20 Pages V  « < 9 10 11 12 13 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
> Do You Believe In A God Or Gods?
Religion
Do you believe in a God or Gods?
Theist [ 47 ] ** [36.43%]
Agnostic [ 25 ] ** [19.38%]
Atheist [ 44 ] ** [34.11%]
Other [ 13 ] ** [10.08%]
Total Votes: 129
  
Alexiaden93
post Jul 3 2010, 02:03 AM
Post #201


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.518
Joined: 16-April 09
From: Sandnes, Norway
Member No.: 7.072



QUOTE (MickeM @ Jul 3 2010, 02:42 AM) *
Can you tell me who lit the fuse to this big explosion?

I can't. Does this prove the existence of God? sad.gif


--------------------
My YouTube Channel
Lost in all the 2000+ GMC lessons? Check my Lesson Plan


Guitars
Fender American Standard Stratocaster - Olympic White body, Maple fretboard, White Pearl pickguard, 21 frets, SSS
Yamaha Pacifica

Amplifier
Marshall 15CDR, 45 watts


Recording equipment/software
Line 6 POD Studio GX
Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000
Reaper v3.04
Sony Vegas Pro 8.0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jul 3 2010, 02:39 AM
Post #202


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Vasilije Vukmirovic @ Jul 1 2010, 03:23 PM) *
Exactly! Evolution is a fact, other issues are steel mysterious but I like the fact that we human are basically millions of years old, and have that long history, it really gives you sense of pride and purpose. During that long times, lots of things can happen and it did happen.


I,m sorry but evolution is not a fact . That is why they still call it a theory
it might be the best answer so far ,but is is far from fact
You need to ask yourself - is there any Data that we could attain that says that we need to rethink our hypothesizes
Basically, WE don't know what we don't know
we will use this for an example--2 plus 2 is 4- there is know new info that we can retrieve that will prove this wrong- thus it becomes a law
Science could find something tomorrow that shoes evolution to have a miscalculation and be wrong - this new information - in theory could prove that science is so far off that it would look ridiculous
That being said - it is the closest we have to prof for the start of the us so far
I just don't like when we get locked in to something- then we will not have a clear mind to see the evidence that might be in front of our face

The fact that we were created from a random universe and yet have so much order confuses me, because
randomness produces randomness not order
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirJamsalot
post Jul 3 2010, 04:14 AM
Post #203


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.226
Joined: 4-May 10
From: Bay Area, California
Member No.: 10.312



I consider myself to be a Christian, and I don't believe in the theory of evolution - I view it as a faith based system for reconciling physical questions of origin, but not metaphysical questions pertaining to our experience, such as knowledge, communication, free will, identity over time, the concept of justice and law, the ability to take control of our environment, the problem of the one and the many, identity, love, sadness,... ad infonitem - basically everything that puts the hum in human smile.gif

I can't reconcile our exprience with this theory because at its core, it says that everything in our experience is the result of a purely physical reaction to laws of nature. That would eliminate any notion whatsoever of free will, and yet we experience free will - well, at least those of us who aren't determinists ^.^ Determinists have a different problem - condemning any action as immoral when they believe it had to be because it was predetermined by laws of nature.

Anyways, if I'm going to have faith in a system, it needs to answer these kinds of question for me, and the Bible basically meets my need. It leaves room for mystery, but we all have some measure of mystery in our thinking to deal with - i.e., how is it possible for God to have always been God, or what does it mean that matter always existed? Questions of original origin will always be a mystery no matter what your belief is. Sorry for the run-on sentences - it's hard for me to write just a little on this topic.

smile.gif

Oh, and music! Why do I love music so much? you guys are great - keep rockin smile.gif
Christian A.


--------------------
The more I practice, the more I wish I had time to practice!
My Band Forum: http://passionfly.site/chat

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fkalich
post Jul 3 2010, 04:41 AM
Post #204


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.728
Joined: 12-February 07
From: People's Republic of Lawrence Kansas
Member No.: 1.189



QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Jul 2 2010, 08:39 PM) *
I,m sorry but evolution is not a fact . That is why they still call it a theory
it might be the best answer so far ,but is is far from fact


You are using the term "theory in the" talk radio interpretation of the word, not the way a real Ph.D scientist uses it. The definition of theory for a scientist is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Theory does not have a connotation of being "speculative". And as theories go, Evolution is clearly one of those that is the most solid, the evidence is just so overwhelming, from all corners.

Tell me one thing, even one argument with any empirical basis, that disputes evolution in any serious fashion. I know you can't, nobody can, there is no serious argument supported by any evidence. Yes theories are refined or improved on as man progresses, but Evolution is one that is pretty solid at this point, any revisions are going to be pretty minor. It all just fits too tightly.

