Akin1212:


You have time bringing out facts to someone who will not accept them. Have you seen the backwardness I talked about?

After you explained extensively to him that humans and other animals cannot see with the same radiations and that science has made that possible with certain instruments. He still did not understand and process it.
He obviously thought since science has made instruments that make us see other radiations, it means all human beings have it automatically. His reasoning level is very very low, there's no point in helping understand things beyond his level. Just leave him.

Can you imagine someone who claims to be intelligent using a pet-oriented blog to strike a point. It's a pity.

Please boss take it easy. If someone does not understand something, we have to explain to them. Don't be harsh, this is just an online conversation

OkaiCorne:


I read you perfectly sir, but it now confuses me as to whether it is your opinion or A FACT.

There are some Scientists with a different opinion kindly check the link below...

http://www.petmd.com/news/health-science/what-cats-and-dogs-can-see-humans-cant-you-wont-believe-it-31380

What makes them wrong and what makes your Opinion right?

That is why I asked if you concluded by seeing the world through the eyes of a dog or cat

If Science is always correct, why are there different opinions on a single matter? Please I am not asking to prove you wrong, I just want to learn with the right facts on ground.

There is also another article on the 4th of August 2017 that has a different conclusion from yours;

http://themindunleashed.com/2017/08/can-cats-dogs-see-spirits-science-confirms-can-see-frequencies-cant.html

You are not understanding my points are you? I have the same conclusion as these websites. We cannot see what dogs can see normally.

But science has been able to develop instruments that enable us see what these animals see.

I don't know why you do this, but it will not favor any of us if you keep acting as if you don't understand what I am saying.

OkaiCorne:


I read you perfectly sir, but it now confuses me as to whether it is your opinion or A FACT.

There are some Scientists with a different opinion kindly check the link below...

http://www.petmd.com/news/health-science/what-cats-and-dogs-can-see-humans-cant-you-wont-believe-it-31380

What makes them wrong and what makes your Opinion right?

That is why I asked if you concluded by seeing the world through the eyes of a dog or cat

If Science is always correct, why are there different opinions on a single matter? Please I am not asking to prove you wrong, I just want to learn with the right facts on ground.

Good, I will now bring out my points from your link. Please endeavor to read again.

When I answered your question, I told you that humans see with the visible light spectrum, you can go back to it to confirm. I told you that other animals use UV and Infrared. I specifically answer you that there are things other animals see that we can't see, do you recall?

Then I told you that, this is where science comes in, that we study these animals vision, here is an excerpt from your link that confirms that we study them.

"UV light is the wave length beyond the visible light from red to violet that humans can see. Humans have a lens that blocks UV from reaching the retina. It was previously thought that most mammals have lenses similar to humans.

Scientists studied the lenses of dead mammals, including cats, dogs, monkeys, pandas, hedgehogs, and ferrets. By researching how much light passes through the lens to reach the retina, they concluded that some mammals previously thought not to be able to see UV actually can."

It is not a personal opinion, it is something that is happening in the scientific world. The blog you copied that from is a pet blog which is talking to pet owners, it's not a scientific related blog. You must agree to that if you are sincere.
So the blog post is referring to pet owners who may be scientific and non scientific as related to dogs and cats.


But here is a scientific website which reveals everything

http://www.sci-news.com/biology/science-humans-can-see-infrared-light-02313.html.

Please, if you have the time read it up.

PS: The website is full of scientific jargons, if you don't mind. Please don't misinterprete anything there, if there are things you don't understand come here I will explain them.

OkaiCorne:


How did you arrive at this conclusion? Can you see the world through the eyes of a Dog or Cat to arrive at this conclusion?

I am not certain of this...but you are.

I am really curious.

Please sir, let us be clear and always read each other's post to hold on to the truth and learn a great deal.

Asking me this question is as a consequence of you not reading my epistle. I explained a lot there. I explained how cats and dogs and other animals alike see. And I went further to explain how we have been able to see what they see using the radiation they use. Please, go back to the epistle and read again. If you want me to continue, I beg you sir, READ what I post because I am fully reading everything you're posting.

