikes the ground, rest of foot slaps the ground and as we roll through the step, we put all of our weight on our toes at a hyper extended level. Not to forget that our knees lock as we do it. Aside from the foot and knee damage we receive over time, we send the shock right up to our back. By the time we reach our 40's we start having back pain (As I do already). This is how Natural selection works?... We weaker Animal survives over the stronger more perfect ones? (of coarse I do not think this is the case. I think Bigfoot is the generic name for ALL of them.. or at least four.)

Humans make no evolutionary sense. We are the contradiction to the whole theory. Only our brains make us survive.

So this Weekend I went to my local Nature center they were having a fundraising event.
They had several people from different Animal Research areas.
Very Intresting one came to the place
He has a Bird it appeared to be a Goose.
As he described it isn't JUST a Goose they actually have no clue what type of bird it is.
The Bird has traits of the Goose and Several other different Birds not similar to the Goose.
They are not sure if it is a new Species yet that was unkown or what it is.

Why did i write this?
Well I believe that science is not Perfect. New Theories are coming out all the time.
ID is just another theory
You can argue till your blue in the face but you Limit yourself to TOE while I am questioning TOE and I will Question ID.
We have so many holes in current evolution theory. So science keeps readjusting the Evolution criteria to fit the new information. And other main stream science will argue against ID.
Its funny it sounds Just like what happen when TOE first came out .

Wood you claim that Intellectual Design has had no Peer Review
I would like to point you to the following website that points out Peer reviewed articles and Journals and Papers.
http://www.discovery.org/a/2640

Joseph A. Kuhn, “Dissecting Darwinism,” Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, Vol. 25(1): 41-47 (2012).

David L. Abel, “Is Life Unique?,” Life, Vol. 2:106-134 (2012).

Douglas D. Axe, Philip Lu, and Stephanie Flatau, “A Stylus-Generated Artificial Genome with Analogy to Minimal Bacterial Genomes,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2011(3) (2011).

Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, “Can the Origin of the Genetic Code Be Explained by Direct RNA Templating?,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2011(2) (2011).

Ann K. Gauger and Douglas D. Axe, “The Evolutionary Accessibility of New Enzyme Functions: A Case Study from the Biotin Pathway,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2011(1) (2011).

Ann K. Gauger, Stephanie Ebnet, Pamela F. Fahey, and Ralph Seelke, “Reductive Evolution Can Prevent Populations from Taking Simple Adaptive Paths to High Fitness,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010 (2) (2010)

Michael J. Behe, “Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and ‘The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution,’” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 85(4):1-27 (December 2010).

Douglas D. Axe, “The Limits of Complex Adaptation: An Analysis Based on a Simple Model of Structured Bacterial Populations,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010(4):1 (2010).

Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, “Mutagenesis in Physalis pubescens L. ssp. floridana: Some further research on Dollo’s Law and the Law of Recurrent Variation,” Floriculture and Ornamental Biotechnology, 1-21 (2010).

George Montañez, Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski, and Robert J. Marks II, “A Vivisection of the ev Computer Organism: Identifying Sources of Active Information,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010(3) (2010).

William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “The Search for a Search: Measuring the Information Cost of Higher Level Search,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Vol. 14 (5):475-486 (2010).

Douglas D. Axe, “The Case Against a Darwinian Origin of Protein Folds,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010 (1) (2010).
Winston Ewert, George Montañez, William Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “Efficient Per Query Information Extraction from a Hamming Oracle,” 42nd South Eastern Symposium on System Theory, pp. 290-297 (March, 2010).

I could go on, But when do we reach that magic Number for peer review Papers to have ID seen as a Theory. All these Papers answer the various questions you have had about ID.


Please explain the
Cambrian era 525 to 530 million years ago. This is the biggest mystery that even TOE/NS can not explain.

For most of the nearly 4 billion years that life has existed on Earth, evolution produced little beyond bacteria, plankton, and multi-celled algae. But beginning about 600 million years ago in the Precambrian, the fossil record speaks of more rapid change. First, there was the rise and fall of mysterious creatures of the Ediacaran fauna, named for the fossil site in Australia where they were first discovered. Some of these animals may have belonged to groups that survive today, but others don't seem at all related to animals we know.