But I know the religious arguments, when all else fails, they just say "God used the blueprint that science has uncovered, he just figured, "why create new genes for the hairless primate with the soul, just economize and use 97% of the same genes I used on Chimpanzees". That means about as much as flapping one's gum's and saying "blub blub blub blub".

This post has been edited by fkalich: Jul 3 2010, 04:45 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirJamsalot
post Jul 3 2010, 05:40 AM
Post #205


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.226
Joined: 4-May 10
From: Bay Area, California
Member No.: 10.312



QUOTE (fkalich @ Jul 2 2010, 08:41 PM) *
You are using the term "theory in the" talk radio interpretation of the word, not the way a real Ph.D scientist uses it. The definition of theory for a scientist is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Theory does not have a connotation of being "speculative". And as theories go, Evolution is clearly one of those that is the most solid, the evidence is just so overwhelming, from all corners.

Tell me one thing, even one argument with any empirical basis, that disputes evolution in any serious fashion. I know you can't, nobody can, there is no serious argument supported by any evidence. Yes theories are refined or improved on as man progresses, but Evolution is one that is pretty solid at this point, any revisions are going to be pretty minor. It all just fits too tightly.

But I know the religious arguments, when all else fails, they just say "God used the blueprint that science has uncovered, he just figured, "why create new genes for the hairless primate with the soul, just economize and use 97% of the same genes I used on Chimpanzees". That means about as much as flapping one's gum's and saying "blub blub blub blub".


Theories are based on induction, which means future discoveries can always be uncovered that negate previously held beliefs - you'll recall the world was at one point in time, flat. Point being, majority consensus doesn't yield truth, only reason for believing it to be true.

All evidence is interpreted - facts don't speak for themselves, they need context in order to be understood. If you come from the standpoint that everything in our experience is physical only, then you'll never even attempt to interpret the evidence in a metaphysical light - so if the truth is grounded in a metaphysical answer, you'll never arrive at truth because you've precluded it at the outset.

Just something to consider.


--------------------
The more I practice, the more I wish I had time to practice!
My Band Forum: http://passionfly.site/chat

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jul 3 2010, 12:46 PM
Post #206


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (fkalich @ Jul 3 2010, 04:41 AM) *
You are using the term "theory in the" talk radio interpretation of the word, not the way a real Ph.D scientist uses it. The definition of theory for a scientist is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Theory does not have a connotation of being "speculative". And as theories go, Evolution is clearly one of those that is the most solid, the evidence is just so overwhelming, from all corners.

Tell me one thing, even one argument with any empirical basis, that disputes evolution in any serious fashion. I know you can't, nobody can, there is no serious argument supported by any evidence. Yes theories are refined or improved on as man progresses, but Evolution is one that is pretty solid at this point, any revisions are going to be pretty minor. It all just fits too tightly.

But I know the religious arguments, when all else fails, they just say "God used the blueprint that science has uncovered, he just figured, "why create new genes for the hairless primate with the soul, just economize and use 97% of the same genes I used on Chimpanzees". That means about as much as flapping one's gum's and saying "blub blub blub blub".


Darwin himself said that the years of fossil records will show his theory to be true, but here we are 120 years later and we have only three our four missing links
The problem is that to go from a sea dwelling creature to a land dweller you would need 50,000 distinct species
I believe this to be the lack af evidence
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vasilije Vukmiro...
post Jul 3 2010, 01:11 PM
Post #207


Jazz Instructor
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 2.691
Joined: 1-October 08
From: Belgrade
Member No.: 6.012



QUOTE (thefireball @ Jul 1 2010, 06:42 PM) *
(Note: None of this is meant to be taken wrong. Please do not think I'm trying to start something. I'm just stating what I believe.)
I respect your opinion, but I think the reason we look so similiar to monkeys is because we have a common designer. Same with contractors and designers who build beautiful buildings. I'm sure you've gone down the street of a housing project. A lot of times they look very similiar.

Think about it: We can look at a house and say, "My, my, how beautiful this house is. This house must have been built by a well-experienced person." We say this about a house - we know that they didn't just throw a bunch of bricks, mortar, nails, screws, boards, etc into a pile and set off an explosion - then all of a sudden this house appeared!! We know this even if we had never seen the house being built.


Peace out. wink.gif


Yeah of course. Still, house is built in such a way in order to adapt to the external conditions; heat, cold, possible earthquakes, environment.
So is man. Everything is so well arranged precisely because of adaptation process.
And, we can say "well-organized" intelligently-designed only from perspective of external conditions.

