₦airaland Forum

nuclearboy: @DS:

I believe the complaint is about the process of determining what "aids" terrorism and who decides what that is!

Todays news has it (for example) that Borno youths in "Gwange 1" are aiding the JTF identify boko haram members! Consider a scenario where someone decides the reporter of such news has, by stating what ward and locality, passed on information to the murderer Shekau (thus helping him identify his enemies and deal with them) and thus has fallen foul of this "open ended" edict! What if they now arrest and sentence (?) such reporters in lieu of clearly stated indices?

The ONLY problem I see ACN complaining of is the leeway this allows for interpretation!

I assume you are considering decency but in Nigeria, that is an unaffordable luxury

Egbon mi, e ku jo meta. Been a while.

Now listen: they complained about the proscription of a terrorist organization.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

donchris999: So, boko haram is now an opposition party? Hmmmm! Na wa o. Opposition party that bombs church. Opposition party that murder innocent citizens. What is worste than infringing on a fellow human rights than taking his/her life?

Thank you o!

Garri the 1st: An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition

Again.

From the need to fight a terrorist organization (now rated as second only to the Taliban in the world, in terms of mass murder) to clamping down on political parties, is quite a stretch of the imagination, don't you think?

Garri the 1st: I think I agree with the ACN on this.

An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition as well as those who may be critical of the methods employed by the Govt in combating terrorism.

Salient issues were raised by the ACN spokesperson, and these are the issues that one expects the Federal Govt(through the office of the A.G.) to address. ACN's concern is valid given PDP's penchant for engaging in cheap blackmail and witch-hunting of those who are critical of their dealings.

Let the FG clarify the grey-areas of the proscription law and I'm sure everyone will be fine.

We're talking terrorism here, my friend, reckless and consistent murder of thousands of people. . . . . . .?

Now the key question: does such an organization (as Boko Haram) have a legal right to exist and be recognized as a legitimate association?

A terrorist association?

Now if the answer is in the negative, as I expect it must be, for all sane people, then what's wrong with the proscription?

The proscription, in fact, only symbolically amounts to stating that which is already the case: namely that it is an illegal association, no?

[quote author=Beaf!]^
Last time I checked, we are NOT at war. Why this reference?[/quote]If you do not recognize the Boko Haram situation as warfare against the state, then there is really a problem in this country.

eGuerrilla: Please do not insult my intelligence by asking platitudinous questions.

Abeg calm down o!

Presidents have a right to exercise emergency powers when the occasion demands - sure.
But then, so does citizen Joe who seeks clarification on grey areas, within the ambit of federal law.

Well, in blunt terms, the question behind this thread is the legal and moral right or authority of a person or group who condemns the proscription of a terrorist organization responsible for, and committed to, thousands of murders.

^^^ Are you familiar with the concept of emergency and war situations, and that which is required to effectively deal with them?

Why are Presidents granted emergency powers during wartime in most countries?

omonnakoda: H0rny and honey are very different words

But they kinda feel the same to me

Gbawe: Can you and others not see the obvious? Do you not understand the huge difference in per capita income to note that most parents in the UK and in developed nations can give children adequate after-school study aids?

Are we a developed nation or even near being one? If we are pragmatic, realistic and solution-driven, it will be obvious the government needs to spend even more of Nigeria's wealth on ordinary Nigerians instead of the very small percentage connected to Governance.

Let me tell you all this right now as something most Nigerians are not aware of. Nigerian Senators can get as many as three I-pads totally free of charge because of their job!!! Do they deserve it more than our children who are the future and cornerstone of any national greatness we are planning for?

In relation to that, what is the need for argument as per the notion of Nigerian children gaining an educational aid, much cheaper than an I-pad, that helps them learn optimally and introduces them to important technology that is now homogeneously important worldwide?

With our universally touted "one dollar per day" poverty, we must welcome every government effort to negate how poverty can prevent our children from being the best they can be. I really do not want to engage in a long back and forth and will simply ask you to note that I believe socio-capitalism is best for Nigeria given where we are today. My example of 5 year old using tablets in the UK is to show that we must move to counter economic advantages others have that keep their children, even in sleep mode, ahead of kids in Nigeria. You may enjoy arguing for the sake of it but, after all is said and done, we cannot escape how developed nations keep ahead of the technology/innovation pile because of the massive investment, private and public, in human development.

Fully supported.

Particularly with reference to the ACN's criticism of the "ban" or "proscription" of the group, which I see mentioned on the front page of The Guardian today.

mkmyers45: And how does this defer from a robot playing a game of poker against another player.Now when handling, the robot has to decided what the opponent's hand is...There's a level of certainty so if he has a flush he has think and decide whether to deal or hold the hand as he come up a full house..Remember that my contentions is not that we have perfect robots atm but that its plausible too in the most human sense of it.