OkaiCorne:


The summary of your message is the relevance of Science to advancing the cause of Humanity which I do not disagree with.

I am really comfortable with your style. Please continue with my questions

No sir, the summary of my message is that, other animals do not have an ADVANTAGE of detecting God with their senses than us in the scientific world. We study them, we reproduce their living processes and we can sense what they sense due to instruments we have created. Do you agree? Let's be clear please.

OkaiCorne:


Very good...now my next set of questions please...

1) Can you use Science to give me one basic example of life existing without a creator?
2) Does Science have all the answers to life?

Before we proceed, I need to be sure that you are digesting my points and I am digesting yours. I am not here to argue and I am not here for an interview either.

Did you read my epistle and do you agree that humans now do not have limited sight due to the instruments we have developed? We need to know what we are doing.

OkaiCorne:


Fair enough ... you are seem more mature and composed, so I can relate well with you and perhaps get the point Akin1212 might have failed to pass across.

Back to your question. I CANNOT CONCLUDE whether Cats or Dogs or Eagles have seen the Eternal Creator because I do not have their vision nor sense of smell.

BUT THEY STAND A BETTER CHANCE because they have a better sense of Vision and Smell...

Back to my questions sir. Thank you

I wonder why you brought it up then when you cannot conclude. That being said, that you don't know what cats and dogs see, and it has been established that whatever they see, their eyes is still part of the 5 senses of every animal on earth.

Before answering your question, let me quickly bring something to light. Sight is a function of electromagnetic waves, which includes several types of waves, I won't mention, you can check them up. But the visible light spectrum is what humans use to see. Other animals use ultraviolet, infrared and other types to see. No animal has a better chance than the another when it comes to sight. No waves is better than the other. There are many things we see that Dogs, cats and, eagles cannot see. But there is nothing they can see that we cannot see. And this is because we have devised instruments that can see in other wavelengths. This means we can see what dogs and cats or eagles can see, but they still cannot see what we see. But to be clear, Dogs still see in visible light spectrum.


Now to answer your question, You asked this: Do you go to a gun fight (Universal level) with a Knife (Limited Senses)?

My answer is NO. You fight a gun fight with a gun and a knife fight with a knife.
And that is where science comes in. I just told you up there, that we don't have limited senses because we can now see what other animals can see. Do you know that a snake sees with infrared rays(heat). There are scientific instruments that can see with infrared rays everywhere these days, you can order for one. There are scientific instruments that can see with ultraviolet rays. We are fighting this gun battle with guns. Science has gone beyond what you can chew without knowing about it.

OkaiCorne:


I humbly ask sir...Can you give one basic example of how Life can exist without a Creator?

This has not answered my question. I am writing in the words that you can read. Why do you do this? Do you want to discuss or you want to troll?

I answered your questions, answer mine. Let's discover the truth together, please.

OkaiCorne:


Very good, now we are getting somewhere with the Human-Ant Analogy. If you agree our sense of sight and smell is limited compared to lower creatures I just mentioned...what is the basis for using these senses to conclude that an Eternal Creator DOES NOT EXIST?

Do you go to a gun fight (Universal level) with a Knife (Limited Senses)?

To be honest, you are stimulating me intellectually with your clear and concise response (no sarcasm intended).

Can we continue this discussion here if you are not concerned with derailing the thread further? or Would you prefer I open another thread and leave Akin1212 playground (at least the thread has over 25 pages in less than a week )

I reminded you that I answered your questions and you needed to answer mine. You have not answered my questions and this is one thing I have seen in your discussions with Akin. With all due respect sir, not answering questions is an attribute of unintelligent people. What's so hard in answering my questions? Are we discussing or you are interviewing me. I would like to continue if you answer my questions, if you won't I will not like to drag it further because I am not Akin1212. Answer my questions too as I have done yours. Let's be fair.

Akin1212:


Actually, bro, I have just been trying to help him think. Since he cannot do it all by himself. I am not sure he is oriented scientifically since he has demonstrated it here with his false scientific claims. But unfortunately, he can counter scientific logic despite not having prior knowledge of science. He thinks science is an assumed ideology and unintelligent being like him can just talk about.

