Teempakguy:
fortunately, this is the science section and we don't have to take this nice story seriously.

sukkot:
its a mish mash of roman, egyptian and greek mythology superimposed on the bible. i think its quite creative

Teempakguy:
same here, dude.

sukkot:
like there is an actual planet / asteroid called chiron, and an asteroid called vulcan, and a constellation called draco, and an asteroid called osiris, and an asteroid called prometheus. point being everything i just wrote is mythology but it is also veiled astronomy. these are all celestial bodies that have been represented as mythological characters in the mythologies of these various ancient empires

Teempakguy:
right, but again, i have to remind you that this is the science section.

it does not pay to speak in parables here. we already have enough abstraction going on.

sukkot:
but you know in science there is such a thing called hypothesis, so it aint like yall are dealing in facts all the time. most of the scientific theories and musings and postulations of yore have been found to be all wrong. point being, we are living in a matrix and all we think we know through science is really all that you have been brainwashed to think is real. like how can the sun be 93 million miles away but it appears so close ? how can the earth be globe shaped and the seas dont spill over ? how come the planets appear so close in the sky ? point being ? everything you think you know is really a lie. you are just as indoctrinated if not more so, as the next man who peddles mythologies

Teempakguy:
Oh . . . damn.

samsard:
Teempakguy take Sukkot seriously at your own peril. Enlightened as he claims to be, he is saying things that a five year old would have outgrown by now.

sukkot:
buahahah Samsard, really, all i was doing was creating a gumbo of mythology, astronomy and the bible to create a geomagnetic storm induced colorful aurora. a vivid picture of what was, what is, and what is to be

samsard:
Now am even more confused

sukkot:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xZV9M1DUjk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_xb4cvTjY4

Teempakguy:
Totally wrong videos, you posted. the starting premise is so false . . . the mathematics can only be right if the earth is flat.

you don't believe the earth is flat, do you?

sukkot:
i believe the earth is a globe but the aspect of it we live on is flat. kinda like a marble, but inside trapped in it is a flat surface. basically we are enclosed in a globe but inside the globe is a flat surface. so basically we are trapped on this moving rglobe and someone is watching and studying us. its like a gameshow. there will be winners and there will be losers. the world is a stage and we are all actors. question is have you found your role ?

Teempakguy:
riiiggghtt . . .


well, i've seen crazier claims. good thing you said you "believe."

sukkot:
everything in life is a belief. even everything you spew is a belief. unless of course you can conclusively tell me that you were the one who created everything and know how exactly you created it

Teempakguy:
some beliefs are crazier than others and some are not even worth consideration.

sukkot:
and who are you to say which belief is crazier and not worth consideration ? lmao. come on now Teempak, if i didnt know you were a member of NL i woulda thought you were the creator himself with how you seem to think what you have is the real deal but everybody else is on pseudo-knowledge

Teempakguy:
Well, I believe you're not half as half as intelligent as you think you are.

it is now up to you to accept that believe that as true. since every belief has the same value to you.

while you're at that, you can also believe the more than a hundred crazy conspiracy theories lying around.

some things can quickly be verified as false knowledge and stupidity. i don't have to be a God to know such things.

sukkot:
and thats a relative quantity. i may be extremely intelligent to someone and to the next i am dumb. also depends on what field you speak off. a fisherman is very intelligent when it comes to what types of baits to use and the angle of the hook and where the density of the fish is high etc etc but if i am introduced to that world i become dumb because i dont know much about fishing. point being intelligence is relative. so that makes your point mute

Teempakguy:
You don't know what what intelligence even means. which even proves my point further.
intelligence is the ability understand problems that have not been encountered before. a fisherman wouldn't be considered intelligent simply because he knows stuff about his trade. the true test of his intelligence comes when he is exposed to a new an alien trade. how fast he learns that and uses it to earn a living would then be the measure of his intelligence.

you are willing to believe a proof that the sun is close based on trigonometry, rather than a proof that this is false based on newer and more sophisticated mathematics, thereby ignoring the faulty premises because you didn't want to do mental work. that is hardly intelligence, in my books.

sukkot:
intelligence as defined by the white man or the real definition of intelligence ? cuz somehow i think you subscribe to the white mans definition of intelligence.

Teempakguy:
Intelligence is an English word. it follows that the definition ascribed to the word can only be correct if it is provided by the English man. if you want to describe another thing, invent your own damn word. we can't keep assigning arbitrary definitions to words who already have established definitions and expect order and understanding to prevail.

invent your own word. don't hijack.

sukkot:
but you are very very wrong monsieur Teempak, the word intelligence is derived from the latin word' ' intelligentia '. its not an english word. i suggest you start getting into the etymology of words so you can know where they come from

Teempakguy:
it is NOT . . . intelligentia.
it may have been derived hence, but as of now, the word is an english word and we will use the english definition. if you use to use your own definition, you must use the latin word intelligentia, and unequivocally state what you're talking about when you use that word.

that's how intelligent discussions are carried out. without equivocal and suspicious discourse.

sukkot:
intelligence (n.) Look up intelligence at Dictionary.com
late 14c., "the highest faculty of the mind, capacity for comprehending general truths;" c. 1400, "faculty of understanding, comprehension," from Old French intelligence (12c.) and directly from Latin intelligentia, intellegentia "understanding, knowledge, power of discerning; art, skill, taste," from intelligentem (nominative intelligens) "discerning, appreciative," present participle of intelligere "to understand, comprehend, come to know," from inter- "between" (see inter-) + legere "choose, pick out, read" (see lecture (n.)).

Teempakguy:
ehen?
intelligence is defined as faculty of comprehension and understanding. which is what i'm saying. the rate at which a person understands is called the level of his/her intelligence. it even follows from here. it is not skill. skill has it's own English word. called skill.