Originally posted by MAXIMUS POWERS: Often, elaborating extensively about a person's psyche can be a demanding task for a writer, especially if he/she wishes to keep the reader glued to the pages. Dostoyevsky achieves it with terrific ease. Crime and Punishment is a didactic novel which superbly dramatises Doestoevsky's view of sin, guilt and punishment. I read this when I was 12. Leave out the obvious "classics" and recommend true gems. This, To Kill a Mockingbird , Catcher in the Rye etc., whilst all being decent books, are books for tweens. Well, OK fine they're not, but they should be. Much better than the mind-numbing crap tweens of today read. Make good recommendations or don't bother!

Yeah... OK.

@ Maximum Powers, Go go power rangeeers dii dii di di. I also quite liked Rugrats, Arthur, Paddington Bear and Sailor Moon, but no way to the extent of Spiderman which I had been just obsessed with. I wanted to be spidergirl. And it was perfectly plausible.

I didn't find this even remotely funny. Surely I can't be the only one.

Originally posted by MAXIMUS POWERS: Have you read this book? Let me tell you this. It's brilliant. It's peculiar, annoying even. But not peculiar in the sense of "Finnegans Wake" which is just really unbearable shite in spite of what people will tell you. This is one of the best books of the last 50 years.

OMG Che, that was it! What is it called?

Haatu, my brother used to watch Dragon Ball Z when he was in high school and I used to mock him for that. Then I got hooked. It was just literally super addictive! When I was a kid, I used to looove Spiderman. I also watched Teenage mutant ninja turtles, and that cartoon with 4 people with rings (fire, earth, water, ?) I can't remember the name but I would run around with kiddie rings and pretend to be them. I would also later on actively think of ways to expose myself to radiactive radiation, so I could become an awesome mutant.

Originally posted by Oz: my baby! I like the smell of it!

^As soon as the holiday season is over, imma gonna take 'em trainers out! Straight into the garbage bin On a serious note, it's time to get fitter. Expect updates from me in 2010, inshaAllah! In the words of Joe from Family Guy: "LETS DO IT!!"

Chloe by Chloe & Ange ou Demon by Givenchy. Though I rarely wear perfume.

