Low-Mao

This post is more related to evolution's theories on the the begining of the universe. Also, lifeform adaptation is true, proven science where as an organism evolving into a completely different species is not. But since I was to lazy to write this post myself, I suppose I shouldn't be discussing it with you.

This is obviously in reference to the posts "Why they don't believe in Christianity" and "why they don't believe in Evolution." I agree with you Quade in that it doesn't lead to any sort of actual discourse, and I apologize. However, these posts were just meant to give a more compehensive look on why people don't believe to those who actually care and hoped it would provide a little insight as to why. I didn't feel this topic deserved the time necessary to be as comprehensive as these articles already are, but also didn't feel that was reason enough to ignore it. I suppose it would've been best to just create a link to the text and make a comment. Good point though, I agree completely Best Regards, Corey

Chance is the engine most evolutionists believe drives the evolutionary process. Naturalism essentially teaches that over time and out of sheer chaos, matter evolved into everything we see today by pure chance. And this all happened without any particular design. Given enough time and enough random events, the evolutionist says, anything is possible. And the evolution of our world with all its intricate ecosystems and complex organisms is therefore simply the in–advertent result of a very large number of indiscriminate but extremely fortuitous accidents of nature. Everything is the way it is simply by the luck of the draw. And thus chance itself has been elevated to the role of creator. John Ankerberg and John Weldon point out that matter, time, and chance constitute the evolutionists’ holy trinity. Indeed, these three things are all that is eternal and omnipotent in the evolutionary scheme: matter, time, and chance. Ankerberg and Weldon quote Jacques Monod, 1965 Nobel Prize–winner for his work in biochemistry. In his book Chance and Necessity, Monod wrote, “Man is alone in the universe’s unfeeling immensity, out of which he emerged by chance… Chance alone is at the source of every innovation, of all creation in the biosphere. Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, is at the very root of the stupendous edifice of evolution.” But a moment’s reflection will reveal that chance simply cannot be the cause of anything (much less the cause of everything). Chance is not a force. The only legitimate sense of the word chance has to do with mathematical probability. If you flip a coin again and again, quotients of mathematical probability suggest that it will land tails up about fifty times out of a hundred. Thus we say that when you flip a coin, there’s a fifty–fifty “chance” it will come up tails. But “chance” is not a force that can actually flip the coin. Chance is not an intellect that designs the pattern of mathematical probabilities. Chance determines nothing. Mathematical probability is merely a way of measuring what actually does happen. Yet in naturalistic and evolutionary parlance, “chance” becomes something that determines what happens in the absence of any other cause or design. Consider Jacques Monod’s remark again: “Chance …s at the source of every innovation, of all creation.” In effect, naturalists have imputed to chance the ability to cause and determine what occurs. And that is an irrational concept. There are no uncaused events. Every effect is determined by some cause. Even the flip of a coin simply cannot occur without a definite cause. And common sense tells us that whether the coin comes up heads or tails is also determined by something. A number of factors (including the precise amount of force with which the coin is flipped and the distance it must fall before hitting the ground) determine the number of revolutions and bounces it makes before landing on one side or the other. Although the forces that determine the flip of a coin may be impossible for us to control precisely, those forces, not “chance,” determine whether we get heads or tails. What may appear totally random and undetermined to us is nonetheless definitively determined by something. It is not caused by mere chance, because chance simply does not exist as a force or a cause. Chance is nothing. Fortune was a goddess in the Greek pantheon. Evolutionists have enshrined chance in a similar way. They have taken the myth of chance and made it responsible for all that happens. Chance has been transformed into a force of causal power, so that nothing is the cause of everything. What could be more irrational than that? It turns all of reality into sheer chaos. It therefore makes everything irrational and incoherent. The entire concept is so fraught with problems from a rational and philosophical viewpoint that one hardly knows where to begin. But let’s begin at the beginning. Where did matter come from in the first place? The naturalist would have to say either that all matter is eternal, or that everything appeared by chance out of nothing. The latter option is clearly irrational. But suppose the naturalist opts to believe that matter is eternal. An obvious question arises: What caused the first event that originally set the evolutionary process in motion? The only answer available to the naturalist is that chance made it happen. It literally came out of nowhere. No one and nothing made it happen. That, too, is clearly irrational and unscientific. So in order to avoid that dilemma, some naturalists assume an eternal chain of random events that operate on the material universe. They end up with an eternal but constantly changing material universe governed by an endless chain of purely random events—all culminating in magnificent design without a designer, and everything happening without any ultimate cause. At the end of the day, it is still irrational. It eliminates purpose, destiny, and meaning from everything in the universe. And therefore it leaves no ground for anything rational. In other words, nihilism—a belief that everything is entirely without meaning, without logic, and without reason—is the only philosophy that