maasoap:


Did he say something wrong? He actually made sense. How many men commenting on this thread had their fathers conducted DNA test on them? Probably zero.
But if the tests are to be carried out now, some will be found out not to belong to their "daddies". . Or, may be you saying cheating just started like ten years ago?

So are you sayin since you are not your father's son. You do not care whether you raise bastards or not.
It also means if you father followed a path you must follow thru that path as well.
If you father failed at academics, you should fail at academics too.
If your father was a poor man. You should remain poor too?

Lol! Chai! The way some people talk, it's like their brain is on vacation.

Kajaard:
Even Keanu Reeves( the John Wick actor) recently escaped this paternity fraud stuff as well. The video is in the link below. He won the case after the DNA result proved he was not the father of the 4 kids.

Women fear God O

https://youtube.com/shorts/RW5cqG6V9KM?si=5q-ZCVpkMRLjC7XL

Haaa!!!!! 4 kids?

post=129665227:
So Guys, I left Onitsha Town To IKEJA , LAGOS This Afternoon, getting to IKEJA, I was so hungry, I decided to place an order for food.

See The Food Of 6,000naira, I see for here.

What Is Really Happening Inside This IKEJA?

Na So, Una Dey Take Suffer For This Lagos.

See Photo Attached Here.

Where for Ikeja?

okoroemeka:
my cousin got an oil company job because he married from a connected family,he is now living large in London with his family because of his wife connections,,my brother the end justifies the means

I'm not your cousin, I don't intend to be and i will never be. I'd rather I work as a motor conductor than have a woman do shit for me.

Apus:
Victorian; Hungerbad. Good souls. RIP to dem.

Hungerbad! He was a real comrade.
Funny enough, I learnt of his death just this year.
May the ground remain spacious for them both. Victorian was as white as snow.

Indifferent.
Death is no big deal. It's like being unconscious for eternity.

immortalcrown:
He can get a genuine help from her. The help could be finding him a job, introducing him to a good girl that might become his wife, establishing a true friendship between her children and the guy's own children, giving him a financial support when she can, etcetera.

May I never be reduced to this piece of trash in my lifetime. It's better to just die than receive any favour from women.

FayaBall:


Now Una dey find common sense when e no sweet you again.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
You can't enlighten a man who is passionately committed to ignorance.

Have a good morning.

FayaBall:


Now Una dey find common sense when e no sweet you again.

If I said "christians are people who worship Mohammed, and they do not believe in Jesus because he is from Africa". Would that make any sense to you, or would you find it worthy of discourse?

FayaBall:
Now, na worthy discussion because e no sweet dem again!

How do you expect us to be comfortable with definitions and theories that are not consistent with any field of knowledge or dictionary?

This is plain common sense.

FayaBall:


But you know dear!

I don't know dear!

FayaBall:
See atheists complaining eh!

Complaining about what dear?

Aemmyjah:
Francistown
Kindly come and prove OP wrong.

OP was already wrong to begin with.
I guess he needs to learn how to effectively query ChatGPT, understand scientific terminologies and get familiar with lexicons before he can engage atheists on a worthy discussion.

Because one can't just manufacture a definition from the thin atmosphere and expect everyone with common sense to dance around it. Never!

KnownUnknown:


No need to go into any back and forth with you. The snippet above shows your ignorance and arrant stupidity.

You are not even intelligent or knowledgeable enough for your delusions to be called Dunning Kruger effect.

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

Like I told your partner, you are too stupid for me to be even bother with. Sayonara you stupid SOB. Lmao

As in. It's not worth engaging at all.
This kind of thread depletes intellectual capability.

TenQ:
Summary:

Conclusion:
1. If we insist on using Tangible to mean ANY EXISTENCE that produces EFFECTS on matter, then we must be CONSISTENT with our definition as Gravity, Electric Field, Magnetic Field, Mathematics, Software, Logic, Information, Consciousness, Mathematics will be Tangible. But note that other than these Effects there is NO EVIDENCE for them. Whatever we have is a NOMENCLATURE that describes the cause of the Effects we observe

2. If we use Tangible to mean ANY EXISTENCE or REALITY that can be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time (whether by touch or machine other than softwares) then we must be CONSISTENT with our definition as Gravity, Electric Field, magnetic Field Software, Logic, Information, Consciousness, Mathematics will NOT be Tangible.

