Forum.freehovind.com - All http://forum.freehovind.com/browse-ppage-25 en-us ATIServer 468 0 25 <![CDATA[Discussion: Who Will Ben/Sci-borg/Ron's evil bro/Attorney, Return as Next? - I know Ben can't wait to sock-puppet his way in here. ]]> (http://forum.freehovind.com/view-6695)
May God forgive him. It shows you the type of mind and person he really is. He's lost all credibility with me. Read some of his comments on this page. Here's even some more evidence of what kind of a sick person he is (http://forum.freehovind.com/view-6407). He doesn't care about the truth. He' unaware of the demonic influence over him ]]>
Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:28:06 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Good Reason To Not Debate Evolutionists Online 'cont.' - Evolutionists want to waist your time to keep you from God's will.]]>
The quotes below are from the following sites: http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/forum/christian_warning.htm

"2. Evolutionists will try to lead you into endless debate, and they will more often than not succeed! They will always, almost without exception, get the last word. They will be relentless. This is all part of getting you to waste your time, which the spiritual enemy just loves to see you do (the evolutionist person does not necessarily love that they waste your time, many are probably unaware of the demonic influence on them)."

"Evolutionists believe what they do despite any evidence presented to them. They are firmly committed to a worldview that removes accountability. Without exception, I have found that the committed evolutionist activist is always, I mean always, socially liberal. This ubiquitous connection overwhelmingly establishes the fact that you will likely never convince them, because it is not evidence but worldview that drives them; they simply do not want to be convinced"

]]>
Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:22:01 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Eric Hovind's new blog and cheating poll - Eric Hovind's new blog and cheating poll]]> Recently, Kent's old web site, drdino.com, got a makeover and Eric is now running along with blog postings.
 
It will be interesting to see how long he blogs compared his previous blog at http://erichovind.blogspot.com/.
 
Also, there was a poll on whether evolution was a religion, a fact or a reasonable scientific theory. It was "pharyngulated" and the poll was changed to about creation.
]]>
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 23:45:17 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Good Reason To Not Debate ronnie Online]]> ...because when he loses debates online, he likes to accuse his opponents of being pedophiles:
 
dude sorry but i was kind of thinkin the same thing a while back that some of these guys sound like chesters
 
 
And a few posts down, after being asked what a "chester" is, ronnie posted this:
 
it's a slang word were i come from.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chester
 
...with the link providing the definition of "a term for a pedophile."
 
]]>
Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:48:44 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Why are all Pedophiles Christians?]]> "It is now an established and obvious fact that the recently published Australian Pedophile and Sex Offender Index listed 'Clergy, Church and Religion related' as the largest identifiable group of offenders -- by almost twice the size of the next group." Court records since the publication of this references how the conviction of priests for child sex abuse is running at 4:1 to other occupations. This means that the church and religious orders in Australia could be producing up to approximately one-third of the nation's pedophiles. Warming to his argument, Swan points out "that if the same number of church-based pedophiles had come from the sex industry, a Parliamentary inquiry would have commenced years ago. The sex industry and the church both employ approximately 20,000 people in Australia. As it appears, the sex industry seems remarkable free of convicted pedophiles ... no prostitutes, X-Video producers or sex shop owners appeared on the Pedophile Index and none have been recorded in court records since."]]> Sun, 11 Jul 2010 13:07:52 +0000 <![CDATA[Discussion: Wikipedia Under Investigation for Pedophilia - Wikipedia under investigation for supporting pedophilia. ]]>

FOX NEWS STORY: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/06/25/exclusive-pedophiles-find-home-on-wikipedia/

EXCLUSIVE: Pedophiles Find a Home on Wikipedia


Wikipedia has become home base for a loose worldwide network of pedophiles who are campaigning to spin the popular online encyclopedia in their favor and are trying to lure more people into their world, an investigation by FoxNews.com confirms.

Chat room posts show a clear effort by pedophiles to use Wikipedia, which can be accessed unfiltered in public schools across the country, to further their agenda. Message board posts often include links to specific Wikipedia articles that the participants say need to be edited to "normalize" pedophile behavior in the public eye and to recruit more pedophiles into their community.

