₦airaland Forum

Livelystone01:
My target is studying two industries for some time now, pharmaceuticals and EV, especially breakthrough products and see when to push in.

Stay away from EV SPACs!

https://wolfstreet.com/2022/05/30/ev-spacs-warn-about-running-out-of-cash-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-the-craziest-stock-bubble-ever/

basilico:
One day this song will be elevated to a national anthem

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYb9sRLUDyM

Like your leader you'd neither read a book nor go to the theatre and would have likely just watched a film.

benalvino3:
Says the guy who thinks he is not successful because of the white man. TV and liberal news taught him that.

I wonder how successful me can possibly think anyone stops me being successful, but then one must expect you to make up crap in your head and believe it and then assume your crap applies to buda, you very poor sod.

triplechoice:
But our brains and the overall human body is just an extension of who we are inside.

They know so much about the outside but not much of the inside.

"They" Triple? Do you listen to them like you'd listen to a pastor perhaps, and unquestionably believe whatever they say? Even scientists don't unquestionably believe what other scientists say!

I have carried my inside around with me since the day I was born and I can't say I know so much about my inside, but I do know that my brain is just a part of my body and if you remove my brain from my body neither could exist alone, and neither would you look at any one part of buda and claim that is buda. I hope.

This is clearly not science, triple, despite the fact that you produced it with your mind, and if you are the scientist you claim to be you'd at least show how you came to your conclusions so they can be tested instead of presenting us with your very subjective unverified beliefs.

The only energy "that is responsible for the "creation" of our world and its content" is called God, which is a different way of saying "I don't really have a clue but instead of doing science to ask and knock and seek, I'll just give up and fill the gap with believed crap".

With apologies.

triplechoice:
Most of the things I will explain here has been stripped of the usual spirituality attached to it elsewhere.

So ,instead of the word, spirit or soul, terms like energy or true self (core consciousness) is used instead. There are all the same, but different ways of naming the same thing.

1.Our material bodies, a product of biology, is formed in our mother's womb; its not what we are.. Our true selves which exist as a force field of energy has occupied the material body at birth, after it has evolved to a point where it's now capable of generating conscious independent thoughts that can be expressed through a physical body.

This energy that we are, is sourced from the purest form of energy that is responsible for the "creation" of our world and its content. This pure energy is present in all thingnd It's not a blind arbitrary force. It has intelligence , and the evidence of this, is seen in the intelligent design of our world.

In some groups, this purest form of energy that we're drawn from, is often refer to as spirit due to the unique features it possesses, and the peculiar characteristics it displays at different levels of manifestation. Others have personified this energy as God .

Before we begin to occupy human bodies, we have been evolving as energy from the mineral state , where we were unconscoius ,to the animal state. ,where we acted mostly with insincts, and finally the human state where we are now fully conscious, with the ability to generate independent thoughts which finds material expression through a modulating brain that has the capacity to trigger our bodies to act on such thoughts.

We exist within our bodies as a force field of aware energy. . We are not "floathing" inside our bodies as this energy that we are , is present in every single cell in order to enliven our bodies.. Those gifted with the special ability to "see" what others can't, are able to picture our true selves as a globe of brilliant white light within us.They are not hallucinating because what they see can be validated.



Those who have had out of body experience or near death experience usually report seeing themselves surrounded by a brilliant white light or they are the light itself. Pure energy can either manifest as light or sound..


However, those out of body experiences are not properly understood by religious people who have misinterpreted it, and have been using it as a validation for their religious beliefs. Individual scientists who have also tried to explain it, don't understand it very well , and have hastily labeled it as hallucination caused by the brain.

The re are two kinds if OBE; one ,hallucinatory and the other, not, but the two has been conflated as one both by religious people and scientists who experience and investigate it.



In the final part, I will tthrow more light on OBE to clear the misconception surrounding it.

