₦airaland Forum

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=319383.msg4735538#msg4735538 date=1255567613]Why don't you invest in a couple of yards of strong rope and then find a strong beam to tie it to instead of hounding me around like a pinhead?[/quote]Prolly becos there is one tied around your neck already? sorry I don't believe in suicide be it individual or mass as you obviously do.  
The fact remains, you are yarning opata how can you say that Rio is still better than Terry?

maedan:
@duduspace
thanks for the offer but no thanks. Better to eat tripe in a place of happiness than to eat chicken peri peri in a place of strife. I never knew you were a goner. No wonder. Go in peace, ok, lol



Going. . .going. . .Goooooone .

Alright I hear yu, we Gunners always do our stuff with class and play sexy football. My offer remains till when you get tired of masquerading as a rich sheikh's plaything. 

@OP

You can move in with me for a month (after an AIDS test) so that we can make it reality.  but pls confirm that you are female first cos I don't swing both ways.

^^ Read yur bible very well o, I've never heard it said anywhere that there is no pain in heaven, the only thing it says is that there will be no crying there but the two are not the same. It is possible that their mouths will be glued shut so that they can't cry.
And what do you mean by no pain, don't you know it is a mixture of pain and pleasure that turn people on? infact, some people can't have an orgasm if yu don't beat the living daylights out of them.

uplawal:
@duduspace,u know it that am not a candidate of hell cos am already registered to get my 72virgin male in paradise

Hmm, I fear for you and I foresee danger ahead, 72 male virgins are not going to be gentle at all with all the desire they've been suppresing all this while, they may actually end up maltreating you the way they will take you porously.
The guys in hell will be more matured and gentle.

Bring the money first, I'm sure we can give the Chinese half of the amount to come up with a Central Airconditioning system for hell. We can then invest the remaining and go on an eternity long vacation.

manmustwac:
No but if u look on the last page there's a list i made of 20 candidates for hell. Unfortuneatly i forgot to add your name

Correct that error sharp sharp, we need more hot babes in hell.

I don't care if Rio Ferdinand has been the best Defender since kingdom come, it is only mumus like Sauron who can't differentiate between their butt holes and their mouths will rate him higher than John Terry at present.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4734298#msg4734298 date=1255552966]Diego Maradona single-handedly won 86 world cup. . . . .
U are a bumbling idiot with little or no nous in your infected box you call a head.

Quote? Go back and read your senseless verbiage and make a fool of yourself.[/quote]Mr Mad Cow, are you still here venting? 99.0% of what you say are blatant lies the remaining 0.1% are untruths.  
yu better crawl back to that "Manure" heap you crawled out from.

edoyad:
You don notice too ?
At the end of the day you forget what you're even trying to prove. . I'm sure It's a deliberate Scum tactic.

I'm not so sure, I think that chap just likes to hear the sound of his own voice (metaphorically speaking).

^^^ beware of free lunches, remember Newcastle?

@maedan
I feel for you, instead of walking alone why not come and proudly walk with me as a gunner? instead of hawking yourself along with Liverfool to look for Oil rich benefactors? 

^^ 10, 9, 8, 7, 3,. . . . until they are back injured again.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4731970#msg4731970 date=1255529915]Losers back off when the kitchen gets hot.

U came here to blab fuckery about Welbeck not good enough to make the championship. . . I have shown he didn't make it due to his injury and not your watery knowledge of events.[/quote]There is nothing to back off from when a idiot MUMU with an overbloated ego is talking rubbish and making an ass of himself.

1. Can you quote exactly where I mentioned anything about the championship?
2. I'm sure if your claims are investigated, they will turn out to be lies as I exposed your lack of knowledge previously
3. You have not shown jack, all we have to go by is your word which even the worst of fools would think more than twice b4 accepting.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4731708#msg4731708 date=1255527918]U could be suffering from Trisomy-21 symptoms for all i care. . . .
The $64,000 question is. . . . .Did Welbeck pull out of the under 21 championship due to injury or not?[/quote]And yu can be suffering from CJD for all I care cos it seems yu've got some memory loss and also seem to be suffering from a delusion which gives you an overbloated importance of yourself.

What exactly makes you think I have to answer your question? And of what relevance is your question to the issue at hand? what issue exactly are you disputing? or are yu just venting becos yu have to say something?

@Edoyad
I'm not even arguing with the guy anymore but how can the guy be lying blatantly like this?

I mean, this is the original statement I made:

Confirms what we've been telling you but which your puny brain can't appreciate, we've got better youth players than you have. Jack Wilshere will clock 18 in January 2010 and is already a first teamer for England U21 team and being hotly tipped to be picked in the world cup squad when your much touted Welbeck can't command a starting shirt in the same team. Aaron Ramsey is also 18 and is already a full international for Wales. All the other guys I gave you their names previously are also under 19 years of age and are already Under 21 players for countries such as The Netherlands.

so of what relevance is the question he is asking? and how does this correlate to the nonsense the guy is saying? I tire for dis guy o.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4731570#msg4731570 date=1255526984]Yet another evidence this poof is a military-grade simpleton.