�Pedophiles have campaigned to push their point of view that 'pedophilia is OK and doesn�t hurt children' on Wikipedia,� says Xavier Von Erck, director of the online pedophile watchdog organization Perverted Justice Foundation and Wikisposure.com, its offshoot project devoted to tracking pedophiles and pedophile activism on Wikipedia. �This has been a problem since Wikipedia started.�

In response to a request for comment on this story, Sue Gardner, executive director of Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia's parent organization, said in a statement:

"Wikipedia has a long-held, zero-tolerance policy towards pedophilia or pedophilia advocacy and child pornography. The Wikimedia community is vigilant about identifying and deleting any such material. Any allegations to the contrary are outrageous and false."
On April 22, a user with the screen name �apple� on the BoyChat message board posted a call for pedophiles around the world to start a Wikipedia article devoted to the author of a memoir described as �the life history of a lover of boys!!�

(BoyChat is a notorious, long-running online message board for adults who are attracted to underage boys.)

A user named �Drowning, not waving� replied in a post called �apple get that Wikipedia entry written�:

�IMO still the best autobiography written by a bl [boy lover]. A must read, despite (or because of) depicting a very different world to today's.

"And don't forget his Some Boys for a fleshier look at his interaction with the world.�

Three years ago, on Annabelleigh.net, an online message board for adults who are sexually attracted to prepubescent girls, a user named �student� outlined the campaign to use Wikipedia as a platform for activism and to recruit more pedophiles. (Annabelleigh, also called GirlChat, is the sister site to BoyChat.)

The Annabelle post, titled �Keep your eye on the prize,� read:

�The most important function Wikipedia serves is via the pedophilia articles themselves. It is important that they remain fair and unbiased. It is important that they continue to have external links to the support and activist community. The user pages are much less important.

"It is of the utmost importance that pedophiles newly daring to google "pedophile" or "pedophilia," or look them up directly in Wikipedia, in an effort to understand themselves better, are able to get unbiased information �. Many of these men and women are in dire need of support.

"Secondly, nonpedophiles who recognize the increasingly sensationalistic media treatment, etc., and turn to the Web to find the facts or people who use the Web as their primary source of information: If they turn to Wikipedia, Wikipedia should give a fair and balanced view. This community needs that to happen�.

"That should be the primary focus of our Wikipedia efforts. If you have to 'lie and hide' to keep our influence balanced against the bigots, then by all means lie and hide to do it. By all means, do not give up the fight to self-identify on the user pages, but make sure you do not let it stop you from editing!�

Wikipedia's critics point out that schools throughout the U.S. encourage students to do research on the online encyclopedia, which is free and available to anyone with an Internet connection. This means that students who use Wikipedia to research the academic subject of pedophilia will immediately find a page on the topic that is being targeted by the pedophiles. Wikipedia's "Pedophilia" page also is the first "hit" when you search the term in Google or Bing.

The article on pedophilia, in its suggestions for further reading, suggests other Wikipedia pages edited by pedophiles, including "Child Sexuality," and "NAMBLA," a page about the North American Man/Boy Love Association. That page links directly to NAMBLA's website, as do 25 other Wikipedia pages.

Wikipedia also has 32 external links to GirlChat, 14 to a Danish pro-pedophile website and 12 to BoyChat.

FoxNews.com also found hundreds of posts on BoyChat linking to Wikipedia pages, including "Child Sex Tourism," which provides detailed information on the different laws regarding child prostitution in countries around the world, and which links to newspaper articles that highlight �hotspots� like a section of Mexico City where child exploitation is rampant and unchecked by law enforcement. Other recent links were to Wikipedia pages named �Sexual Objectification," "Child Erotica" and �Simulated Child Pornography.�

These Wikipedia articles, edited and shared by pedophiles, are nothing but guideposts to get them aroused, says Hemanshu Nigam, who headed security divisions at Microsoft and MySpace and now runs SSP Blue, an online security consulting firm.