2. We are not conscious of who we are as energy because at birth when we occupied our physical bodies crreated in our mothers womb , we automatically took on the perspective of the human body, and then sort of got hypnotized into thinking we are a body and not different from it.

It is difficult to see any separateness anymore, as we have gotten so attached to the body we occupy that we now feel what it feels through the brains attached to it.

Cases of children who unfortunately found themselves growing up amongst animals and ended up behaving like the animals that adopted them are a good parallel to help us understand better what I am trying to explain

benalvino3:
Sometimes I see what's going on in the US and realised how the TV series: prison break was trying to tell us there is an elite that runs a lot of things. In that TV series the deepstate is called : the company.

An intelligent person would not be surprised you allow yourself to be educated by a TV. It's a tool drumpthgp used effectively to fool magas like you into believing in kraken.

budaatum:
When I was like really young, these mates of mine who grew up in Obanikoro Village told me rats talk. Well, even at barely 7, I was atheistic in nature, so I argued that rats don't talk. Now there were like 5 of them, so they ganged up on me calling me all sorts of names and that I know nothing, "rats talk jo!".

One day, about two years later, we were in the home of one of them and NTA was showing Tom and Jerry. "There," they said, pointing to the telly. "I thought you said rats don't talk?"

Turns out oyinbo rats do talk, silly me!

triplechoice:
@Lordreed

Please.go through the link below and find the current position of neuroscientist when it comes to mind and consciousness.

A lot of disclaimer was issued to warn the public not to accept as conclusive some of the claims being spread on the net by a few dissenting neuroscientist.
https://jonlieffmd.com/blog/the-limits-of-current-neuroscience

Neuroscientist probably know more when it comes to mind and consciousness than just about any field out there, and this is due to their use of science and it's methods, and however you wish to look at it, we humans have come a very long way from when the mind and consciousness were things only women have and which made them converse with a supposed serpent.

The problem starts when you read what they say as if it were gospel that you must believe instead of using your senses to understand what is presented to you.

Note that different neuroscientist are presenting different views here. The scientific method would be used by we humans to sift out the wheat from the chaff in the end, just as pre-corpernicus and pre-gallileo was sifted out by the use of the senses, and as the gods are being sifted out by the use of the senses.

triplechoice:
Anyone who has taken their time to read the other parts of what I wrote, would have understood that by mentioning science and the scientific method, I was talking of how it is understood by expert scientists, and not your subjective understanding of it which you brought in to make me look stupid; that I don't know the meaning of science and the scientific method, and that you, a non scientist, know it more than me ,so you want to lecture me.

Why would I want you to look stupid when in fact I only responded because I found what you wrote to be intelligent and worthy of my time and consideration? Are you using your senses properly, Triple, or just trying to show how one can be limited with their use?

We are not competing, triple, or I am at least not competing with you. We are supposedly learning by engaging with each other through our senses which is how we learn and know more, unless one is so closed minded that one assumes one knows it all already.

triplechoice:
I only tried to highlight the limitations of the scientific method to support my argument that there are things in life science will never make us know or understand.

The human being is limited, triple, and we make the best of it that we can. The scientific method is just that, a method of using the senses, which you acknowledge with its rigour of training far outstrips any other method of sense use and training as shown by the evidence such use has produced. And the best way to understand just about anything is you using your own senses to query and learn about such things.

Still, kindly present a better method than the scientific use of one's own senses to learn and and know and understand instead of asking me to use the senses of my Lordreed.

triplechoice:
I am afraid you have brought in a red herring to distract and confuse me.

I just woke from it now .Your subjective definition of science and what means to be a trained scientist is what has brought us here.

Using one's sense of judgement alone (your definition of what it means be a trained scientist) to make sense of the impression coming through your five physical senses ( sense of smell, taste and so on) ,which is actually what I was referring to will not make you an expert in the sciences.

Your brain can throw illusions at you, and deceive you into making wrong judgements.

I understand from a lay man point of view , we all can be scientists, but those in the main body of the sciences see it differently.

