₦airaland Forum

slimfit1:
Most pastors are just multinational speakers

Multinational speaker? What's that? A motivational speaker with multiple passports?

personal59:
The eye is one of the most manifest pieces of
evidence that living creatures are created.
All sight organs, including animal eyes and
the human eye, are extremely striking
examples of perfect design.

In spite of their complexity, it is not correct to suggest that the eyes are evidence of (divine?) creation. I think this is the irreducible complexity argument, which amounts to nothing more than argument from ignorance. This argument has long been debunked. Nature can, of course, create irreducibly complex things. One such example is the delicate balance of massive, weighty rocks on very tiny ones, such as we have in Jos. At first sight, one might imagine that it must have taken great care to balance those rocks in just the right angle and position, so that the small ones can bare the weight of the large ones, but it isn't so, the rocks are just that way due to due to gradual weathering. Your irreducible complexity is mere redundant complexity in the case of the blind mole which has eyes but can't see because eyes are useless in its world.

This exceptional
organ is so overwhelmingly complex that it
surpasses even the most sophisticated man-
made devices in the world.

In what sense does the eye surpass the most sophisticated man made devices in the world? You have to be specific. There are cameras that can capture frame rates orders of magnitude better than the eyes can capture.

It is not
possible to explain the existence of the eye
other than as a matter of special creation.

It is possible to explain the existence of the eye without recourse to "special creation" whatever that means. Read the Evolution section of this Wiki link

The eye has a multi-sectioned complex
system and, as discussed above, all of these
individual sections had to come into
existence at the same time. It is impossible
for a half-developed eye to function at "half
capacity". In such a circumstance, the act of
seeing can by no means take place.

Your claim makes no sense because there are several kinds of eyes in nature, so what does a half-developed eye mean? Some eyes, like dogs', don't see colour like humans, and have very poor resolution.

In this case, we again face that very
important question: who created all of the
components of the eye all at once?

This question is unnecessary. The components of the eyes do not necessarily need to exist all at once. Refer to the wiki article.

The owner of the eyes is obviously not the
one who makes the decision about their
formation. For it is impossible for a being
devoid of the knowledge of what seeing is
like, to desire to have a seeing organ and
have it attached to his body. So we have to
accept the existence of a Possessor of
superior Wisdom Who has created living
beings with senses such as seeing, hearing,
and so on. Another claim is that unconscious
cells gained consciousness-requiring functions

Classic god of the gaps argument. Look it up! "I don't know how water cycle works, therefore god makes the rain", "I don't know anything about germ theory, therefore god created diseases to punish us", "I don't know how evolution explains the eyes, therefore god created them"... You get the drift!

Article 2
Our eyes are taking 10 pictures per second.
So on a daily basis, the eyes are constantly
taking 576,000 pictures if a person sleeps
for 8 hours.

This is actually unimpressive. Like I mentioned earlier, there are cameras with far better frame rates than the eyes.

Which camera in this world can
continue to function for years and years
without being electronically charged like the
eyes?

Are you kidding me? The eyes aren't charged? What function do you reckon the food you eat plays with respect to the eyes? Wait! You actually don't know that you and the food you eat are practically made of electrons, do you?

WombRaiders:
Crap.

You based your analysis from stats you pulled from your azz.

Libyans are 99.9999999% Muslim.

I told you to stop embarrassing yourself, but like a goat, you just keep coming back for more whipping.

Check CIA World Factbook for Libya's religion demographics

Only Egyptian Copts and Morrocans account for that 8.3%.

So you agree with the 8.3% number, which means you like statistics from my azz after all! Who would have known?

As far as I know, only Libya is contributing to the boat migrations off their coast to Europe.

As far as you know?? Might be just as well, since I've just demonstrated you know nothing. Your spurious vituperation rings desperately hollow!

So the fact remains that 99.9% probability that the rapist pig is Arab Muslim.

I see we've made progress. You've switched from Libyan Arab Muslim to just Arab Muslim, but your statistics are still off. It was only moments ago you agreed that 8.3% aren't in fact, Muslims. So by your authority, 100% - 8.3% = 99.9%

You're quite the Mathematician, or might I say, by a slight stretch of imagination; Mathemagician!

WombRaiders:
Crap

The final bleat of a slaughtered goat!

.

Demmzy15:
Christian e-jihadist, you could travel to Europe and move Muslims out. At lest do it for Christ, the fact is Islam would continue to grow in Europe and there's nothing you can do about it... Mark my words!

No sir, Islam is not on the rise as you are want to believe, that's just inane propaganda that works to the advantage of both Islamic fascists and right-wing European fascists too. What you mistake for growth is an artifact of high birthrate within Muslim immigrant populations. At about 2 million, France boasts of the largest Muslim population in Europe. What you may not know is that many of these so-called Muslims are however just nominally so. Some sort of cultural identity because they were mostly born into North African families.