Posts on BoyChat also instruct participants to hide their identities and avoid being blocked by other users while editing pedophilia-related articles on Wikipedia.

Anyone can edit an article on Wikipedia as long as he follows Wikipedia�s principles of having a neutral point of view, which means the articles aren�t supposed to take sides on any issue and they must cite �verifiable, authoritative sources,� according to Wikipedia. Some pages are protected and can be edited only by volunteer administrators who have a certain number of edits and days editing under their belt, while other pages are fully protected and may be edited only by volunteer administrators or stewards voted on by the community. If someone makes an edit that other members of the community don�t approve, they can revert that edit or, in more drastic circumstances, nominate the entire page for deletion. The deletion request is then commented on by other members of the community until a consensus is reached. (Click here to see Wikipedia�s policies and guidelines page and here for the fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates.]

But an investigation by FoxNews.com shows that pedophiles are gaming this system, using their message boards to rally opposition and to sabotage attempts by other Wikipedia community members to rid the online encyclopedia of pro-pedophilia content.

For example a 2007 post on BoyChat calls on the pedophile community to vote against another user�s request to delete a Wikipedia page called �Marthijn Uittenbogaard,� named for the leader of a defunct Dutch political party that had three members and advocated for the legalization of sex between adults and children.

After the page was nominated for deletion by multiple Wikipedia users, a BoyChat user named �SqueakBox� wrote on the blog:

�Hysterical antiped lists Marthijn Uittenbogaard for wikipedia scrapheap!
"Get yer' votes in -"

The blog post concludes with a link to the Wikipedia page where the proposed deletion was being voted on.

The site remains active today.

Wikisposure has identified hundreds of convicted pedophiles and well-known pedophilia activists who have been members of Wikipedia�s community of volunteers who edit articles on the online encyclopedia. Some pedophiles active on Wikipedia have been sent to prison on charges relating to child pornography, according to Wikisposure, which has assisted in some of the investigations.

Von Erck, who uses a pseudonym, said a number of pedophiles have been kicked off the site, but many of them have returned using different usernames.

�The problem with it is you need to have a committed effort to deal with committed people who are devoted to pushing their propaganda online like pedophiles,� he said.

But Nigam, who is co-chairman of President Obama's Online Safety Technology Group and sits on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, said it's not that complicated. "Almost every other social networking site has taken steps to clean up their sites, except for Wikipedia," he said.

Nigam said Wikipedia is making a conscious choice to abandon its responsibility by hosting an online haven for pedophiles.

�It�s nothing more than a company that is choosing to ignore the worst kind of exploitation in the world,� he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/06/25/exclusive-pedophiles-find-home-on-wikipedia/




]]>
Mon, 28 Jun 2010 19:11:04 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Will Evolution Help me Grow Wings? - I'm growing a feather in my back! ]]> Mon, 05 Jul 2010 23:28:58 +0000 <![CDATA[Discussion: Audio doesnt work right on Video, is there a workaround?]]> http://freehovind.com/watch-2146601419809292776
 
8 Answering Hank Hannagraf and answers in Genesis
 
its 53 minutes long, i have the volume at 100% and its barely audible, and very noisy
 
dont know if other videos are also not working, but is there a codec needed or ??
thanks
]]>
Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:31:23 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Obama Hires Pedophile Supporter to His Administration. - Obama hires pedophile supporter Kevin Jennings to be his "safe school czar."]]>
If this isn't radical, I don't know what is. This story is from Coral Ridge Ministries.

CORAL RIDGE MINISTRIES NEWS



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 11, 2010



CONTACT:

Andrew Scott, (954) 334-5332, a.scott@crministries.org



Obama Administration Appointee Kevin Jennings Poised to Bring Pro-Homosexual Instruction to Schoolchildren — Details on February 14 Coral Ridge Hour National Broadcast



FORT LAUDERDALE, FL (February 11, 2010) –Pro-family experts caution on the February 14 Coral Ridge Hour TV show that Obama administration appointee Kevin Jennings, a prominent homosexual activist, is poised to bring pro-homosexual instruction to public schoolchildren nationwide.