Build an Eskimos Igalo in South California, and ask someone, is this intelligent? Of course no, it's melting, but in South Pole it is well-designed.
Similarly, put a man in the water, what would fish say? smile.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kristian Hyvarin...
post Jul 3 2010, 01:19 PM
Post #208


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 471
Joined: 21-October 09
Member No.: 7.720



For all who like facts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Observational_evidence

However, I don't really think a subject such as are there divine beings out there should be discussed with facts as arguments. These are matters of faith... and even though I don't believe in God, I'm always willing to discuss my and others' beliefs. smile.gif And I'd like to remind you that evolution and God do not close one another out - evolution and Bible may do that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fkalich
post Jul 3 2010, 01:36 PM
Post #209


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.728
Joined: 12-February 07
From: People's Republic of Lawrence Kansas
Member No.: 1.189



QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Jul 3 2010, 06:46 AM) *
Darwin himself said that the years of fossil records will show his theory to be true, but here we are 120 years later and we have only three our four missing links
The problem is that to go from a sea dwelling creature to a land dweller you would need 50,000 distinct species
I believe this to be the lack af evidence


Just where did you pull these statements from? And Darwin was a lot further back than 120 years, his voyage was at around 1835, 175 years ago. And everybody knows he was in the dark in a certain fashion, he knew nothing of genetics. He was just a pioneer, that is all. Had he collaborated with Mendel, the two between them could have come up with a lot more than they did.

You need some serious literature. Some decent books are written by non-Ph.D types, but you have to be careful. There is so much nonsense dissimulated now, it is everywhere. You are best looking for books that are written by actually Scientists or Professor's in the field, because they have to be solid, as they are reviewed and critiqued by their peers. A lay author can say about anything, and the typically do, shamelessly disseminating nonsense. You won't learn anything from TV, really, TV just make you more stupid, the more you watch, no matter what you watch.

Ffor a general introduction to science in general, this is decent, and a fun book. Not written by a scientist, but still not bad, close enough to accurate in general to be very useful. It is a few years old, and a few more things have come out of genetics. Genetics is really taking charge now in research, drawing implications from Mitochondria DNA. But still a good introduction to science in general.

http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Nearly...;sr=8-1-catcorr
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MickeM
post Jul 3 2010, 03:11 PM
Post #210


Born of NWOBHM, Moderation Team Leader
*

Group: Members
Posts: 8.562
Joined: 9-January 07
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Member No.: 1.062



QUOTE (Alexiaden93 @ Jul 3 2010, 03:03 AM) *
I can't. Does this prove the existence of God? sad.gif

No I was just curious to know. smile.gif

QUOTE (fkalich @ Jul 3 2010, 05:41 AM) *
Tell me one thing, even one argument with any empirical basis, that disputes evolution in any serious fashion. I know you can't, nobody can, there is no serious argument supported by any evidence.

And in all fairness, the opposite goes too of course.
Proof in all cases, is supposed to support a theory. You simply can't prove something isn't there.
As little as you can't provide proof that God doesn't exist and had part in every step of the evolution.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jul 3 2010, 03:18 PM
Post #211


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (fkalich @ Jul 3 2010, 01:36 PM) *
Just where did you pull these statements from? And Darwin was a lot further back than 120 years, his voyage was at around 1835, 175 years ago. And everybody knows he was in the dark in a certain fashion, he knew nothing of genetics. He was just a pioneer, that is all. Had he collaborated with Mendel, the two between them could have come up with a lot more than they did.

You need some serious literature. Some decent books are written by non-Ph.D types, but you have to be careful. There is so much nonsense dissimulated now, it is everywhere. You are best looking for books that are written by actually Scientists or Professor's in the field, because they have to be solid, as they are reviewed and critiqued by their peers. A lay author can say about anything, and the typically do, shamelessly disseminating nonsense. You won't learn anything from TV, really, TV just make you more stupid, the more you watch, no matter what you watch.