Then, between about 570 and 530 million years ago, another burst of diversification occurred, with the eventual appearance of the lineages of almost all animals living today. This stunning and unique evolutionary flowering is termed the "Cambrian explosion," taking the name of the geological age in whose early part it occurred. But it was not as rapid as an explosion: the changes seems to have happened in a range of about 30 million years, and some stages took 5 to 10 million years.

Internal, genetic factors were also crucial. Recent research suggests that the period prior to the Cambrian explosion saw the gradual evolution of a "genetic tool kit" of genes that govern developmental processes. Once assembled, this genetic tool kit enabled an unprecedented period of evolutionary experimentation -- and competition. Many forms seen in the fossil record of the Cambrian disappeared without trace. Once the body plans that proved most successful came to dominate the biosphere, evolution never had such a free hand again, and evolutionary change was limited to relatively minor tinkering with the body plans that already existed.

The Cambrian explosion or Cambrian radiation was the relatively rapid appearance (over a period of many millions of years), around 530 million years ago, of most major animal phyla, as demonstrated in the fossil record, accompanied by major diversification of organisms including animals, phytoplankton, and calcimicrobes. Before about 580 million years ago, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies. Over the following 70 or 80 million years the rate of evolution accelerated by an order of magnitude (as defined in terms of the extinction and origination rate of species0and the diversity of life began to resemble that of today.
The Cambrian explosion has generated extensive scientific debate. The seemingly rapid appearance of fossils in the “Primordial Strata” was noted as early as the mid 19th century,and Charles Darwin saw it as one of the main objections that could be made against his theory of evolution by natural selection. The long-running puzzlement about the appearance of the Cambrian fauna, seemingly abruptly and from nowhere, centers on three key points: whether there really was a mass diversification of complex organisms over a relatively short period of time during the early Cambrian; what might have caused such rapid change; and what it would imply about the origin and evolution of animals. Interpretation is difficult due to a limited supply of evidence, based mainly on an incomplete fossil record and chemical signatures left in Cambrian rocks.

More recently it was discovered that the history of life on earth goes back at least 3,450 million years: Rocks of that age at Warrawoona in Australia contain fossils of stromatolites, stubby pillars that are formed by colonies of Microorganisms. Fossils (Grypania) of more complex eukaryotic cells, from which all animals, plants and fungi are built, have been found in rocks from 1,400 million years ago, in China and Montana. Rocks dating from 565 to 543 million years ago contain fossils of the Ediacara biota, organisms so large that they must have been multi-celled, but very unlike any modern organism. P. E. Cloud argued in 1948 that there was a period of "eruptive" evolution in the Early Cambrian, but as recently as the 1970s there was no sign of how the relatively modern-looking organisms of the Middle and Late Cambrian arose

Intellectual Design:
You are playing with a limited View of ID you are assuming it is some mysterious “invisible Entity”
I would say that since in todays world we are the Intellecutal Designers we are manipulating Genetics , DNA and cross breeding species to create a better Species of animals for food or what ever. That this is proof that an Intellectual Design in the past was possible. This should be researched and Questioned and is a Working Theory:

Field of genetic engineering, where biologists manipulate the information in DNA to produce new biological functions. It is easy to believe intelligent agents might have ways of implementing their designs in the natural world — since we see it happening, reported in the scientific literature on a regular basis. This new research discussed in Nature News shows exactly how intelligent agents can manipulate information in DNA to create new structures and functions. There is no reason, in principle, why an intelligent agency must lack a mechanism for implementing designs in the natural world.


No you have said numerous times that TOE doesn't say we came from a Single Organism:

I. Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, called natural selection, stated that different species originated from shared ancestors, with the differences in the organisms being caused by adaptations to different environments. The environment determines which species are best fit to survive, and the traits of the organisms are passed down to new generations. With enough time, such passages of traits could lead to whole new species. This theory was developed after more than two decades of observations, studying thousands of animal and plant samples, all with extraordinary inferences drawn from observed similarities and differences.

You are correct in that it doesn't specifically state that. SO WHAT is the shared ancestors where did it come from what created it for all life to branch out from. What time frame was this in?