Jennings is the Assistant Deputy Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools in the U.S. Department of Education. He also founded the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which advocates for acceptance of homosexuality among public school students.



“Jennings lives for one purpose,” said Janice Shaw Crouse, executive director of The Beverly LaHaye Institute. “His whole career has been devoted to mainstreaming homosexuality and to creating a culture that is not just accepting of, but approving of homosexual behavior—particularly among teenagers and pre-teens.”



The program notes that Jennings wrote the foreword for the book, Queering Elementary Education. He has also said he is inspired by Harry Hay, states Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries’ Washington, D.C., correspondent.



“Hay is one of the founders of the Mattachine Society, the first gay-rights group, and he was a strong supporter of the North American Man-Boy Love Association, which is a pedophile group that supports men having sex with boys,” said Knight, author of the new book, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who are Pushing America Toward Socialism.



Meanwhile, Jennings’ GLSEN group “has advocated safe-sex kits that include instructions for ‘fisting,’” Crouse said. “I don’t think it takes much to imagine what that’s about.”



Crouse sat with Jennings for two years on a U.S. Surgeon General’s task force on sex education. She recounts on the television feature the disturbing advice that Jennings gave as a teacher to a student.



A 15-year-old student “talked to Jennings about being approached by an adult man in a bus stop with whom he had sex,” Crouse recalls. “Jennings’ advice was, ‘I hope you used a condom and had safe sex.’



“This is against the law, number one; number two, it’s unconscionable that a teacher would give that kind of advice to a student,” Crouse stated. “And this is the man who is supposed to be providing safe schools for our kids?”



Despite calls from concerned citizens, pro-family groups, and members of Congress for Jennings to be replaced, “the Obama administration has sort of thumbed its nose at all of us,” Crouse said. “I think the American public is saying in this New Year, ‘we have to do something about that.’”



“Jennings has no business even being near a school, much less in charge of the government’s safe-school program,” Knight said. Knight’s newly released book, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who are Pushing America Toward Socialism, includes a detailed profile on Jennings and his advocacy for an extreme homosexual agenda.

http://www.coralridge.org/partnercentral/ministrynewsdetail.aspx?id=159




]]>
Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:33:03 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Did We Come From Maggot-Like-Creatures? - Fossil of Rare Armor-Plated Worm-Like Creature Discovered in Canada's Capital.]]>

http://www.besse.at/sms/evolutn.html]]>
Mon, 05 Jul 2010 04:45:22 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Science is real]]> [url] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty33v7UYYbw&feature=related[/url]]]> Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:58:23 +0000 <![CDATA[Truth In Genesis - At TruthInGenesis.com you will find many resources on the Creation / Evolution debate]]> Sat, 26 Jun 2010 23:30:17 +0000 <![CDATA[climate gate, the epilogue - because ronnie is still around...]]> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10538198.stm
 
extract
 
"

However, it says "there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness", notable over complying with Freedom of Information (FoI) requests.

CRU scientists were too quick to dismiss critics from outside their own circles, it says.

Sir Muir said the methods the inquiry team used ought to allay fears that this was a whitewash.

"It's inevitable that people who've made up their minds (beforehand) have made up their minds," he said.

"But we haven't ducked the issues... we've gone to the heart of the issues to resolve them as best we can."

Edward Acton, UEA vice-chancellor, said the review should "finally lay to rest the conspiracy theories, untruths and misunderstandings that have circulated.

"We hope this exoneration of UEA climate scientists and their research collabroators around the world, some of whom have suffered considerably during this experience, will be widely reported.""

]]>
Wed, 07 Jul 2010 22:23:26 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Responding to mwolf]]> Since our little pal Mikey seems to determined to just post the samefundie/creationist talking points over and over again (while ducking and dodging every time someone poses a direct question or challenge to him), I've decided to put together a list of the various claims he's made - along with a summary of how those claims are inaccurate or fallacious.
 
