The world is coming to an end (1 Viewer)

[Enteebee]

Prophets in the Bible correctly prophesied the exile of the Jews into Babylon, destruction of the temple of Solomon, fall of the Babylonians to the Medo-Persian empire, the arrival of Jesus Christ on Earth...and that's just getting started. So as far as I'm concerned the Bible has a pretty good track record and it has proven its reliability time and time again.

Did it prophecise these events or just record them? Was it specific in who it was talking about or would I be on an even footing to suggest the bible may have been speaking of another case?

 

[Enteebee]

Don't buy the speculators nonsense. Most oil is not even traded on futures markets. WTI and Brent make up a small proportion of the world's oil that is actually used for refining. Speculators don't take any oil out of the physical market anyway. They simply resell the oil they buy when their contract reaches its maturity date, releasing it back into the market. They are hardly taking significant supplies out of the physical market and hoarding it.

They don't take any oil out of the physical market but they do raise the prices.

Furthermore, regulating derivative markets would have devastating impacts on many companies that rely on them as part of their risk management strategies and this would flow on to consumers.

I wasn't suggesting that we should regulate them, merely that I think there might be other causes for the current price rises than supply.

Also, wtf, capping prices? Are you saying the government should force companies to sell petrol at a loss?

No, I just mean that by having oil shale production up and running we would essentially have a price cap (or I suppose, ceiling) around where oil shale has become profitable. Essentially my point is that it's unlikely to go up much when we have reached a point where so many more supplies are economically viable.

edit: I think maybe I confused you into thinking I'm advocating some type of regulation in the market here, unfortunately I think this is a situation where the market is screwing its self and the governments of the world can't do much to save it.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Finally they assume that everything short of current energy consumption levels would be catastrophic. Remember we can cut down alot on current consumption by traveling less, using less electricity ect before we all starve and suffer a mass dieoff.

that's the whole point of this thread

i don't wanna do any of those things

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Oh so you want us all to be crammed in to high-rise like those japanese in hong kong or wherever it is? and ruin all our views?

the government should just fix the price of petrol

 

[*TRUE*]

Also, I don't believe it's the end of the world. The Bible also says a lot of stuff about Jesus's return as unexpected and that it will take people by suprise.

How many Jesus freaks would be suprised if Jesus turned up right about now?

Not many.

Im a 'bibletard' I guess. & I agree with the above.
Plus you just cant live your live freaking out about dying. I think ive done my best ; Im too lazy to worry about it anymore.
Plus I don't even understand what is meant to happen at the 'end of the world'.

 

[boris]

I guess if the world is ending, we can eat as many whales as we like!


Joint of Whale Meat Steeped in Red Wine Marinade

6-8 portions:
1 1/4 kilos of whale meat
3 dl red wine
1 dl vegetable oil
3 ground cloves
1/2 teaspoonful of coarsly ground pepper
2 teaspoonfuls of salt

The Marinade
3/4 litres of juices from the meat Thickening (milk and flour) 4 dessert spoonfuls of sour cream (20% rømme) Sugar colouring Salt

It may be a good idea to bind the joint to help it keep in good shape. Place it in a small oven dish and pour the marinade over. Leave the joint there until the next day, turning it at regular intervals. Remove the joint from the dish, dry it well and rub it with salt. Cook the joint until it turns a pleasant brown colour all over, turn down the heat and add water to reach 2-3 cm up the side of the joint, approx. 3/4 litre. Let the joint simmer for about 20 minutes, turn it over and leave it for another 20 minutes. Measure enough of the juices to make enough marinade, about 3/4 litre. Add the thickening to the marinade, and then the sour cream to taste. Serve with boiled beans or other vegetables, and potatoes - boiled or fried in the pan.

 

[inasero]

Oh, so not dissimilar to the Bible.

Glad we cleared that up.

so you grab some unsubstantiated 'proof' off wikipedia and use that to justify why biblical prophecy is wrong? if you could back up those examples with understanding of the context i might be convinced.

 

[inasero]

Well to accept that they were fulfilled, we first have to accept that the bible is historically accurate. It is highly contentious how accurate it is.

The whole thing is pretty dodgy. You're taking one very old text, translating the prophecies in to the aforementioned wording, then using another very old text as proof that the original prophecies came true.

Most of them are still quite vague and could easily be fulfilled by a fraudulent prophet (i.e. jesus) intentionally fulfillinge a them.

Oh and before you try, showing sections of the bible that have been substantiated by archaeological evidence will not prove the accuracy of the whole text.