I am not trolling him, I am helping him. He has really derailed this thread with jargons. Thanks for noticing.

You are supposed to lecture him on the basics of science and then pick up from there. He has shown zero knowledge of science, what do you expect from him? I am disappointed you now resorted to exchanging insults with him. If you check well, he does not really have good points that's why he will use trolling and insult as his strength, you should not have gone down that path with him. I am not here to support him but I can see who is lost and who is correct. Just stop the insulting please.

OkaiCorne:


Bros calm down and answer me on these especially if you agree there is a limitation on our 5 senses as humans

1) Do you have a better Vision than an Eagle, or Cat (Dog at Night)?
2) Do you have a stronger sense of smell than a Dog?

Look, there is no limitation there. I will only agree with you that there are limitations if you can tell us categorically that cats and dogs see this God with their eyes. Do you know what cats and dogs see? Do you know if they see God or not?

But you cannot compare cats and dogs eyes to humans eyes when it comes to God because you don't know what they see.

Please take note that I have answeres your questions, and take your time to answer mine too. Don't avoid them as you have been avoiding Akin's questions.

Akin1212:


Dear All kindly critique my Logic alongside OkaiCorne and conclude...


Dear OkaiCorne and all Nairalanders, let us go back to the basics of logic and Science;

OkaiCorne LOGIC
If at the Logical level, humans (conscious & intelligent life form) needs ENERGY to get things done therefore;
At the intuitive level, An Eternal Creator (which is an immaterial spirit and I have not seen before) needs ENERGY (Universal Energy which is physical and material) to get things done (create the Earth, Other Planets and Stars that he has lost control of)

AKIN1212 LOGIC
If at the basic level, humans (conscious & intelligent life form) needs ENERGY to get things done therefore;
At the advanced level, Energy(Which nothing can happen in its absence) plays a key role in creating the Earth, Other Planets and stars without the input of an immaterial, unintelligent life form (Eternal Creator, which nobody has seen before). Because the 5 senses (alone,in which none else exists) of a Human (which is correct according to science) cannot visualize the spirit eternal creator.


This is not copying, it's the correction of your misplaced brain

I have seen that you have misunderstood scientific logic, I just have to correct it.

Please sir, do you just like trolling this guy or you're having fun?

It's obvious that this guy is unintelligent and is here to derail this topic. I have seen his lapses since 4 days now, he does not have a real world understanding. Is he even a scientist? Why discuss what he does not understand with him?

OkaiCorne:


Based on the above bolded in red color, Akin1212 has used Scientific Logic to imply that:

Humans SEE better than Cats and Dogs

Humans PERCEIVE better than Dogs...

Hence the Human Sense is very correct with absolutely no limitations whatsoever in concluding on the absence of an Eternal Creator

Do you stand to gain anything in telling people what is false?

Please I just want to know. What do cats and Dogs use to see? is it not their eyes? Is eyes not one of the 5 senses?

Your above statement proves nothing, it does not prove Akin1212 wrong. I have been following this thread for 4 days now and please it will be wise to just accept that you have been floored. Especially on logic and intuition. Yo have been floored also on the planes of existence and the parallel universe. These things are in public for everyone to see. Please sir, enough of this shame.

They are all just sending her pms. wtf?

gidgiddy:


Balderdash

The so called Igbo coup was not aimed st breaking up Nigeria. Nigeria has had many coups, none of them broke up Nigeria.

It was the Aburi agreement that was supposed to keep Nigeria one.

The Aburi agreement is not far from what is happening today. There are many groups who are today asking for restructuring and if Nigeria is not restructured, they are ready to secede from Nigeria. But the North does not want restructuring.

The Aburi agreement was also about restructuring Nigeria and the North did not want it.

Had the Aburi agreement been followed, there would have been no war.

You are very misinformed bro. Please I don't want to start posting long messages. Try to read the incidents prior to the first coup, the aburi accord too.