Now I suggest you look at a Movie like Mission to Mars it is by far the best thinking for Intelligent Design.
The Intelligent design is the introduction of DNA into the primal life on the planet. IE the Cambrian explosion.

^^^

Horse Shit. All of it.

Got Yeti Yet? wrote:^^^

Horse Shit. All of it.

REAL intellectual of you lol.

You have all given me some interesting ideas and information to think about. Reading all of this has made me think about how one can believe or entertain the thought of believing all these ideas, and still maintaining some semblance of my religion at the same time.

I know I am throwing a wrech in all of this. But being raised how I was, and studying the different theories of science, sometimes make me question my religion, or to entertain the idea that maybe the religios texts are just a collection of stories to explain how we came about. Thoughts?

Religious text are all basically Mythologies:
A collection of stories to descirbe the

The body of myths belonging to a culture. Myths are traditional stories about gods and heroes. (This is the Key they are Traditionally but not exclusively) They often account for the basic aspects of existence — explaining, for instance, how the Earth was created, why people have to die, or why the year is divided into seasons. Classical mythology — the myths of the ancient Greeks and Romans — has had an enormous influence on European and American culture.
a.a story about superhuman beings of an earlier age taken by preliterate society to be a true account, usually of how natural phenomena, social customs, etc, came into existence
(This is the modern explanation.)

In the past these Myths and stories were the science of the time.
I am curious when we have the arab and asian worlds one of the most advanced cultures in the past that brought about much of modern science. Yet they still believed in a Being or beings who influenced people.

I would like the Evolution experts who do not believe that dinosaurs lived at the same time man came about explain:
This Dinosaur on a temple in Cambodia which when this Temple was built never had any idea what it would look like.

Green911 wrote:I know I am throwing a wrech in all of this. But being raised how I was, and studying the different theories of science, sometimes make me question my religion, or to entertain the idea that maybe the religios texts are just a collection of stories to explain how we came about. Thoughts?

I am a firm believer that myth is strongly based on reality. Does that mean that is exactly how it happened....not at all.

As far as religion...I am not religious but I know that for a vast percentage of the population their religious beliefs are the foundation of who they are. Does that mean there is no for for them to embrace science? I guess it depends on how literal they take the words written of their religion. I personally see religion as a moral guide...the stories being examples of how one should live and treat others. This gives a strong moral foundation and a set of rules on how to interact with others...and leaves one open to accepting "science" as an explanation for how the world works.

Tzieth wrote:

Got Yeti Yet? wrote:^^^

Horse Shit. All of it.

REAL intellectual of you lol.

Poor sentence structure.

You obviously believe in bigfoot and are full of shit. I'll let it slide.

Keep on Reaching For The Straws.

I'll continue to check in from time to time to remind you that there is no BigFooT.

I may even call you a few names along the way.

Got Yeti Yet? wrote:

Tzieth wrote:

Got Yeti Yet? wrote:^^^

Horse Shit. All of it.

REAL intellectual of you lol.

Poor sentence structure.

You obviously believe in bigfoot and are full of shit. I'll let it slide.

Keep on Reaching For The Straws.

I'll continue to check in from time to time to remind you that there is no BigFooT.

I may even call you a few names along the way.

Of course it was poor sentence structure... You can't talk to mentally deficient people like you talk to your own peers. You gotta dumb things down a bit.

Green911 wrote:You have all given me some interesting ideas and information to think about. Reading all of this has made me think about how one can believe or entertain the thought of believing all these ideas, and still maintaining some semblance of my religion at the same time.

I know I am throwing a wrech in all of this. But being raised how I was, and studying the different theories of science, sometimes make me question my religion, or to entertain the idea that maybe the religios texts are just a collection of stories to explain how we came about. Thoughts?

Yeah, I had to deal with that my self a while back.

I became heavily involved with woman who was of a Christian denomination the complete opposite of my own. Her mother was pastor of her church, and her father was the night-time pastor. Oh, and they were all "Prophets".

I did not mind that her mother was a pastor. Even though my own denomination still preached women were inferior to men, I always had a problem with that. If Jesus created a new covenant and wiped a way the old, then the slate should have been wiped clean from "The fall" when the first covenant with God was made. (That was the way I saw it, anyway.) She was Pentecostal and I was Southern Baptist but none of that mattered until she demanded that I start attending her church.

