This is the blog of a Norwegian (Marianne, aka 'M') who moved to Australia in 2007 to be with Roger (aka R) and feels lucky to have escaped a comparatively communistic country with ridiculous weather!

one thing which has bothered me about american traffic signs for a long time, is that they write on them what all of them mean. there's no point in having symbols on them anymore. here are some pics i found, with the norwegian equivalent on the right.

speed limit:

one way street:

do not enter:

here are some i just thought were funny.

 
unless you're walking backwards, then yeah, you'll have to face traffic..

ummm... they need to be told not to block intersections??

 
this one is called "seat belt required".. need i say more.. *giggle*

i stumbled across the word "mulie" in the urban dictionary today. the meaning isn't all good.....

1. mulie
Slang word for a chick that prefers anal to traditional vaginal sex. These girls tend to be a little more sexually promiscuous than the average woman. (prounounced mule - ee)

2. Mulie
1.) A person that becomes drunk and disorderly enough to end up in jail for a few days. Usually happens when all eyes are upon them and everyone is counting on them.
2.) One who disrupts all plans by becoming so intoxicated they end up in jail and need to be freed through the generosity of others.

3. mulie
(i censored this one)

4. Mulie
Western Australian slang term for the "Southern Blue Pilchard", a small fish roughly 5-6 inches in length and commonly sold in large frozen blocks and used as bait by anglers, especially those fishing for tailor.

charming....o_O

someone needs to make a snack sized apple. there are baby carrots and they're so nice, cuz they're just a mouthful each time. if you don't feel like eating more, you don't. but if you take a mouthful out of an apple, you commit to eating the whole thing. and apples are just too big to be snacks, they're a whole meal in themselves. that's why someone needs to make baby apples.

Evolution teaches that billions of years ago there was a big bang which formed the universe, the earth and, eventually, us.

Creation teaches that God created heaven and earth (Gen 1:1).

There’s lots of evidence showing that the earth isn’t billions of years old. In fact, evidence points towards a 6 day creation.

Both creation and evolution are religious, but the media try to make it appear it’s an argument between religion and science. Evolution is a religion, not a science.

The word ’evolved’ is a tricky word. There are 6 different meanings. One of the meanings is scientific, 5 of them aren’t. They are silly.

1. Cosmic evolution. The origin of time space and matter, big bang. At some point time space and matter had to come into existence. The Bible answers that. ”In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” (Gen 1:1)

Evolution tries to answer that with big bang.

2. Chemical evolution. The origin of higher elements from hydrogen.

If the big bang theory is true, the big bang produced hydrogen and some helium. Then how did we get all the other elements?

3. Stellar and planetary evolution. Origin of stars and planets.

No one has ever seen a star form. We see stars blow up all the time, it’s called a supernova. All we see in the crab nebula is a spot getting brighter. They’re assuming a star is forming. It could be the dust is clearing and there’s a star behind it. No one has ever proven the formation of a star.

4. Organic evolution. Origin of life. Somehow life has to get started from non-living material.

5. Macro-evolution. Changing from one kind into another. This is where an animal changes to a different kind of animal.

No one has ever seen a dog produce a non-dog. You might get a big dog or a small dog, but you get a dog every time. And the dog, the wolf and the coyote had a common ancestor, but they’re the same kind of animal. The bible says they will bring forth after their kind, not their species. (Gen 1:12 and 24). Darwin’s book was about the origin of species. That’s not even what the argument is about. The argument is about the origin of kinds. A kind is one that can bring forth, that’s how you determine what a kind is. A horse and a zebra can bring forth, a horse and a banana can’t.

6. Micro-evolution. Variations within kinds. Only this one has been observed.

Sci-ence n. [>scire, to know] 1. Systematised knowledge, derived from observation, study etc.
-Webster’s Dictionary-

This is science: The first law of thermodynamics, which tells us matter (and/or energy) cannot be created or destroyed. Everything is made out of matter, so if matter cannot be created or destroyed, how did the world get here? We’re here after all.

According to evolution, nothing exploded about 20 billion years ago. 4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and it rained on the rocks and turned them into soup. And the soup came alive. Evolution says the first selfreplicating systems must have emerged from this organic soup. (Woot??)

The theory also says it’s not the first time it’s happened. It says that all the energy and matter will once again be packed into a small area, then another big bang will occur. It happens every 80 to 100 billion years. From a state of nothingness, the universe began in a huge explosion. You see, one day, nothing exploded. And here we are. Well that explains it.. o_O

Alan Guth said, in Scientific American: ”… the observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region. It’s then tempting to go one step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing.”

If 20 billions years ago, all this stuff got together for this big spin and the big bang, where did all this stuff come from? Who or what made matter? Where did the laws come from? Who made gravity, centrifugal force, intertia, etc…? Where did the energy come from? It takes energy to make something move.

More science: There’s a law called ‘the conservation of angular momentum’. If a spinning object breaks apart in a frictionless environment, which is what the big bang would have been, the pieces that fly off are gonna spin in the same direction as the original object.