Do we agree to these two basic rules. We have an understanding asd a rule of Engagement

CC:
Budaatum, triplechoice, KnownUnknown, Jaephoenix, HopefulLandlord
TheBillyonaire LordReed triplechoice: FRANCISTOWN: jaephoenix: JessicaRabbit

Aemmyjah:
Emusan:
StillDtruth:

So you want us to engage you based on what you want "tangible" to be or lemme rephrase and say, based on what you altered "tangible" to be?
You downplayed the word's meaning itself , which the whole world recognize and you gave it a meaning to satisfy your intentions.

Mtcheeeew! Brosky, whatever you think or want tangible to be is basically your own cup of tea to deal with and is none of our business.

When you have something that is more familiar with common reasoning, then you can debate us on facts and not what you want.

I apologize to myself for wasting my precious time on this irrelevant discussion.

CC:
Budaatum , triplechoice , KnownUnknown , Jaephoenix , TheBillyonaire , LordReed , triplechoice , jaephoenix:

Aemmyjah :
Emusan :
StillDtruth :

Barims:
Behind our house, there's a church that disturbs the entire neighborhood every night with loud noise. Despite having only around 18 members and being located in an unfinished building, they use large speakers that cause significant noise pollution. I'm deeply concerned about my mom's health, as she suffers from both insomnia and hypertension. This constant disturbance prevents us from getting any rest at night. Can I get the police involved in this issue? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated. I reside in Osogbo, Osun State.

Take a legal action against them. Or take your own action against them.

Moshybear:
Good day nairalanders. So this is a true story of my life and i am currently having mixed feelings maybe your comments will make me have a peace of mind (Hopefully)

Back then in school (IMSU) I had this roommate called Juliet ( not real name). For those who attended IMSU you will know that Hookup was full blown even before other Universities got acquainted with it. I look at Young girls doing it now and i just smile.

Anyways back to the story, this roommate of mine never lacked anything. Was it groceries, expensive hair, Phones, laptops etc , you name it. And this girl was from a poor background. I know her parents.

Rich Guys have rented very expensive apartments for her more than three times but she still chose to be roommates with me so as to chop their money and have savings.

I know you guys will be expecting a sad ending for her but this is not Nollywood. Presently she visits countries around the world like Dubai, Paris, London, LA , New York, Greece etc like breeze. I saw this girls posts and story on Instagram and couldn't believe my eyes.

However me back then was hoping on love and was dating a broke guy back then who later got me pregnant and i was refusing advances from very rich older men as an understanding girlfriend and wife to be ( foolish me) . Doing all the chores for this boy who later dumped me and the child as soon as he graduated and moved overseas. Since we graduated, this guy has never asked of my welfare nor sent a kobo to me for the upkeep of our "daughter".

Right now even to feed is a difficulty not to talk of accomodations.

So Nairaland people was i foolish to believe in Love at the expenses of a good life?

Thanks for reading this far.

I will really appreciate your responses. God bless

I still have a lot of info but let me stop here for now.

If this story is true.

One thing people don't understand is that success is on people, and not on what they do.

Let's flip your lifestyle.
If your friend had been the decent one and you had been the immoral one. Your friend would still have been "successful" and you'd still be broke up till this day.

If you realized I put the word "successful" in quotes. It means, your friend may appear successful, but is she really successful? Do you know whether she has any sicknesses or diseases that she's battling?
But fines pictures at fine spots are your own criteria for a successful lifestyle.

It's too early to determine who is truly successful.
My people go talk say "Person wey never die never know the kind death wey go kill am".

The end justifies the means.

StillDtruth:


Not everyone is born catholic like you

You didn't go to church before you read the Bible?
Yiur parents didn't tell you stuff and Jesus and Yahweh before you learnt to read the Bible?
Dey play.