So, my buda, you're not a scientists just because you can make use of your sense of judgement to interpret the world around you.

My argument is not focused on what it means to be a scientist.

You've noticed my red herring definition of science. I'm glad. Note I neither said "trained scientist" nor "expert in the sciences". I red herringed scientist Jesus too.

We humans have no other tools than our senses with which to receive data about the world, and our minds are what we use to make sense of the data that we receive, so I can't think of any other way to learn about the world than to use one's senses to receive data and interpret it with one's mind is my point, and a'scientist' red herringed by me as one who has gone through the rigorous training to use one's senses properly, should be more competent at least in their specific sphere of inquiry at so doing. I mean, see as you disqualified lay person me, lol.

Yes, my "brain can throw illusions at you, and deceive you into making wrong judgements", a fallibility I already admitted to, but the rigour of experimentation learned by a 'scientist' would make one ask and knock and seek so one can separate the wheat from the chaff.

I am not trying to "distract and confuse" you. I'm engaging with your intelligent mind.

TenQ:
Angels, Demons etc have a spirit body by which they have their identities even though they are not physical beings.

Humans are blessed to have in addition to their physical bodies their spirit bodies by which they can have a spiritual expression and identities (just like they used to have their physical identities.)

Therefore at death, a man's soul expression is through his spirit body.

But what exactly is this spirit body?

Does it have a function, and where and how can it be found?

BasedUsername:
Imagine not knowing how to build a fire, hunt, fish, farm, perform first-aid, or defend yourself. You will be useless during any crisis.

A crisis where, based. Is Russia invading America or something I don't know about?

TenQ:
You said:

How can you say Jesus NEVER said...while you deny compilations of words Jesus spoke?

I was being pedantic. And I do not deny "compilations of words Jesus spoke". If I denied "compilations of words Jesus spoke" I would not be quoting the words that I read Jesus spoke.

TenQ:
I wish I understood what you are saying here but I don't.
Every human being who dies sheds his physical body but retains his spirit body.

What is a "spirit body"?

triplechoice:
Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough.

The scientific method of inquiry,not just using one's senses alone to know things, is what I called a human construct. It was developed by humans. Those who practice science as a discipline are giving rigorous training under this method so they can use it to properly make observation and conduct experiments to confirm what is observed.

First, we are discussing complex things, so however clear you attempt to be will likely hit against my own fallibility. Accept my apologies. I am honoured that you try to make yourself clear.

triplechoice:
The scientific method of inquiry,not just using one's senses alone to know things, is what I called a human construct. It was developed by humans. Those who practice science as a discipline are giving rigorous training under this method so they can use it to properly make observation and conduct experiments to confirm what is observed.

The method of using the senses properly might have been constructed and taught and rigorously trained, triple, but the sense (the eye, for instance, and its ability to be used to see) itself is not a human construct, and it is the use of the senses that they have rigorously trained under this method so they can use it properly. The tautology is intended.

The methodology is a "human construct" that evolved out of the ignorant misuse of the human senses into what it has become today and which we can witness by the numerous human achievements, and destructions I dare add, that are before us.

triplechoice:
The scientific method can't be perfect because as humans we don't know everything about the world we live in to be able to come up with a perfect method to interpret it.

No one is claiming that the scientific method, which is purely a method of using one's human senses, is perfect. Afterall if my eye itself is dim, no amount of method can make me see clearly. However, that same scientific method is what would make me consider the dimness of my eye and find a way to overcome my deficiency of "don't know everything about the world we live" and continuously test my interpretations. The intention after all is to learn about the world, which I would not be doing if I already knew everything about the world. Perhaps I should first use my senses to realise that I should show some humility because I don't know everything about my own little village, not to talk of my state or my country, and the world is big!

triplechoice:
How do we arrive at the conclusion that our world( also the extended universe) and it's contents is only interpreted by our senses which are limited, and the scientific method which trained scientist admit are not also perfect, if not that we believe it to be so?