Edit: Btw, I think we have a very different idea of what is specific. To me specific is something like "On September the 11th, 2001, terrorists will hijack commercial flights and fly the planes into the World Trade Center in New York City." This would be a handy tip. But the bible's predictions are more like "something bad will happen at some point." Not very impressive, or useful.

how would jesus have faked being born in Bethlehem, and being born to a virgin (the virgin mary)? why, for what malevolent reason, would you want to fake your own crucifixion? just because you can? crucifixion was one of the most painful, humiliating ways to die and there's no reason anybody would willingly go through it, unless it was the only option.

 

[inasero]

Oh dude you just committed that most heinous offence of using the Bible as your proof.

You cannot use the Bible as proof in any way, shape or form because it is unsubstantiated, unproven, and the very text that MADE those "predictions"!

That hold just as much weight as "oh I read this book called Harry Potter and it said that "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" and then IT ACTUALLY CAME TRUE SORTA IN THE BOOK which means it is true! Witches and wizards and magic exists! SO THERE."

Also, Jesus was NOT BORN OF A VIRGIN. That is an accepted MISTRANSLATION from the original Hebrew word 'alma' which means YOUNG WOMAN.

what you're saying basically is that the prophecies of the Bible didn't actually come to pass...and therefore that my reasoning is circular. except i'm sorry to say that the Bible has prophecied plenty of historical events which were recorded by independent sources...for example Jospehus the Jewish historian recorded Jesus was a historical figure who was crucified and appeared to his disciples resurrected. The authenticity of these documents have been debated, so how about the eyewitness accounts of over 500 disciples? That leaves only two conclusions- either they all had a mass hallucination experience or the event actually happened. Note that this was at a time when persecution of Christians was rife so they wouldn't have had any ulterior motive.

And in case there was any confusion regarding the interpretation of the word "alma" in the book of Isaiah:
1) alma can in fact be used as a reference to a virgin;
2) supposing that that wasn't the writers intent, all doubt is removed as the Bible sets it out clearly "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly" Matthew 1:18-19. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

 

[inasero]

If you could do the same I might be convinced you're not an idiotic automaton.

All of the bible is cribbed from other creation myths and shouldn't be taken as an indication of any past or future events.

Christ, I mean, citing the bible is about as idiotic as me citing the LOLCat bible to prove that Jesus was a cat. Dig?

PAGING ROB ITT.

I have been just in case you hadn't noticed. I'm assuming you're referring to the movie Zeitgeist which supposedly "debunks" Christianity as a modern allegory for ancient myths. Yes very well made, it almost had me convinced. Well, I don't profess to be the most knowledgable ancient historian but after a bit of research I found alot of the claims he makes are outright wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QAhrC3nG5E

 

[inasero]

Of where the bible got it wrong? Jeez you're one of them aren't you? I'll play, what about Noah's ark?

lol I think you're using the term 'economical' in a different way, something is economically viable if it can be sold at a profit. The only reason why oil shale isn't profitable yet is that due to the expensive nature of the extraction techniques at the moment crude oil is still cheaper, though I do believe we've now reached a point in the price of oil whereby oil shale could be profitable.

The thing is though that the market is fairly cautious... many companies invested in oil shale back in the 1970's when the price of oil was (adjusting for inflation) somewhat like how it is now, however then the price dropped thus meaning that they lost a shitload of money in startup costs etc.

Essentially though what I'm saying is that once the decision is made to start utilising oil shale (this will also require allowances by the government as I believe in some countries it's still heavily regulated) and production facilities are up and running we could have a cap on the price of oil (if the price is solely driven by supply, which currently I don't think it is... though it may help with speculators too) essentially freezing the price somewhere around where it is now. It's not all that nice and we may have a bit of turbulence as we get on board with this, but it basically means that doomsday scenarios are a little far-fetched.

It isn't necessarily supply that's fueling the current price rises, though it may be a decent factor there are other things such as refinery capacity and speculators. Also what I've already said...

There is great energy expenditure in getting a powerplant up and running... but I don't see how this is much of a problem? I mean, there is still a HUGE net gain in energy over the lifetime of the powerplant...

Lack of evidence =/= evidence of lack

Also, I don't think that oil shale or any "alternative energy" sources could ever replace the cheap, abundant supply of energy we obtain from burning hydrocarbons- yes in the future when it gets too expensive we'll have no other choice, but when you think about how reliant we are on cheap energgy at the moment you can see how it'll really affect out lives...as i said it's not just about making minor adjustments in our lives, and driving around hybrid cars, doing "sustainable" activities aren't going to make the slighest bit of difference- it's already too late for that.