But let me address the coup issue. Yes, so many coups happened in the past but I wasn't talking about the effects of coups. I am talking about the effect of the 'first' coup, the first of its kind in the history of Nigeria. It started the Biafra war/Nigeria civil war.

Prior to the coup, The Igbos and the Hausa-Fulani had connived against the Yoruba on the inclusion of the rights to secession in the constitution. They agreed on that.

But after the coup which targeted the Northern premiers, the North became angry because it was planned by the Igbos(5 Majors who were Igbo). They reacted by killing Igbos in the North. So they arranged the aburi accord in 1967 between the FG and the military governor of the East, Ojukwu. Please read more on that.

gidgiddy:


The Nigerian war did not start like this. The Nigerian war started because of the faliure of Aburi.

But why are people fighting war to be with each other? Instead of fighting each other, better to separate amicably

The Nigerian civil war did not start because of the failure of Aburi accord, it started because the Igbos rejected the inclusion of the rights of secession from the constitution and because of the first coup which was planned by Igbo majors was focused on killing the Northern premiers.

The Aburi accord was held to salvage it and it didn't work because the Northerners wanted to revenge.

In one word, both Northerners and Easterners are stupid.

Lightening:


So if the Catalonia's had called Spain zoo and Spaniards animals and further threatened Spain, it would then have been appropriate to label them [b]terrorist? [/b]See naked display of foolishness.

I hope you continue your quest of the Legend of fools. Just learn simple.

Terrorism is violence or threat of violence for political reasons. So yes, if Catalonians had threatened Spaniards for secession purposes, they would have been labeled terrorists like you people, IPOB.

Hope you have learned something today?

butterflyl1on:



You are trying too hard to sound smart.

From the start I told you vitalism was philosophy and your next comment was "so in my world vitalism is philosophy"?

Why deny it now?

We are talking about science and from the blue you said science disproved vitalism which does not in any way subscribe to science and you say I am confused?

Go to bed and sleep

You are really confused brother. I made that statement in my very first post after answering the attributes a god should have. When we have not even gone deep at all. Stop looking for cheap wins and agree to your mistake. We are all fallible.

So, if I ask this - "so in your world vitalism is philosophy"? Does it mean I said categorically said that Vitalism is not philosophy or this is one of your empty assumptions again? You need bed more than me, you should go, we'll continue to see the fall of you in the day after work.

butterflyl1on:


You are indeed confused

A synthetic DNA simply imitates a natural existing DNA. It was simply copied. It was not built from scratch. It was built off one which already existed.

This shouldn't be hard to take in should it?

In simpler form, it was fabricated from pre existing DNA blueprint. Why use the pre-existing blueprint? Why not create an all new blueprint altogether?

Why borrow information?

Dalaman is absolutely right about who you are. And you keep confirming it.

Whatever you believe or however it makes you happy to live on lies and fallacy, Synthetic DNA is not Cloned DNA. Synthetic DNA IS MADE FROM FRAGMENTS, AND THAT IS SOMETHING. In fact, the first people who made it won Nobel prizes that proving god can never win for you.

You don't know science yet you talk about it. Is that how you spread fallacies?

These were my statements on Vitalism and science. Vitalism depicts religion full blown. Philosophy is a school of thought or doctrine. My statement asking if philosophy is vitalism is a bombastic statement. But your claim that I posted vitalism as science is one of the many lies just like in the bible. Don't force it, you have messed it up.

butterflyl1on:


SMH you seem lost.

you posted vitalism as a science and I told you it's philosophy and you were shocked that it is actually philosophy and tried denying it.

However vitalism which does not subscribe to science since it dwells on the immaterial which in itself limits science.

Science cannot disprove what is above or beyond its limit. They can only say so to themselves as their limit permits but what is beyond it remains its limitation

I have always maintained that science has its limits in materialism and cannot go beyond that. However materialism is not all there is. In fact it is extremely minute compared to what truly is.

See it anyway you choose but your view remains yours while mine remains mine and science or man cannot rule my life when same science simply works with pre existing information which even they do not know how such fine tuned and orderly information was even made available for them to be discovered and applied to work so well for humanity.

