(www.cnnbcvideo.com)

I sent Solo one of these and I wanted to post a link to one with his name in it, but apparently only he can do that.
This is a hoot. Send to one of your friends.

Cornel Wrote:
"My points were (a concise extract):

1. Whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved, not free.
2. God knows everything about us. He knows what is the best way to obtain the real freedom.
3. Humans have relative truth. We have to know the absolute truth, and that Truth will set us free.
4. I asked if “the free will” is part of “the soul” or of “the spirit”, but no answer…
5. I presented that the soul is different than the spirit, and animals have no spirit.
6. I mentioned that atheists cannot explain part of “the soul” and “the entire spirit” .
7. The nonspiritual person is not able to understand God's works because they are spiritually discerned."
8. Our will is the result of how we are “wired”, spiritual or nonspiritual.
9. Be careful, there are philosophers and speculant scientists! See to them that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy!
10. Physical processes are based on spirituals, not vice-versa! The ‘spiritual world’ determines the ‘material world’.
11. Do not nullify the Word of God for the sake of your tradition!
12. Miscellaneous, based on others questions."

Cornel, while in this particular subject, your posts are on topic, in far too many others you interject some bible quote where none is required.

Your list above is very helpful to your points, finally being in plain language and not couched in cryptic quotes from gthe scriptures.

Much of what you say above, however are statements of your beileif and/or admonishments.
Basically what you are saying above is, you cannot enter into a discussion to try and convince non-spiritual people of anything in the scriptures because they are incapable of understanding. Your sole answer to eveyone's question's here who are asking you to use reason, because that is their playing field on which they base their argument and undestanding, your sole answer is, you guys can't possibly understand. So you won't discuss in a way that is convincing to these people and you are telling them that they aren't capable of understanding. So save your breath.

Or, don't just pound us with what you believe. Tell us how you came to believe. Perhaps if we follow your thought process on how you came to believe the dogma, we may have a better understanding of your "reasoning". But this is a discussion, with people explaining their points of view in a philosophical exchange. If your thoughts on philosophical exhanges are "Be careful, there are philosophers and speculant scientists! See to them that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy!" then just refrain from participating.

Well, I must admit, that whenever Corenl adds one of his god quotes to any topic, I just generally skip over it and go on to the next post. That is what I do with Cornel. I expect this not at all what Cornel wants. I think his agenda must be to add his input in the hopes that he "converts" even one person. I can't think of any other reason for his series of non-sequiters and non-contributing input. Unless he merely likes to "hear his own voice" so to speak. Cornel, I truly don't mean to pick a fight with you. I am sure you are sincere in your beliefs and you are here doing what you believe is right. But for me, you generally interfere with the flow of the discussion and the only way that I am able to cope with it, without getting angry, is to merely totally ignore that you posted. I wouldn't be surprised if that is usually the case with everyone else. But sometimes, I guess, you just get too irritating. Couldn't you just drop it and keep it to yourself? Believe whatever you like but don't force it on the rest of us. ... and contribute in some meaningful way to a conversation that is on topic?

You know, this is going to go round and round and get nowhere. You aren't really expecting Cornel to have an epiphany and see how much sense you all make in your point of view and totally change his outlook?
By the same token, Cornel is NEVER going to win you guys over to his way of thinking/talking.
Everyone is firmly entereneched and really needless to provoke any further.

You sound very accomplished. It is enough for now, but we will want to know more and we will want to know your opinion on things technical as well. It's so nice to have to write about yourself and something a little different for a change.

Jean, thank you. That is really neat.

I have another way too.
See here

AnotherWay.skp

Mike, I was thinking the same thing. Cornel has selected the SketchUp Forum to participate in but, given the subjects he chooses, he could be on any forum.
Why the SketchUp Forum Cornel? Do you use it in your work at all? Why is religion the only topic you ever discuss here? If it is the SketchUp Forum that is important to you, surely you want to contribute to SketchUp knowledge, or perhaps ask SketchUp related questions.
It's time to learn something more about you.

Cornel, to me, you don't sound like you have a lot of joy. I can't imagine that you are a happy soul. Everything you write is so dour and sad. I wish you could let go of your burden and have some more fun.

Eric, I disagree that the concept of freewill requires a religious underpinning.

There is a chemical, biological aspect to the question as well. In some ways this is an issue related to another thread about people being rewarded for their abilities.

Over the years I have come to believe, much to my dismay, that we are the result of how we are wired and our cheimistry. You are bright because you are born bright. You work hard because you have been hard wired to be that way. You are gay because you are wired that way. You are an axe murderer because you are wired that way. You are a hot momma because your hormones are raging and many years later, you are not because the hormone supply is cut off. You try to repair your wiring with Ritalin, or Lithium, or what have you, because free will won't fix the problem. Chemicals do.