Rather than writing the same replies over and over again, from now on I'll just post a link/reference to the appropriate post in this thread. If there are any that I've missed, please post 'em. I'd been meaning to put together a list of creationist fallacies and lazy debate tactics, but this should serve the same purpose since Mikey uses pretty much all of them.
 
And here's an index with links to the individual posts, to make it even easier to refute Mikey's claims.
 
CLAIM 1
"Atheism is evil because it's responsible for the holocaust and various other attrocities." 
 
CLAIM 2
"All atheists are communists/socialists/Marxists." 
 
CLAIM 3
"Atheism is a religion because atheists BELIEVE there is no God."
 
CLAIM 4
"By not speaking out against the killing of Christians in China, or DrWorm's post that right-wing Christians should be put in camps, atheists condone both."
 
CLAIM 5
"our observation is needed  to make the wave functions collapse into matter," therefore "the'big bang' [couldn't] produce matter without our [God's] observation".
 
CLAIM 6
"everything may not be natural and God is plausable" [sic]
 
CLAIM 7
"The Bible is historically-accurate because of the dead sea scrolls/passages in the Bible that have been verified by historians or archaeologists"
 
CLAIM 8
"Creationism is valid because of discoveries made by scientists who also happened to be creationists."
 
CLAIM 9
"My philosophy is superior because I only believe, but you think you know everything."
]]>
Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:37:31 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Why Macro Evolution is a Joke: explained - Monkey to man or animal to man can't happen. ]]>
The Sheer Lack Of Evidence For Macro Evolution - William Lane Craig - Watch more funny videos here]]>
Fri, 02 Apr 2010 02:37:25 +0000
<![CDATA[ten commandments... - ...they aren't what you think they are...]]>  
]]>
Thu, 06 May 2010 22:14:26 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Examining evolutionfairytale.com "Christian Warning"]]> So after ronnie's constant copy-pasting of text from this page, I decided to give it a read - and it's just about the silliest collection of creationist/Christian apoligist spin I've ever read (except for MikeWolf's posts, of course).
 
In a nutshell, the post takes the failures and deficiencies of creationism - and tries to portray them as positives.
 
My number one warning to Christians is this: do not let evolutionists lead you into endless arguments that will only serve to waste your time where it can be better spent elsewhere.
 
That's ridiculous for two reasons. First of all, these people start a site called "EvolutionFairytale.com" and put a forum on it, and they're whining about drawn-out arguments? This is yet another example of a standard Christian apologist tactic: go on the offensive - but as soon as anyone pushes back, play the victim.
 
Secondly, it's almost invariably the creationists who draw out these arguments - their refusal (or inability?) to accept anything that conflicts with their dogmatic beliefs means they typically end up arguing in circles. That, and their tendency to throw hissy-fits when they (invariably) lose the argument, at which point they start posting Bible passages, accusing their opponents of pedophilia, etc.
 
One of the tactics of the enemy
 
(emphasis: mine)
 
The "enemy"? How melodramatic - and it's also just about the most transparent attempt at an "us vs. them" dichotomy that I've ever read.
 
Not only is there other ministry work you may be being held from, I also consider lost family time is often not worth the limited benefits a forum may bring to God’s kingdom.
 
"Fortunately, I absolutely despise my family, so I have plenty of time to run a forum and write long-winded Christian apologist screeds."
 
Evolution is a direct assault on Genesis, the very foundation of the Bible - "If the foundations are destroyed, What can the righteous do?" (Psalms 11:3).
 
"A faith that cannot survive collision with reality deserves few regrets." - Arthur C. Clarke
 
Satan is very clever, and knows that if he places doubts in people's mind about the very first book in the Bible, then why should they believe the rest of the Bible.
 
Ah yes, the "oppressed majority" posturing.
 
Funny though, Satan's "clever plan" doesn't seem to have worked with the majority of Christians (who accept theistic evolution, at least going by denomination).
 
Any excuse to justify creationism's endless failures, I guess.
 
Helps prepare you to debate origins in a public setting, such as with coworkers, family, etc. Keeps you tuned-up on the latest evolutionist responses.
 