Lets see. 1. You did not understand my reference to saltation, and instead mocked me that my knowledge is gleamed from cartoons. 2. You lied that according to fossil evidence, the floreansis looked more human to you. When I gave you drawings as proof, you mocked them and called me 'an ignorant child'. Then when you saw the fossils, you tried to back down by saying there is a possibility they were dwarfs. 3. About evolutionary scientists who believe birds didn't evolve from dinosaurs. You initially said: "Rubbish. The consensus in the scientific community regarding birds is that they evolved from theropod dinosaurs." Later on you went on to say: "I meant what the overwhelming majority of scientists accept today. There will always be dissenting voices. That's given." And then accused me of name-dropping when I gave you the evidence. 4. I asked you for the definition of evolution (to prove my point evolutionary theory isn't even in accordance with itself) and you gave me a description that completely conflicted Ernst Mayer's. Finding it hard to stomach, you accused me of "misconstruing others" and asked for proof. I gave you a quote from the book, you concluded Mayr is wrong. Then you said both of you were right because you agreed. 5. When I asked you if you found it odd that natural selection created protections (DNA repair mechanism) against the very thing that enabled evolution (beneficial mutatations) you replied "who said natural selection created these "protections", and when I asked whether the first cell had them, you said "possibly". 6. You said: "Evolution is a process not an event. They will never be a scenario where the offspring of one species suddenly (like in one or two generation) becomes another distinct species". I had previously quoted Mayr: "[Evolution…] may lead to the production of a new species-individual in a single step." –‘What Evolution is’ 2001 page 174 Most likely you will retreat from your previous comment and say he is wrong. If this does not prove my point of "evolution not being in accordance with itself", nothing will. 7. You made a claim that evolution does not proceed from less complex to more complex and as a proof said there are single celled organisms. When I asked you where single celled oranisms of today came from, you yelled straw man fallacy & now you claim I don't know the meaning of Abiogenesis. Now the reason I didn't bother with you, is because you are dumb (yes, you really are) and it's utterly useless arguing with you because you are a stubborn id1ot. You can't even see how you are wrong. You don't get it. It's like trying to talk to a wall. I'll reply to your ****** post and show you why I didn't bother with it. You wrote that humans and other apes can't synthesize vitamin C, I replied that some other animals couldn't either. Now you wrote: "But the point I was making completely sailed over your head." Even though I corrected you. I wrote down what you were trying to say. I wrote: "What you are trying to say here is that the mutation that makes vitamin C gene inactive is almost the same to the mutation seen in chimps." Then I proceeded to ask if you had ever heard of pseudogenes. Again, this reference went completely to deaf ears. You replied: "The fact all of them can't synthesize their own vitamin C like us, indicates we share an immediate common ancestor with them. Keep in mind that EVOLUTION THEORY postulates that closely related animals should display close similarities" This is a ****** answer. Guinea pigs can't synthesize vitamin C, we share a common ancestor with them too? Again, back to my point (which, if you knew anything about, you would understand), have you or have you not heard of pseudogenes? Do you understand the reason for my asking this question? Of course you don't. "Another evidence for evolution from biochemistry is the DNA molecule. All living things use the same molecule to transfer genetic information from generation to another. This is consistent with Evolution Theory but NOT with the Theory of Special Creation. Why would Allah use the same molecule in all organisms if he created every single organism individually?" Lol. "Note that as 2+2=5 is unremittingly confronted with the unassailable evidence for human evolution, she retreats further and further into denials and lame quibbles. The above is case in point. What exactly is she trying to say?" Yes, ask. "Most of our DNA is what is called Junk DNA." and bla bla the rest of... "2+2=5’s quibble above is complete red herring. No one is talking about functional and non-functional parts of human and ape genome. Instead, it is a comparison of the similarities/differences of human and chimp genome. Gene functionality is completely immaterial. The same functional/non-functional genes would still be present in the genome and is detectable. " Lol. You know what. I can't do this. This is too ******. It makes me realize I have been arguing with a fraud all this time. It makes me want to go and watch MTV because they're less likely to offend me with such id1ocy. 1. Junk DNA was coined by evolutionists who thought they had no function. Then they were embarrassed when it was discovered they did have use. 2. I was not talking about Junk DNA. So you are right I guess, no one was talking about "functional or non-functional parts of human and ape genome". I'll spoon feed you. What I was talking about was that humans and chimps' "98%" claim is in fact BASED ON PROTEIN CODING REGIONS which compromise 1.5% OF THE TWO GENOMES. The more area will be covered in the future, the more the number will change (and possibly dramatically drop). Therefore 98% genome similarity is misleading, a half-truth, if you will. "You need to look again. It is a fusion of two chromosomes as evidenced by the extra telomeres and centromeres." This is a matter of opinion. Unless you were there to witness the fusion. About Robertsonian translocation, you said: "Yes, I do. What is your point? That chromosomal rearrangements occur? If so, you're wasting your time." I did not ask you what causes Robertsonian translocation. I asked you, what the CONSEQUENCE ("Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition") of Robertsonian translocation is. The answer is more miscarriages. Now how could this new, changed chromosome have taken over the entire population and become what is most common in people, when it's carriers were at disadvantage due to fertility problems? "Your questions are getting more and more bizarre. Why would you expect human and chimp knee to be similar?" Because you brought up "comparative anatomy". Knee is not part of the anatomy? And now my question are getting more and more bizarre? You are a clown. And the circus goes on: "Do humans and chimps have the same gait? If not, and they obviously don’t, then why would you honestly expect their knees to be similar? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning." You don't know what the words you used means? Now why is that not a surprise? Oh yeah, because you've done that before. Comparative anatomy according to Princeton university: the study of anatomical features of animals of different species. Do you want me to spoon-feed you how the knee is part of that, and thus a very legitimate question? "Ever since the ancestor of humans switched the tropical forests of Africa for the fast encroaching savannas, the body of our human ancestors adapted to upright walking. We inherited that modification" Goes on to show how much you know, (yet) again. So according to you, there are known intermediate mechanisms between a simple pivot hinge and a four-bar mechanism? ‘Despite the overall similarity of the design of the knee in tetrapods, no ideal animal model of the human knee is available.’ - Dye, An Evolutionary perspective of the knee, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Most people would agree chimps and other apes look similar. Most people would also agree that humans and chimps do not look alike. "It "proves" human evolution because the process of evolution is gradual one, taking place over millions of years. Thus, temporal relationships of the fossil record are important and should show up in our fossil data. If humans evolved from ape-like ancestors, then the fossil record should show it" This is tiresome. Fossil findings show there have been other creatures roaming on Earth. After your request for example of variation within a kind, this is what you had to say: "These are dog breeds not different species. Species have exact scientific definition(s)." And you really wonder why I can't be bothered with you? You are incapable of keeping up with what's being talked about. "It is good that this time you provided all of what he said instead of misconstruing his words like you always do with other scientists" Elaborate. Just because you cry "straw man" or "you misconstrue others" like a little girl everytime you're in trouble, does not make it true. "What he said in the last part of your quote is perfectly consistent with Evolution because every time there is a new species, genetic information is reduced." You are a troll. All this time you have been arguing mutations add information, just so you can retreat from your original point . "Until then you're just another believing History Denier."[/b] Lol. Is there a club I can join? "As I said already said, we both agree with each other." "As my Ernst Mayr quote above demonstrates, Mayr didn’t agree with himself." What quote? You mean the quote of which you said this: "These definitions are identical and convey the same thing." "So the problem lies with him, not with science. " That would mean the problem lies with Professor Diamond too, who in the preface calls the book the best book on evolution there has ever been and ever will be. But whatever, I don't need your comments for this. "I think you’re lost or maybe mistaking me for someone else. I asked for you to provide evidence that attests to your unsubstantiated assertion that most mutations are deleterious. " I never said so. I only said so of some of the errors that slip through the DNA repair mechanism; that they are detrimental. Now don't resort to such obvious lying, it's not nice. Here is what I wrote originally, originally posted November 14: Yes, some errors slip through and it affects the information it encodes. They are mostly detrimental; mutations are responsible for thousands of inherited diseases and diseases such as cancer. There are some which are neutral, and some which are beneficial (as you noted), but the truly beneficial mutations (not talking about beneficial as in helps the bacteria resist antibiotics) are so rare that there are, quite frankly, none. On top of that, all examples of mutations are actually loss of information, even the beneficial ones. So if natural selection and mutation result in LOSS of information, then how can evolution of increasing complexity occur? (to which btw you replied "there are single celled organisms" and after my response to that, you later ironically accused me of changing the subject, and yelled straw man fallacy - and even later ever-so true to your logical absurdity, accused me of not being able to distinguish Abiogenesis from evo theory) And this is exactly why this whole discussion is frustrating and has the appeal of a banana for me. You have the attention span and the logical ability of a 3 year old child. "To that end, you provided two completely unrelated quotes. The first merely describes, in general terms, about hereditary mutations (which I already acknowledged) " Where did you acknowledge? I can't see it, please refer me to that post. "Now, can we surmise why you CAN’T produce a single authoritative source that supports your claim?" A claim you created only in your head. "Each unique individual has about 100,000 new mutations that he/she didn’t inherit from parents. Otherwise we’d all be clones. These mutations are the source of NEW genetic diversity that adds to and replenish the gene pool." If life started from single cell organism, and mutation is a decrease in "true information content" (although "making it genetically more diverse") how could this result in more... anything? Logically speaking. Now lets go back to the discussion about our Creator. "Stop lying to yourself. You're not interested in the truth, if you did you wouldn’t be Islamic apologist. Your entire agenda in this whole thread is defending your fragile superstitious believes. Sadly, you’re bound by Islamic dogma to believe in logical absurdities, shun reason and be hostile to the truth. Which pretty much establishes why you’re so oftentimes wrong." "And Allah isn't competent enough to create a single, unambiguous book that could convince that vast majority of humanity of his instructions and existence" It is not that God is incompetent to do that. It is that if He did it, there would be no need for faith. "It didn’t take a millisecond before Allah was banishing his own “creation” from heaven to earth after they rebelled" Again, free will. They were free to choose to obey God or not. But you have to remember that God had prepared Earth for them even before they did. It was predetermined that we would live on Earth. "Islamic dogma tells that the Torah and some mythical book called Injeel was originally sent by Allah only to be "corrupted." Allah also sent countless “prophets” to deliver his message, all of them failing." Well, you are denying God right now. Why shouldn't other people be just as free to corrupt what they see fit? The prophets are by God's mercy, as He will not reveal Himself to the inhabitants of Earth, but people need protection from the likes of you, who will want to corrupt them. Of course they will fail to win over EVERY single human. But that was not their purpose, their purpose was to be of guide to those who seek guidance. So they did not fail, they succeeded. "If the world ends today most of humanity (>80%), as per Islamic eschatology, will end up in hell." If you look around, how many of humanity are kind-hearted, polite, well-meaning and loving? Very few. Heaven is for those rare people who execute these characteristic in this world, by themselves (with the will and guidance of God). Hell is for those who did not care for such things. You must remember that everybody's real home and destination is ultimately Heaven. Some just need to be purified first, because they were not able to do it by themselves, therefore they are forced to purify in Hell. There will be even Muslims in Hell. Allah Almighty says: "They will find all that they did, placed before them: And not one will thy Lord treat with injustice." - Al Kahf 18:49) Think of it this way. In Paradise, people are granted "whatever their heart desires". With human free will, a person has to be in full control of themselves and their desires. Otherwise if people with pride, jealousy, hate, greed, anger etc were allowed into Paradise where all their wishes come true, there would be chaos and misery. "If I were you I'd keep Allah out of this discussion." You just simply don't know Him.