 

[inasero]

Did it prophecise these events or just record them? Was it specific in who it was talking about or would I be on an even footing to suggest the bible may have been speaking of another case?

Prophesy means to foretell an event ahead of time. Some parts of the Bible record events and are historical in nature, like the Gospels. Prophetic writings are clearly not history. They accurately and specifically predict future events.

Jesus prophesied in the Book of Matthew that the Temple of Jerusalem would be destroyed 40 yers before it was destroyed by the occupying Romans:

Matthew 24:1-2

1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings.

2 "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

 

[inasero]

hahahaha, life after the oil crash lol. beware anyone that peddles certain doom and destruction.

Peak Oil doomsday theories are based on some very obviously flawed assumptions.

The assumption is made that demand continues to grow at current rates when it is already slowing in response to price increases.

They also point out, quite correctly that no one energy source can replace oil. However, a combination of alternatives can.

Also, we still have many years of oil left, even if it sells at high prices. There is certainly time to build new infrastructure like nuclear power plants.

Finally they assume that everything short of current energy consumption levels would be catastrophic. Remember we can cut down alot on current consumption by traveling less, using less electricity ect before we all starve and suffer a mass dieoff.

Please refer to my previous reply to Enteebee re: alternative sources of energy.

You realise that energy consumption goes far beyond what we use at home and our driving patterns? And what of emerging developed nations like China and India? How are you going to convince them to consume less? The whole economy practically is run on cheap oil, and price rises will have a devastating impact.

 

[inasero]

Meh, if we had more efficient cars, better public transport and lived closer to where we work in higher density housing we could reduce demand for oil alot without sacrificing any practical lifestyle benefits.

The problem is more the transition phase because it takes considerable time to adjust and in the short term consumers have little choice but to absorb the price increases. Hence there is so much fuss about rising oil prices. The sooner people accept that they are here to stay and learn to deal with it, the better.

"Big deal. If gas prices get high, I’ll just drive less. Why should I give a damn?"

Because petrochemicals are key components to much more than just the gas in your car. As of the year 2002, approximately 10 calories of fossil fuels are required to produce every 1 calorie of food eaten in the US. Source The size of this ratio stems from the fact that every step of modern food production is fossil fuel and petrochemical powered:



Pesticides and agro-chemicals are made from oil;



Commercial fertilizers are made from ammonia, which is made from natural gas, which is also peaking in the near future. Source



Most farming implements such as tractors and trailers are constructed and powered using oil-derived fuels.



Food storage systems such as refrigerators are manufactured in oil-powered plants, distributed using oil-powered transportation networks and usually run on electricity, which most often comes from natural gas or coal. Like oil and natural gas, coal too is peaking in the near future. Source



In the US, the average piece of food is transported almost 1,500 miles before it gets to your plate. Source In Canada, the average piece of food is transported 5,000 miles from where it is produced to where it is consumed. Source



A recent article published by CNN documented just how much fossil fuel energy is used to produce our food. Emphasis added:



In the U.S., up to 20 percent of the country's fossil fuel consumption goes

into the food chain which points out that fossil fuel use by the food system

in the developed world "often rivals that of automobiles". To feed an

average family of four in the developed world uses up the equivalent

of 930 gallons of gasoline a year - just shy of the 1,070 gallons that

same family would use up each year to power their cars. Source



According to the Organic Trade Association, the production of one pair of regular cotton jeans takes three-quarters of a pound of fertilizers and pesticides. Source



In short, people gobble fossil fuels like two-legged SUVs.

Falling oil reserves will impact us in many more ways than how we get around.

 

[Enteebee]

Also, I don't think that oil shale or any "alternative energy" sources could ever replace the cheap, abundant supply of energy we obtain from burning hydrocarbons- yes in the future when it gets too expensive we'll have no other choice, but when you think about how reliant we are on cheap energgy at the moment you can see how it'll really affect out lives

At the current price of oil, oil shale has become economical. This puts the price ceiling on oil somewhere around this mark, though it may take some years to get facilities up and running with government leasing of the land.

as i said it's not just about making minor adjustments in our lives, and driving around hybrid cars, doing "sustainable" activities aren't going to make the slighest bit of difference- it's already too late for that.

