Mellie - you should listen to this & then go to bed.
A nice song for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKH9enYiFIU

Sir lastnail wrote on Oct 17^th, 2010 at 1:33am:


His theory of relativity for one.

If it was so brilliant, then ask yourself, why didn't he win a noble prize for this?

Because like it was then, and as it is now, is still controversial 'theory' not scientific fact.


Read this wiki article on him, he was notorious for not crediting other scientists work, assisting him with his 'said' discoveries, this and pinching their others theories and applying them to his own scientific formula, after having condemned their 4 dimensional theories prior...insisting his 3 dimensional theory was accurate.

look, I don't know what to tell you, but he was a fraud, liar, cheat and a plagiarist, and this my friend is documented fact.

Also, it might be worthwhile noting, Einstein published hundreds of books and articles. Most were about physics, but there were a few which expressed leftist political opinions about pacifism, socialism, and zionism.

Here, read all about him, he was more political and controversial than you might realise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein

True, he was brilliant aright, a brilliant con-artist...so is Al Gore.

mellie wrote on Oct 17^th, 2010 at 1:42am:


It's the Stones singing " the hand of fate "

at the risk of oversimplying things (which it is really easy to underestimate the need for for here quite often), one very important criteria for canonisation as a catholic saint, apart from the candidate actually being already dead, is that they were actually a catholic, despite mellie's view that the catholic church should be making everyone a saint whom mellie's anglican perspective on the world deems appropriate.
yes, that's right, the Vatican actually likes its saints to be catholic as a prerequisite. Is that ok with you?

Bobby. wrote on Oct 14^th, 2010 at 1:33pm:


Some people say that due to oversupply Catholic sents are like American dollar.

AT the time Mary MacKillop answered the prayers of a woman dying of leukaemia, there was a lot of static in the air. In China 43 million people were dying of starvation in one of the world's worst famines.

Thirty years later in the 1990s, when MacKillop answered the prayers of a woman dying of lung cancer, 3.8 million were dying in the Congo wars, 800,000 in the Rwanda genocide, a quarter of a million in the Yugoslav wars.

Doubtless there were Christians praying to God, Jesus, angels, saints or favoured religious personages to intercede in these calamitous events. And on top of them, were millions upon millions of supplicants with more personal requests - a win at the races, a sober husband, top marks in HSC English, please.

All these prayers, we have to imagine, were being transmitted through the ether, and finding their intended host only to be coldly ignored. In the case of the two lucky Australians, we are asked to believe, MacKillop received the signal, and was moved to respond.

Why were these women spared when the ruler of the universe allowed millions upon millions of children to die of hunger? And what of those cancer sufferers who prayed to MacKillop but for some inscrutable reason did not go into remission? Has the Vatican checked out this control group?

It is all, frankly, beyond belief. But much of the media is finding itself caught in the MacKillop frenzy. Journalists and broadcasters report the two "miracles" as fact, instead of as claims, or "alleged" miracles, or even as hocus-pocus. They ditch the scepticism with which they would normally greet tales of the supernatural. They ask for no independent, corroborating evidence beyond the Vatican brief.

In taking MacKillop's miracles at face value, we are jettisoning logic and rigour, and a belief in double-blind studies that must underpin science and medicine. We are abandoning reason.

If MacKillop were being canonised because she was a good woman who did exceptional deeds while on earth, there would be less need to be querulous about the excessive and sycophantic coverage of her impending canonisation. To many Australian Catholics it is a big event, and the media can hardly ignore it. But the issue at the heart of the canonisation is the power of prayer to bring about miraculous medical cures through divine intervention. It is misleading and potentially dangerous for the media to endorse such an idea.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/war-victim-havent-got-a-pra...

Tonight on TV.

6:30pm - 8:00pm  Channel 7 TWO

Quote:

Mellie.
Quote:


To answer for Nail:
Nothing can be absolutely proven.
This is where science can only provide substantial evidence.
That is why I cited an actual example.

Quote:


Here the General Theory of Relativity predicts & explains this.

You must try to always argue using a fact - not get tied up in words.