Aemmyjah:
Francistown, are you also poorly made like Jaephoenix?

The word made is a very generous term.
The OP was only trying to let you know that, the possibilities of humans, being designed/made is minimal. He already made himself clear enough when he mentioned that some kids are born with deformed heart and other kinds of sicknesses.

If humans were made. Why would any maker make a human with a deformed heart?

I guess this is what the OP meant: If humans were products of evolution, then humans evolved well. But if humans were products of an intelligent design, then the designer is far from being intelligent.

StillDtruth:


You atheists have begun with your lies again.

Was anyone born holding a bible? No

Everyone had an open mind when they first read the bible. And anyone who reads the bible with an open mind finds that the bible
provokes him to ask relevant and important questions and reveals the kind of persons they are/who they want to be anong other things they wish/do not wish to know.

You were already indoctrinated into christianity before you learnt how to read the Bible.

jaephoenix:
The Bible is a book adored by Christians. It has been found to contain a lot of errors, lies and contradictions and thus not a reliable book. I made a thread about it here, in case ya'll wanna check it out and debate on the points there. Unfortunately for Christians, the gaffess were so many, and they could not come up with any defenses.
But in this thread, I'm gonna concentrate on the creation story, cos a Christian challenged me to(Just like another christian challenged me to open a thread about the bible errors and in the end he never gave any defenses). The errors are so much that I have to take them in parts. So this is only Part 1

What are the factual errors in the Genesis creation account?
There are several errors, since it’s a creation myth based on the knowledge, superstitions and misconceptions of the people who wrote it, just like any other creation myth. Let’s consider just some of them:

1. Duration time for the creation. This is the first considerable problem. Genesis says that, from the early stages of the earth’s formation to the dawn of man, only six days passed, which is obviously wrong. We know this whole process took about 4 billion years. Many apologists try to solve this crude mistake by declaring that the word “day” has a more vague meaning, such as six general divisions of time. We don’t know this, however, and the whole context of the story seems closer to 24 hour days (for example, we constantly read “And the evening and the morning were the first day.”).

2. The order of creation days. The order in which the creation events happened in the bible and the true geological and biological evolution of the earth are completely different. Some examples follow:

a. In Genesis 1:7 it says God divided the waters above and under the firmament. The only logical way to interpret this “firmament” or “heavens”, is the atmosphere, where water in vapour form is stored and eventually falls as rain. If this was done in a subsequent stage of the earth’s formation (day two), we would expect that the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere should increase over time. We however know that the exact opposite happened, as carbon dioxide and water vapour were partly replaced by oxygen.

b. In Genesis 1:11 it suggests that plants were the first form of life to appear, what is obviously wrong. It also suggests that plants and animals appeared in different times, what we know not to be true. Last, if compared to Genesis 1:16–18, it indicates that plants came before the sun, which would be impossible since sunlight is a fundamental ingredient to the process of photosynthesis, which is how plants produce their food.

c. In Genesis 1:16–18, as discussed before, the sun comes only after the plants appeared on the planet, which is obviously absurd. Some apologists try to save this by alleging that the sun already existed but wasn’t visible until the fourth day, since the earth’s atmosphere was thicker. First of all, the atmosphere was already transparent enough to see the sun when the first plants appeared in the planet. Moreover, the organisms from which plants evolved had already “invented” the process of photosynthesis and hence needed a substantial amount of sunlight. Finally, there are several studies who show how a plant’s growth is deeply affected by an increased period of cloudy days, and so it’s absurd to suppose that big trees and others could have appeared in a time of thick atmosphere, where the portion of light entering the planet was so weak that the sun wasn’t even visible.

d. Genesis 1:20 and 24 suggests that flying animals came before land animals, which is just wrong due to the fossil and DNA knowledge we have.