Do you seriously think a robot is conscious of its processes, or takes any conscious part in those processes? Surely you do understand that the robot is merely regurgitating a set of instructions placed there by its maker, the scientist?

Come on. Be serious.

plaetton: erroneous notion that complexity can hardly come out of simplicity.

Again. No theist ever argued that the first cause is not simple: if anything, the Jewish and Islamic insistence on the oneness of God is strongly indicative of the finest simplicity, at a philosophical level.

plaetton: Indeed. These are some of the analogies I intend to use to debunk the popular but erroneous notion that complexity can hardly come out of simplicity.

Not just complexity, but targetted complexity of the kind that you will see in the software for something as complexly designed as a spaceship, submarine, Global Internet Server, or advanced manufacturing plant.

Things occurring in nature, like the human brain FAR outstrip ALL of these things in terms of targetted complexity, design and functionality. Same goes for a single white blood cell.

So you really have to appreciate why the vast majority will never accept your chance hocus pocus.

And sensibly so.

^^^ Lolz, dont get your bosoms in a twist bro, just kidding around. . . .

plaetton: You are mixing apples and oranges.

We can only speculate about origin of the first spark of life.
Was life on earth purposefully seeded, did it spontaneously arise, or did a meteorite accidentally bring it from another planet or another part of a distant galaxy?
I which ever case, the origin is still purely speculative.

Now, on the other hand, how a simple microscopic life evolved in complexity over time is well beyond speculation. We have a good understanding, a well accepted working model of the processes of change.

We even have an accepted working model of how giant stars form from the accretions and coelescence of simple cosmic dusts.
Our sun is a perfect example of an intricately complex, powerful, orderly and seemingly purposeful product of cosmic evolution. Just Another by-product of chance, yet so seemingly orderly and purposeful.

Now, let me ask you:
Looking at our sun, it's size, its many functions, it's power and many mysteries, it's complexity, would you also say that the sun is much too complex and much too purposeful to have come about as a result of a series of cosmic chance events?

Of course the existence of the sun and every other star is a result of the big banng, an event which cannot be explained by your "acceptable working model" and which contradicts your surmise on equilibrium.

An event which self-evidently discloses external influence.

Uyi Iredia: Instead of baldly asserting it, summarize how life evolved from complex molecules for critique.

Exactly.

Plaetton,

The supposed graduation from unicellular organism to multi-cellular is just one such leap which is not accounted for by the so called "acceptable working model" and for which there is no understanding of the process whatsoever as you claim. I challenge you to show the "acceptable working model" that is known to cause this to happen, and yet this is just one very small graduation in a claimed process which is as fantastical and imaginary as it is impossible and inconceivable.

Not to begin to speak of the development of consciousness and self consciousness.

You are wishing things into existence as terribly as the religious do, honestly.

plaetton: We can only speculate about origin.

But how simple particles evolved to great complexity are not mysteries. The processes are well understood.

The blue contradicts the red, and since this thread is about the development of consciousness, the red is outrightly false as far as that is concerned.

^^^ In that case you should be able to describe in specifics what happened to cause the first life: the first living organism.

Go ahead.

plaetton: But how simple particles evolved to great complexity are not mysteries. The processes are well understood.

Oh my God!!!!!!

You didnt just say this did you? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

^^^ Small small bro. The PH link never responded.

Just laughable.

Can Christians achieve Nirvana?

Can Hindus go to Valhalla?

^^^ Jayyyyyy! ! ! ! ! ! ! Where you don deyyyyyyy! ! ! ! !

^^^ Good question, although I suspect the answer lies in the fact that such elementals never had any instrinsic ability to have free will in the first place, regardless of their location. Lucifer on the other hand, had such an intrinsic capacity but was only restrained because of proximity to God and the pressure of the Light. Away from that proximity and pressure, he could act in freedom.

However, I have always told justcool that I am not comfortable with the idea of "cosmic distances from God" as propounded in the message. Particularly with regard to a divine being. I feel that Divinity cannot be reconciled with the concept of distance. Just my feeling though. I may of course be simply poor in my capacity to grasp this matter.

Uyi Iredia: I know. I said that on purpose.

This is a sexxist comment! You mean that he's being a nagging biatch! That's wrong because it denigrates nagging biatches, and therefore amounts to gender apartheid.

thehomer: Punk I sent you to your room without supper. Now put the viagra down. Put it down! Or do you want another mouth scrubbing?