works with naturalism. The universe itself is incoherent and irrational. Reason has been deposed by pure chance. And such a view of chance is the polar opposite of reason. Common–sense logic suggests that every watch has a watchmaker. Every building has a builder. Every structure has an architect. Every arrangement has a plan. Every plan has a designer. And every design has a purpose. We see the universe, infinitely more complex than any watch and infinitely greater than any man–made structure, and it is natural to conclude that Someone infinitely powerful and infinitely intelligent made it. “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made” (Romans 1:20). But naturalists look at the universe, and despite all the intricate marvels it holds, they conclude no one made it. Chance brought it about. It happened by accident. That is not logical. It is absurd. Abandon logic and you are left with pure nonsense. In many ways the naturalists’ deification of chance is worse than all the various myths of other false religions, because it obliterates all meaning and sense from everything. But it is, once again, pure religion of the most pagan variety, requiring a spiritually fatal leap of faith into an abyss of utter irrationality. It is the age–old religion of fools (Psalm 14:1)—but in modern “scientific” dress. What could prompt anyone to embrace such a system? Why would someone opt for a world–view that eliminates all that is rational? It boils down to the sheer love of sin. People want to be comfortable in their sin, and there is no way to do that without eliminating God. Get rid of God and you erase all fear of the consequences of sin. So even though sheer irrationality is ultimately the only viable alternative to the God of Scripture, multitudes have opted for irrationality just so they could live guilt–free and shamelessly with their own sin. It is as simple as that. Either there is a God who created the universe and sovereignly rules His creation, or everything was caused by blind chance. The two ideas are mutually exclusive. If God rules, there’s no room for chance. Make chance the cause of the universe, and you have effectively done away with God. As a matter of fact, if chance as a determinative force or a cause exists even in the frailest form, God has been dethroned. The sovereignty of God and chance are inherently incompatible. If chance causes or determines anything, God is not truly God. But again, chance is not a force. Chance cannot make anything happen. Chance is nothing. It simply does not exist. And therefore it has no power to do anything. It cannot be the cause of any effect. It is an imaginary hocus–pocus. It is contrary to every law of science, every principle of logic, and every intuition of sheer common sense. Even the most basic principles of thermodynamics, physics, and biology suggest that chance simply cannot be the determinative force that has brought about the order and interdependence we see in our universe—much less the diversity of life we find on our own planet. Ultimately, chance simply cannot account for the origin of life and intelligence. One of the oldest principles of rational philosophy is ex nihilo nihil fit. Out of nothing, nothing comes. And chance is nothing. Naturalism is rational suicide. When scientists attribute instrumental power to chance they have left the realm of reason, they have left the domain of science. They have turned to pulling rabbits out of hats. They have turned to fantasy. Insert the idea of chance, and all scientific investigation ultimately becomes chaotic and absurd. That is precisely why evolution does not deserve to be deemed true science; it is nothing more than an irrational religion—the religion of those who want to sin without guilt. It was estimated that the number of random genetic factors involved in the evolution of a tapeworm from an amoeba would be comparable to placing a monkey in a room with a typewriter and allowing him to strike the keys at random until he accidentally produced a perfectly spelled and perfectly punctuated typescript of Hamlet’s soliloquy. And the odds of getting all the mutations necessary to evolve a starfish from a one–celled creature are comparable to asking a hundred blind people to make ten random moves each with five Rubik’s Cubes, and finding all five cubes perfectly solved at the end of the process. The odds against all earth’s life forms evolving from a single cell are, in a word, impossible. Nonetheless, the absurdity of naturalism goes largely unchallenged today in universities and colleges. Turn on the Discovery Channel or pick up an issue of National Geographic and you are likely to be exposed to the assumption that chance exists as a force—as if mere chance spontaneously generated everything in the universe. One Nobel laureate, Harvard professor George Wald, acknowledged the utter absurdity of this. Pondering the vast array of factors both real and hypothetical that would have to arise spontaneously all at once in order for in–animate matter to evolve into even the most primitive one–celled form of life, he wrote, “One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible.” Then he added, “Yet here we are—as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation.” How did Wald believe this impossibility came about? He answered: “Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.”10 Given enough time, that which is impossible becomes “virtually certain.” That is sheer double–talk. And it perfectly illustrates the blind faith that underlies naturalistic religion. There is no viable explanation of the universe without God. So many immense and intricate wonders could not exist without a Designer. There’s only one possible explanation for it all, and that is the creative power of an all–wise God. He created and sustains the universe, and He gives meaning to it. And without Him, there is ultimately no meaning in anything. Without Him, we are left with only the notion that everything emerged from nothing without a cause and without any reason. Without Him, we are stuck with that absurd formula of the evolutionist: Nothing times nobody equals everything. From "The Battle for the Begining" - Jonh MacArthur