Keep on clutching at straws

Lol, I posted Vitalism as science? Really? Have you read the post again? Go and read it and come back to say sorry. Else I'll post screenshots of my post, your quote too. You have started to show the usual habits of typical religious people who lose arguments cheaply.

You see, I have stopped posting long epistles because I have realized how pathetic you seem. You are still here defending your mistake.

butterflyl1on:



I will simply say one thing about all your ignorance here.

Since I have already responded to all the above except your last comment to let me do so very simply.

Synthetic DNA consists of genes that are isolated from the natural world, "captured," and then copied.

You seem not to know what the word CREATE means and you thought synthetic meant actual creation and not a copy or clone.

Synthetic DNA is simply a copy of an existing one. Your ignorance is appalling .

Even your link speaks about copying and tinkering with what already existed and you seem overjoyed?

Why don't they try getting it done from scratch and not based on an already existing blueprint or copying from that which already existed.

This singular ignorance of yours shows that your entire post is a farce

I am sorry for two things

(1.) Your state of oblivion which will never end.
(2.) The condemnation that you are suffering right now

Now, let me educate you a bit.

*Synthetic DNA is DNA made from materials that are not DNA. Basically from the Nitrogenous bases, 5-carbon sugar and phosphate groups.
*Cloned DNA is DNA made from other DNA materials. Although it is synthetic but it is made from another copy of DNA DIFFERENT FROM DNA fragments. So, in our field(Biochemistry) we call it Cloned instead of Synthetic.
*Natural DNA is DNA made by the genetic combinations of both parent during fertilization

Please, it is pertinent that you learn. And it is rather appalling for someone who doesn't know to assume he knows. The person is simply an Ignoramus.

butterflyl1on:


You are so ignorant it hurts

Vitalism is the philosophical doctrine that life has a quality independent of physical and chemical laws, such as an immaterial soul. It therefore is opposed to naturalism, the belief that only the natural world exists.
Vitalism is also the basis for the modern spiritual belief in a "life force" or energy. This "force" has been roundly rejected by science,

This is the position which supports fundamental Christianity and the new age and you in your ignorance feels it is destroying religion when it clearly supports life exists outside the material world as science knows it.

Why do you think science rejects it?

Science cannot accept what it cannot prove materially and vitalism is an immaterial philosophical position.

Go and borrow some intelligence you clearly have a deficit.

Whatever made you think vitalism was science did you a great disservice. Vitalism is philosophy and philosophy last time I checked is not science and because it isn't scientifically proven is often rejected and seen as simply a personal opinion.

You need help especially since you are now throwing shoes and spoons at me all to get cheap points. Your slogan seems to be "throw anything at him so as to fake intelligence".

Well I know better.

I see clearly that you don't read with understanding or best put, your comprehension level is low. Did you say you know better? Let's see if you do. Read my post that you quoted with this on vitalism and come back to explain yourself.

The statement was 'Read on vitalism and see how Knowledge in science has destroyed religion, it's a gradual process.' It occurred to me that your interpretation of English is also faulty, why should I even continue with you when you don't even lack basic understanding?

Even a primary school student will know that statement means vitalism is a vital part of religion and not vice versa, so what are you saying here?

dalaman:


He's reading without understanding. That's what happens when you are too much in a hurry to make noise.

He still doesn't understand the point you are trying to make, read his last post.

I have seen his confusion

butterflyl1on:


When I say you desperately want to shift the goal post you say I am a liar.

Here you began talking with me about science and here you are branching off to philosophy via vitalism

Is philosophy science?

Deny your goal post shifting again.

And yet the goal post shiftings are responses to your posts. Look for a better and responsible way to gain points. You have been crying goal shifting in every post you've made.

So in your own world Vitalism is Philosophy? Lol, you should always check for meanings of words before you use them.

Go check for the meaning of vitalism and come back.

And can you even imagine, you don't even know the meaning of vitalism! I give up on you.