3. Magical elements. Some apologists argue that the creation myth in Genesis has a special status, since it’s much more “sober” in terms of reality than the creation myths of other religions. First of all, what matters is the truth. To construct a fable with elements closer to reality doesn’t change the fact that it is a fable. Secondly, the fact that the Genesis account seems less mesmerizing than others is just because the israelites followed monotheism (or at least monolatrism), and hence their creation story was devoid of the many struggles between gods that commonly take place at the beginning of other myths. Finally, it’s important to remember that there are many magical elements surrounding the Genesis story: the book of Revelations talks about a war in heaven between a dragon and his hosts and an angel and his hosts; Genesis itself, just a few pages afterwards, talks about talking serpents, magic fruits and a universal flood that occured just because God was in a bad mood with humanity

Nlfpmod
Seun
Emusan
LordReed
KnownUnknown
Maynnmann
TenQ
Aemmyjah
Olaadegbu
Elated177
Maxindhouse
FRANCISTOWN
Advocatejare
Lawag3
StillDtruth
Triplechoice
Workch

Etc

Anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind will basically lose believe while at the first chapter of the first book.
Just the first chapter, see how many bs.

This is going to be an interesting read. Lemme grab my milky doughnut.

TenQ:
Mr FRANCISTOWN
Please before you respond: Do we agree on these below
1. Softwares in a memory device is usually recorded in formated forms using appropriate file system format of disk partitions with data all in binary format on magnetic devices as magnetic North or South polarity, in Flash memories as ON or OFF in array of memory cells made from floating-gate transistors, in Optical Disks as Good or Bad Reflectance from microscopic data pits and lands arranged in a spiral track on the disk's surface etc.

I'm failing to see how this is relevant to our discussion.

TenQ:

2. The Recorded data on the memory devices do NOT add nor subtract any Material (such as atoms, molecules, electrons etc) from the physical device.

So what are you getting at?

[quote author=TenQ post=129621005]
3. If the File system on a memory device is NOT recognised by a machine, the data on it doesn't exist to the machine because it is NOT recognisable.

Th data exist to the machine but the file is considered to be in a format that is not supported by the machine.

For instance, when you have a file with (.exe) extension on an android phone. You will see the file, though you can't read or write to it. But you can see it and you can delete it.

A simple case is if you had a video file with a (.mkv) extension. Your regular video player will may not be able to read the data in that file. But the video file dataexist on your phone(the machine).
Let's say you download a VLC. You'll be able to read the data.

On i and Android OS. You'll see such files as "unsupported file format" or "unknown".
The data contained within the file do exists to the machine. The file is detectable but the data are undetectable to the machine, until the file is opened.

I think you and I should be careful of the terms that we use to avoid misconstruing and misunderstanding.

TenQ:

4. The same applies to the format in which a software is compiled on a memory device: even if the filesystem is recognized and the format in which the software is compiled on the machine is NOT, the software is NOT recognised. Like a software compiled for Windows OS will not run on a Mac or an Android or a Linux device (Unless we use an Emulator to translate the compiled code to the appropriate instruction format for the target OS)

Absolutely

TenQ:



6. Since Data on a physical device Exist BUT is NOT physical, then it is NOT Tangible.

Lemme just copy and paste my response on your other thread.
"It depends on which context. In my previous post on your other thread. I remember I said clearly that "I didn't say whether or softwares are not tangible." because the word "tangible" can serve different purposes depending on the mind of the speaker.

For instance: The word tangible can be a "Noun" and at the same time an "adjective"

According to my wikitionary:

Adjective:
tangible

•Touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch
Synonyms: palpable

or
•Possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete.
or
•Comprehensible by the mind; understandable.

If you looked at the first definition. Since softwares are not perceptible by any sense of touch. It is safe to say softwares are intangible but the second and third definition, especially the last definition.
A software is Comprehensible and understandable.
For without the two, a software is useless.

Now it is possible to say that a software is tangible (adjective)

Also

Noun:
tangible (plural tangibles)

•A physical object, something that can be touched.

•Real or concrete results.
Yes, but what are the tangibles?

If we were to follow the first definition.
We could possibly say a software is intangible.
But if we were to follow the second definition. Since softwares are real. Therefore we can say that softwares are tangible.

