egg

Err, read what was being discussed mate. The point was on the creation theory as opposed to big bang. That topic is pointless enough, I ain't expanding the discussion.

So I got drivel. Predictable. Let's assume my Aunt Mary likes the idea that God created heaven and earth etc, how could that belief actually harm anyone and/or impact her daily actions? Just give one hypothetical. Just one.

My second sentence is a typo because I gave your nonsense the lack of attention it deserved. I meant to say, as well you know, A scientific theory is a scientific theory, but a theory can be non scientific.

Again, bollox. A scientific theory is a scientific theory, but a theory can be non scientific. Have a little look at the correct definition of theory. Google is your friend.

Bollox. If someone believes that God created the heaven and the earth etc, explain how that belief alone could possibly "impact actions" and that those "actions impact people". Give an actual proper answer, not your usual drivel and spin.

MLG, the last time you wanted to discuss the bible I wasn't interested, and I'm not now. I don't read the bible. Have the discussion with someone who's interested mate.

I'm not sure where this has come from. There are competing theories about the creation of earth. They're not theories I'm discussing - I believe in the scientific big bang for what it's worth, although the source of what went bang needs explaining. If other people subscribe to the alternative non scientific creation theory, good luck to them.

I don't think that there's much dispute about that. Valery would have done abetter job at RB against Villa than Djenepo but Ralph made his feelings perfectly clear. They haven't got a future here under Ralph.

Indeed. He also said, and I paraphrase, that coincidences are calling cards from God. One of the greatest ever scientific minds with a belief in God.

What difference does it make to you or anyone else if someone believes in the creation theory? You say its no skin off your nose, but you've stepped into the thread and made a point quite forcefully which suggests it does matter to you.

That doesn't alter that the fact that some people believe it's option 2 and are entitled to that opinion. Tim's post also highlights how pointless any "discussion" on the point is. There's 2 options. Take your pick and disagree with someone else's opinion if you really must. If someone believes in the creation theory (entirely different of course to a belief in a god of course) rather than logical science, it makes no difference to anyone else. Indeed, it staggers me that anyone would be interested in whether someone else believes science or creation, God or no God, religion or no religion. Live and let live.

Translation "people with more understanding than me told me what I didn't want to hear".

Your interpretation of the tales of one holy book has been done to death mate. This isn't a bible study thread. If you want a theological discussion, perhaps broaden your horizons.

I get your sentiment, but I'm not sure many people are saying that Valery is decent. Perhaps Valery. And his agent.

Curveball, but I'd be happy with that. Him as a 10 gives us options, an alternative to what we have obviously, but also possibly shifting Armstrong to a 6, meaning JWP or Diallo for FB cover.

Yep, but only til next summer on sensible wages. If he wants longer and/or high wages, then no.

Slinger

Ha!! That's better than official confirmation.

Where's this Lookman talk come from? That seems very unlikely, but would be a great bit if business.

Yep, pretty much agree with that. Stephens at LB, staying back, gives scope for KWP to play high and a 10 on the left to get forward and mostly stay there. At the end of the day, we're skint so if we get nobody in we'll have to make do. Ferry looks a player though, and you be right that after Vokins has shown that he's not quite at the level that Ferry now his has chance as the next young LB.

Made/created/caused, it's obvious to the non fuckwits amongst us what was meant.

He's a a decent winger to be fair and perhaps the club think it's easier to convert him to a full back than a 10. It's amazing though that last week he was seen as understudy to Vokins, but after he was shipped out as not being good enough that Ferry is now deemed good enough cover. Gulp.

Yes he did. There was an article, I think in The Athletic, a while ago. If I recall correctly they had to undo the surgery and rebuild again. Horrible injury.

Tangagnga, that's more like it. We need proper defenders to give defensive cover, not midfielders who can do a job.

Thanks, you saved me the bother.