Translation: it keeps you equipped with the latest and greatest creationist talking points that you can use to spam the comments of any Richard Dawkins videos on youTube.
 
Present an article or idea for review. Comments from the opposition can especially be useful, because they will often try harder to find holes or faults in your article. Evolutionists can occasionally provide good feedback, after all.
 
"...until we ban them for 'equivocation', that is."
 
Time-consuming. Writing a good post can take time, especially when research is involved.
 
"...or so we've heard."
 
They will always, almost without exception, get the last word. They will be relentless.
 
Sorry, chum, but the reason that "evolutionists" usually get the last word isn't because we're relentless - it's because the vast majority of creationists couldn't even successfully argue that water is wet. And, of course, it doesn't exactly help that there isn't a single shred of legitimate evidence that supports creationism.
 
The truth is, I have never once in 11+ years witnessed an activist evolutionist commit their life to Christ
 
"I've called Richard Dawkins a fag, what more can I do?!?!?"
 
Evolutionists believe what they do despite any evidence presented to them.
 
"Unlike creationists, who require such convincing evidence as.... uh... well.... uh.... HEY LOOK OVER THERE!"
 
They are firmly committed to a worldview that removes accountability.
 
Err, and I guess we'll just have to take his word for that...
 
Without exception, I have found that the committed evolutionist activist is always, I mean always, socially liberal.
 
*cough*bullshit*cough*
 
This ubiquitous connection overwhelmingly establishes the fact that you will likely never convince them, because it is not evidence but worldview that drives them; they simply do not want to be convinced
 
"So when you lose debates again and again and again, be sure to use that as your excuse!"
 
Evolutionists almost always outnumber creationists on origins boards, despite the fact that public polls show a comfortable margin of creationists over evolutionists.
 
That is completely false for most of the industrialized world - that statement is only accurate for the United States, and then only certain parts of the US.
 
So, in other words, he's trying to praise creationism on the grounds that it's accepted by people who also believe that lasers operate by sound waves. There's a ringing endorsement.
 
Christians generally do not feel the need to justify their faith on an internet forum.
 
Are creationists truly unable to see the contradiction in writing that sentence - and then posting it on a website that is dedicated to "Christians [...] justify[ing] their faith on an internet forum"?
 
the Bible says they are willfully ignorant (dumb on purpose
 
"As opposed to creationists, people who are so intelligent that they need to have the term 'willfully ignorant' defined for them."
 
This is my humble opinion on the origins debate, and some words of wisdom from years of experience that I wanted to share with fellow Christians so they know what they are getting into if they jump into an origins forum.
 
Translation: "I got run out of talk.origins after less than a dozen posts, so now I'm bitter and attempting to come up with elaborate justifications for creationist ineptitude."
]]>
Mon, 31 May 2010 11:01:43 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Kneemail to Rush Limbaugh - Kent Hovind's kneemail to Rush Limbaugh]]> Kent Hovind wrote to Rush Limbaugh back in May. The letter states several obvious lie such as the definitions of evolution and that he is in jail because of the IRS.
 
]]>
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:15:15 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: OMFG....These people are nuts.]]> They really need to take all the Right-Wing Christians and put them in camps where they can't hurt the rest of us:
 
From Mr. Hovind's blog:
 

Doc, this is a letter, I was asked to write for my City Job. They have come up to par with what I call Biblical technology … He is my letter less the City and company name of the product…

As per your request concerning my religious conviction, why I cannot partake of the new technology implement, being adopted by the City of ——-; namely, the “———- Bio-scan Time Data Terminal”. 

  I am a Judeo-Christian I live according to the teachings of Jesus, The Messiah or Christ, from the Holy Bible. I have been following His ways for 29 years. 

 According to the book in the Bible called, “Revelation”,  Jesus told The Apostle John (paraphrased):  

“There is going to come a time, when, “technology”, though governmental global policies, enforced by military means, would compel, “All people” into a system that would not allow them to do business in the usual way, unless, they took a “Mark” (Chip) & agreed to those global monetary business practices”.