First of all, the message is unreasonable. That’s the first cause for them to disbelieve, it is unreasonable. 1Corintians 1:18, “The Word of the cross, or the testimony of God, or the Word of God’s wisdom, that is to say the revelation of God inscripturated is to those who are perishing, that is their condition, foolishness...it is foolishness.” In a somewhat sarcastic way, that idea is repeated in verse 21, “God was well pleased through the foolishness of the message.” Verse 23 says to the Gentiles, “It is foolishness.” And then in another sarcastic way in verse 25, “The foolishness of God is actually wiser than men.” And so clearly there is this idea that the revelation of God in Scripture is foolish. It is...the word is moron, moronic, stupid, pointless, unsuitable to human reason. They treat the Word of God with contempt and disdain. And I won’t go into all the details about that, but a crucified God was ridiculous to the Gentiles and equally if not more ridiculous to the Jews. Salvation by faith in a crucified God was even more ridiculous. The whole thing was frankly unreasonable. Secondly, non-Christians do not believe the Bible because the reality is unattainable. 1Corintians 1:19, “It is written, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the mind and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside. Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God...that is to say God made it this way...the world through its wisdom did not come to know God.” In our rebellion towards God, He cursed the human race into a condition in which it is impossible by means of human wisdom to come to know God. You can’t get there on your own. God designed it that way. “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise...He says...I will destroy the cleverness of the clever. And it pleases God by means of all their intellects and all their wisdom and all their erudition, they cannot come to know Him. In the wisdom of God, God made it possible....impossible for men and women to come to know Him on their own. Thirdly, they don't believe because it's ridiculous. 1Corintians 1:22, “They...the Jews...seek for signs. The Greeks for wisdom.” The Jews were looking for signs. You say, “Wait a minute. Jesus gave them signs and signs and signs and signs.” Yeah, but they wanted the big sign, you knock off the Romans, set up the Kingdom, reign in fulfillment of the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenant. And when He started talking about His death, He went to the cross, it was over. Crucifixion came to the Lord Jesus because He condemned their hypocritical religion, because He didn’t display His power against the Romans and fulfill their own messianic scheme. And then even on the cross they said, “Why don’t You come down off the cross?” Maybe there was a last hope that He would do the sign that they were looking for. But the crucifixion of God? The crucifixion of the Messiah by the Romans? Unthinkable. On the other hand, the Greeks, they sought wisdom. And what does that mean? They sought intricate, complicated, profound, complex philosophies with fancy words and esoteric concepts. And they laughed at the simplicity of the gospel and the unbelievable idea that a crucified God was to be worshiped. That’s why there is to this day a stone in Rome that shows a man bowing down to a jackass and it’s a reflection of an ancient view of Christianity and it says, Alexamanos worships his god.” And the interesting thing about it is the jackass is on a cross. Who would worship a jackass on a cross? It is frankly unbelievable. Number four, its people are unremarkable. The Jews wanted a sign, the Greeks wanted wisdom. Paul preached Christ crucified. The Jews stumbled over it. The Gentiles said it was foolish. 1Corintians 1:26 doesn’t help. “Consider your calling, brethren, there were not many wise, according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble.” Bottom line here is we’re not too impressive. They weren’t then and we aren’t now. The majority of believers have always been unremarkable. They have always been unimpressive to the world, especially to the world of elite minds who treat us with contempt. We’re not the smartest and we’re not the noblest. In fact, 1Corintians 1:27, “God has chosen the foolish to shame the wise. He has chosen the weak to shame the strong. He has chosen the base and the despised and He has chosen the things that are not...” It just keeps getting lower and lower and lower. He chose not the noble, not wise, not the intellectual elite, not the mighty, not the great, the influential, the movers, the shakers, the powerful, not the noble. It’s actually a Greek word that means well-born, high-born, socially ranked. “But He’s chosen foolish, weak, base, agenes, the no births, the nobodies, the no-names, the John Does, the insignificant and the despised.” And then it goes down even lower than that. He’s chosen “The things that are not,” the present participle of ami, the non-existent ones. This last statement is the most contemptible expression in the Greek language to demean another person, to treat them as if they did not even exist. So, they don’t believe. And the fact that we are such an unremarkable lot adds to their resistance. And then a fifth. Not only are the people of this book unremarkable, but the preachers are unfashionable. Come in to chapter 2, “When I came to you, brethren, I didn’t come with superiority of speech or of wisdom.” And that was a problem because they loved this esoteric kind of fancy, complicated, maze-like teaching that brought in all kinds of complexity and profundity and titillated their minds. “I didn’t come with superiority of speech, no tricks of wisdom. I’m determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” There again is this repulsive, unbelievable, simplistic message. Furthermore he didn’t help his cause any by his own persona. You remember the Corinthians said about him his person was frankly contemptible. And his speech was unimpressive. He was with you in weakness, fear, much trembling. My message, my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom but in demonstration of the Spirit and power. So you have a pretty comprehensive look at why people don’t believe. You start with the fact that they can’t. That they don’t have the capability. That they are void of the life of God. They can’t escape the natural. They can’t escape being in the flesh. One who is in the flesh minds only the things of the flesh and he cannot know the things of the Spirit. And you add the fact that all of these give reason to reject and you understand something of the dilemma. The message itself was offensive, unreasonable, unbelievable, incomprehensible. The people were the lowly and the preachers were the weak and the unimpressive and the fearful and the trembling. And you add the fallen condition, natural darkness, satanic blinding and divine judgment and non-Christians cannot on their own believe the truth. So the search for God and the search for Christ and the search for the truth and the search to discern whether the Bible is really true in what it’s saying cannot begin and end with human reason. That’s why every time you see one of these deals on television, “The Search for the Real Jesus,” “The Search for the Truth,” it always ends up in error...fallen mind can’t get there on its own. Slightly modified from "Why We Believe While Others Reject" - John MacArthur

