What about Boomer? HOT!
I don't know... Grace Park never really did all that much for me. Not that I think she's the Elephant Man or anything, but there are others who just catch my eye so much more. Katee Sackhoff, for example, she's quite beautiful.
(Who the hell is
who keeps showing up with all these women...?)
You know who else was really hot, but not portrayed that way? The other badass pilot Kat.
We're starting to see more and more of that these days. Kat is one. Benson from Stargate Universe is another one. Even Weir from Atlantis, to a somewhat lesser extent. (Tori is great company, by the way... very down to earth. Remind me to tell you sometime about the evening that I spent hanging out having drinks with her and a few other fans. Definitely filed in organic Flash RAM under "Times That Are Good".)
# # # #
Right, so I don't believe that there was a man named Jesus who wandered the desert for 40 days and nights and survived on mana alone. Nor do I believe in Noah's ark, Moses parting the Red Sea, etc. etc. There's more evidence to point out that this did NOT happen.
Yes, there is.
So yes, I know the people who attend the SciFi conventions don't think the movies, books, tv shows etc. are documentaries, but I DO think that even though things are written about in a fictional series, they can theoretically be true. Take for instance all of the Star Trek technology. Yes, Star Trek is fictional, but theoretically, a lot of the moving parts are documented quite well and could theoretically be true. Take for instance the entire blueprint of the Enterprise, transporters, transponders, communicators, the time line of the series etc. If someone had more detail, they might possibly be able to use the Star Trek books to build a working warp class engine.
There are some things in those milieus that are theoretically possible, and others that aren't. The Trek communicators, for example, definitely are -- in fact, we're not too far from that now. Transponders as well. Transporter technology is a bit of a stretch. Warp engines are, as far as our current science can tell, impossible. (Future discoveries may change that evaluation, of course... that's the way science works.)
In Star Wars, Yoda says a lot of things that are quite inspirational. Honestly, there could be a religion based on the sayings of Yoda. Why not?
No reason at all. In fact, a movement in the United Kingdom has sprung up in the past few years, exhorting people to identify themselves as "Jedi Knight" when completing the "religion" section of the census.
If the Flying Spaghetti Monster said those types of things, then maybe it would also have followers.
Well, yes and no. The FSM does
have followers, but even at that... Pastafarians know that the FSM does not exist, and in fact, they self-identify as Pastafarians precisely because they do
know that and are trying to make a point in so doing.
Yoda also said, "Once you start down the Dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny." Yet even Yoda, arguably the wisest and most powerful Jedi ever, was wrong about this. What do you think about that?
So to tie this up, I believe all of these nuggest of insight are divinely inspired by God to help people live their lives to the fullest. As God is the source, Jesus, Yoda, the Flying Spaghetti Monster are the transmitters. It's like when you're listening to the radio, the songs don't come from the radio, but rather, they are transmitted from the station and your radio is the tool used to translate the radio waves into sound so that we humans can understand what's being said.
OK, I understand that that's what you believe
but do you have any reason to think that it's true
Why not just take God out of the equation? What purpose will that serve? Pretty limiting if you ask me.
It's not so much a question of taking Yahweh out of the equation. Rather, it's a question of trying to figure out why Yahweh should be in
the equation. And if you don't even know why it should be in the equation in the first place, then having it in the equation, rather than taking it out of the equation, is what's limiting.
And for what reason? So I can claim to be "rational"?
Not so you can claim
to be rational. So that you can actually be