I do not understand what you've said there. Who is arriving at what conclusion, triple, and what content is being "interpreted by our senses", and what other method or tool would you like to be used, and what the heck is it that "we believe it to be so"?

Personally, I can't see how I can come to a conclusion about the road I am about to cross if I do not interpret its content with my own senses, despite my limitations, because of the scientific method with which I have experimented to determine the best and safest way to cross roads. And I do not merely believe it to be so, for experience as perceived by my very own senses have shown me that it is so such that I can safely say I know how to cross roads safely, despite the limitations of my senses and my ability to use them, I dare add.

TenQ:
What other means can you know what Jesus said or not said to make this claim?

There is no other way, just be aware its like claiming Chinua Achebe's Okonkwo said, since no one was there recording it. Or better still, the read all about it in the newspaper of today.

Note we also read that he was killed and that he died.

TenQ:
Of course, men can kill the Body.
There is no denial that men has power to destroy and kill the body.

If you kill the body of buda buda will die and no one would be particularly concerned about the spirit of buda if it does not die too, yet as I said, the Spirit of the Christ that we read people were yelling "Crucify Him! Crucify Him" and whom we then read was nailed to a cross and stabbed and poisoned and died, lives in spirit, it is said, and the huge number of people who wake up on Sunday mornings to go worship in temples built to worship His Spirit and hopefully learn from it too testify to this fact. If after you kill the body of buda people build temples and worship buda then buda too will live in spirit, though all the Gods must forbid it, I say.

Personally, I think Jesus would say of some temples, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” But I'm certain he'd temper his rage with the fact that the labourers must eat too.

NeckingNgulping:
Way back then, i went against homosexuality with every bit of me, advocated against it to the extent that I lost my voice. Then, i realised that i was only doing myself no good -drained all of my energies fighting a fight i can't win, so i decided to let them live.

What's the point fighting someone who's hell bent on doing what makes them happy? They say the sexuality is innate. I got some other issues to deal with.

You realised how ridiculous you were fighting another for what they do with their priq, lol.

feedthenation:
Video: Proud Boy member denied entry to Trump rally because PB or QAnon symbols are not be allowed

Proud Boy is denied entry at the Trump rally after being told nothing with PB or QAnon symbols will be allowed in: “You’re kidding me right? The Trump campaign gave us VIP tickets! This is really happening? Can I ask why Proud Boys aren’t allowed?” pic.twitter.com/h3PIZ4V0lR

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) May 31, 2022

They must have hired Democrats to man the door and apply cancel culture.

BasedUsername:
"We just want common sense Islam control."
"Ban assault Muslims."

Did you not say such labels are meaningless, based?

What is an "assault Muslim"?

BasedUsername:
The UK even went further to ban assault knives in public settings to crack down on stabbings. Next they'll ban assault cars to crack down on hit-and-run. Come to think of it, didn't the Aussies just come out of their draconian lockdown situation?

People don't intentionally hit and run with cars, based, and if you do you'd very likely be caught because we made you do a test to get a license and made you register your car and we installed licence number recognition to identify you.

But of course that wouldn't stop you who buys an "assault car" as opposed to a car for transport that most buy. Thankfully, you are very few.

BasedUsername:
All I see is kids with essential survival skills

If you do not have children, based, you at least were a child once, so do you teach those "essential survival skills to your children and do you survive today because your parents taught you those "essential survival skills or can you just not see?

TenQ:
Why is it that God seems to be able to do what man cannot do with respect to killing the body and mind? Jesus emphatically said that man CANNOT kill the Soul : at least you agree that men can destroy the mind.

Mat 10:28:
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

First, Jesus never said. You read it in a book.

Second, the Jesus you claim said, was nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side and poisoned and died, so they obviously killed his body.

As for the Spirit of His Soul, as in, all we read he stood for and taught, that is what lives and can not be killed, Tenq. It is why it is said He is worshipped in Spirit today, though I would add, misunderstood.

