ahamaad

The only way some people will get DOL out of their system is if someone gives these people a gun and shoots him on the Villa park turf.

The comparison is not a fair one. DOL had bugger all to spend, even the time when Ellis said we were going to spend mega it turned out to be a net £4 million or so. Different board, different circumstances, and 1) Laursen is fit 2) Bouma got used to the Premier League 3) Gabby coming through 4) Ashley Young 9 million we would never have spent that under Ellis etc etc

Wayne Bent had two parents, his body is now the vessel for the spirit of the Christ; Michael. (I think) Keep up Doc. :winkold: Ooops. :oops:

Terry, Michael claims to be the messiah. Yet Jesus was born from a virgin, but we have categorical evidence that Michael had two parents. How is this? Also, it is claimed in the bible that the second coming of Christ would be accompanied by other things - can you elaborate as to whether they have occured aswell?

Can we please cut out the condescending and sarcastic remarks. And this thread will not be locked and any attempt to sabotage it would mean the offending posts will be deleted. Lets just stick to the debate and guestions/answers.

Terry, you may have answered this question already - but many many people in the past have claimed to be the messiah - what makes you think Michael is? Is it because he says it is? Or because you believe him to be? How can you know other people who claimed to be the messiah aren't, after all others believed them to be?

But what is this 'nothing' - I asked this earler and was told it was the equivalent of going to the south pole. Which suggests the Universe is spherical. But if you went to the South pole and fired yourself up in a rocket you'd end up in space. Are these scientists just making a guess at what exists outside the universe?

Terry, thanks for coming on the site to explain your side of things. I have 2 questions 1) What makes you think that Michael is being spoken to by God 2) Are you an Aston Villa supporter - and if not how did you find out about this site?

:shock: So are you a member of this group then Terry?

Because we are assuming life is the same carbon based life with a DNa blueprint allowing it to reproduce. Of course such things may have different skin etc - but the environment is has to life isn probably has to have the same composition - ie oxygen at the right amounts, a sustainable source of energy and some form of food.

Of course some people think the governments know about this already... Although I must admit, given the incompetence of the UK government such informarion would have been leaked into the public domain long ago. :winkold:

Thats a good read. However, my argument, based on an assumption of course, is that if there are other civilastions out there, there are some that are at a more advanced stage than us scientifically ( there may be some that are at a less advanced stage). If that is the case, and they have mastered space travel, why have we not had any contact from them?

What I can't get my head roun, is the 'finite nature of the Universe'. So it has a beginning and an end? What shape is it?

I am using the assumption that some people have used by saying given there are billions of stars/solar systems by probability there are a fair few similar to our own with a planet similar to our own, at the right distance from their 'sun' composed of the right materials to sustain life, and also be of a gravitational pull able to sustain an atmopshere and hence life. If there are indeed thousands of these - which you now use the laws of probablity to base this assumption on, you would also think that these life sustaining environments are at different stages of development. Given the age of the universe, some might have been extinct, some less advanced than us, and some more advanced. The other assumption is they believe like us, that there is life out there, and have attempted to make contact - yet there is no sig of this contact. In fact, correct me if I am wrong, I don't think atronomers have found a planet like earth in the universe yet - at the right position to be able to sustain life. What is unique about Earth is not only it's position from the sun, but it's size (and hence its gravitational pull) and its composition. While it is not unfeasible that similar planets could exist, I think it is highly improbable

Thats two asumptions you have based on not a single shred of evidence. There is absolutely no proof that extra-terrestial life exists, yet people think 'there must be' - I don't get it, what are you basing this assumption on?

Not true - they have a probe that is in the process of leaving our solar system and travlled in close proximity to Uranus and Pluto (which is no longer a planet incidentally). Ok, on the basis of the assumption that there are billions of stars/solar systems like ours capable of sustaining life - presumably at different stages of 'civilastion', why has no contact been made by them? Not a single radio signal. No visits in stellar space craft. Only anecdotal rumours about crashes in 'Area 51' kept under close tabs by the US government.

But what is outside it? And if you tell me its 'nothing' then what exactly is that nothing? :? I have a headache just thinking about it!

Interesting read on the Fermi paradox Simon. My argument agaist extra-terrestial life is there has been not one single shred of evidence to suggest that there is intelligent life out there. I don't think they have even discovered bacterial type life anywhere outside the our planet. Of course there are astronomers and scientists who think there are certain planets/solar systems that could possibly have conditions that sustain life but this has never been proven. Conspiracy theorists will argue that world governments, and especially the US government have kept such things under wraps (area 51 and the like) but despite that you would hav thought there was something, even a radio signal from another planet to suggest there is life out there. So I am in the 'don't know' group but with a tendency towards the 'no'

Just to update, I had the Samsung g800 and it was a brick - so I sent it back and got the Nokia N85 8G and I have to say, what a great phone! Though I do think the second generation iPhones will be the next great deviceonce apple have ironed out the faults with the original iPhone.

Everyone has the N95 - its common, I'd rather not commit to an 18 month contract for a phone that most people have. The Samsung has a far superior camera - its the only 5 MP camera phone with a 3x optical zoom, and has other features too, including high speed net browsing and video downloads. I was actually waiting for the next generation phone after N95, but that was the N95 8G and is just a sooped up version of the N95.

I have ordered the G800 - should arrive tomorrow. I'll let you know, I have a 14 day cooldown to swop it over if I change my mind. (which I probably will)

Not sure, it is supposed to be better than the most camera phones on the market at the mo.

Not that impressed with it, the battery is poor and it crashes all the time. People I know who have it don't like it that much.

I have been offered these 2 on a free, but 18 month contract. Obviously the touch screen is the next big thing and which is why the F700 is considered the next big thing, and it comes with £80 worth of free bose headphones. It aslo has a slide out keyboard. Howevere the Samsung G800 is a proper camera, and has everything but a touch screen, which I am not too fussed about. Samsung F700 G800 I will add a poll - this will determine my final choice!

Its not often I agree with Ian but that article is spot on IMO (except the bit about MON being a great manager).