QuoteThere is nothing wrong with repeating clips if it serves a theme or creates a point of reference for continuity, or if artistic revisions of the clip are used. It's a common technique. However, wontonly using the same clip to fill up space or because it's "cool" isn't a practical or logical use of the same content.....There are no "rules" in creative editing. But there are techniques that feel and flow better. Some of them would go against the grain of time-honored practices. Nice vid overall, but I still find myself struggling (with most skydiving videos) to find a theme, story, concept, or flow that goes beyond "Hey, this shot is cool, toss it in..."Quote Well said...I agree completely I suppose I wasn't being as careful with my words as I would be in the speakers corner. Best Regards Truly, Corey

Refrences? Please Best Regards, Corey

It was in 95...Not sure on the specs but it took about 10-20 minutes to dial into AOL depending on how many times the phone rang. I finally got connected and had blast. AOL froze the account a couple days latter because of inapropriate conduct.....

I liked The video lex....it entertained me and kept my attention which is preety good cause I wasn't really in the mood to watch anymore videos. is it posted on skydivingmovies.com?....otherwise it doesn't count And ya...don't ever repeat clips again...big editors no no. You probably had a good reason in your mind but it doesn't work. I suppose it's ok if it's not obvious...at all. Perhaps it was just a test to make sure we watched it. Best Regards, Corey

JT!!!!!!!.....WTF....LOL BTW...How them DVD's comming along?