What have you been arguing since??

butterflyl1on:


I will make this short. Atheism is as old as religion FYI but somehow religion has grown in leaps and bounds leaving atheism in the dust.

Increase in knowledge has not affected the growth of religion but has actually brought an increase and growth.

Technology which has helped push knowledge has taken Religion to places it was not able to get to initially and this has brought acceptance and growth.

You think knowledge is a curse to religion?

It is a blessing and I thank God for it and you know why?

Habakkuk 2:14

For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea

This spread of knowledge is today being aided by scientific advancement as a partner

Awesome isn't it?

Nothing is funnier than this unintelligent post.
Read my links.
Read on vitalism and see how Knowledge in science has destroyed religion, it's a gradual process.

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
.

You have been lost right from the start

You are trying to disprove God and not "we" so try not to cast your burden on me. If man "discovered " God as you claimed can you show me the origin of this discovery? I mean can you show me the first man who originated the God idea? Do you have a verifiable history of this?

I can't show you because he is dead, but the lie started from Abraham. So you don't even know? Lol.

I have seen that there is no point going back and forth with you, you can rot in your ignorance but I'll address some of the lies you posted here but not all{/quote]

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
Ironically, knowledge has increased today and so has religion and it is still growing exponentially. By the way it has been projected that atheism (which you feel is based on knowledge) will massively decline by 2020 by as much as 30 million.
The numbers show that in 1970 there were 165,500,000 atheists worldwide, about 4.5% of the global population. In 2010, the number of atheists had fallen to 136,582,200 or 2.0% of the population. If trends continue, according to the study, there will be 136,685,000 atheists in 2020, or about 1.8% of the world population.


How come increased knowledge isn't causing as much damage as you postulate but rather moving more toward him?

Where is your source? I just posted daily mail as my source that atheist became the third most embraced faith in the world, but your lying mind crafted a decline. Weldone. Just post your source and let's see its credibility.

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
This is the point you never will get. Neccesary evil does not mean absolute evil to a God who sees the bigger and final picture. If Tampering with an event would affect the end of all results which would mean an ultimate good then why tamper with it especially when those being affected are still simply products of this God and he has the right to do with them as he pleases.

I still insist you answer my question. Which of the choices would you take?

Lol, of course, I will never get it and you also will never spill it. But what I understand there is that whether it is absolute evil or a necessary evil, evil is evil. And you have succeeded in making me understand that although god told you he is good, sometimes he peeks at evil and commit some evil to end up good. In other words, god does evil sometimes.

I don't want to get it more than that, you have said enough.

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
Do not blame me for your senility. Discoveries are named after their discoverers for sake of documentation and this does not deny their attributes but the attributes are not found in the names they are given but in their explanations which eventually are linked to the name thereafter. ( say this repeatedly until you understand it).

Keep your trash to yourself, I'm done with your ignorance in this aspect.

'

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
Deny all you want but science has confirmed scriptures and by extension, God. The video you deny carefully used science to corroborate the book of Genesis which offered a summary of what science gives in detail based on man's perspective. Scripture cannot start explaining relativity or the laws of cause and effect to man when man is yet ignorant so let man use his own language to explain to man in a way man can understand. Simple!

Lol, the video you posted described the universe to an extent it said there are forces which created something from nothing, that I agree on. Then it said the forces are familiar with god, a bunch of people like you? Nothing is corroborated there, the forces can't be god because where will you put the angels, the holy spirit and jesus the son of god? You are really lost, take time to find yourself. What is man's language, that there is a spirit in heaven with a kingdom of angels and his son is coming soon? That's the language of fools.

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
When we talk about man why would you assume we were individualising it? Man means all of humanity so where is the insincerity or are you desperate to tag me as an insincere person in order to garner cheap points when you have been the insincere one all this while and I have tried setting you straight repeatedly? your desperation is evident and you know your ego is the one in the ringer not mine.

Looks who's talking... Lol

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
Knowledge builds on past knowledge! Science builds on past scientific advancements and do not work in isolation. Every kind of knowledge is limited to the parameters available in their time. If you cannot grasp this simple thing then I certainly cannot help you.