Ffor a general introduction to science in general, this is decent, and a fun book. Not written by a scientist, but still not bad, close enough to accurate in general to be very useful. It is a few years old, and a few more things have come out of genetics. Genetics is really taking charge now in research, drawing implications from Mitochondria DNA. But still a good introduction to science in general.

http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Nearly...;sr=8-1-catcorr


This is your reply
You mock me because i had the dates wrong
but what you did was ad 50 years of nothing more to the fossil record- further proving my point
but I believe that the origin of species came out in 1859
Please read my post again .I said that this is the best proof that man has yet, but science must not rule something else out based on a theory that can change.

and you still have not answered the ?
Is it possible to find new information that might prove that we have miscalculated something

Please don't be offended- but no one will ever answer this question

If you are really interested in my facts ,I will be more than happy to tell you where they come from . It might take a little time though




This post has been edited by jstcrsn: Jul 3 2010, 03:26 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jul 3 2010, 03:44 PM
Post #212


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



Since I'm here and can't get an answer

The first rule of thermal dynamics is you can't get something from nothing
So how did nothing swirling around in nothing create billions of stars
(By the way - NASA's information is that if you were to run every power plant on earth for 7 million years
you would have enough energy to run the sun for One second- and this is a small star)
running this type of energy for billions of years
Because if the
big bang
were to be true all that power would have had to be in that first explosion

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jul 3 2010, 04:28 PM
Post #213


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



Globular cluster age

In the mid-1990s, observations of globular clusters appeared to be inconsistent with the Big Bang. Computer simulations that matched the observations of the stellar populations of globular clusters suggested that they were about 15 billion years old, which conflicted with the 13.7 billion year age of the Universe. This issue was generally resolved in the late 1990s when new computer simulations, which included the effects of mass loss due to stellar winds, indicated a much younger age for globular clusters.[54] There still remain some questions as to how accurately the ages of the clusters are measured, but it is clear that these objects are some of the oldest in the Universe.

Do you see how much we don't know
With every bit of new information - Science Changes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thefireball
post Jul 3 2010, 04:54 PM
Post #214


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4.487
Joined: 9-March 10
From: United States, Arkansas
Member No.: 9.801



QUOTE (Alexiaden93 @ Jul 2 2010, 05:51 PM) *
Now, if God is benevolent (and omnipotent for that matter), why do innocent people die from a natural process (all created by God, according to you) such as disease?


God works in mysterious ways. We cannot comprehend his ways. He has a purpose for everything. Sometimes those hard times are nothing more but to strengthen our faith.

QUOTE (Vasilije Vukmirovic @ Jul 3 2010, 07:11 AM) *
Yeah of course. Still, house is built in such a way in order to adapt to the external conditions; heat, cold, possible earthquakes, environment.
So is man. Everything is so well arranged precisely because of adaptation process.
And, we can say "well-organized" intelligently-designed only from perspective of external conditions.

Build an Eskimos Igalo in South California, and ask someone, is this intelligent? Of course no, it's melting, but in South Pole it is well-designed.
Similarly, put a man in the water, what would fish say? smile.gif


I agree about adaption - to a certain extent. If I were to move to South Africa, I would have to adapt to the hot weather, just like if I moved to Alaska; adapt to the cold. However, I don't believe in adaption in becoming a whole different species. If evolution is true, then how come we are not all the same species? What about the small organisms living now? You mean they've been sitting there for these billions of years and still haven't evolved? (That's what so funny to me) tongue.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alexiaden93
post Jul 3 2010, 05:54 PM
Post #215


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.518
Joined: 16-April 09
From: Sandnes, Norway
Member No.: 7.072



QUOTE (thefireball @ Jul 3 2010, 05:54 PM) *
God works in mysterious ways. We cannot comprehend his ways. He has a purpose for everything. Sometimes those hard times are nothing more but to strengthen our faith.


No offence intended, but why would gratuitous death strengthen anybody's faith in God? Do the dying children believe in God when they are dead? Do the parents believe in God when he takes their children away?

In my opinion, on the contrary, people lose faith when death occurs for no reason, and in my experience people convert from being strongly religious to being atheist when this incidence of death takes place.

How do you know God has a purpose for everything? Do you even know for a *fact* that he exists? There is so much speculation and endless discussion, when the existence of God has yet to be stipulated.

This post has been edited by Alexiaden93: Jul 3 2010, 05:55 PM


--------------------
My YouTube Channel
Lost in all the 2000+ GMC lessons? Check my Lesson Plan


Guitars
Fender American Standard Stratocaster - Olympic White body, Maple fretboard, White Pearl pickguard, 21 frets, SSS
Yamaha Pacifica

Amplifier
Marshall 15CDR, 45 watts


Recording equipment/software
Line 6 POD Studio GX
Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000
Reaper v3.04
Sony Vegas Pro 8.0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thefireball
post Jul 3 2010, 05:57 PM
Post #216


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4.487
Joined: 9-March 10
From: United States, Arkansas
Member No.: 9.801



QUOTE (Alexiaden93 @ Jul 3 2010, 11:54 AM) *
No offence implied, but why would gratuitous death strengthen anybody's faith in God? Do the dying children believe in God when they are dead? Do the parents believe in God when he takes their children away?