“I believe the, “——— Bio-scan Time Data Terminal”, (that implements (R.F.I.D.) Radio-frequency Identification technology), is one of the symbolisms or “technologies,” Jesus was telling John, to warn humanity about in Revelation.

Definition: “Radio Frequency Identification” (R.F.I.D.)- Denoting technologies that use radio waves to identify people or objects carrying encoded “microchips”.
(For said subject; “mark” will be defined as microchip or short, “chip”. and WiFi is the “Technology”, how information will be passed along.)

These technologies in and of themselves, are harmless. It is when I am “asked” to cohere (unite) My body part on a machine that gives me an uncomfortable feeling.

Revelation 13:16-17; 14:8-12 and 19:20 warns humanity, not to be “deceived” concerning this mark. (chip).  Revelation 13:16-17 is very clear concerning this mark; “And he causes all, (humanity) both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive “a mark” (Chip) in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, unless he had this “mark”. (Chip) Deceive- To cause (someone) to believe something that is not (fully) true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage.  

I have informed the Pastor’s of my church that they may be receiving inquiry concerning this subject. Interpretation to this subject and it’s technology … was not known in the Bible writer’s time. The author used the closest “symbols” or words” to convey, understanding, to the future generations reading his book.

These are my “discoveries” why I feel it compulsory (according to the rules I follow in the Bible), that I can not get involved with this “technology”.

The word … interpretation is always brought up in religious matters. Interpret: “To understand a particular way that conveys ones understanding of the creator’s ideas. (For this discussion, “The creator”, is God)

 Revelation 13:16-17 gives clear, characteristics and distinctive phenomenon, surrounding this technology. Namely, “No man might buy or sell”… unless he had this mark (chip). 

Schools of thought in the religious field, what this “Mark” may be:
1). A literal mark, (Chip) or device placed on the or in the hand or forehead.
2). A mental acceptance or agreement, (contract) to said such practices. 
    (This may include a badge or objects carrying encoded microchip.)
See reference of this “Chip” in (Attached 1)

I read and keep up with current events. I have re-read the ——- City Policies and Procedures Manual Adopted August 15, 2008 for “Harassment”. Though it was intended inform our members, women were joining the ranks of the ——– Fire Department, “Religion” falls under Harassment as well. Rights that have not only been on the books since, August 15, 2008 but since “December 15,1791”.  

I cherish and exercise my religious rights. I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution against ALL enemies foreign and domestic. I would be doing a DIS-SERVICE to my country, my family, members of my department, members of those from my family who served in the military, my Church, and My God … if I did not question this “Subject”, that I feel dangerous and “a threat” to the future generations, who don’t understand R.F.D.I. technologies for future purposes.

Their are those within our Country ebbing away at “Our laws” imposing  “Policies”, that are forcing me, “the worker” to fear and compromise “God given freedoms”. I’m tired of standing back and watching the lines of right and wrong become fuzzy, because they are blurry in the eyes of others. I worked for this job not to have it compromise my American way of life or my religious practices. 

Below are attached information on:

R.F.I.D. Technology 
(Attached 1)

“TOUCHING BIG BROTHER” by Esq. Simon G. Davies 
How biometric technology will fuse flesh and machine, 
Information Technology & People”, Vol 7, No. 4 1994; 
(Attached 2) 

Original Greek words used to explain “mark”.
Each word goes back to it’s root form. Definitions are from 
Strong’s Hebrew and Greek dictionary. 
(Attached 3)

 
 Biblical Scripture references, warning humanity of individual’s through 
government powers that will push to change laws and policies … 
and make this “Mark” mandatory or, the person that does not comply 
will not be able to buy or sell. 
 (Attached 4)

(Attached 3) the Greek definitions imply… this “Mark” can be a  “System” or “A policy” or, “A system of policies”. The word  “Mark” can be translated as: “Emblem, symbol, image, figure, mark, sign; crest, “BADGE”, “DEVICE”, insignia, stamp, seal”.  

 “Device” is of particular intrigue as it describes the, the “Tempo series T016 Bio-scan Time Data Terminal”.
 
