The question of whether or not God exists seems pretty importan -- to you. I could not care less about this question. You look like a dog chaising your own tail asking it -- to me.
Why this is, is because abstract language used to communicate shared perspectives cannot express the all
I don't buy it.. language isn't something that is static. As it's evoloving, that which cannot be explained now can be included in the future, and as a whole, perhaps limited only by human experience. Humans not experiencing the all, that, I buy.
For spiders, knowing what's poisonous what's not, perhaps isn't the strongest suit of the fearful, from that follows that it best to be safe than sorry. Rationalized. Dogs have teeth. Its friendliness is subjective, and one such friendly dog perhaps attempted to assert dominance on them while that person was a child, forever scaring them. Rationalized.
Your conclusion does not flow from your premis, though. That fundamental connection from "beginning" to "creator" is imagined, but more importantly, has no record of measurement in any capacity on this plant. If you have something more than a thought experiment, then please, share, by all means.
Vast complexities are a function of large numbers. The universe is big. Real big.
Let me ask you this, how likely would the human race would find itself observing the universe from an unstable solar system? We find ourselves on a stable system because it is the stable system that allows the kind of time for us to develop, not the other way around. Since the explanation of "this is incidental to our existence" is *far* les exotic than creation, it's also far more likely.
Vast complexities are a function of large numbers. The biosphere is big. Real big.
The existence of religion thought the ages is completely *irrelevant* because they've all materialized from the human condition, not scientific research. Besides, what exactly is "religious thought", and how would it apply? From my readings, a lot of that thought was drug induced. Are you suggesting that we start taking shrooms before we do science? Might be fun...
I would think that it would be literature, not philosophy. Philosophy is built up from logic. Literature, good literature *should* make one suspend his disbelief... so it would be pretty shitty literature too.
You keep sayings "True Parent" like I magically know what the fuck youre on about. One is a parent or not. You bringing up elitist bullshit just to argue against isnt all that clever.
I'm not after 100% accuracy, and that should be fairly clear. But I'm not about to give credit to an opinion that reeks of ignorance either. For all practical purposes, the original poster does not have any significant insight in to having children. The only insight presented is a myth. The chances of both traits being of someone who does have kids would be low, I'd imagine.
All of this presupposes that the contract is valid. Its not. Moreover, we argue that it is unnecessary, and void of benefits to scociety. We are backed by piles of evidence in the form of the record industry middle man bear pig getting filthy rich, and only a handful of untalented performers recieving any significant mention by them -- reality. In short, its a system for the rich to get richer at the expense of our culture... you know whats really not helping? Subscribing to a dysfunctional system, and protecting it.
That he has no kids is obvious. When he states who should and should not have kids. Its generally not so black and white when you are a parent. Your struggles simply beat it out of you.
if the Arabs disarm, peace would still exist, and they would still exist.
Israel doesn't want peace. It wants land, specifically the primary territory from some kingdom they had 3,000 years ago. That's why Zionist terrorists engaged in bombings and assassinations and the odd massacre before 1950. After 1950, they engaged in false flag operations and finally enacted their own Manifest Destiny when they started the 1967 War with a sneak attack on Egypt. If Israel gave a shit about peace, it would go back to the Green Line, not announce 1500 new settlements a quarter on the land they are illegally occupying. Peace would have gotten in the way of all of that.
Now, this is the point where some Zionist will come in and cry wolf again, or try to drag this down into whattaboutery, so here's a preemptive piss off. The roots of this conflict are based on 1) tiny minority of the population bringing in settlers on land stolen from the native population and 2) Israel's land grabbing in the 1967 War, which they started by attacking Egypt's Air Force. And there's no counter-argument that isn't self-defeating. Case in point: if Israel was justified in starting the 1967 war because of a blockade of a shipping route, then every Qassam rocket in response to the total blockade of Gaza is justified.
Bold statements... wants land? Oh... you mean the land they conquered just like every goddamn nation out there before the 20th century? Get back to me after a history lesson... or 20. War is war, and if the didn't want to give it up they shouldn't have conspired to attack on all fronts. I've no sympathy for them now that history showed them to be the losers. Their loss was well deserved.
The bombing was a criminal act. You must have missed the heading that reads "aftermath." not too surprising.
Assassination is strickly anti-zionist. Any group that claims to be zionist and assasinates is by their very nature invalidated. As far as politics go, again, this is another criminal act. But don't let that deter your delusions!
Another link to another condemned act... I think I smell a pattern batman!
While the latter is a genuine fuckup. We are at 1/4 so far. You've finally found some merit for speaking!
But then you go into some rhetoric about "stolen land" from some "native population". There, right there, I have to ask, are you high? Stolen from *whom*? What exactly do you know of palestine before brittish rule? The ottoman empire before it? Hint... nomads do not own land by definition. Nor did they claim it UNTIL Israel formed, surprise surprise, someone wanted the jews out again.