I suppose the cars and the technology found in them today existed 100 years ago or they evolved from what was available in limitation years ago. Every knowledge known to man is limited to the finite nature of man. Period!

I think you need to help yourself instead, your straying is superb, top notch and first class.

If knowledge builds on knowledge, does it not continue? We are not talking about Man or time, we are talking about knowledge. It is continuous and that is how it will be. Knowledge is not limited and can't. Those who lived in the past generations and those who are living now are still regarded as unified 'Man' to avoid individualizing. You need a knock to understand this?
Knowledge survives generations and continues, the knowledge used to produce Rolce Royce of today emanated from the one used to make it in the 20th century. Man(unified) inasmuch as he survives every generation that passes will continue to grow in knowledge until infinity. If you don't comprehend this, I give up on you.

.

butterflyl1on:
author=Graycoder post=61395286]
At this juncture I can boldly say you just had some spare time to make some empty noises with and not even to say anything remotely sensible. I have coped with your shallow reasoning and believe me it was not hard at all. It was actually fun. God is a fact and you can take that to the bank. My age has nothing to do with anything likewise your age has nothing to do with the fact that science with all you claim they know cannot create one single DNA string or code but can only analyse what already is.

Knowledge is limited to generations. Without people there would be no knowledge. Take away the people and knowledge dies. Knowledge cannot thrive outside people and knowledge is limited to what we are exposed to and how long we run with it in our mortality.

Word of advice: Go get stronger, more intelligent arguments next time. These ones are below par.

Someone, who believes a fairy god exists said I have a shallow thinking, lol what can be funnier?
Is God a fact? Is he no more a force according to your video? If he is such a fact, why not invite him to dinner? Lol, he lives in your imagination you mean to say.

Can science not create a DNA? lOL, ANOTHER IGNORANT STATEMENT. How many Journals have you even read?

You should be reading my links, you'll learn a lot.

Synthetic DNA created

erico2k2:

ahaha Rich man where I live we do not subscribe for GB, I dont even know what that means,I keep telling you, there is Hunger in your words I can sense it 6000 miles away, you still dey call that thing shirt?

Where you live you know MB, but you don't know GB?

If you're obsessed with the shirt, it doesn't cost a thing. I'll send it to you maybe you can buy sense with it.

From IPOB you jumped to nonsense quoting. I cannot continue hobnobbing with you son. Download the shirt and set your IQ right.

erico2k2:

Chai nah so Dis thing pain you reach, I just go look your foto, wetin I see make me understand your matter
bross plz take down that foto,your faded 1st class akube bendown select and that your wire you call beards, .I k now say the country hard but try hustle more.Stop wasting your time deffending thieving politicians,The small Money you get take am buy food dont waste it o n MB unlike people like me wey get unlimited fiberotic broadband.U dey here dey nack big big Oyibo and Hunger dey your voice, even hunger dey your post.
Chei, the struggle is real!

What more can I say? Hunger dey your voice, is that political correctness too? Lol. That shirt you see there can buy you a brain, but the shirt is more important to me I would have used it to buy you one ounce of brain. If you eat like me, you would have at least small brain to know what is and what is not. The GB I subscribe for will be enough for the whole of your household for the rest of the year. Try again your comeback is weak.
I know you can't be stronger though, but keep trying.

erico2k2:

secret service and its not secret you see their faces etc,is your stupidity not out of this world?
Oga Im not IGBO nor IPOB nor Biafran, I have no links or connection with the Igbo people, Im from the South South,Im not a tribal bigot like you,Im speaking from Exposure and political correctness.Did one prime minister not call Nigeria fantastically corrupt? did anyone die?
what is wrong in calling Nigeria a ZOO, or referring to its Politicians as Animals?Are they in any class as Gadaffi who was called Mad Dog?
Unlike you, I live in a society where if you are called names, you prove them wrong by given a reason why you should not be called as such!



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

I see that your foolhardiness is legendary. And I am bemused by that hard fact.