I believe this excerpt from Scripture might explain what happened. Why does Jesus speak in parables? Matthew 13:10-23 ........10 Then the disciples came and said to him, Why do you speak to them in parables? 11 And he answered them, To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12 For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:You will indeed hear but never understand,and you will indeed see but never perceive. 15 For this people's heart has grown dull,and with their ears they can barely hear,and their eyes they have closed,lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them. 16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. 17 For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. 18 Hear then the parable of the sower: 19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path. 20 As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. 22 As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. 23 As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty. Also.... God designed us to have a relationship with Him which is why we could feel depressed when that relationship is broken. We then try to fill that void with anything, which is why we are never permanently satisfied.... Best Regards, Corey

Yes, but not in its entirety. I'm familiar with Islamic beliefs and found that what I did read to be somewhat interesting. There is much that can be said about its similarities and differences in comparison to the Bible and other World Religions. Based on what I read, I can say that it offers many virtuous benefits to the individual as do other world religions, however it clearly attacks the Biblical Scriptures that it claims to be based on which is also indicative of other Religions such as Catholicism, Mormonism, and Jehovah's Witness. Collectively, the primary attacks are typically against the diety of Christ and their lack of emphasis on human depravity and the separation it causes between God and man. They also seem to fail in their recognition or are at least unclear in their explanation on how this separation is eliminated thus enabling us to be reconciled unto God. The typical prescription is to just believe and be good, but if we are to go back to the basics of the Bible that all these Religions claim to be based on, we find that it is not that simple..... As I said there is much that can be said and I believe at this point it would be appropriate to carry this "discussion" to a new thread that will actually be related to it's subject. Best regards, Corey God Bless you all Related Scripture: 2 Timothy 3:16-17 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. Matthew 6:24 No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money. Revelation 22:6-19 18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

It would be incredibly arrogant and wrong superficially...but if somebody told me that they were a Christian then said that they didn't believe Jesus is God, they aren't Christian and I would have a responsibility to show them where in the Bible it says Jesus is God. ....I never said Christianity wasn't a religion, I just don't think it matters and I understand why other Christians feel it is a bad connotation. Best Regards, Corey Peace........Please

When the Anti-Christ reneges on his word he will also claim that he is God. He will require worship and try to kill all those who don't. When this happens Christ will come the second time in Judgement which will also include the destruction of the world. He is not comming back as a man walking through Israel performing miracles this time. It will be very obvious who He is and where he came from and there will be no more debate. This will essentially be the "proof." Mathew 24: 24-27 "24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and miracles to lead astray, if possible,even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand." "26 So if they say to you,'look, he is in the wilderness,' do not go out. If they say, 'look, he is in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the comming of the Son of Man." I'm sure this will raise more questions and reading the Bible in it's context will answer many of them. Also, Just because you say you are a Christian doesn't mean you are. Romans 10:9 "...if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Many people may say it, but most don't really believe it and they never show any evidence of their claim. Just turn on your tv and you will see many "Christians" trying to steal your money, raging in hatred against people of particular social cultures or completley taking the Bible out of context and teaching lies. The only purpose this serves is to try and keep others from faith in God that truly have somewhat of a desire to know him and this is not what true Christianity is about. RELIGION Organized Religions have historically been associated with alienation,hatred, selfrighteousness, murder, pride...etc. They are unbiblical, manipulative and often omit or twist scripture in order to fulfill their own means of wealth, power, and control. Unfortunately none of this is listed in any of at least eight official definitions of religion. I suppose it is a matter of semantics that is not worth the arguement. Best Regards, Corey

This man is just one of many Anti-Christs, but the ultimate one will be an influential world leader that many people will respect and admire. He will play a leading role in the advocacy for world peace and there will seem to be no evil about him until he reneges on his word and causes severe calamity, either directly or indirectly. In regards to the second comming of Christ, all I will say is that it won't be a matter of question, but rather a matter of fact and everyone will see and acknowledge it for what it is. Please read the Bible for futher details. I found that when I finally read the Bible in its historical, cultural and literal context I wasn't confused about it anymore. I'm quite embarassed to say that I was one of those people that completely mocked the Bible without ever reading the whole thing. I found most of what I saw on tv in regards to the Bible and that which I learned from the Catholic Church was all just a big lie. None of it had anything to do with what the Bible actually teaches and they twisted it in order to acheive their own selfish desires. I learned that I was personally responsible for my beliefs in spirituality and could no longer allow lies or personal resentment to keep me from faith in God. Let's just say what if the Bible is true...Isn't it reasonable to assume that an individual owes it to themself to at least try to be honest with God and say "listen, I don't understand all this nonsense and I don't like how you do things but please, if you exsist, help me to understand this foolish book? I'm confident that if you truly have a desire in your heart to know and understand who God is, He will give you the capability to understand the Bible soon enough, thus revealing himself to you. If you are content in your disbelief, I would encourage you to read the Bible anyway and try to strengthen your disbelief or at least try to discredit the Bible by informing yourself with what it actually says instead of repeating what you have heard or what you simply created in your own mind. Best Regards, Corey God Bless you all...peace