She then asked me my opinion and I told her.. This lead to a huge argument that I was trying my hardest to avoid. It was over "Speaking in tongues." One guy in her church would start jibber-jabbering something and then another would stand up and translate it and I was like "WTF???" So she explained to me that the one guy was "Filled with the spirit" and giving a message to the church from God in the language of Angels and the other guy was translating it. I then asked "Why would they do that?" and she said "So that Satan cannot understand it." So I then said "Let me get this straight... This guy is speaking in Satan's native tongue, Angel, so that he cannot understand it?"... This pretty much lead to WWIII. She would then start citing verses, and i would counter them with other verses that I had to memorize from the two years I spent in a Baptist Christian school. She then pulled out her Bible and shown me a passage about speaking in tongues. and pointed out the verse that said "People thought of them as drunkards who were babbling." So I read that, but kept reading and it said "While others were amazed that these people were speaking their native tongue." and that ended with Jesus saying "Go ye there forth and teach all Nations." Which fell in line with the Baptist belief that Jesus gave his Apostles the ability to speak all languages.

Long story short, I came back from work one day, and she had all my stuff packed in bags and placed out side of the door. She then yells from the other side of the door "You must leave.. God told me of the man I am supposed to be with and it is not you!"

I later found out this man was her X-husband that she had recently divorced for breaking her nose then raping her two year old daughter while she was unconscious and that made me sick to my stomach. This is when I began questioning my whole religion entirely and began reading the whole Bible front to back with a fine toothed comb and found that it was not just her church picking and choosing versus to meet it's belief, but mine as well. A lot of it actually made more sense as I read it for the first time without some douche-bag standing in the front of pulpit telling me that "This vers actually means That.." This is when my epiphany struck. Why was I Baptist to begin with? Why was she Pentecostal? Why was my Grandfather Catholic? Why were Muslims Muslim and Jews Jewish?... Because our parents were... Because we were brainwashed into this from the time we were young. So how is this "Salvation"? where is the "free will" in this?

I then wanted to know just who put the Bible together, and found that it lead back to my historical passion.. The Roman Empire. Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, but that had other consequences. Christians at that time were fighting and killing other Christians over philosophy. All Christians were broken into cults that followed the teachings of a particular Apostle. So Rome needed ONE Christian philosophy as cannon. So they scoured the middle east finding anything about the Hebrew God and Christ that they could and voted on what to add or leave out of what is now called "The Bible".. It wasn't necessarily even put together by Christians.

After learning this, I completely lost all my faith... So to take my mind off of my disillusion, I started writing my first fictional novel to take my mind off of things. The Book was Biblical based about Nephilim and I used actual Biblical people as beginning characters. Those people that the old testament mentioned, but never really delved into .. Naama, Tubal-Cain etc... I felt since the Bible was obviously a work of Fiction, I did not find it fair that these people did not have their own story. So I wrote them into my books.

While writing my first book, I started having this weird dream. The same dream every night... I am viewing my self in third person from above. I see my self running and looking up into the sky with a complete look of fear. I do not see what I am looking at because what ever it is, it is behind my focal point; ie I am looking down at my self, and whatever it is that my face is looking at in fear is behind the me that is looking at myself further up in the sky. I am running on building tops and jumping from one building to another like Spider-man (You know how dreams get lol). As soon as I jump the building I was on begins to crumble. Now it is getting overly dusty and I can't see where I am jumping any longer. and the ground beneath my feet begins to crumble and I feel myself falling. I am then climbing over rubble and I see human shapes through the dust standing in the distance, and people are screaming and running around all around me, but the silhouettes of the six people I initially saw, are just standing there and chit-chatting. I then make my way towards them, and see that they are soldiers waring the same BDU's I used to ware when I was in the Army. As I get closer to them, I realize they are not speaking in English, but some Arabic sounding language. I looked at the part of the BDU's that would normally say "U.S. ARMY" and it instead says "Americans".. I then ask "What are you guys?" and suddenly they all have A.K.47's instead of M-16A2's and they begin firing at me and chasing me. Then there is a flood that goes crashing through the city. So now I am running from the flood waters and I somehow get my leg caught on the side of the car of a freight train and am hanging upside down as a wall of water is rushing towards me. Then I see some bearded guy waring a powder-blue silk bathrobe with white trim sitting on an upside down metal bucket that is hovering in the sky. Suddenly a tornado comes out of the bottom of the bucket and soaks up the wall of water before it reaches me. I am then free and back on my feet and I run west. Suddenly I am in a new City, that I recognize as Seattle. But everyone I see is Korean. Then they start shooting at me, and I wake up.