You uploaded a video and I was expecting to hear Catalonians call Spaniards names but I didn't. It confirmed how stupid you are.

So a secret service is not secret because you see their faces? . Political correctness i

If, in your folly, everybody who doesn't want Biafra is a tribal bigot, what are those who want it? You see why you are stupid at your age?

One prime minister called Nigeria fantastically corrupt, how does that relate to secession? Please, how old are you?

What is wrong in calling Nigeria a ZOO? Seriously? LoL. I'll tell you though, what's wrong is that when you call your country a Zoo, then you will start seeing Pythons, Crocodiles and all sorts of dangerous animals swallowing and killing the Biafrans who also live in the Zoo with animals.

Gaddafi was called a mad dog, now answer my question, how does it relate to unconstitutional secession?

Look, I have actually had enough of your political foolishness. Just stop quoting me. I cannot continue wasting time on a south-south illiterate.

butterflyl1on:



why do you insist on goal post shifting at all costs?

You began talking about science and God and creation (be it real or not) and how science has allegedly proven that the earth is not a good place as stated in "the holy book ".

Now you are talking about a two way door in communication with God (prayer)

What has prayer got to do with the physical affecting or causing a change to the spiritual origin of the physical (which is my position)?

We are talking about the spiritual affecting the physical per creation and not prayer. Prayer only enables the spiritual to affect the physical (which is Still a one way door when it comes to effect) but not a two way door when it comes to the physical affecting the creative spirituality which brought the physical to reality.

You have been making extremely unintelligent comments all through your posts and I have tried repeatedly to call you to order but you seem set on that course. I should have stopped a while back seeing the obvious goalpost shifting attempts you attempted but why do that when conversing with an obviously simple minded fellow?

I can see your dogma, it's not hidden at all. You have been mentioning shifting since as if your points depend on it. Just let me know.

You said the physical does not connect with the spiritual, now I brought an instance where you people say it does, you tagged it prayer. So, you knew it was possible before you said it was impossible? Someone who is honest would know I just buttressed my point and the fact that you people claim. Why would I bring prayer into the argument, what I highlighted there was a two-way door between the physical and the spiritual, now you know I got you in a corner you're trying to cry foul. Lol, I understand you perfectly bro.

So, there is a creative spirituality and and an effectual one?

Go and practise more. Lol

butterflyl1on:

You keep jumping all over the place.

Your understanding of what the spiritual is viz a viz the physical is strictly limited to what you know about the physical and nothing more. So how do you know that the spiritual cannot touch the physical? Because you say so? Lmao

How do you know that the spiritual can touch the physical because whichever holy book you read said so?

I know so because I have dared so many gods, Jehova, Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Poseidon, Olodumare, Obatala etc to say a simple hi or tilt my back. None of them have been able to do so. Besides, there is no spirit realm because there is no proof for it. It stays in you people's head.

butterflyl1on:

Science is still a baby and cannot reject anything beyond its empirical scope.

Science has always validated the spiritual and God but of course you would deny this grin

What you call assumptions are facts yet unknown to science which in itself is limited by materialism. Only dummies would embrace science with all their heart even when science itself declares itself still a baby and limited.

Science is young, yes no argument on that. But the young always grow and the old always die, isn't it.

Religion is older and it's dying. According to demographics, there are more than a million atheists in the world right now. The 3rd set of people on set of beliefs. What do you think about that? Atheism saw an increase from 2001 to now. People are becoming wiser.

Your god must be out of clue, after all, he set laws 8000 years ago and doesn't want to change them since then. Was the world the same as it is now 8000 years ago? Lol

Third largest

butterflyl1on:



You assume there is a two way door and that is a wrong premise

The spiritual causes the physical to be. And since the spiritual caused the physical without being affected itself it clearly shows a one way door. (you can call it a catalyst).

Someone actually answered below. So, I must accept this because you said it?

I believe religious people commune with their gods and spirits, and the spirits and gods also respond to them. And despite knowing this you still don't think it's not a two-way door? I laugh in Swahili. I repeat, if you continue this way, by raising unintelligent points. I may be forced to stop.