The reason there was no 0 (zero) in early European mathematics was because the roman numeral system was used. The arabic system found it's way into Europe by 1000ad and by 1100ad was found vastly superior to roman numerals.

The roman number system was NOT based on place value. If they wished to express the concept ‘nothing’ they would use the word “nullus” (Latin for null or none). Eventually an Italian mathematician named Fibonacci (1200ad) wrote a book called the Liber Abaci where he began to convince people that the new number system was superior to Roman numerals.

Fibonacci is famous for inventing the The Fibonacci Sequence. Fibonacci sequences appear in biological settings, in two consecutive Fibonacci numbers, such as branching in trees, arrangement of leaves on a stem, the fruitlets of a pineapple and the arrangement of a pine cone. Very interesting study.

Except for the hair coloring and chemical peels the rest are reasonable things to apply. Oh, sun tanning causes cancer. But some of the things women do actually hides what she truly is. Of course the days of girdles are long gone. At least one doesn't see commercials for them anymore.

A civilian version of the AK-47 is semi-automatic. Automatic weapons are illegal for American citizens.

The big issue is how people with psychiatric problems are obtaining any kind of weapon. To the best of my understanding it is against the law in every state in the country for people with psychiatric problems to purchase or own a firearm. When one listens to the news weeks or months after a mass shooting the phrase psychiatric problems always surfaces. I'm not sure why but there are sectors in society that do not want psychiatric problems to be part of the discussion: which I find dodging the issue. If local medical professionals, police and even military know these facts why isn't this info being relayed to the people responsible for federal back ground checks?

News story from Memphis, TN:

two gun toting burglars have shootout with home owner. The home owner and a friend walk in his home faced by two burglars carrying hand guns. Home owner reaches into a closet and retrieves his AK-47. A shootout ensues. Both burglars are killed. Police deem the home owner shot in self defense.

While the burglars got what the asked for I feel for their families. I assume this was a burglary for drug money. One wonders if ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN will cover this news article:

Semiautomatic weapon saves home owners life!

The old testament prophets, new testament apostles and Jesus himself all spoke of a literal battle.

Unfortunately there are non-christian men who have convinced themselves that christian women are easy targets. Godly single women are waiting for Godly single men to cross their paths.

Both men and women require some amount of physical attraction to consider a romantic relationship. Men don't request dates and women do not accept dates if someones initial physical attraction isn't there. Personality over looks sounds good but in reality "looks" are a requirement in both genders. We all know this. When in high school and college there is an attractive "caste system". One person isn't deemed attractive enough to be in anothers CLASS. To deny this is to deny humankind's history.

Why do women almost hide their true self behind makeup, nails, etc.

It's almost like a Greek tragedy where the players wear masks to hide who they are.

Why do women spend billions of dollars to make themselves into someone they aren't? If a man were to do this women make fun of them. Obviously society has accepted this but it doesn't answer the question. If women want real equality why don't they tell the makeup industry, no more?

Evolution is a "science" that's continually being modified for the purpose of showing that God is no longer needed under the guise of science. The more scientific journals I read and documentaries I view the words we feel, we think, we assume, we believe, etc, fill the "proofs" being offered as absolute fact. In one paragraph the phrase it's seems is used and in the next paragraph this new theory is talked about as though it's now fact. Few, in society, see this and fewer yet are willing to challenge them. When someone does they are publicly viewed with disdain in print and public broadcasting but factual challenges are strictly disallowed.

This portrays the philosophy of "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts". This, of course, is what the person who believes in creation is accused of but what they will not acknowledge is that the modern educational system has indoctrinated all of society but some are beginning to see major difficulties in the foundational teachings of evolution. Educators and scientists do not want to be asked to respond to these short comings. The religion of evolution teaches, given enough time, "all things are possible, only believe".

Many science-savvy people take it for granted that the universe is made not only of Carl Sagan's oft-quoted "billions and billions" of galaxies, but also a vast amount of an invisible substance called dark matter. This odd matter is thought to be a new kind of subatomic particle that doesn't interact via electromagnetism, nor the strong and weak nuclear forces. Dark matter is also supposed to be five times more prevalent in the universe than the ordinary matter of atoms.

