auggybendoggy

I am updating my information concerning anyone who has Norton Int security and Steam Issues. It seems the actual Program that needs access to the Internet is found in the Steam/Steam apps/..emailname../counter-strike the file to grant access is hl.exe and this will clear all security issues. Hope this is helpful to anyone. Auggybendoggy!

I read the tech. page and found it unsatisfying. I still think man is way too smart globally to sit around for 130,000 years then get smart in the last 10,000. I read the Language page and while I find this one more interesting, I too find this one unsatifying. I don't deny Apes or Dolphins can communicate in basic symbols or associations. All that I am saying is that complex logic (technologys backbone) being devoloped so late in a series of millions of years seems unreasonable. It's like saying the odds of the Lotto are 18,000,000 to 1 is impossible but yet someone somehow hits it. Seems more reasonable to say man has been here for 15,000 years as we know him. His prior status to that could have been for millions of years but that would propose an evolution speed fluctuation. sorry if im not too clear on my thoughts. I'm a terrible writer and am as bad at writing as I am at scoutknivez Auggy

I understand but you dont find it funny that it took 130,000 years to figure it out. I mean from assyria to Midevil (before electricity) you had some major learning still. Ships from continent to continent, higher math, Bridges over rivers and canyons. Seems like 130,000 years is a bit too long to say men stayed stupid for 120,000 years then got smart. Mans nature has always been greed. So someone should have not only invented the wheel but sold it to make a bill gates fortune. I'm not saying I don't believe Man was literally created formed as a man. But I won't shoot theisitic evolution down either. I just dont know about these things. Also I know theres alot of information out there but don't have assurance that its all accurate or phony. Also there are scriptures that imply dont believe everything you see. That makes it even tuffer. Like in Corinth concerening the anti christ. Since they refused to love the truth, God will send a dillusion so strong they will believe the lie. So I just trust in the Grace and Love and mercy of God. Auggy

Did you hear that everyone Watchtower was kissing the floor from my cheap mug Glock. Ok, Ok, so it probably was the round when I bought the 5000 machine gun. I am getting better Watch. Im learning to aim for the head and I'm not getting so scared when I run into opposition. I still have the tendancy to go the other way when I see the enemy though....Kind of like david and goliath only I'm not so brave Watch, To be honest I won't look up all the info on the advancement of man. If you are correct about man to monkey I would still believe God's hand was in it. I'm like the biggest liberal on the bible there is. You might call me a heretic Just to make a point I rented The Last Temptation of Christ. That means I'm a heretic according to conservatives. Heak the reason I wrote on this forum was this thread, because I do doubt many points of the conservative. I don't think my doubt is so much in God but rather in man. I know I doubt God but to hear sermons that are so dogmatic about how we should all live gets a bit old. I think Jesus and Paul said it best. LOVE OTHERS AS MUCH AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF, LOVE THE LORD GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, THE LAW IS SUMMED UP IN A SINGLE COMMAND LOVE ONE ANOTHER. It's not that hard to recognize that WE ALL have a problem with this. We hate and get angry, We greed and don't share. We beg for mercy from God but condemn everyone we don't approve of. So with that said It's not that I don't want to hear your thoughts I do. I just don't want to spend time looking up stuff I think I will find no answer on. I have a newbord (our first) Emma Jean and I'm trying to play as big a part as momma feeding and staying up with her. It's great but its hard. Please post up any info you like so we can read it here thats faster and easier. Auggy

ok watch i read all the links. I'm not sure what they prove except to say man as we know it (homo-sapien sapien) was around 130,000 years ago. I still have 2 major problems regardless of all the fossils. 1) if man as we know it was around 130,000 years ago how come complex laungages and writing only exist like 12,000 starting with sumer, assyrian, jewish, and mayan. It seems they would have been well advanced by 10,000 years ago than wearing fig leaves or cow skins to cover themselves. Where are the ancient 10,000 year old sewing machines. The 10,000 year old Fod Model T's. I don't find it hard to believe that in 10-12,000 years we can now fly large pieces of metal from continent to continenet. I find it hard to believe that we only do that after 130,000 years. So where do you think we will be scientifically in 100,000 years from now (assuming man is around and doesnt nuke himself to oblivion)? I tend to think man has not been that smart except a few thousand before the basic hyroglyphics were being used. 2) If man was around 130,000 years ago then shouldn't population be off the charts? Just a thought 3) Still yet why are there no survivors of any of the inbetweens. I know someone mentioned pigmys. I don't think theyre some neandrethal or homo cro magnum sapien erectus lopithicus. Were talking millions of years yet no survivors. And all around the world. another question to ponder. Whats with Chineese eyes. Is it real foggy out there that they have to squint to see far so they evoloved into a slanted eye race? Sounds kinda lame huh? Or perhpas other continents were too hot so other races (non african) lighted the skin so they woud'nt absorb too much heat. again sounds lame. Whats with that. So we might say the different races are the advanced stages of many different species evolved. So they did not kill off eachother then. I dont know bro, Im all confused... I've got a feeling that if the weather man cant tell me next year on th is day what the weather will be like then there aint no way in hell hes gonna look back and tell me what life was like 1,000,000 years ago. Auggygonnagetyoubendoggy