Originally posted by chocolate & honey: LOl@2+2. I never had the opportunity. My mom would always convulse at the mere mention of "Holiday Activities" even would try to go out of her way to let the teachers know, their religion is B.S. Embarrassing!! How many times did I bring note to school saying I wasnt allowed to eat xmass cookies or anything other food, lol! LOL! Whyyyy? What's wrong with cookies and food? It's not like they dip it in "holy water" lol... There's a kid who closed her eyes when the teacher brought a cross in the class, lol! When the teacher asked why she closed her eyes, she replied it was against our religion to look at crosses. So sweet. My mother was against trips to church and singing Christian songs, but I guess she just didn't see much harm in a man dressing in red and sporting a fake beard, or elf hats. I actually remember our neighbor visiting our house dressed as a Santa and me running under the table, lol. Didn't do me much harm! Well apart from the fact that I'm such a twisted, terrible person

PPS I second Avatar Jake! Lol.

BTW don't wait for the release of DVD! This movie is going to flop EPICLY in Blueray/DVD sales, as it's a 3-D film with its selling point being 'a great cinematic experience'. It won't look as great in 2-D, and frankly there is no story to carry it in 2-D.

My reaction was: I bet the several specialized computers used to 3-D render the the film for all those months, didn't run on green electricity! I hated the whole tree-worshiping element of the film. There's a new pagan religion called Gaia worship. It was clearly trying to force-feed us that. I felt offended. But then I looked at how gorgeous the whole thing was, and there I was, happy & smiling & enjoying the film again! At the end of the day it's just a film. A blockbuster made to entertain for a couple of hours (in this case nearly 3 hours). Don't go and create morals for yourself out of this film. Not saying you were. Oh look, cheesecake waiting to be finished off...

Chocolate & Honey, I like turkey & christmas porridge and gingerbreads. I'm slightly embarrassed to say I've worn the elf hat, rode on a sleigh, sat on Santa's lap, and received xmas presents and cards from classmates. I used to look forward to Christmas with great excitement when I was a kid. I even spent my very irregular, almost rare, weekly allowance to buy a chocolate advent calendar, and ate all the chocolate from the class' advent calender during the break time, cunningly always making sure I closed all the windows. Ah, childhood.