On behalf of all of zion I am truly sorry that your rosy version of history is complete and utter bullshit. I am truly sorry that you've been conditioned to hate hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of innocent people over the actions of a literal handful of people, often provoked under threat of genocide, yet still condemend for their actions.
By the way... where are your precious links that describe atrocities done to Israel? Couldn't be bothered? I wonder why...
Payed for opinion is a far cry from "like-minded" people. In fact it's completely contradictory as the opinion of said people is not relevant and effectively is made for them. Yet another way for the rich to get what the rich want, and fuck everyone else over. By "allowing" it aren't you essentially saying that you do not care whether or not the person trying to convince you one way or another is honest with you?
That does not solve the problem. It's ironic that corporations were invented as a method to shield the person from undue risk, only to have that expand into being a person, but still without the risk. 2 steps forward, 3 back, and 15 in a totally different direction.
The problem becomes only appearant when what you call "your code" is actually someone else's code that you happened to develop. At that point, your argument is completely moot.
I must be really stupid then. More often then not I get modded up, and all I've ever done is share a personal opinion/thought. That is to say I speak for the discussion, not the mod -- sigh.
Here we go again. Just couldn't resist the itch to point the finger at them "eeval joos". Trolled every goddamn thread in the discussion too. Indeed, how dare a nation not give in to genocide, how rude. You always peddle the same lie, as if it strengthens your position in the argument, meanwhile anyone with a brain in their skull is rolling their eyes, letting out an exasperated sigh. Yes, Israel bombs military targets. Read that again -- millitary targets -- personnel with arms, specifically personnel who had *used those arms in the past to attack it*. They _should_ if the nation has any hope to survive, concidering that every single neighbour it has will invade as soon as the opportunity arises. There are statements from each of their leaders on record, they confirm this. But your type already knows this, in fact, that's the idea, isn't it? At the end of the day, you're dreaming that millions of innocent people would be murdered, and it gives you warm feelings on the inside... doesn't it? They are nothing to you but infadels? You are a sick individual, and should seek psychiatric help. Your religion isn't saving you. It turned you into a complete asshole. A sorry excuse for a civilized man. I'd rather throw my lot in with real barbarians than the likes of you -- as at least they have SOME respect for the world around them.
Slashdot Mirror
The question of whether or not God exists seems pretty importan -- to you. I could not care less about this question. You look like a dog chaising your own tail asking it -- to me.
I don't buy it.. language isn't something that is static. As it's evoloving, that which cannot be explained now can be included in the future, and as a whole, perhaps limited only by human experience. Humans not experiencing the all, that, I buy.
Love it.. of all the replies this got, this is the cleanest illustration of the madness.
These are the tendencies that support the evolution of rich within societies -- just that there's only room for a few slots there.
Selfishness along with tendencies to have an alpha doesn't shed any light on that for you? Pay attention.
It also implies that it's not sustainable. Evolution provides the evidence.
For spiders, knowing what's poisonous what's not, perhaps isn't the strongest suit of the fearful, from that follows that it best to be safe than sorry. Rationalized. Dogs have teeth. Its friendliness is subjective, and one such friendly dog perhaps attempted to assert dominance on them while that person was a child, forever scaring them. Rationalized.
I can't stop laughing. Thanks!
Your conclusion does not flow from your premis, though. That fundamental connection from "beginning" to "creator" is imagined, but more importantly, has no record of measurement in any capacity on this plant. If you have something more than a thought experiment, then please, share, by all means.
Vast complexities are a function of large numbers. The universe is big. Real big.
Let me ask you this, how likely would the human race would find itself observing the universe from an unstable solar system? We find ourselves on a stable system because it is the stable system that allows the kind of time for us to develop, not the other way around. Since the explanation of "this is incidental to our existence" is *far* les exotic than creation, it's also far more likely.
Vast complexities are a function of large numbers. The biosphere is big. Real big.
The existence of religion thought the ages is completely *irrelevant* because they've all materialized from the human condition, not scientific research. Besides, what exactly is "religious thought", and how would it apply? From my readings, a lot of that thought was drug induced. Are you suggesting that we start taking shrooms before we do science? Might be fun...
I would think that it would be literature, not philosophy. Philosophy is built up from logic. Literature, good literature *should* make one suspend his disbelief... so it would be pretty shitty literature too.
You keep sayings "True Parent" like I magically know what the fuck youre on about. One is a parent or not. You bringing up elitist bullshit just to argue against isnt all that clever.
You just cant help yourself eh?
This ac is on the hyper defensive. Being an asshole while hes at it. The swoosh is strong with that one.
Your opinion is anything but humble.
I'm not after 100% accuracy, and that should be fairly clear. But I'm not about to give credit to an opinion that reeks of ignorance either. For all practical purposes, the original poster does not have any significant insight in to having children. The only insight presented is a myth. The chances of both traits being of someone who does have kids would be low, I'd imagine.
