Comment Rules


Comments are welcome for or against what we publish here.  

However this site has a  purpose. The largest purpose is to encourage truth rather than opinion. Contrarian thinking, not just accepting what is normally accepted by most of society is an approach to discovering truth.

evidenceArrogant opinions which are expressed without specific references will be deleted as they are simply opinions and do not help anyone to approach what is truth.

Flaming, emotionally laden, ad hominem attacks on people or groups of people just because one wants to get something off one’s chest are NOT acceptable. They do not help to advance the cause to discover truth.

Some comments over the last year or so have simply been unapproved because instead of simply making a statement and then backing it with specific references or generally accepted facts the individual has resorted to unloading his emotional baggage. There are places on the web where this is encouraged. This site is not one of them.

In watching a video on the Israeli scientists, one of the head scientists said something of this ilk. “Where others discover something new or the answer to a very old question, then stop researching, we ask if this is really true then what else can be discovered in this area?” IN other words, where others are satisfied with the status quo, Israeli scientists have been above and beyond successful since they START where others think they have come to an END. That may be why they are responsible for so many inventions and discoveries over the years.

That is what this site is trying to do: taking often-held ideas like evolution as being mindmadeup-stonehanded down like the 10 commandments of scientific religion and saying, “Really? Then what about this evidence? What about this problem that makes no sense if we accept that idea?” STARTING where others END.

Some ideas that are generally accepted but have many holes in their research unanswered by modern science such as climate change being caused by human activity; we all evolved from a bit of primordial ooze in a pond of mud because it was hit by some cosmic rays; or the atheistic belief that Hitler was a Christian when he exhibited animosity toward and control over religion and did not show any characteristics of Christianity as shown by Jesus Christ or Mother Theresa, leave many doubts; the idea that more laws against having guns will prevent more murders. But some ‘scientists’ or ‘atheists’ hold on to these views religiously. Maybe because that is all they have which to them must not change even in the light of new evidence.

Some quote very emotional stories about children being killed by guns in a terrible way and are all out for gun control RIGHT-THIS-MINUTE! But does enacting laws ensure obedience to the laws?

  1. Is murder illegal? Are there still murders? Fewer, same or more?
  2. Is it illegal to speed? Are there still speeders? Fewer, same or more?
  3. Is it illegal to steal? Are there still thieves? Fewer, same or more?

Is it possible that the right education, the support of the 10 commandments from which most modern law started, and better screening of possible offenders may reduce the number of murders?

Is your mind open or closed? If open, study the graph below. If closed, just go away because you won’t believe it anyway.

dccrimestats-gunsDoes enacting laws banning guns work as shown by the above chart?

Think! If someone is going to go to a school and shoot a bunch of kids, is he going to stop and say to himself, “Oh I forgot, gun gun murder is illegal, I better find another way? HMMM. How about blowing up the whole school? Why settle for killing only a few? Remember Oklahoma? Remember the twin towers?”

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>