Posted on Wed, Oct 24, 2012
Jeff & Teegan Nordhues will be here to dedicate their son, Ezekiel David Nordhues, to the LORD! Pot-Luck dinner after service!
Discussion:
Baby Dedication this Sunday!
Amal (anon)
· 11 years ago
hi stevemy qutsieon is re flattening of the spine and should we do so? stuart mcgill advocates the putting of our hands underneath our lumber area to keep spine in a neutral position and that flattening the lower back has actually already flexed it.can you please verify what we are supposed to be doing with our spines specifically during supine floor exercise.thanks
Edon (anon)
· 11 years ago
Actually I never had any problem with the <a href="http://reubepaec.com">emntioos</a> = math statement and I tend to agree with it. I recall sitting in high school chemistry class many years ago and thinking about how the human thought process is chemically facilitated, possibly chemically motivated, and thinking to myself: damn! what's happening in this room is chemistry trying to understand *ITSELF*. My teenage mind was blown to say the least. I think there's a middle ground in this conversation which is usually left out. The 2 classic positions are: 1) the universe is deterministic, governed by math, and is therefore just a sprung trap we're all caught in, nothing is interesting, nothing is fun, there are no surprises, it's all just flat and 2) no, how can my free will be flatted, I am a special snowflake, blah blah quack quack bleat bleat. The middle ground, I think is that while math can describe everything in the universe, it takes an absolutely incredible amount of incredibly complex math to do so. We think that recognizing the mathematic nature of life robs it somehow of its dimension and spark, but it's a question of resolution. Imagine if someone said: A photograph could never look good on a computer. It's just a grid of squares. Sure, they'd have a point, up *to* a point. But as we all know, even a grid a few thousand pixels across and down can look absolutely amazing it can trigger all the same responses as a silver photographic print (which I've always admired for their literally atomic pixel size). So when you say: our entire population is just an abbacus made out of living tissue I guess my only objection is to the word just. What do you mean just? We are an abacus. A gigantic, multidimensional, complex-to-the-point-of-chaos abacus. We're not just an abacus. Take the biggest abacus you've ever seen, lay it on its side, stack a million more like it on top, and maybe several thousand of those stacks could describe an eyelash of mine. A dead one that's fallen onto my shirt. But sure. I think that artists and poets protest math as the foundation of the universe because they can't understand very much math, and 1+1=2 is not very sexy to them.But I also think that people who insist that you can't quantify reality are denying themselves some pretty profound miracles. Okay hippies, you can stand on a pedestal and claim that math and science can never describe you. But while we're off here coding the human genome, you're still scraping around the bottom of your tarot deck thinking you can find some kind of answers there. Give me a break, the reality, while much more digital than you might have thought, is much more interesting than your bullshit, albeit analog, spiritualism and religion.So yes, the world is math, emotion is absolutely part of that. But math can be a very deep and wide language, so let us not fear to be described by it. Great post, Rich.
Muhammad (anon)
· 11 years ago
I’ve examine just a few good prdutcos the following. Definitely well worth bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise what amount energy you put to help make these an incredible informative page. http://lpdpttt.com dlgdyvqnbjn [link=http://tfympvgspj.com]tfympvgspj[/link]
Nerice (anon)
· 10 years, 11 months ago
Sharleena (anon)
· 10 years, 11 months ago
Betsey (anon)
· 10 years, 11 months ago
Allie (anon)
· 10 years, 10 months ago
You must first create an account to post.
