RoyW

There seem to be a lot of coding problems with a website that has been set for free by a friend who knows enough to put a basic website together but is not a web designer (using Microsoft Publisher and free file transfer protocol software - which we realise isn't really intended for the job).

What are the best options for easy to use, cheap software that could be used instead for a website that we can easily manage ourselves?

Ideally we don't want to have to pay a professional website designer to redesign the site for us because we need to know how it was put together because we intend to make frequent changes.

Any recommendations on how best to proceed?

Suggestions of websites and/or books that would help me learn about coding are also welcome!

For reference the website is here: http://buteowildlife.co.uk/

I have recently had a website set up by and friend ( www.buteowildlife.co.uk ), and have found that there are some problems with some pages when they are viewed with certain browsers.

For instance, on the "about us" page of the website, the some of the text below the photos disappears under them when the page is viewed with GoogleChrome or Safari browsers.

How can problems like this best be avoided?

(The website pages have been put together with Microsoft Publisher).

I know that there are often disagreements about what actually constitutes a species (as opposed to a subspecies, or race, of another species).

For example should the Scottish Crossbill be treated as a species - the first link says they should, the second suggests not (with a fair bit of sarcastic humour!);

http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/biodiv...

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archive...

I don't really think that there is a 'correct' answer - I'm interested in peoples opinions (to the title question - the crossbills are just an example).

There are several different religious groups that follow the Bible - and the Bible apparently allows for this (by having different laws for Jews and Christians for example). If all of these are worshipping the same god why so much disagreement? Why not agree that God has allowed them to choose exactly how they should worship?

As an example here is a quote from a recent answer in R&S;

'People love to cite the "crusades" and inquisitions as "Christian atrocities", but these were perpetrated, not by Christians, but by Catholics. And if you tell me that "Catholics are Christians", then please explain why Catholics are prohibited from marrying Christians. They themselves draw the distinction between their own cult and those born from above into the family of Yahshua the Son of Yahweh." '

Ok, so you can choose to believe that a bat is a bird 'because God says it is', or you can explain it away by saying that people used to treat all flying creatures as one group and the hebrew word used in early bibles includes birds, bats and some large insects.

This second explanation is completely rational and explains the bat thing very well - but if this is the case isn't it an admission that parts of the bible have been incorrectly translated (instead of birds/fowl it should read 'flying creatures'). If any part of the bible is admitted to have changed in translation how can it all be considered the true word of God?

What about other verses in the bible;

How many Christians condemn homosexuality, but eat pork and shellfish (to pick just a few verses from Leviticus)? Are individuals allowed to choose which verses they ignore or don't take literally?

How should ambiguous verses be interpreted? There are numerous different interpretations of some verses (Eg The reference to 'the circle of the earth' in Isaiah 40:22), again are individuals allowed to interpret this their own way?

Christians; How do you decide which parts of the bible you will follow?

Please don't say that it's all undeniable fact because you can't honestly say that there are no contradictions if you take every word literally.

All main religions state that their god is benevolent and forgiving - some religions even say that you can ask god for forgiveness for any sins (even murder) and still go to heaven.

If there is life after death then why would there not be a chance to ask for forgiveness AFTER death - surely a benevolent god would grant forgiveness for a simple lack of belief if he is willing to forgive ALL sins?

Apart from anything else this could be considered the safest option if you want to enter heaven - if there is just one true god then this way you know that you are at least not following a 'false' religion!

I'm not looking to be 'saved' by the way - just interested in opinions...