According to evolution's Big Bang theory all matter was flung out into the universe. According to the second law of thermal dynamics (Entropy) the energy used during the big bang is being used up and any expansion is slowing down. Eventually expansion would stop and equilibrium (no movement) will take place. Science has given evidence that the universe is continuing to expand and doing so at a faster rate. Since a creator is out of the question scientists have spent nine decades searching for an explanation. Dark Matter is the latest "discovery".

However, the reality is that dark matter's existence has not yet been proven. Dark matter is still a hypothesis yet some sectors of the science community already assume it is "near" fact. Any scientific theory has to make predictions, and if it's right, then the measurements that are performed should line up with the predictions. Dark matter theories make predictions for how fast galaxies are rotating. But measurements made of the detailed dark matter distribution at the center of low mass galaxies didn't line up with those predictions.

If dark matter does exists and is causing the universe to expand at a higher rate then it has to interact with matter and obey the laws of physics. Stars orbit their parent galaxy in nearly circular paths and gravity is the force that holds the stars in those orbits. Newton's equations predict that the force that makes the stars move in a circular path, F(circular), should equal the force due to gravity on the star, F(gravity), or else the star would fly off into space or fall in to the center of the galaxy (Newton's F = ma).

Near the center of galaxies, Rubin and Ford found that F(circular) was roughly equal to F(gravity), as expected. But far from the center of the galaxies, the two sides of the equation didn't match up very well. These insights reveal that either we don't understand how inertia works, we don't understand how gravity works. Since God has been left out a third possibility is that the equal sign is wrong, meaning that there is some other force or effect that the equation doesn't include. Newton is wrong! So,again, in order to maintain the theory a proven law of physics is denied and an unproven theory (dark matter) now reins supreme.

If dark matter does effect normal matter as we know it then it should be measurable and monitor it's direct effect on regular matter. Other physicists have suggested modifications of the laws of gravity. Einstein's general relativity doesn't help here because, in this realm, Einstein's and Newton's predictions are essentially identical. That a type of matter that doesn't interact with light at all, yet exerts a gravitational pull, permeates the universe. Question: how can a type of matter exist that doesn't interact with light yet exerts a gravitational pull on light?

As in many theories and assumptions put forward to defend evolution no scientific proof exists yet the scientific community will cling fast to these theories (teaching them to our children as fact) until several decades pass and they are found to be without a sound scientific base. But then society continues to live within this deception.

Just heard (news) some company is coming out with a new game called "Active Shooter". The person playing can be the person shooting or a police officer but people are being shot. THIS IS SICK. It's also part of our societies problem. No doubt courts will let it go.

During the late 60's LSD was popular. I recall a news story of an individual on LSD who felt he could fly and jumped off a 500 foot cliff. Was it mistake? yep. Was it a choice? Yep. Did he pay a price? Yep.

The same goes for relationship cheating.

What you're saying is true but we live in a time when commitment is optional (except for taxes).

The relationship should always be WE. When still married the bank account (to my understanding) was WE. It wasn't until a year before the divorce that I found out the ex had multiple credit cards and a separate bank account.

In today's world relationships (like marriages) are disposable. When I was young (born in 1951) one had to demonstrate to a court that a divorce was warranted. And yes abuse was definitely considered warranted. Married couples had to work things out. My parents generation had the "till death do us part" commitment and mentality. Does that mean all marriages were perfect? No, but no-fault divorce has made it very easy for society to walk away. If a married couple can walk away for no reason this translates into single couples can walk away for marginal terms. Is it fair: no, but this is the product of the ME generation. Unfortunately the courts only allowed what my generation wanted. "If I don't like the circumstances I'll leave": both men and women. For some reason the commitment mentality did not find it's way into my generation nor my children's nor grand children's generation. How to change this is the big question. People need motivation and right now the individual reins supreme while society is falling apart before our eyes.

The National Association of Women Lawyers were instrumental in convincing the American Bar Association to help create a Family Law section in many state courts, and pushed strongly for no-fault divorce law around 1960 (cf. Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). In 1969, California became the first U.S. state to pass a no-fault divorce law.

IMO, as we age and the years increase since a divorce I think people become accustom to being alone. I've dated a few women since the divorce but as time passes the need for a partner is fading. I'm becoming happy with just friends and family. Something else that seems a part of the dilemma is as divorced men and women age we trust the opposite sex less and less. When I was 20 something men and women seemed to have a need for companionship. I've heard people say "I don't need someone but I want someone". There has to be an emotional and social need before people want. Marketing 101.