U came here to tell us Welbeck was dropped because he wasn't good enough whereas he pulled out due to injury.
U told us Macheda was 18 during the European Championship but he was 17 as at then.
Now who's the charlatan?[/quote]It is either you are up to some mischief, your understanding of English is suspect or a combination of both, anyone who reads the posts can come to their individual conclusions.

I can't for the life of me understand how the statement "Macheda is 18" translates to "Macheda was 18 during the European under 21 championship"
Are you on some expired pills or suffering from withdrawal symptoms?

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4731271#msg4731271 date=1255524667]Well. . . . .This is the way losers back off after being boxed into a corner.

Did Welbeck pull out of European under 21 championship due to injury or not? [/quote]I practically gave up on you as a lost cause, need I expose more of your lies? I practically don't need to as your verbal gymnastics (usually in the backward direction) expose you for the charlartan and noise maker that you are.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4731050#msg4731050 date=1255523081]U have a splinter in your sphincter. . . .

He was 17 when the tournament kicked off.
Under 21 competition started in June. . . . .Macheda turned 18 in August.
Use your brains.

Which means he is still 18 and was 18 when the tournament kicked off.
He wouldn't have participated in the qualifiers at 18.

Any idiot can make the rank for England.
If Walcott with no Premiership experience can go to the world cup. . . .what else is there to say?
Going by your logic. . . .Walcott is better than Defoe, isn't he?

Macheda at 17 has copped his debut with Italy's under-21 side.
If you are not a doofus, you would have known Welbeck was invited for the European under-21 competition but pulled out due to his injury.
I mean. . . .If Fraizer Campbell(OT reject) can make the tournament, why wouldn't Welbeck make it?
It is not easy but your youth players are yet to win any meaningful competition under Arsene Wenger.
SAF's fledglings have won the league(95/96). . . .won the Carling cup in 2006 and won it in 2009.
Tell us what Arsene's fledglings have won at the senior level.


I won't even stoop low to your level.
All i know is you are the spongy tissue that came out with Clifford Orji's placenta.[/quote]Sauron's incoherent babbles, potopoto yarns. Ol boy, you dey give us disorganized noise and you think say na music.

^^ The day anti-football and win at all costs by stifling the opponent was put to shame at the highest level of soccer. 

OH Happy day !

dayokanu:
^^ Hello, He plays for freaking Denmark

Tell us who are the international players from Arsenal  Clichy, Diaby, Upson, Denilson, Bothroyd, Sidwell or Owusu Abeyie

Of course your monkey brain would be quick to forget Cesc, Senderos, Djorou and Song. 3 of whom are likely going to their 2nd world cup before their 25th birthdays.
Isn't it amazing what Hypoglycaemia can do to a Monkey's brains if he doesn't get his bananas on time?

@verycute

I am happy for you that your life changed for the better, remember that even drug barons set up trust funds and send some people to school to better their life but does that make selling of drugs a worthwhile venture?

You are quite myopic in your thinking, if the teaching of your erudite Pastor Chris is so useful why has it not transformed the country at large? do you really understand how much 3 million people are? do you know that the republic of Ireland has a population under 5 million? yet Nigerians were running there to have children and obtain stay just a few years back.

Can you just imagine what those 3 million people can do if the teaching your lord and master Pastor Chris is giving them is of any good?

My point remains that there is nothing to be rejoiced over in having 3 million people being gathered in a place to be hoodwinked by one sweet tongued deceiver as Oyakhilome when they should have been gainfully employed in advancing the economic prospects of their nation.

how can yu say that isn't scary? try showing that to a child and see how the child will react to it. Even as an adult, I was pretty much shook up and disgusted with the pic. Is that really the Satan you worship?

^^ Ashley Cole at Chelsea, Steve Sidwell at Villa, Matthew Upson at West Ham, Jay Bothroyd at Cardiff e.t.c.

Keep in mind also that we usually keep our best cos we don't go out splashing the cash like most other teams. It is only now that we seem to have a glut of good young players that I expect some really good young players might have to leave for more first team opportunities elsewhere as seems to be happening with Merida and might have happened with Bendtner if Ade didn't leave.

For the strength of our academy however, I would rather look at the number of internationals we produce.

what happened? have the neo christian zealots finally succeeded in getting Banom banned? The great Baba Adeboye's long arms don catch up with you at last?