TenQ:

Of course: What is your definition of an existence being Tangible?

If it satisfied at least one criterion of the fundamental laws for all observers everywhere.

TenQ:

My Questions:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does it prove it doesn't exist?

Tangible is a very ambiguous term.

TenQ:

2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?

Very real.

TenQ:

3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?

By mass and dimension, any physical quantification of a software is often than not impossible without the aid of a hardware. Since software itself is not perceptible by any sense of touch.

But softwares are measured and quantified by their value now.

TenQ:

4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?

Without the use of a hardware? I'm not sure there is much wisdom in that.

TenQ:

5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?[/i]

Softwares can't stay on a machine's C.P.U. The C.P.U only takes instructions from the memory and execute them.

There are softwares that do not need other softwares to detect them.
The very common one is the OS(operating system)

One very simple way you can detect a software without using another software is to just use a hardware.

TenQ:

Dont insist on falsehood just to keep yourself in an argument
1. Gravity is NOT a force

My kid sister once asked me this question several years ago and I remember spending a great deal of time explaining how gravity works.
When Einstein said gravity isn't a force. What he actually meant was that Gravity is not a traditional force like the other forces.
How did he come to that conclusion?
One day he was walking thru the city and he saw some men fixing a roof.
Then, in his head, he imagined that, if one of the men slipped and was falling down.
The man falling down wouldn't feel a force pulling him, neither would he feel a force pushing him. And also since gravity didn't bend the rays of light.
Then he said gravity must not be a force, like the fundamental ones.

But gravitational effects are basically caused by the warping of spacetime and the acceleration of objects through the warped spacetime. It evidently looks like a force was applied, something must be responsible for the acceleration. Therefore, the most accurate approach would be to call gravity an "emergent force," meaning that what looks like a direct force is actually emerging from more fundamental effects (the warping of spacetime). With this in mind, it is perfectly reasonable to call gravity a real force.

This force of reaction (weight) determines that gravity is a force and not a geometric property of spacetime. This is the result, once the gravitational mass is revealed as the object of the gravitational acceleration, free of its cancellation, by its inertial mass, during the free fall of body.

In a free fall, a body falls at 9.8m/s. What is responsible for the acceleration?

Let's leave ChatGPT. Let's rub minds together. What do you think gravity is, if it's not a force?

The reason I said you should leave ChatGPT is because ChatGPT is powered by AI. AI uses machine learning.
It's outputs are based on the inputs.

TenQ:

I have interacted with Atheists especially here on Nairaland to know that it is their view. Their reaction even to this thread is an example of that

Atheists are just a group of different people. What brought us together is the lack of believe in the existence of a God.
There are many atheists who believe in paranormal, ghosts and some sort of rituals.
Some don't believe in anything at all.
It doesn't make anyone less of an atheist.

TenQ:

If it is virtual, it doesn't exist! This is why going to the back of the mirror actually proves that what was seen wasn't real. In Optics, images are either REAL or VIRTUAL


But the EM isnt the Image

You know, the most important thing is the way the brain interpretes every information.
What we are really seeing are just beams of light. The brain interpretes it to be the image.

TenQ:

True!
I am showing that several examples abound for EXISTENCES that are REAL but NOT TANGIBLE
One of these is the SOFTWARE in a Machine!


This is good;
Now the Question for you is this:
The Software within a Machine is obviously REAL but is it TANGIBLE?

It depends on which context. In my previous post on your other thread. I remember I said clearly that "I didn't say whether or softwares are not tangible." because the word "tangible" can serve different purposes depending on the mind of the speaker.

For instance: The word tangible can be a "Noun" and at the same time an "adjective"

According to my wikitionary:

Adjective:
tangible

•Touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch
Synonyms: palpable

or
•Possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete.
or
•Comprehensible by the mind; understandable.

If you looked at the first definition. Since softwares are not perceptible by any sense of touch. It is safe to say softwares are intangible but the second and third definition, especially the last definition.
A software is Comprehensible and understandable.
For without the two, a software is useless.