If you want my honesty, I think organised religion is generally on the decline, and this is because we are now in the age of reason. Try rationalism sometime, and you'll wonder why you wasted so many years of your life on religion.

WombRaiders:
Fool.

If you like twist it as much as you like.

The suspect is north African and thus Arab most likely from Libya which is 99.99999999999999999999999% Muslim.

Dunce.

And finally why will I rember a Taqiyya spewing marafarker like you?

For someone so quick to make generalising statements, it appears your foothold on statistics is appalling. Let's help you out

1) Muslims make up 96.6% of the Libyan population. 96.6% =/= 99.99999999999999999999999%

2) Population of North Africa= 199 million
Population of Libya = 6.5 million.
Probability of anyone being Libyan because they are North African =6.5/199= 0.33%. Given this negligible value, it does not follow that a North African is "most likely from Libya".

3) 8.3% of North Africans are non-Muslim (See ref)

4) From the foregoing, assuming the correctness of the ANECDOTAL evidence that the rapist is North African, the chance that the person is Libyan Muslim is the product of the probabilities that a North African is Libyan and that the person is Muslim Libyan. That is:

0.033 X 0.966 = 0.032 or 3.2%.

As such, you can see that you're completely off on a tangent. So why don't you refrain from afflicting us with the pangs of your ignorance and avoid embarrassing yourself further, thanks.

Brazil... And it's statue, not status

What a noble thing... Please, do keep beating your chest over other people's achievements. There's enough achievements to make your chest go red.

tomakint:
My brother not everything missing in our constitution that can not be acted upon as though they exist. Agreed there is no immunity clause for SINators but show me one serving SINators convicted and imprisoned accordingly, trust me, serving Senators are like serving Governors. You wondered why a corrupt Governor hurriedly become a SINator just to evade justice?

Obviously, my comment was in response to your proposition that a law should be enacted to strip senators off their immunity. Such a law would be pointless since the purpose for which it is invoked is nonexistent.

This is independent of whether or not a serving senator has been convicted in the past. As it turns out, that's not a problem of law, bit that of implementation.

tomakint:
I hope a law can be convoked soon which can strip a convicted serving Senator of his immunity clause so that rogues who want to hide behind the Senatorial status would be discouraged!

Senators do not have immunity.

omowolewa:
It really good and timely.

But why must the forensic audit be performed by a foreign firms only, where is the local content act preached by our government. Must it be foreign always.

How can we appreciate naira when the government gave us the impression that the best can only be foreign.

How can we appreciate Nigerian education when our government made us believe the best should only be imported.

This is one of the rare moments I think the need for foreign services supercedes the appeal of local content. Not only must this audit be fair, it must also be seen to be fair - as much as possible. We're acutely aware of the propensity of Nigerians to politicise anything, and a report by local auditors is an easy target regardless of the facts, the only requirement being that it is a Nigerian company.

This is a time consuming process, and I, sure as I'm born, don't want to see the government repeat a cumbersome audit because some powerful people have labeled it compromised. On any day, I'll be for local contents too, but the baggage of preconceptions and perceptions means this is not one of those days.

OP, it might be more useful to compare the pays with the cost of living. Although, I definitely do agree with you that the welfare of Nigerian teachers does need to improve.

They should repeal the invasive law already! My word! In the mean time, Buhari should also pile pressure on the US the repeal any laws banning polyamorous marriages.

He's a misogynistic coward. This cannot even be assumed to be a case of an overzealous sense of justice, as it were. His refusal to strip the guilty guy is a telling fact about his dirty sexist motive. Such people don't deserve any position of authority, as they abuse whatever trust vested in them.

Sadly, this is symptomatic of the perverse and pervasive African mentality that objectifies women into sexual commodities, no more. I'm sorry to those girls who must have had their sense of self worth and dignities ripped out of them by a pervert.

So they stripped the girls, but not the guy? Misogynistic, megalomaniacal, sociopathic coward bastards!

brightnelly:
How long is your TAIL??

Not long, as it turns out. I should be clear: We have tail bones, not tails. Nevertheless, they are vestigial features from our evolutionary past, when we actually had tails.

Anyway, my point should have been that we're all animals, and the absence/presence of tail isn't a prerequisite for classification into the kingdom: Animalia. There are other primates, certainly anthropoids like chimps and gorillas, who have lost their tails too. If they are animals, so are we!

SirHouloo:
Did Evolution stop as soon as man was born? How come new specie of humans hasn't been formed since years ago?

How will a new species of human look like if/when they form? Go do some reading of the Homo genus of primates.

brightnelly:
As long as they have TAIL they are ANIMALS

Humans have tails.

Mc4larin:
A new kind of creature found in the
forest of Nandurbar district
(Maharashtra – India). Its appearance
resembles much with the human
beings. Some believe, it is actually a
form of Goblin (a dwarf-like
villainous character on European
stories).