@Purist

It is called the carrot and stick approach. If you don't accept christ for the good things you will get then you may accept him because of the fear of the bad things that will happen to you if you don't.

ritchboy:
dudu,
sauron is renowned for his intellectual challenges.
you are better off arguing with a frying pan

Argue ke, emi ko, it wasn't me, I was only trying to save him from himself as I believe there is hope for everyone including Forrest Gump wannabes but it is already lookin like a lost cause.

maedan:
Lol @ duduspace.
Not even that!
You might as well give up and wish us well instead of DJ'ing that your broken record

The only broken record here is "You'll never walk alone". You've been walking alone since Gillete and Hicks drove you into debts with their takeover.

All this one na story, we go compare trophies at the end of the season.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=324131.msg4726253#msg4726253 date=1255450072]1. Macheda is 17. . . . .U gotta be fickle to think a 17-yr old player will make U-21 team for Italy.
2. Welbeck is barely 18. . . .stop chatting shit.
3. When Kanu was 17, he did not play in the under 21 competition.
4. Allow United lads to be 21 before saying they did not make this competition or that.[/quote]You are not only a liar but you don't know your football history well enough and you are not even current with the status of your own players so stop talking rubbish.

1. Macheda is 18
2. Wellbeck will clock 19 next month
3. Kanu was in the unsuccessful Nigerian Under-20 squad to Mauritius 1993
[Quote]It was while at Iwuanyanwu that legendary Segun Odegbami drew Nigerians attention to the phenomenon called Kanu after watching him play in 1992 in a match between Iwuanyanwu and 3SC of Ibadan.
But it took some time before other Nigerians saw what Odegbami saw in Kanu. When Nigeria was preparing for the 1993 African Youth Championship (AYC) scheduled to hold in Mauritius, then Super Eagles technical adviser, Dutchman Clemence Westerhoff, noticed Kanu's promise and invited then Junior Eagles coach, James Peters, to pick the boy in his team.
Peters, who perhaps felt Westerhoff was interfering in his duties, tactically took him to Mauritius and kept Kanu on the bench until Nigeria crashed out of the tourney after falling to the superior fire power of Ghana and Cameroon.[/quote]4. Confirms what we've been telling you but which your puny brain can't appreciate, we've got better youth players than you have. Jack Wilshere will clock 18 in January 2010 and is already a first teamer for England U21 team and being hotly tipped to be picked in the world cup squad when your much touted Welbeck can't command a starting shirt in the same team. Aaron Ramsey is also 18 and is already a full international for Wales. All the other guys I gave you their names previously are also under 19 years of age and are already Under 21 players for countries such as The Netherlands.

Do you think it is easy to field a team with an average age less than 20 years in the carling cup and comprehensively beat a premiership team? if it is that easy why hasn't Fergie ever done it?

@Deep Sight

Your use of words and story telling is remarkable, you are definitely involved in the theatre arts, are you a practitioner in that field?
You do remind me of a very close friend of mine from my days in OAU.

Deep Sight:
^^^Dudu Space -

In order that this thread is not derailed into another "Proof of God's Existence" thread, i will meet you up on another thread to discuss these. But very briefy, let me point out a few things -

I am through arguing the proof of God's existence with anyone (except when I'm in the mood to amuse myself) because I 've come to the conclusion that it is a moot point which is why I'm an apathetic agnostic. You can't prove either way whether he exists or not without falling into a fallacy so I keep a very open mind in that regards.

Deep Sight:
The words "multiple" and "prime" are an incurable contradiction in themselves. Reflect closely on this.

You are talking about living out of time and you are still holding on to rigid definitions as defined in time, isn't that a contradiction? My precise point being that once you go out of what we know and are sure of, all other things become conjectures with their attendant inconsistencies.

Deep Sight:
Natural Disasters re-balance the earth's cycles and eco-systems. Predators control cattle populations. . .  etc. Again, reflect closely.

You've put up a reasonable defense but it falls flat on its face, without going into details, the question remains couldn't an "Ultimate intelligence" design things better?

Deep Sight:
Come on! I almost had to chuckle at this. Prior to the big bang, what nothingness was there? You seem not able to step out of the bubble of things already existing, within which you input possibilities. . . Let's discuss nothing existing (singluarity/ pre-big bang). What endless possibilities could exist in such? Nil. Have you reflected on the law of motion? Notice how nothing can move without being moved by something alreay moving. . .?

I do step out of the bubble of pre-existing things, but with a caveat (that no one is able to prove anything conclusive beyond the point at which matter came into existence without falling into a fallacy). The age old question remains that how exactly did something come out of nothing? but attributing it to a creator and then giving attributes of intelligence and power to that creator is also a fallacy which actually does descend into farce as evidenced in religion (organised or individual).

Besides, have you ever questioned why matter cannot be destroyed? but is only transitional? maybe when we get to understand how to make nothing out of something then we will know how something can come from nothing. I think there is a very good reason why null and infinity are theoretical constructs which cannot be practically evidenced or ascertained.