In my opinion, on the contrary, people lose faith when death occurs for no reason, and in my experience people convert from being strongly religious to being atheist when this incidence of death takes place.

How do you know God has a purpose for everything? Do you even know for a *fact* that he exists? There is so much speculation and endless discussion, when the existence of God has yet to be stipulated.



I take on faith that makes me believe he is real. It is my faith that makes me realize - well, this is a bad thing that has happened. But God has a purpose. I don't know what is it, but that's because God's ways are higher than mine. People who stray through their faith when things go wrong are weak in the faith - I'm sorry, but that's the truth. I don't mean to sound condesending. That's what God's Word teaches.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alexiaden93
post Jul 3 2010, 06:45 PM
Post #217


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.518
Joined: 16-April 09
From: Sandnes, Norway
Member No.: 7.072



QUOTE (thefireball @ Jul 3 2010, 06:57 PM) *
I take on faith that makes me believe he is real. It is my faith that makes me realize - well, this is a bad thing that has happened. But God has a purpose. I don't know what is it, but that's because God's ways are higher than mine. People who stray through their faith when things go wrong are weak in the faith - I'm sorry, but that's the truth. I don't mean to sound condesending. That's what God's Word teaches.

Again, God's Word... I find it odd how religion was introduced to the world after the major revolutions, including the convention of systematic agriculture, basic mathematics and written language. Maybe religion was used as a legislative power in ancient civilisations, such as Rome and Egypt? What better way to maintain order than to threaten with plague, lightning bolts and death? I am not saying religion is a negative institution, despite the endless wars and deaths in the name of religion, it is a binding and motivating force. However, in the year 2010 when countless Biblical incidents have been proven wrong by science, I find religion a somewhat fragile thing to follow.

Yes, there is conscience, altruism, but why must all of these good feelings be credited to God? Are human beings not able to decide themselves what is right and wrong? Moreover, if Christians commit the act of decency in the name of Salvation, can't this be interpreted as an act of pure selfishness?

Do persuade me, and try to be more specific than "I don't know what it is" or "God's Word".

I believe in something that is indisputably *real*. Love and altruism are real. God, on the other hand, can be discussed.


--------------------
My YouTube Channel
Lost in all the 2000+ GMC lessons? Check my Lesson Plan


Guitars
Fender American Standard Stratocaster - Olympic White body, Maple fretboard, White Pearl pickguard, 21 frets, SSS
Yamaha Pacifica

Amplifier
Marshall 15CDR, 45 watts


Recording equipment/software
Line 6 POD Studio GX
Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000
Reaper v3.04
Sony Vegas Pro 8.0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lcsdds
post Jul 3 2010, 07:27 PM
Post #218


Learning Tone Seeker
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.054
Joined: 2-September 08
Member No.: 5.825



Religion IMO is a way for the few to control the many......
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Marek Rojewski
post Jul 3 2010, 07:54 PM
Post #219


Experienced Guitar Hero
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.657
Joined: 26-May 08
From: Lodz, Poland
Member No.: 5.185



Religion is also an easy answer to a very hard question - "how to live". It really takes tons of time and dedication to find ones place in the world with thinking, it is endless times easier to just put few clichés and pretend "everything is clear".


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alexiaden93
post Jul 3 2010, 07:57 PM
Post #220


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.518
Joined: 16-April 09
From: Sandnes, Norway
Member No.: 7.072



QUOTE (Marek Rojewski @ Jul 3 2010, 08:54 PM) *
Religion is also an easy answer to a very hard question - "how to live". It really takes tons of time and dedication to find ones place in the world with thinking, it is endless times easier to just put few clichés and pretend "everything is clear".

Actually, the judiciary system is very much based on religious texts, as the latter were already influential. "Thou shalt not kill" has been transformed into "It is punishable by law to violate the physical integrity of another human being" or something along those lines... In other words, religion is no longer the sole source of justice and order. The concept of religion is no longer as quintessential to the survival of society as it used to be... In my opinion.


--------------------
My YouTube Channel
Lost in all the 2000+ GMC lessons? Check my Lesson Plan


Guitars
Fender American Standard Stratocaster - Olympic White body, Maple fretboard, White Pearl pickguard, 21 frets, SSS
Yamaha Pacifica

Amplifier
Marshall 15CDR, 45 watts


Recording equipment/software
Line 6 POD Studio GX
Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000
Reaper v3.04
Sony Vegas Pro 8.0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

20 Pages V  « < 9 10 11 12 13 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th April 2017 - 11:22 PM