It's a work of art OP. Stop misleading people. The work was done by Patricia Piccinini and exhibited in Venice Biennale 2003, under the title "We are family". For enthusiasts of bizarre art, similar kinds may be found if you follow the LINK

RapLawd:
Don't worry I'll use something else to make it more gross as par your suggestion

lol...okay. At least you finally found a worthy purpose for your "something else".

RapLawd:
Lie, other part of the body can do it as well, even something not rough can be used to operate phone, I do use my tongue to unlock my device when my hands are pre occupied...

It would be less gross if you used your nose instead.

mcyemite:
at last Hon. Patrick obahiagbon made it to nairaland...welcome sir

Haha...you're mildly amusing.

As for the old screens that responded to anything, they were based on resistive sensors. The primary difference between capacitive sensors and resistive ones is that resistive ones don't require charge transfer. The arrays just sense a change in resistance when pressure is applied and respond accordingly. So anything, including insulators can affect resistive screens.

mployer:
You wrote so much grammar but your assertion is practically incorrect.


I just noticed the screen also respond to sachet of water. Where can you find accumulated charge around an insulating nylon sachet?

Don't be absurd. If you think a sachet of water isn't conductive, try touching a live wire with it! But you don't get to sue me or the pure water company for damages if you survive, because there is now online evidence that you were well informed before the experiment.

Plastics can accumulate charges-I'm sure you've tried the electrostatic experiment with your pen in primary school-but they aren't good conductors. This doesn't mean they don't conduct at all. So if a plastic is sufficiently thin, it would definitely conduct, and charges can readily be transferred between your hand and the water sachet.

INTERMAN:
Reasons Androids Respond Only To Fingers

I know we have a lot of genius and brilliant people in this place. Ok. This is my question. Why is it that phones like androids, ipad,ipod etc does not respond to other things like erazer, pen,plastic,metals etc but only to human fingers and body?

They don't only respond to your fingers. They respond to any part of your skin, and practically anything that is capable of forming a capacitive (accumulated charge conductor) contact with the screens. The screens have very tiny arrays/matrices of conductive films. When a conductive object contacts the screen, this distorts the electric field of the individual tiny dots in the array. Since the arrays are arranged spatially, you can map the distortions of their electric fields to specific locations on the screen. The only requirement is that your object of contact is sufficiently conductive.

The search term wasn't "Daura president" as the op claimed, it was "daura Dollard". OP is better advised to familiarise themselves with the acronym GIGO to understand why the search result was what it is. It is instructive that 100% of the results are from Nairaland with about half coming from a thread cramjones initiated to discourage its use.

wirinet:
At times some people argue just for the case of argument. Turning logic on its head. What is in.cest and what is in-breeding. (even Nairaland Bot changes in.cest to in-breeding automatically).

Nairaland bots are by no means, the yardstick for definitions. Ever heard of GIGO? It stands for Garbage In Garbage Out. Look it up.

Please explain how inbreeding can occur without recourse to in-cest? Please look up the dictionary meaning of in-cest. It is simply sexual relation between close relatives.

Sure. I'll be using oxford dictionary:
Inbreeding: Breed from closely related people or animals, especially over many generations.
-Breed:Cause (an animal) to produce offspring, especially in a controlled and organized way.
In.cest: Sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other.

From the definitions above, it is clear that in.cest isn't the same as inbreeding. To answer your question as to how inbreeding can occur without in.cest, look up artificial insemination.

So what do you call offsprings resulting from sexual intercourse between two close relatives?

Irrelevant question.

You are just throwing the gay in-cest angle as a red herring. Homosexual incestual relationships are extremely rare and inconsiquential.

Kindly humour me and my "red herring" then, should gay incestuous relationships be allowed, given that the premise of your opposition to in.cest predicates on its supposed catastrophic effect on the human gene pool?

what is usually considered as danger to society are mainly sexual relationships between father and daughter, between mother and son or between siblings. The closer the relationship, the more the danger of genetic disease being introduced into a population.

I repeat, incestuous relationships =/= inbreeding. Drop that faulty line of reasoning!

Meanwhile closeness of family relationships that can be regarded as incestious varies from society to society. In some societies relations between first cousins are not considered incentious (for example the Jews and the Arabs), while in some Nigerian societies relationships between couples of the same clan or kindred is forbidden.

I don't see how this helps your argument. Okay, so you're pointing out that the line differentiating incestuous relationships from non-incestuous ones is arbitrarily defined by society. I agree! In Saudi Arabia, cousin marriage is quite common. This isn't defined as incestuous relationship of course, but your argument about weak gene pool still applies, as this system has been identified to contribute massively to the prevalence of anaemic individuals. This is clearly inbreeding, yet these kinds of diseases do not only surface due to inbreeding. They can also occur between two careless and/or ignorant adults that are not remotely related.
The point I'm making is that sexual relationships between two or more consenting adults should not be regulated. But whatever your sexual preference, have enough medical awareness and sense of responsibility before you decide to raise kids.