Pastor AIO:
To use Krayola's example above, My spirit might tell me not to give him a penny though he might be my best friend yet another guy who doesn't even know neither of us, but just overheard our conversation, might feel inspired by his spirit to suddenly give it to him.  It would be right for that guy but not right for me.  Each situation is unique, each person is unique.  What applies to me will not necessarily apply to another person.

How then do you explain the spirit of an insane person? or what exactly is it that makes a psycopath kill without compulsion or an iota of guilt? are you saying that killing innocent people is not right for the rest of us but right for such people?

What of those who have been brainwashed from when they were impressionable? does that suggest a link between the brain and the spirit? if that exists to what extent do they affect each other and which one is dominant over the other?

If this spirit exists as you say, and every individual has one, just like every individual breathes air and ejects waste, why then is the experience so different for the individual (or virtually none existent in some) besides, at what point exactly do you stop using your brain and start using your spirit?

Deep Sight:
^^^ Nice One, Duduspace. . . I entirely agree.

Its just that in Pastor's case the contradictions seem to still be inherent in posts even on this very thread. There of course has never been a problem with changing one's perspective.

Pastor has a brilliant analytical mind and that's the only reason i want him to be perfectly clear, such that i am able to understand him, and have a basis for interacting with him.

I think that is probably because Pastor himself is still in the "By any means necessary" mode I mentioned earlier in my post. But I think he is well on his way to true enlightenment which is when you are able to own up to the limits of your own knowledge.
He has already started questioning the postulations of organized religion and he is coming to his own conclusions as he goes along but he has never allowed himself to question the inconsistencies of the god concept yet, rather blaming human beings(organized religion) as being responsible for the inconsistencies while overlooking the obvious fact that god is yet to reveal himself to everyone (in a general or consistent way that is) thereby making those inconsistencies a sure outcome (even if he truly exists).

Deep Sight:
The perfect religion (if it may be called that) for an agnostic is the pure form of Buddhism. Go and consider it, it's really excellent stuff. I am still flirting with it, the only differentiating area being my Deist inclination which is somewhat at odds with pure Buddhism, which is silent on the question of a Deity.

My sister has recommended the same for me and I might study it someday but at present I'm quite content living as an Apathetic Agnostic.

Deep Sight:
1. Even for the world to come into existence by randomness, matter still had to be there somehow. What was the source of that matter. I ask this, because matter, unlike intangible quantities, cannot be eternal in either the future or past tense? Phaps we may say it is eternal in the sense of continuous change of state. . . But surely, it cannot be an "always been" like abstract entities are. . .? Thus your randomness supposition commences at a point where matter is already in existence. I want to address the cause or trigger of ALL existence.

   2. Recall the argument i amde about the random pebbles and the square. I know you responded to that. But those linear lines of the square will still be very hard to come by even in eternal time given the random principle. Do you know why? Because Randomness by its very nature is defined as haphazard . . . that's why even eternal time would not throw up the sort of lined square that i gave you IF RANDOMNESS IS THE PRINCIPLE reconsider this. . .

  3. Randomness not really likely to throw up the initial energy for the "Big Bang". . . conceptually contradictory, yes?

1.
A very interesting and quite a worthwhile objective but will always come with the fallacy of the first cause.
Even if we cast the fallacy aside and proceed, then how can you really be definite there is only one such prime mover  responsible? why eliminate the possibility of multiple prime movers or even an entire race of such prime movers? and why exactly must it be intelligent? possibly because we are intelligent and so must have been created by someone also intelligent right, but in all honesty, do you consider everything about our existence intelligent? haven't you ever questioned some things? like why do we have natural disasters? or why do we have people born with mental health issues? why would an intelligent creator create such?
My basic point is, we are the ones making gods for ourselves (in our own image) to resolve the inconsistencies in our very existence, no surprise then that all such gods come with their own set of inconsistencies.

2.
I think you are going with the very basic description of randomness and random processes. A random process is a repeating process whose outcomes follow no describable deterministic pattern, but follow a probability distribution, such that the relative probability of the occurrence of each outcome can be approximated or calculated.
If you consider our existence as such a random process, anything (every event or combination of events) that can happen has a relative probability (no matter how minute) and when you combine this with infinite time or "eternity" then anything that can happen is sure to happen somehow someway. So, if you take our very existence as a combination of events, it has a probability which you might consider to be so small as to be totally impossible but which when put in the context of infinite time becomes a sure outcome.
I am however not saying that this is exactly how we came to be in existence but I can't fault the logic behind such a view and it is one I strongly tend towards these days because it accounts for all the inconsistencies I find in other theories.

3. Within a Universal sample space encompassing all things we know and those we don't, the initial energy for the big bang is an event with a probability attached to it which is sure to happen given infinite time.