The fourth night having this same dream, was when I wanted answers. I went to the book store and bought all kinds of dream interpretation books, that all said opposing things. So with all options failed, I called my Pentecostal Ex-Girlfriend... The Prophet lol. I told her the dream and asked her what it meant.. She then said "Go ask your Pastor." I then said "I am Baptist, we do not believe in this sort of stuff." She then said "It does not mean anything.. God is willing me to tell you that."

So I have this same dream six more nights in a row when suddenly I am woken up, by the Lady who My Uncle was buying his house from. She was in a panic and violently shaking me to wake up. "Heath wake up we are being invaded!!!" Is what she said... I get up and watch the news... It was September 11th, 2001 and the news keeps replaying a Plane crash into Tower two with Tower One still smoldering. I then realized that this was the first part of my dream. I knew Arabs did it long before anyone delved into the Hijackers... I then called up my Ex and said "I now know what the dream meant.." and she says "It means you are the Anti-Christ." I said "No, this was Gods message to you that you are full of shit." and I hung up. My faith in the Bible was not restored, but my faith in God was.

I feel that the man in my dream sitting on the Bucket was Jesus with a modern hair cut, so my faith in Christianity was restored, but my faith in "Church" was not.

So the way I see it now... I think God is real.. I think Jesus was who we were taught that he was, but we do not have the whole story. If there was one true way, then there would not be all of these different religions.. EVERYONE would know for a fact that God was real. As it states in Revelation of Christs return, "Every knee shall bow every tongue shall confess". Why then and not now? Why would people be sent to hell for that which they do not know? Why would the man who was being crucified and said "Forgive them father, for the know not what they do.", suddenly start judging people who "Know not what they do"?

Sorry to stray away from Bigfoot, but my point is that all religions may have something right, but all religions have something wrong as well. "Religion" means brainwashing to a certain degree and I do not think God wants a bunch of zombies following him. So do not let scientific theories shake your faith. In the end, EVERYTHING falls on opinion be it religion or science.

TZ thank you for sharing your Story.

You said your getting a similar feeling now that you did on 9/11.
Could you explain your feeling or if your getting dreams now?

CMcMillan wrote:TZ thank you for sharing your Story.

You said your getting a similar feeling now that you did on 9/11.
Could you explain your feeling or if your getting dreams now?

No that was different... Aside from the dreams, I felt this gloomy feeling before 9-11 and I was not alone. Everyone that I knew seemed to have felt depressed as well... This feeling of depression mixed with anxiety. I remember having a conversation about this with a co-worker who was telling me that the news was also reporting this mass anxiety and depression and attributing it to the fact that the Millennium bug did not happen and that was the reason for the mass amounts of anxiety and depression drugs being prescribed. lol The whole reason I was asking co-workers about it was that Art Bell was also talking about this and calling it "The Quickening". I was felling this a few months before 9-11. So I contributed it to my recent break-up and dis-disillusionment of my faith. The dreams did not start until 10 days before 911.

But I always wondered about that... It's like what they say about residual haunting's. That when something traumatic happens, their emotions leave an imprint on time and space so that the incident plays over and over... It was like 911 sent ripples through time and space and people were feeling the grief before it happened, and of course afterwards.

I am not feeling that now, but there is still that second part of the dream I wonder about.

No one who has studied the evidence can deny the existence of sasquatch. Any person who knows nothing about the evidence, and yet says "There is no such creature as sasquatch." is ignorant. It bugs me to no end when a learned scientist, ignorant of sasquatch, is interviewed by the media and quoted as saying that the existence of sasquatch is merely the result of overactive imaginations, etc. His declaration is given the same weight as noted sasquatch believer and scientist Dr. Henner Fahrenbach who lectures to college students on the biology of sasquatch.