Playya, have you ever heard of zacharia sitchen? He writes all kinds of books on that subject. I read one years ago and it was all BUNK! That dude is just whack. I never read Whitley striebers stuff but I saw the movie and all I can say is that Christopher Walken is the best actor in the world. What do you think of that Watchtower? Auggybendoggy

I agree totally with White knigt. Adaptation is absolute. The short neck girrafe adapted but did not turn into a short neck osterich. The fact that many people live in different places on earth in different enviroments should provide enough room for Neandrethals to exist today. If monkeys exist at a low level still then shouldn't Neandrethals? After all Nthals are a higher form of a monkey yet the monkey out smarted them? Did the monkeys overpower them? Perhaps we killed them but left the monkeys alone? Any yet my point is not settled here because there would still be more than 3 levels of species (monkey, Nthals, Man) but what about inbetweens. The fact that you have Monkey----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Man with nothing in the middle (espcecially Nthals) provides much doubt that Man devoloped from monkeys. Evolution is an ongoing real time event to my knowledge. So why the necessary explosions? Ah again punctual equilibrium. I don't buy it. ps watch, when I get better you better change your name to Watchmedie! Auggy

If neandrethals became extince then there should be no low level monkeys. they should have been extinct too. If it is survival of the fittest then seems monkeys are an exception to the rule and they are proving survival of the weakest. If they survived then why not others? again no reasonable answer. But since Watchtower is way better than me at CS I will rephrase my statement to. Thats the best answer I've ever heard on this matter though it does not satisfy me. PLEASE don't kill me so fast watch! Auggybendoggy

the statement i make of "why did evolution stop" is in reference to Evolution in real time. Why still are there low level evolved primates (monkeys) and high level (man) but there are no neandrethals in the zoo? So the question is pondered..."did evolution restart (we know them as monkeys) yet it continues (we know them as man)" Why are there such large gaps between monkey and man no talking monkeys. No monkeys who drive. No men who swing from trees. No men who eat bannanas like me....uh oh i may be that missing link Seems to me we should see inbetween LIVE specimens today and not just extremes. Auggy

the inbetween or mid stages of fossils is not at question. Evolution in real time is what is at question. Why are there no inbetweens of man and ape now? We know 2 facts: 1. There is a low level monkey primate in different various forms 2. There is man in different various forms. Why did evolution quit evolving in between stages. It took a entity...evoloved to monkey...evolved to man...then suddenly stopped only to continue mans evolution AND RESTART MONKEYS? No cigar with that. There is no resaonable explanation that I have been offered as to why we do not have neandrethals in the zoo. The best reasonsble answer at this time is to say there are no inbetween beings at this point because there never was inbetween beings. Evolution then must have a mind of its own...sounds like what watch might be suggesting...or may i say that a mind controls evolution. Auggybendoggy, P.S. laugh at arnie now, but if you had Grey davis as your Gov you'd be beggin for Arnold. P.S. Im a proud father of a 7.5lb little girl named Emma. Yahoo! Shes sooo cute. she was born 12:15 am Oct 2nd.

If you have Norton Internet Security installed and you have latency to mmmm hanging around 1500 then try placing the ip address of mmmm into the trusted connection zone. This should free up your latency and get you in. One sign of high latency is you get stuck on "validating game resources" Good luck, Auggybendoggy

the problem, and why i mention punctual equilibrium, is that there are no progressive stages in evolutions evidence (species to species). People point out that if evolution is true why is it we see none of these neantrethals? After all there are the low lever monkeys and the higher level man but no evidence of inbetweens in any species. You dont see crocs or lizzards with beaks nor do you see seals with wings. These middle stages (from my very little knowledge) were explained with PE. Thus the alligator did hatch the penguin. Species within species (micro) is understandable. But monkey to man is a bit harder to prove. so the question remains for me where are these inbetween evolving primates? Long live Arnold S. for Cal Gov. Long Live CS Long Live Auggybendoggy! OUT!