This leads me to another question. If the universe began as a swirling dot, shouldn’t everything be spinning the same way? Yes, it should, according to evolution teaching scientists. And yet, 2 or 3 of the planets in our solar system are spinning backwards, as are at least 8 of the 155 known moons and some whole galaxies. Why?

I think God did it that way on purpose just to make the big bang theory look stupid. And it is.

Jesus said ”Haven’t you read that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female..” (Mat 19:4)

If that was the beginning then we can figure out the age of the earth. You can look through the bible and add up the dates. Adam was the first man (1 Cor 15:45). Adam lived 130 years and had a son, Seth (Gen 5:3). Seth was 105 when his son Enos was born (Gen 5:6-8). Enos was 90 when his son was born (Gen 5:9) etc etc. If you add up the dates, it comes to about 4000 B.C., not millions of years ago. The earth is then roughly 6000 years old.

Let’s look at scientific facts why the earth cannot be billions of years old. In 1999 the world’s population reached 6 billion. In 1800 there were only 1 billion people.

When Jesus walked the earth there was about 250 million people on the planet. The Bible says there was a great flood 4400 years ago. If you start with a population of 8 ppl, you would get a population of some billion in a few thousand years.

Galaxies are spinning, but the stars on the outside are going faster than the stars on the inside. They gradually lose their spiral shape. If they’re billions of years old, why are they still spiral shaped? For a creationist it’s simple: They’re not billions of years old.

According to theory, red stars slowly evolve into white dwarf stars and it takes billions of years for this to happen. It’s true red stars become white stars, but it doesn’t take billions of years. Egyptian astronomers described Sirius as a red star. In fact, everyone did. It was said to be redder than Mars. Today Sirius is a white dwarf star. It happened in less than 2000 years.

Comets fly through space, and they’re always losing material. You can’t just keep losing and losing, pretty soon it will all be gone. A comet has a life expectancy of about 10000 years. Why are there still comets? Some say it’s because new comets are always coming in, from the Oort cloud.

This Oort cloud is 50000 AU away. The earth is 1 AU from the sun and Pluto is 39 AU away, to put it into perpective. It’s impossible to see a comet which is 50000 AU away. In fact, no one has ever seen the Oort cloud, not even Oort himself. No one can prove it’s there.

The earth is spinning about 1600 kmph at the equator, but because of solar and lunar gravitational drag forces it’s slowing down. The earth slows down 0.0002 seconds per day per year. If our world were billions of years old, it would already have stopped turning. Or, calculating differently, a billion years ago our planet would have been spinning so fast the centrifugal force would have been enormous. Any signs of early life would have flown off the planet, or the planet itself would be completely flat. So, either way, our earth cannot be more than a few thousand years old.

Scientists say the different layers of the earth are from different ages. This is rubbish. The layers all formed in the flood in the days of Noah. All over the world petrified trees are found standing up connecting the layers. It doesn’t take long for things to petrify.

The oldest languages in the world are less than 6000 years old. According to the Chinese calendar this is the year 4703. The Hebrew calendar says this is the year 5766. There are no reliable historical records which go back more than 6000 years.

Evidence for a young earth is overwhelming. I could go on and on. Scientists only say it’s billions of years old because they need billions of years for it to fit their theory.

To learn more, visit www.drdino.com or http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/05agee3.htm.

Julie is 5 yrs old today. my baby is all grown up:)

speaking of cats, they have retractable claws and dogs don't. dogs rely more on their teeth when they hunt and cats rely more on their claws. only time a dog needs its claws is to help with its footwork when it's running, digging and scratching, so they don't need sharp claws like cats do, and thus their claws don't need protection. the cat's claws are retracted to protect them when they are not in use and they are only ejected when the cat needs to use them to hunt, defend itself or climb. this requires specialised muscles to extend the claws like a blade and a specially designed sheath for these claws for when they are drawn back.

what did cats do before they "evolved" the amazing feature of having retractable claws? they would have to behave like dogs. what made them decide to behave like cats and how did mindless 'mother nature' respond by sticking those specially designed muscles in their paws? was it by chance that these muscles and sheaths showed up at the same time? did they think them into existence? did they develop gradually over millions of years? if that's the case, how did they get along during the transition? obviously, they both do just fine as they were made, so why would it have been necessary for the design of either to be changed?

it doesn't take a lot of brain power to realise that they are both wonderfully well designed.. (especially cats).

i have recently experienced a new feeling. it's not very often that i've disliked someone, but occasionally in the past i've thought i hated someone. it turns out i haven't. compared to what i feel now, what i  have felt in the past has merely been a strong dislike. what i feel now is complete hatred. i think it's interesting that the first time i experience this feeling it's for a guy who used to be my best friend for years. i really don't care whether he lives or dies anymore. i might prefer if he was dead, to be honest.

according to the bible, i should at least try to love everyone. but the only other feeling i would be capable of feeling towards this guy is complete and utter indifference. and according to the bible it's better to hate someone than to be completely indifferent.

"I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth." (rev 3:15-16)

so that's what i'm sticking with for now..:)