Now it is possible to say that a software is tangible (adjective)

Also

Noun:
tangible (plural tangibles)

•A physical object, something that can be touched.

•Real or concrete results.
Yes, but what are the tangibles?

If we were to follow the first definition.
We could possibly say a software is intangible.
But if we were to follow the second definition. Since softwares are real. Therefore we can say that softwares are tangible.

TenQ:

Are you saying that your Being an Atheist is NOT because you lack a Belief in any Deity BUT you hold a rational position?

I do not believe in the existence of deities, not that "I do not believe in deities". They are different.

labake1:
Why is it that most ladies don't want to date or marry their age mates?


Is there a taboo in it?

Because most of their age mates no dey get the kind money wey them want.
If na their younger ones get money. Them go gladly date them too.

TenQ:

1. First go check the meaning of substance and then come back to tell me that Force and Gravity are substances according to your definition

I already explained this, I can't go back to it

TenQ:

2. I am disappointed : You said Gravity is a Force! ? When? Where?

The warping of spacetime and the motion of objects through the warped spacetime resulting into the interaction between two masses.
Though Einstein said it is the result of each object responding to the effect that the other has on the space-time surrounding it. But it doesn't change the fact that GRAVITY IS INDEED A FORCE and also an EFFECT.
But generally, Gravity is a force.

TenQ:

3. I am not surprised that your ability of Comprehension is "sub-poor" : it is worse than terrible. You could have asked ChatGPT to help you answer my questions rather than going off tangent everytime.

Why do I need ChatGPT to assist me with what I learnt while in school several years ago? You use ChatGPT for what you don't know.
I know these things like mad.

TenQ:

4. Your knowledge of Computer and Software is shamefully below beginners appreciation stage. I will not be surprised if you are one of the half backed computer scientists our terrible educational sector is producing.

If you can bring out one error in what I said about computer, then I'll admit to this statement. If not, allow me to mentor you for a year.

TenQ:

4. I can see that you abhor knowledge and even if you read it doesn't sink. This is why you couldn't even read..

"... believe half of what you see." Edgar Allan Poe

TenQ:

5. The best you can do is Ad Hominem and nothing of substance is remotely retained in your brain.

Lol! You think so? You are actually guilty of that.
Just refute what I've said if you thought anything was wrong with it.

TenQ:

You could have even used ChatGPT to borrow knowledge before opening your mouth to say what you are incompetent to speak about.

You don't need ChatGPT for what you know, innit? Throughout all my debate on this platform with anyone. I've never consulted Google for anything unless someone refers me. I naturally know a lot of things and I've read lots of books. I mean lots of books, believe me. So, most of the times, I always know what I talk about.

TenQ:

Indeed according to you in the discussion of what is Tangible:
1. "The Software within a machine is Tangible!"
2. "Softwares are observable and interactive, Even if you can't touch them*
3." Gravity is a Force "
(please where did you learn this?)

1. I never said softwares within a machine are tangible or not tangible. I only said they exist.

2. Softwares are observable and highly interactive (you are forgetting the highly part)

I guess you are taking interactive to be response to stimulus. Hardware may respond to stimulus, but softwares are HIGHLY interactive.

I've actually gotten you where I wanted to get you. You asked me the other time if I've ever programmed, a code to print out "Hello World!" in my life.


In software development, even before the prototype.
One of the first thing we consider as we design the template is the IUI( Interactive user Interface)
During the days of CLP,(command line programming), we were using CUI (Character User interface)
For instance in those days when you write.

F_Name = raw_input()

And you run that code. There is going to be an insertion point on the screen indicating where to insert the characters.

You'll understand better if you've ever written a code in Fortran, Cobol, python console and especially shell, and CMD.

GUI came so that softwares can be more interactive. Any software that is not interactive cannot be deployed. Please use your ChatGPT and learn more on software development.

There will always be a clear difference between who uses chatGTP and who actually does it.

Leave ChatGPT and lemme mentor you. I'll explain using the language that you understand the most.

Is there anything else you wish to learn from me?