You may have some free will in some smaller areas, like do I eat a hot dog or a cheese sandwhich, but I would bet even your preference at that moment is determined by a host of chemical reactions taking place in your body at that moment.
I believe that in the book Freakonomics, the fellow used stats to show that individuals adopted at birth were more likely to have the intellect, intersests, income level, drug and sexual behaviour of their biological parents than that of their adoptive parents. So much for nurture. ( so if you gave birth to a messed up kid, you don't have to brow beat yourself anymore)

I wish I believed otherwise. This is not desireable for me, but my observations have led to this inescapable conclusion.

BTW Mike, to make it abundantly clear about "Oy Vey" in context of the discussion that preceded, :

translated by Random House Unabridged Dictionary as being "used to express dismay, pain, annoyance, grief, etc

Mike you are so funny. He lives at the opposite end of the country near me, but sure, whatever you say.
Just to hit you over the head with it "Jesus" was not Jesus's name. That is Romanized. He was Jewish and his name was Jeshua but I wrote it the way it is pronounced. I signed as though I were he, a good Jew to the end.

Scott, thanks. It just occured to me from something you said before, that I have a very important tip for you.

It is much easier if you do this backwards. That is: Start Scene 1 with the entire model completed and showing. Think through wich pieces are going be "built" before the viewers eyes and make groups or components of each of those. Be careful not to nest things inside one another if the inside component appears after the outside one ( obvious I know but hard to keep track of when you formulating this ahead of time.) So you may end up grouping this in ways that are not the most effiicient for modelling purposes. Once you have all the pieces that you are going to have built before your eyes, go ahead, still in the first scene, to place every single section cut that you will need. So place the one at end that will hide the group when it is active and also place the one that will show the item when it is active. In every single group, make the plane that shows the item to be the active plane ( remember you are doing this backwards so this would be the last step where everything is visible) Once you have all the planes set in all the groups, create your scene tab. Now add a scene. Now edit your group that will have the last item to be built and change the active slice so that it causes the item to disappear and update the scene. Add scene, edit the next group or component that would be the second last to be built and change the active slice again to one that would hide the geometry)and update the scene. Add a scene etc. Do this all the way to the end till the very last scene has the very last group or component disappear.
I'm sure you have guessed why this is a good way to do this. If you start in the opposite direction building one group at a time and placing section slices as you build, every time you add a new scene and add section slices to that one, you will need to go back to all of your previous scenes and hide the newly placed sections that will appear in those and update each of the scenes. Much easier to start backwards and change one section at a time as you add the scenes. Each previous scene will already have it right. NOW, move all the scene tabs so that the first one is the last, and the second one is the second last etc. Now it will start from nothing and build itself.

I don't have to take it easy on you at all. That is just gorgeous. Congratulations on a job well done.

Here is another one that you can deconstruct. View it once with the section planes not showing, then turn on the visibility of the section planes to see what is happening.

garage.skp

Oy Vey!,

Signed Yeshua of Nazareth.

If you do that, you won't be any further ahead. You still have to select the bits that you want to erase.
It sounds like you may not know the various ways to select that will make things easier. For instance if you orbit your view so that the bits you want to chop off are all facing towards the right of your workspace, you can drag out a Right to left selection window over the geometry that you want to get rid of. Stop your selection window just short of the cut lines. That will select all items even partially within the window. Once selected, just hit the "delete" key. To select only those items that are edge to edge or endpoint to endpoint completely within the selection window, do a left to right selection.

To select a surface and it's bounding edges, double click on the surface. To select all attached geometry "triple click
on the surface. ( can't use this above becuse the cut line is still shared by the other portion of the model so it is still "attached") Lot's more ways to select also.

You are doing a bunch of advanced stuff but I think you may be missing some of the basics that may make life a lot easier for you. Groups and components definitely being a biggie.

If you could post your model, and just explain what you would like to accomplish, ( multi-part group??? do it over and over again???) Maybe we can provide some input on how to accomplish faster and easier, yes?

Strange. Have you noticed if the edges around the rectangle that is supposed to be the window has internal lines around it or Profile lines? My expectation is that it is Profile lines and thus the "face finder" logic in SketchUp is "mixed up". If it is profile lines, can you try selecting the greater surface and the rectangle face and egdes and try "intersect Selected" and see if the creates internal lines? then you would be able to delete the face of the rectangle. If that still doesn't work, I have had success with grouping the offending geometry and then exploding it.

Congratulations!!

I'm not sure I quite envison it, but I started to write an answer and decided that a pictorial demo is better. I don't believe I have covered ever scenario, but there may be something here you can use.
Hope so.

stuck.skp

You are saying "A large amount" so I guess you don't mean "all".

There are ways if you have modelled efficiently using groups and components. If not, you could just click with the paint bucket on each face you want to paint. It will activiely select and paint anything you are hovering over as you click..
But, if you have groups and components and the "default" colour is on the faces, you can just click once on the outside of the group or component on one the geometry, with the paint bucket, and it will paint all of the equivalent default colours. That is, if you clicked on a "front" face colour it will paint all front face colours in the group or component. You would do it again for all the back face colours if you wanted to.