In defense of watch, I can say I am not so sure I believe everything is literal in the bible. for instance the 7 day creation. I've heard theo. argue that it may have been 7 days with thousands of years between each literal day. I think Watch is pointing to theisitic evolution. Again watch, these things dampen my faith of how or what to believe in the bible. Did a snake really talk to a woman? I think the mans name was Karl Bart in Germany who said the scriptures are not to be taken scientific but rather as truth. For instance I believe there is a passage where it says the sun stopped. Did the sun really stop. It's not even going to my knowledge the earth is. Perhaps I read it wrong. Or the mustard seed is the smallest of seeds? is it? Does this nullify his point it he got it wrong? Did Jesus know everything? According to Acts 1 he doesnt. I think one thing I'm appreciating more is his humanity. I'm thinking of renting the last temptation of Christ. I think it deals with him being tempted beyond what scripture details. I remember many said "blasphemy"...but these same people just buy into pre-trib arguments like its going outta style. I say LOVE and keep your mind open to God's possibilties. I don't think theres danger in asking if God uses evolution. Late, Auggy

If fossils are being found from all different ages then this will be the missing link. Certainly you will find differences between men bones or animal...half alligator half kangaroo...half man half monkey....half elephant half platypus : ) You would think that you would find strange looking creatures. If indeed evolution is a change from one creature to another then all fossils would be different. possibly with such intermediate species it might be impossible to tell which bones belong to what. My point being, you should find intermediate creatures that had been devoloping from one species to another dinasoaur to a bird... monkey to man...rat to kangaroo. If you did have these then certainly there bones would be different in scale. Seems like the puncual equlibrium theory is more stable to me. I believe thats when a Crocadile lays an egg and out of the egg comes a penguin. However I don't buy PE theory. So I agree with watch the slide theory is more reasonable but my logic is that it may have some issues with the inbetween creatures. Anyone, anyone... Auggybendoggy

uhhhh is it just me or is steam still running like doodoo? I got into one game and I could't join. I could only watch from a corner of a cieling and could not free look, 1st person or anything. well halellujah for XP system restore. I did it and I'm back on 1.5 until I get a good report from people saying steam is flawless (or at least near). So I'm asking is it running like doodoo for many? Auggy

Watch, I do appreciate your ideas. I too sympathize with alot of arguments from the evolution side. Some christians believe in theistic evolution which states that God controls evolution and that it is organized by him. I know most fundamentalists (conservatives) reject the view. I myself do not know enough to form an opinion. My one issue I can't resolve with evolution is it's speed of progression. Seems that man got real smart somewhere about 6000-8000 years ago in sumer and other areas. Math and writings appeared. before this you had more simple writings. If Evolution is true why do we not have languages and writings from millions of years ago unless mans evolution is exceedingly faster than normal. If we evolved from monkeys and they find a fossil 2,000,000 years old then shouldn't he have been smart enough 200,000 years ago to talk and write? Instead you see a burst of complex writings and math. I'd like to see stuff thats only 50,000 years old yet it's never found. I would think that objects 50,000 years old would be in better shape than 2,000,000. Perhaps my lack of evolutin study is evident. Perhaps there are plenty of fossils of man 50,000 years old. I'm simply stating my opinion on limited knowledge. I do tend to think though that we would find younger fossils more fequent than older ones. Any thoughts anyone, I may be totally wack to think this? Auggybendoggy

Can anyone tell me what d/l's I have to have installed to get my cousin CS mod on his computer. It mentioned having a current Half life mod. Does this mean he has to purchase H/L? Auggy

Watch, I read the link. How the heak to they know this "homo-erectus" guy used fire, big game hunting. Heak if they don't have a whole lot on Jesus from 2000 years ago how they gonna have any info on this cat when he was 2,000,000 years ago? Seems like some information of this person is speculation. Perhaps I'm wrong and this homo guy wrote a big ol novel : ) Auggy

Go Arnold Schwartzeneggar!!!

White, brother I agree with you. The opeining question you propose is one tension that I don't think anyone but the cruel minded calvinist can answer and yet hold consisten theology. To extend it out a bit from people who never heard the gospel...What about babies that die. Or dumb people who die in their defect. does their lack of calling on the name of God for salvation doom them to hell for all eternity...heak even for 1 year? I learned in a Methodist church and baptist that there is a thing called "the age of accountability" yet I've never been shown this passage. I've heard the arguments about OT law but it did not deal with salvation (to my knowledge). What I do know is that most of us hold the position that if you deny Christ as the son of God then you are dust. I feel that we add to the scriptures when we need to. In order to make our biased ideas work with our thoughts of who God is, we make adjustments and then find scriptures to build a circumstantial foundation. I'm convinced we know VERY little. From what I understand from others (though I have never studied his teachings) Ghandi may very well be in heaven. I used to take that doctrine about denying Christ a to simple (or shall I say at face value). Yet when it came to John 3:16, it was not good enough for a person just to believe in order to receive eternal life (I could not take this at face value). So I found myself wondering about everyone who loves God...are they the same as me? Interesting that Jesus says about the church many will come on that day and say lord we did these miracles in your name...and I'll say I never knew you Yet in Matt 25 For in as much as you've done it to the least of my brethren You've done it unto me. The people in Matt 25 didn't do it in the name of Jesus. Yet they are saved. Interesting Huh? I don't think the Bibles is a scientific book or historical measuring tape. I believe it contains the information to know God and to be like him in order to meet a true measure of love. Whether one book says Jesus was sitting on a rock and another book says a log doesn't matter to me what does matter is what he said. But when all is said and done I found myself struggling to understand. I have a tendency to lean liberal and to allow homosexuality a place in christianity...yet I am uneasy with it. I simply don't know. To be literal with every passage puts me on the spot with other passages or issues. I found myslef picking and choosing....How very dumb I am. Well anyhow, just some thoughts. Auggybendoggy