^ Liverpudlians sownd so ennoyin. I mean luk at Cherryllll. It's sooo ennoyinn. (I still envy her abs though) Originally posted by -Lily-: 5, You can easily go through long periods without music… I suggest you read more, I always have a good book in my bag, plus all those people who listen to their Ipods on the tube, they’ll probably go deaf as they must put it on the highest notch to hear it above the noise of the tube. I read somewhere that over 60% of deaf people were not born deaf. I find most classical music doesn’t invade like songs with words in them, it’s peaceful. Max, anything that changes your state of mind single handily I would be careful about…hmmmm. HEY, there is nothing more I could add. I agree with everything you said. About the book thing. I haven't got a library card, I usually buy the book I want to read, unless it's nick-able from a friend. I like my authors dead, or on their way to the grave. Any suggestions? I love classical music. I still listen to it. Which reminds me, I need to PM Mr Paragon & that girl from the States.

I liked it. There's a novel written by a non-Somali about a Somali girl, you guys heard of it? It's a teen novel, so if you bring yourself forward, be warned that everyone will think you're a freak. And "my little sister/daughter/niece read it" isn't an excuse. Anyway, back to Fabregas' story. I wouldn't mind reading more. I like the fact that this is a story about a young offender, who changes by falling in love. I like the fact that he is trying to present himself as someone better than he actually is. But I also think you explain too much. For example, instead of saying his brother is intelligent, show it. Write a bit of dialogue where it becomes evident. Gives us insight into their lives, how they live (how different they are) how his brother's room looks, what books he keeps in his bookshelf (does the brother work? if so, where? would it manifest in his brother having a flat screen TV for example in his room?). Describe and show, don't just say. Also make the police bit more intense. I won't go into details but I'll just say this: don't make moral judgements for the reader. Let the reader decide for themselves if something is right or wrong. The last paragraph is preachy. Looking forward to reading more!

Originally posted by MAXIMUS POWERS: speaking of more hot somali chicks, this UK chick is too busy getting comfortable with a black man. I couldn't help but think the depth of field is way too shallow throughout the video. And also that I really need to upgrade my DSLR. Anybody got spare 2k lying around the house?

Nin Yaaban, you crack me up. Even in the era of technology, you live in the stone age. Get your own food!

Originally posted by Raamsade: Neither does the Haj have anything to do (at least originally) with Islam. All the rituals associated with the Haj are of pagan origin. But Muslims appropriated all the rituals and today they're considered integral part of Islam; in fact the Haj is one of the 5 pillars of Islam. Wow you really shine with knowledge, don't you? lol

Raamsade, you've proven to me that you don't know what you're talking about. You are a fraud. So the debate has ended for me. If you cannot keep up with what's being said or understand what the references are or what we are talking about, there isn't even a debate. I could easily continue, but what is the use? You won't be able to understand and you'll try to rephrase your words. You're not interested in debating, you're interested in correcting yourself and appearing right. Also, there is only Norfsky who seems to read this thread. It is very frustrating when other users comment with a few lines without reading what has been written. So again, what is the point? You are no real opponent, and there is only one reader. So this is what I propose. Lets take this discussion elsewhere. Lets take it to a science forum. That way, you can give way to more knowledgable folks, and as an end result, perhaps even return to Islam.

Wow the beach was out of this continent. Seriously, if that is how beautiful "the worst country in the world" is, then imagine how stunning it could be if it was rebuilt and managed well! It's like some ladies' hair, great potential, very poor actual management.

Cara, I hated even the article. What was the article trying to say? He goes on to quote a 12 year old report about Somalis literacy levels (half are illiterate in any language). Why? It most certainly cannot be the most recent report. The whole article was negative and inspired by hatred. @ Mr. Paragon, The Times is definitely after the Somalis. Every decade it's some minority, now it seems Somalis are the hottest scum immigrants around. Puke @ the Times. This is the last time I'm going to accept a copy from a homeless person. I'll let it rot on the street.

Originally posted by *BOB: Who knows it for sure that Prophet Issa (Jesus) was born on 25th Dec.? Of course he wasn't! 25th Dec is an ancient Roman pagan celebration! The new Christian leaders converted the Roman pagans by promising them that they could continue celebrating their beloved pagan celebration Saturnalia. It has nothing to do with Christianity, really.