Device: noun
 1.) A thing made or adapted for a particular purpose, esp. a mechanical or electronic contrivance : a 
      measuring device.
 2.) A plan, scheme, or trick with a particular aim.

To end;

 I follow the S.O.G.’s of the —— City Fire Department. I understand the complexity of the City’s time management challenges. The  city. didn’t create this, technology that just happens to mirror Jesus’ words in Revelation. With all due respect,  because I am under Para-authority, does not mean, I loose my conscience, because I am asked to follow an order? I don’t want to fall under the same category as, “Lynndie England” because, “I did not question and give valid reasoning, to those informing me, “To comply to an order or policy” ; (at least in this incidence), that may cause pain and suffering to myself or others.  (Referring to Attached 4). I have to be true to my convictions. 

 I have been on the City pay roll for 11 years, and 2 years prior in 1992 as a provisional employee with the police tow division. “I respectfully request that the same manor of time keeping that I have been under in these years of employment with the “City of Atlantic City”, be kept in place for me and any other employee wishing the same”.   

I hope my “LIVELIHOOD”, won’t be affected with this, “New technology implement”. Again, I do not feel comfortable with this technology confiscating my unique ID. (Finger print). The City already has a record of my finger prints.  

In saying all this … I did take notice in reading the “Tempo series T016 Bio-scan Time Data Terminal” specifications, 3 choices are given … 1). Fingerprint only, 2). ID number + fingerprint, 3). ID number + code. Number 3 I am comfortable with.
See: “T016 BioScan Biometric Terminal”

My apologies if I am causing any inconvenience. “But, those are the reasons why, I can not participate with this “New technology”, as I believe it fulfills Jesus warnings in Revelation thus violating my rights protected under The Constitution of the United States.

Sincerely 
F.F. Anthony Michael Carfagno

The U.S. Constitution – Amendment 1
”Congress shall make “no law” respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Ratified 12/15/1791 

 
]]>
Thu, 28 Jan 2010 02:21:08 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: CLEAN UP THE SCHOOLS!! - now THIS is why so many creationsit don't understand evolution!]]> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93mWjngq4oA&feature=channel_page
 
of course AronRa makes a lot more vid about this, which i have linked before.
 
so CLEAR UP THE SCHOOLS OF CRAPPY TEACHERS WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY HAVE TO TEACH!!!
]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:19:00 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: taking of them Bible goggles]]> say i was wondering.
after seeing all the delusional fudementalists here the quetion that came to my mind was this:

is it possible for a fundementalist to "take of his (heavily shaded) "bible" glasses"?

 

since otherwise the only reason we rationalst are posting here is only to show inpressionable people the true side of creationism. which is still a reason in it's own right, but if we were able to open up some people's eyes, it would be so much more whorthwile.

 

so fundies, GO ON AND POST YOUR REPLY!!

 
]]>
Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:08:45 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Let's Have a Tea Party - Want to do something about congress and Obama's radical friends? Join the Tea Party.]]> ]]> Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:53:07 +0000 <![CDATA[How to exterminate every single Atheist on earth.]]> Burn all religious books and forget about Gods. hehe, right? :)]]> Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:18:18 +0000 <![CDATA[Discussion: Hovind petition]]>
I'd simply like to request that the petition be looked over carefully by those in charge, since there are several damning comments and other vehemently distasteful phrases splattered throughout...
 
May these comments please be removed for the sake of our brother Hovind's dignity, and to disallow blasphemy against YHVH.
(on this site at least)
 
Perhaps there is someone who can tell me what's being done about this?..
 
Thank you.
]]>
Sun, 02 May 2010 22:15:26 +0000
<![CDATA[Discussion: Kent tries to answer questions. - Kent Hovind tries to answer questions.]]>

Kent is asked about teeth marks on fossils, death, carnivores, bacteria, insects and immortality of Adam and evolution of cats.

http://www.cseblogs.com/2010/04/27/miscellaneous-questions/

Once again, he states that evolutionists believe that living things came from rocks.

]]>
Fri, 30 Apr 2010 23:19:23 +0000