your posts are all very good for both sides which only supports my feelings of doubt. Again both sides can argue using scripture that I believe supports both. Many of these verses have been quoted already. But is there an answer. In speaking with my father in law (a extremely leanred man) he brought up the fact that this issue is debated by secularists. The notion that we are determined to live a pre-determined life by means of genetic instruction (pre-destination) vs. we are acting randomly upon our instincts and psycology and circumstances which can be altered (choice). Interesting huh? Perhaps this is Matrix type of psych? What ever the case, Thomas doubted but did not cease being a christian or apostle. Auggy

Few things should be noted when rekoning the prodigal son. Alot of people use this as proof of not losing salvation but remember its a parable. First off the position of the sons start (before leaving) is not a personal one but rather resembles mans position (relationship) to God. It was not as though the son was adopted, or a step child (red headed) Man walked with God (Adam) and then LEFT. this is the son living with the father at the start Man Falls from grace The son leaves home The son returns to his father But God through his son shows mercy (the father forgives those who have left but repented). It is not endorsingthe following: Even though you went out and lived a life of sin, you had a place by my side all along. No it is stating, though you are wicked I can and will forgive you if you will turn to me. I will take you back. so its really not a true example of not losing salvation. The fact that the father killed the fat calf basically rids all arguments that "If I live a life of sin after my salvation, then I lose rewards and crowns and stuff like that"....according to the above logic of the prodigal, you will be rewarded for sinning and then returning. So he didn't lose nothing he got rewards no matter what Again this must be looked at carefully. All it means is that Eternal life with God is our inheritance. It isnt stating that rewards will not be lost nor is it stating one cannot lose their salvation. The same is true of the argument... A son is a son is a son...we cannot change this no matter what we do. The father and son is more about relationship rather than DNA. These are examples and just that. I learned alot about taking what it does say rather than what it does not. God is merciful and full of love, Even for Lunk (heehee) My point is be careful taking things too literal to prove your points. Rather analyze these things carefully. Jesus was not trying to prove the inability to lose salvation but rather was expressing Gods love and mercy for a wicked people. To take things too literal all the time can be disasterous. Just talk to a pretribber (heehee) Sincerely, Auggybendoggy (headshot) yea right as if I could aim. Its more like Auggybendoggy 1 kill - 49 deaths

Lunk I feel MMMM should have waited to switch until those bugs were worked out. as it was 1.5 was a dialy game for us. Did MMMM have to switch so quick? Just wondering Auggy

steam hates me too I kept getting stuck on validating game resources It took about 1 hr to get into a game and each time I re-entered Auggy

I'm not totally sold that you can't lose your salvation. It's not thats its based on works but in the same sense of James (show me your faith by what you say I'll show you mine by what I do) concept it is reversible. I firmly believe we have a choice always. So I don't think Satan can force us to sin but I do believe man can walk away. I know calvanists usually say then he was never saved but then this leads to..no one could know if they are truly saved until they die in the faith. I have found that both those who say you can and those who say you can't have been very strong christians as examples. If anyone has heard of Kieth Green he denied eternal security yet he stated that he would not endorse you can lose your salvation. At this same time God used him is powerful ways. I think again that Love was the factor and not his theological mind. I don't think people are bringing down the blood of Christ when they say they believe that. Nor do I believe one belives they have a liscense to sin because they say you cannot. I just think people go too far with a position that they offend others. Like I said Shadow, I am not convinced one can or can't. I simply say God holds the gabble not me. As far as understanding the laws of judgement....well I'll leave that to the judge. End times is a big debate that people get sooooo ticked off over. I'm usually thinking...Dude we know soooooooo little about this. but like pharisees and Saducees we think we are sooooooo hot. All I can say is Humble thyself at the side of the Lord. And p.s. if anyoen reading this has not heard Keith Greens Music GO NOW and order the silver and gold collection. YOU WILL BE BLOWN AWAY. If you can get his book "no compromise" get it. You will be so encouraged. Hope to be CS'in with you all soon. I'm still in 1.5 till 1.6 gets worked out it won't work for me. Auggybendoggy