Seems to me this is a religion forum.

The Urantia Book is a collection of spiritualistic channelled writings (as per claims from William Sadler) mostly from the 1930s, compiled and published in 1955. The Urantianism was founded by two former Seventh-day Adventists--Chicago psychiatrist William Sadler (1875-1969) and his brother-in-law, Wilfred Kellogg (1876-1956), a businessman. The Urantia Book was delivered to William Sadler by seven spirit beings in 1934.

The writings combine Christianity with a cosmology of extraterrestrial spirit beings. The book presents an elaborate pseudo-history of the universe (the book actually claims there are many universes, superuniverses, and so on), and that the name of planet Earth in this cosmology is "Urantia". In the Urantia Book Jesus was the most important spirit being in this universe who came to "Urantia" (Earth) to solidify his superior status, but the ideas of original sin or any need for Jesus to atone for human sins are rejected. In this, it departs from biblical theology.

The Urantia Book is an amalgamation of the Theosophical literature of the late 19th century or early 20th century: There are sticking similarities. The Urantia Book contains pronouncements on evolution, cosmology, physics and quantum mechanics, which Martin Gardner ( former Scientific American mathematics columnist) finds deeply flawed.

One of the many criticisms against Christian believers is "the church's" middle ages teaching that the earth was flat and that everything rotates around the earth. Just wanted to lay to rest where that concept came from.

Many criticize the bible as teaching a flat earth. While scripture was not given primarily as a science book one can find concepts that agree with science.

There is a passage saying the earth is round found in Isaiah 40:22:

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

Even in ancient Babylonian writings (2000bc) one finds comments about the earth being round. Even though Greek mythology has Atlas holding up the earth check out the statue on the internet. The earth is a globe. After Rome fell the west fell into the dark ages. This includes those of science. Unfortunately the Roman Catholic Church accepted Roman ideas instead of remaining true to scripture. While middle ages Church and science accepted the flat earth the above scripture is clear on this subject.

The bible never taught a flat earth: the traditions of men did.

There are numerous dating methods, all of which have reliability issues. I've spent the evening reading numerous university sites on this subject. Some even say carbon 14 dating is valid only up to 50,000 years. Yet, in our public classrooms carbon 14 is the most touted scientific method mentioned.

I just watched the trailer for the latest Muppet movie (may 27, 2018):

THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS

There is a small qualifier up front about "The Muppet audience 30 years later". However, one wonders how many children will end up seeing this violent movie with scenes of guns being fired at Muppet characters? Muppet heads being blown off.

And we wonder why our children are becoming so violent.

In my post concerning carbon 14 dating I laid out why this method of dating is invalid. The severe limits that even scientists recognize.

a. In the lead-uranium systems both uranium and lead can migrate easily in some rocks, and lead volatilizes and escapes as a vapor at relatively low temperatures. It has been suggested that free neutrons could transform Pb-206 first to Pb-207 and then to Pb-208, thus tending to reset the clocks and throw thorium-lead and uranium-lead clocks completely off, even to the point of wiping out geological time.

b. In the potassium/argon system argon is a gas which can escape from or migrate through the rocks. Potassium volatilizes easily, is easily leached by water, and can migrate through the rocks under certain conditions. Furthermore, the value of the decay constant is still disputed. The moon rocks were potassium/argon tested and the dates given were 2.5 billion to 4 billion years old. This is a 55% error rate. Not exactly science.

c. In the strontium/rubidium system the strontium-87 daughter atoms are very plentiful in the earth's crust. Rubidium-87 parent atoms can be leached out of the rock by water or volatilized by heat.

All dating methods are based on conditions that have no contamination and assume conditions on earth have always been the same. All of these special problems as well as others can produce contradictory and erroneous results for the various radiometric dating systems. The above are just a few.

Evolutionists know the problems and limitations but choose to believe their theoretical approaches.They refuse to consider that the assumptions they make could be faulty. They call inconsistent results a non-conformity. If the test results (Carefully done in a controlled environment) do not match what they are looking for (assumptions) they throw them out. Those who choose to believe in evolution vehemently dislike the alternative to evolution and will do anything to try and find another answer.