I work on a lot of older electronics, most of which was invented long before surface mount technology was reliable for high temp hostile environments. Now that all of our new stuff is surface mount and I've got components handy, I'm trying to find some crossover mounts that have radial leads and 1206 mounting platforms, so I can ditch the old radial lead resistors that require frequent changing for calibrations, and hopefully stop people who don't know how to solder from destroying boards by trying to rip out radial leads. I imagine there's something like this out there, but Google didn't help and I thought somebody on here might know.

If you look at the original box, all the animals are locked in a cage. When you open the box you are essentially letting the animals go free. So technically this would be a humane act. The Irony is that since we are human and depraived beyond self repair, letting the animals go free is not good enough...we need some sort of gratification either by eating them, playing with them and eating them, or using them in sexual foreplay. Shouldn't this post be transferred to the Bonfire?

Well...I just recently moved to California and to my suprise I found that weed is legal here. First you have to see a doctor and they will give you the appropriate paperwork to become part of the "cannabis club" Apparently all you have to say is that you have headaches and insomnia and you're in. Once you have your cannabis club card, you can legally buy weed from specific people that the government pays to sell it out of their house. They even have all these "new" ways to get high. They do this thing called vaporizing where the weed literally dissapears before your eyes and you inhale the vapor. I've heard that this weed is the stongest stuff ever and vaporizing really knocks you on your ass. They also have a weed pill for those that don't like to smoke or vaporize. My first thought was..."damn, my dream finally came true...too bad I quit." LMAO

I believe it would be imperative to locate the source of the download and report them so that the whole operation would get shutdown. Seriously a missed opportunity. I would give that hard drive to the authorities if you still have it. Perhaps they can salvage some information on where this stuff is comming from.

Qt pro only converts files that are playable in quicktime. Asf is not automatically one of those files but here is a website that shows how to acomplish this:http://echoone.com/filejuicer/formats/formats?f=wmv You could also use this program to convert your asf to mpg4(the best format for ipod):http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/32071 This download is free for trial purposes. You'd have to buy it for $15 to get the whole file converted. *note: as mentioned earlier in this thread...if the file is copyright protected...this will not be possible.

Perhaps the following post can be of some assistance http://www.dropzone.com/forum/Skydiving_C1/Instructors_F37/Handcam_glove_question_P1567855 You could also make your own custom system using a micro lens (MVC3000-H Miniature) that would hook up to a recorder (small mini dv camera) mounted anywhere on your body via hardwire. There are many variations of these lenses and can be relativley less expensive. Some even come smaller than a glove handcam and have great resolution. Best Regards

Well, I think that I can't find any english documentation on this camera...but I noticed it records in mpeg4 which isn't an ideal format for editing. You'll probably have convert it to another format (preferably the NLE's native format). At best you'd still have to spend extra time rendering the mpeg4 file if you were in fact able to import it...then you'd have to render again for the DVD. The risk is minimal, but I'm still not comfortable with recording to sd without tape backup. I don't like the idea of being skrewd if there was a problem writing to the card. I suppose this concern depends on how important the video is. I love the idea of not having to capture but when considering the extra render time, it's probably a wash. I'd have to say no to this camera. Best Regards

It's no suprise that life forms adapt to their environment....but proof of evolution would be a buterfly turning into a hippopotamus.

We'll these things are left up to judges and juries, it's how it has to be....All I want to know is what happened to the days when rape was cosidered jumping out of the bushes with a knife?

Here...This might be a lil more convenient http://logosmedia.info/Demo/MotorSportsDemo.wmv

[url]http://logosmedia.info/Demo/MotorSportsDemo.wmv