All of this presupposes that the contract is valid. Its not. Moreover, we argue that it is unnecessary, and void of benefits to scociety. We are backed by piles of evidence in the form of the record industry middle man bear pig getting filthy rich, and only a handful of untalented performers recieving any significant mention by them -- reality. In short, its a system for the rich to get richer at the expense of our culture... you know whats really not helping? Subscribing to a dysfunctional system, and protecting it.
That he has no kids is obvious. When he states who should and should not have kids. Its generally not so black and white when you are a parent. Your struggles simply beat it out of you.
I was playing along :).
Israel doesn't want peace. It wants land, specifically the primary territory from some kingdom they had 3,000 years ago. That's why Zionist terrorists engaged in bombings and assassinations and the odd massacre before 1950. After 1950, they engaged in false flag operations and finally enacted their own Manifest Destiny when they started the 1967 War with a sneak attack on Egypt. If Israel gave a shit about peace, it would go back to the Green Line, not announce 1500 new settlements a quarter on the land they are illegally occupying. Peace would have gotten in the way of all of that.
Now, this is the point where some Zionist will come in and cry wolf again, or try to drag this down into whattaboutery, so here's a preemptive piss off. The roots of this conflict are based on 1) tiny minority of the population bringing in settlers on land stolen from the native population and 2) Israel's land grabbing in the 1967 War, which they started by attacking Egypt's Air Force. And there's no counter-argument that isn't self-defeating. Case in point: if Israel was justified in starting the 1967 war because of a blockade of a shipping route, then every Qassam rocket in response to the total blockade of Gaza is justified.
Bold statements... wants land? Oh... you mean the land they conquered just like every goddamn nation out there before the 20th century? Get back to me after a history lesson... or 20. War is war, and if the didn't want to give it up they shouldn't have conspired to attack on all fronts. I've no sympathy for them now that history showed them to be the losers. Their loss was well deserved.
The bombing was a criminal act. You must have missed the heading that reads "aftermath." not too surprising.
Assassination is strickly anti-zionist. Any group that claims to be zionist and assasinates is by their very nature invalidated. As far as politics go, again, this is another criminal act. But don't let that deter your delusions!
Another link to another condemned act... I think I smell a pattern batman!
While the latter is a genuine fuckup. We are at 1/4 so far. You've finally found some merit for speaking!
But then you go into some rhetoric about "stolen land" from some "native population". There, right there, I have to ask, are you high? Stolen from *whom*? What exactly do you know of palestine before brittish rule? The ottoman empire before it? Hint... nomads do not own land by definition. Nor did they claim it UNTIL Israel formed, surprise surprise, someone wanted the jews out again.
On behalf of all of zion I am truly sorry that your rosy version of history is complete and utter bullshit. I am truly sorry that you've been conditioned to hate hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of innocent people over the actions of a literal handful of people, often provoked under threat of genocide, yet still condemend for their actions.
By the way... where are your precious links that describe atrocities done to Israel? Couldn't be bothered? I wonder why...
Payed for opinion is a far cry from "like-minded" people. In fact it's completely contradictory as the opinion of said people is not relevant and effectively is made for them. Yet another way for the rich to get what the rich want, and fuck everyone else over. By "allowing" it aren't you essentially saying that you do not care whether or not the person trying to convince you one way or another is honest with you?
That does not solve the problem. It's ironic that corporations were invented as a method to shield the person from undue risk, only to have that expand into being a person, but still without the risk. 2 steps forward, 3 back, and 15 in a totally different direction.
Actually, you qualify, dipshit.
The problem becomes only appearant when what you call "your code" is actually someone else's code that you happened to develop. At that point, your argument is completely moot.
I must be really stupid then. More often then not I get modded up, and all I've ever done is share a personal opinion/thought. That is to say I speak for the discussion, not the mod -- sigh.
Here we go again. Just couldn't resist the itch to point the finger at them "eeval joos". Trolled every goddamn thread in the discussion too. Indeed, how dare a nation not give in to genocide, how rude. You always peddle the same lie, as if it strengthens your position in the argument, meanwhile anyone with a brain in their skull is rolling their eyes, letting out an exasperated sigh. Yes, Israel bombs military targets. Read that again -- millitary targets -- personnel with arms, specifically personnel who had *used those arms in the past to attack it*. They _should_ if the nation has any hope to survive, concidering that every single neighbour it has will invade as soon as the opportunity arises. There are statements from each of their leaders on record, they confirm this. But your type already knows this, in fact, that's the idea, isn't it? At the end of the day, you're dreaming that millions of innocent people would be murdered, and it gives you warm feelings on the inside... doesn't it? They are nothing to you but infadels? You are a sick individual, and should seek psychiatric help. Your religion isn't saving you. It turned you into a complete asshole. A sorry excuse for a civilized man. I'd rather throw my lot in with real barbarians than the likes of you -- as at least they have SOME respect for the world around them.