Lolz. Funny whenever I see you do have a sense of humour, makes me smile because you usually respond to posts in a strangely robotic fashion with those one liners that make one think you are some sort of automaton or software or program, rather than a human being.

Would make sense actually, as that would show why you cannot understand the quality of being as something that is not of matter. Human beings do understand that. It is an integral component of their being.

mazaje: What nonsense is this, i don't have time for your philosophical sophism and ramblings. . .How does the question above help better understand oneness of infinity?. . .

Mazaje, please forget all the back and forth and argumentative egoism going on here.

Because it is an EXTREMELY important question.

I ask it for the third time now, please think about it and answer it -

Can you see yourself, and can anyone else see you?

mantraa: Please watch this video by a 15 year old girl explaining the basic facts of evolution. Its not that difficult to understand. You just need to try to get your head around the vast timescale involved in the process, and remember that 99% of mutations are not beneficial, leading to the fact that 99% of all species that have ever existed are now extinct. However, in a constantly changing environment due to the slow process of continents moving because of plate tectonics, a very small percentage of mutations are advantageus to the new environments and climates and animal ends up in. Over millions of generations this enables natural selection to run its course and species to branch out into new variations, and eventually new species altogether. For example, All humans evolved out of Africa. The species that came out of africa first, Homo erectus are now extinct, as are homo neanderthal, and many other species of hominids whose fossils have been found. Homo Sapiens are the last surviving human specie left due to our intelligence which allowed us to manipulate our environment, create tools, use fire, farm animals and plants, build shelters etc.
In the last 100 years We have learned so much about the history of life on this planet. Dont throw it all away because of a book written by ignorant goat herders 3000 years ago who knew nothing compared to what we know now.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrAQpUAfgW8

Your ignorance is so profound its hilarious, your arrogance, laughable to the extent that it is you that desperately requires common sense.

You will throw away a book written by ignorant goat herders 3000 years ago, and become a fanatic of a book written 150 years ago with starkly zero evidence of its claims. You will ignore the glaring incongruities in the history of humanity as explained therein. At the same time, the devastating implications of the brevity of recorded human history, will of course be lost on you.

The judeo-christian abrahamic faiths are indeed full of many myths and legends, that is a certainty. However I can tell you for free that they contain a far superior thought structure as far as the origin of this world and mankind are concerned, and they also contain far more truth than the Origin of Species does. You will find far more falsehoods within The Origin of Species, than you could find in ten thousand bibles or quorans.

plaetton: he most honest thing I can say here is that we don't know yet what upset the equilibrium and triggered the big ban.g.

Well then, you have at the minimum agreed that it was something.

And that it was external.

That's a start.

Uyi Iredia: In truth, I laughed twice when I read the post you replied. First, when he said equilibrium states are UNSTABLE and temporary; and when he said opening a door alters a thermostat's equilibrium (without noting it as the NECESSARY external factor you pointed out earlier)

I am verily surprised that he does not see the very clear problems and contradictions therein.

In fact, that he does not see, that that acknowledgement of the necessity of an external factor, kills off his argument.

Lolz. Plaetton, you have tried to think, and this is good, but I am afraid you have not built your thoughts properly.

My apologies for not attending to this thread with my full thoughts yet: it provoked too much thought in me and some of the thoughts are even frightening (and challenge my sanity, no kidding) in terms of understanding reality. Also I am trying to wax myself into the zone to write the epistle that this thread warrants.

plaetton: Equilibrium states are not immutable. Infact, most equilibrium states are unstable and temporary. Equilibrium systems are altered and regained many times in your everyday life. Your refrigerator and your airconditioner are typical systems where equilibrium states are lost and regained regularly.
When you set your room ac to 32 degrees, your thermostat adjust the compressor to attain and maintain that temperature. Now, if the door is opened ,hot hair comes in and cold air seeps out, The room temperature rises. The equilibrium state set by your thermostat is altered. The system quickly responds to annul that change having the thermostat adjust the compressor to pump harder to blow more cold air in an attempt to maintain the 32 degrees temperature.

Everything else in the universe works in the much the same way. Our ecosystem works in the same way. The universe is still in that very process from the beginning.
This is what drives every motion in the universe.
Motion = change = evolution.

I am surprised that you cannot see that this shows up the necessity of an external influence which I mentioned. Look at the bold.

Nothing in a true equilibrium will ever change if it is not acted upon by an external factor.

Nothing.

Your example above, in the bold, proves that I am right in so saying.

Also, your example strongly suggests -

1. The existence of a system designed for a purpose and maintained by a specific set of laws to achieve and maintain that purpose

2. The existence of things already - your proposition says nothing of how the factors at play came to exist in the first place.