I'm not proposing that oil has a minor impact on our lives, you're arguing against a strawman here.

-----------

Jesus prophesied in the Book of Matthew that the Temple of Jerusalem would be destroyed 40 yers before it was destroyed by the occupying Romans:

- Was there plans in the air to do such a thing? i.e. Were romans already talking about the possibility/desire to do this?
- Was the bible written 40 years after the statement? It's quite possible that whoever wrote it misconstrued whatever was said to make it a positive prediction.

Lack of evidence =/= evidence of lack

I agree, I definitely can't 'prove' without a doubt that there was no noahs ark... just like I can't prove without a doubt that there's no purple giraffes in china, based on my knowledge collected so far though, I simply have no reason to believe it is true. Perhaps in the future evidence will come up to sway me the other way, this is true, but until then what we say is "I don't know" and live our merry lives as if it wasn't even true.

I mean if the mere fact that it can't be 100% disproven isn't enough for you, why don't you believe all hypothese?

 

[inasero]

i'm not here to argue semantics, least others have something half intelligent to say it's truly pitiful you have to resort to low personal attacks and cheap "wit".

edit: oh yeah and you still haven't told me if you're going to buy us two packs of ice-creams. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is, are you?

 

[inasero]

At the current price of oil, oil shale has become economical. This puts the price ceiling on oil somewhere around this mark, though it may take some years to get facilities up and running with government leasing of the land.



I'm not proposing that oil has a minor impact on our lives, you're arguing against a strawman here.

-----------



- Was there plans in the air to do such a thing? i.e. Were romans already talking about the possibility/desire to do this?
- Was the bible written 40 years after the statement? It's quite possible that whoever wrote it misconstrued whatever was said to make it a positive prediction.



I agree, I definitely can't 'prove' without a doubt that there was no noahs ark... just like I can't prove without a doubt that there's no purple giraffes in china, based on my knowledge collected so far though, I simply have no reason to believe it is true. Perhaps in the future evidence will come up to sway me the other way, this is true, but until then what we say is "I don't know" and live our merry lives as if it wasn't even true.

I mean if the mere fact that it can't be 100% disproven isn't enough for you, why don't you believe all hypothese?

Nobody could have predicted that the temple was going to be destroyed, and as far as I'm aware there was no indication that the Romans were planning to do so- I mean if the Jewish religious leaders got wind of anything, it would have been political disaster for the Romans. Their power in the region relied on maintaining the peace with the Jews.

Believing in the existence of Noah's ark is not at all like believing in purple giraffes, which is obviously ridiculous. I'm just saying that on the balance of probabilities I have strong reason to believe in Noah's ark, not least of which is because it says so in the Bible (but you don't buy that do you?). A worldwide flood would explain why dinosaurs fossils have even been discovered in the first place. In fact fossils are really incredibly difficult to produce and you have to have the right conditions. Why is it that we don't find any fossils of "modern" organisms? Furthermore, the fact that all dinosaur fossils have been found in pretty much the same layer and the fact that the fossil record is incomplete (which is another argument against evolution, but we'll leave that for another thread) points to an epic catastrophe of worldwide flooding proportions.

I hear your point that it'd be stupid to believe in a fairytale just because a book says so. But I believe that the Bible is the inerrant and divinely inspired word of God:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness

I've looked into the claims of the Bible, and I'm wholly convinced that it's the only explanation for the world coming to be the way it is- spiritually, physically, politically, etc., not just taking it at face value as alot of you seemto be suggesting. The Bible has been confirmed and validated time and time again throughout history, and through scientific processes.

 

[A High Way Man]

EvIdEnCe oF LaCk? ! ???????!!!?
Nooooooooooo

 

[*TRUE*]

If the flood mentioned in Noah's Ark killed the dinosaurs, this suggests that dinosaurs and humans co-existed as little as a few thousand years ago? But of course for some reason there is no documented evidence at all to lend support to such a shocking conclusion.


Btw, I could go on all day about how you're wrong about the doom and gloom of peak oil. But far easier to link you to this article. Seriously, if you are starting to believe these nutters on the peak oil doomsday webz, do yourself a favour and read it:

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/07/307-confessions-of-ex-doomer.html

Actually there is alot of 'evidence' (or at least things that could be put forward as evidence ),pointing toward the fact that dinosaurs and humans coexisted.

 

[3unitz]

Actually there is alot of 'evidence' (or at least things that could be put forward as evidence ),pointing toward the fact that dinosaurs and humans coexisted.

such as?