P.s. This is a topic for a thread of its own. If you start one, hola.

triplechoice:
The methodology of science, which is a human construct , and not perfect, is founded on a paradigm of belief which presumes that the observable universe and it's content is the only thing worthy of scientific investigation and consideration.

You've assumed far too much, triple, but the above is one I can't help pointing out.

First, science not a human construct. It is simply the use of the senses that you already have, and the scientific method is the precise method of using one's senses.

Second, science does not have this assumed "paradigm of belief which presumes that the observable universe and it's content is the only thing worthy of scientific investigation and consideration". Science has been applied to the unobservable too, or it would not be considering the mind it can not see, nor would the use of science have been able to be used to discover many things that are unobservable like relativity and evolution which are not so easily observed, or big bangs or black holes or neutrons and electrons and minds and consciousness, which science has the most to say about than any other investigative method which would also have to include the scientific method to be credible.

Science has been determined by the results produced in its exercise to be the best way to use one's senses, and as a method of discovery of the unknown has far exceeded any other method (belief, making up crap in one's head) that has ever been invented. But yes, we are not perfect human beings, and may not perfectly use our senses, hence must we constantly be perfecting ourselves by scientific learning to better use our senses.

As for the product of our minds, by thy fruits shall one know them, for a bad tree does not produce good fruit, and fruits one can clearly see unless one is blind.

I've added the words of a Scientist below so you may not so easily see my fruits (as in, understand what I mean) unless you apply science (your senses, and most especially, your mind). As a clue, the eye and it's ability to be used to see was the first sense humans were aware of, and the quote is from a book that teaches it's use.

A40:
For where? He's an excellent driver no doubt when he has the equipment but I've never understood the argument of him being GOAT over Schumacher. Anyway this season will shed more light. Me I already know who he is without the fastest car. Can't finish higher than 4th. This year fit no finish for top 5

He is no where near Schumacher in my opinion. Schumacher dragged a donkey and made it a prancing horse, while this is the first time Lewis has a donkey.

He'd be lucky if he finishes 6th, though I have faith in Mercedes fixing that car.

BasedUsername:
What do "assault style" weapons even mean? It's such a vague term that can literally just be boiled down to "scary boomstick".

You used it. Didn't you not know what you meant or did my question make you think.

To me its not like a "scary boomstick". Did you mean broomstick?

"Assault-style weapon" implies its a weapon used to assault, as opposed to say a defense-style tool.

kals4luv990:
but yu got it all wrong here ni..if nature wanted both sexes to mate it would have made provisions for it but it did not
Please stop all this,I know yu are not homosexual so dnt lead others astray..biko

Good ol' nature. I'm so glad it made provision for you to have a phone and drive a car.

BasedUsername:
I don't mind background checks and mental evaluation. I mind banning of "assault-style" weapons, though.

Why do you mind banning weapons styled to assault?

Timiofak:
Lol go and learn correct English please.

Why should it? Do you read what it writes?

A40:
Can't realistically see Hamilton winning a race unless Max and Leclerc crash out in the same race. It's going to take something wacky like that to happen

He's not as confident as he used to be when he had the fastest car on the grid. You can see small boy George Russell outperforming him. He's 75 pts behind Max even with two DNFs for Max

Not confident at all. Like last year deflated him. I feel for him so much.

I've always said he didn't know how to set a car up and it's now showing, and is why Mechanic Michael Schumacher is my idol after Senna.

Get your hands greasy, Ham! This is where you get to show character.

A40:
Let's see if he can outperform his teammate never mind compete for anything

I expect Hamilton to get a couple of wins this season. The sport needs it so they might engineer a win for him somehow. But that car is a lemon which might not be fixed any time soon and I just don't see Hamilton doing a dedicated Raikkonnen.

helinues:
Cos mods will take both down. No readvertising here

The offending post is taken down because it was properly reported. I can report yours too if you want it taken down immediately.