₦airaland Forum

Hohenheim:
Just watched Mugen train, wow I don't even know what to say. This is just the second anime movie I've watched the other being Lelouch of the resurrection.
A solid 10 for me

First anime to make 500 million dollars.

nani667:
Done ✔️

6.3 / 10

A little bit late.

Those of you talking about boobs.

durubennie:
Im enjoying it, funny show especially those wall people

Easily a 10/10 for me the creators know their stuff.

Escape Room 2019 Review
(SPOILER AHEAD)

Just like any other horror movie, characters be making stupid decision like.

- They could have just peed in those cups since they were running out of water.

- They could have broken the ice instead of melting an entire box of ice.

- They could have blocked the poisonous gas instead of leaving it opened.


That's it other than those you can genuinely see the author put in thought into the story, so it's a 5/10, I'll totally recommend.

durubennie:
solar opposites a bit similar and more fun than rick and morty
9\10

They are both from the same creator, hence the similarities.

Nobody ; Trash / 10

The movie didn't have a purpose, what message were they trying to pass.

Thief attacked your home with empty gun, you noticed the empty gun yet didn't do anything, instead he went to fight with strangers in a bus.

A hot pile of dog shít.

The woman in the window 3/10

Great acting from Amy Adams, but for some reason the movie chose to remain small, even after it was carefully pace. Till the end I was still expecting a plot twist, but nothing.

It was all a dream could have been better.

Parizz:
Ultraviolet (2006)

Oh my god! It was fun and exciting. Never a dull moment. Milla Jovovich i love you.

You should watch the fifth element

MJBOLT:

best zombie movie,how??

Army of the dead was just over dependent on gore and action to push the movie forward, apart from that, nothing else.

Kaycee7:
You came all this way to the Series thread to spoil my blues with your reggae.

Zack fans will defend anything.

Army of the popcorn entertainment, after watching the movie, I washed it down with a train to busan.Movies like that and World war Z make army of the dead looks like a joke.

Army of the dead: 5/10
World war Z : 7/10
Train to busan 8.5/10


This is 2021, we are suppose to go forward in movie quality, smh.

Army of the popcorn entertainment, after watching the movie, I washed it down with a train to busan.Movies like that and World war Z make army of the dead looks like a joke.

Army of the dead: 5/10
World war Z : 7/10
Train to busan 8.5/10


This is 2021, we are suppose to go forward in movie quality, smh.

HealerH:
Iti bolibo
The purpose of my religion is personal too.

What has your religion achieved. smh

HealerH:
This is a cowardice way of avoiding an intellectual confrontation.

I'll take that as a yes, idol worshipper.

HealerH:
It's confirmed. You're dumb

I'll reply to that question if you can tell me why you're earth.

Purpose is relative, it varies from person to person.

My purpose is personal.

So again what's the purpose of your religion?

HealerH:
You insist to die a dumb fellow.
I have told you already that my God is not a material that I can point at and show you. He doesn't have an "identity". He is in Me. Simple. To see Him is to see me and to see me is to see Him.

The same way love exists but can never be scientifically displayed is how God exist. The same way you feel love is the same way I feel my God. The same way you can't point at love as an independent being and say "this is love" is the same way I can't point at anything and say "this is my God".

I'm getting tired of your dumbness.

For all we know, you may be an idol worshipper.

HealerH:
The name of my God is Healer. My religion is Healerity.
Do you want to sow seed in my ministry? Oluku.

What is the purpose of your religion.

Martinez39s:
Sure! He is being sneaky. His refusal to give us details about his god and his religion despite opening a thread like this shows he is trying to avoid scrutiny and bash atheism. He knows his god idea and religion will be showed to be flawed, hence the game of being elusive.

Yes yes yes yes, I'm waiting for him.

Ekpemoriri99:
Thunder go fire all of una, shey na man create satan abi
Why God no go kill satan make the scene just
When satan disobey God why God no cast am to the pit of hell
But same God send wild animal to kill children wey insult pastor

Every story needs a villain.

HealerH:
Why do you insist to be dumb?

I have seen many snakes but I haven't seen anyone of them talking. Since you seem to believe a snake talks, I'll want you to give me some proof. A video won't be bad. .

What's your religion? Which god.do you worship.

HealerH:
Don't be silly.
I created this thread to plank the irrationality and the absurdity in atheism. Did you even read the thread? Nonsense.

You think atheism is absurd, but a talking snake isn't?

Martinez39s:
He is a big clown.

For him to be ashamed of mentioning his god, shows he acknowledges the flaws in his religion.

HealerH:
I don't like talking about my religion. I like living it. The best way to learn about my religion is to see me live my daily life.
Thank you.

You don't like talking about your religion but create a.thread to do just that.

HealerH:


So you cowardly avoided that last post.

I make the identity of my God abstract? God dey get identity?
Do you even know what an identity is? Tufiakwa.

You should ask me what's the nature of my God. It's simple. The nature of my God is my nature. You want to see my God, come see me. But when I'm no more, He ceases to exist "for me". (I told you I don't believe in life after death). Someone else might discover Him when I'm gone and He'll continue existing for that person. I won't be there to give a damn. For the moment, it's just He and I. What else do you want to learn kid?

This one don mad finish.

HealerH:
The name of my God is Healer. Now do you believe in Him? . Dumbness overload.

What is your god healing.

MrColdsweat:
[s][/s]

You mean you doubt if I know that atheists are fools?
Of course I do.
I know very much that atheists are fools. Afterall, I was an atheist for almost a decade. I've been on both sides, and I can tell you that there's no bigger foolishness than atheism.


When you little boys got no defense, you resort to personal attacks. Una never start.

Bro I can see you're really hurt, calling everyone foolish because they don't agree with you, sigh!

Anyway I liked your comment just make you feel better, peace.

HealerH:
Y'all should get the hell out of my post if you'll keep discussing proofs of God's existence. This post was not created to discuss that. Let whatever argument you make here have it's source from my post.

From the way you write I can already tell you're a woman, so emotional.

Well you created this thread to ridicule atheism, only to end.up being ridicule

MrColdsweat:
Gravity is a scientific theory. Science is subjective i.e subject to human observation and experience.

Even according to this science, there are frequencies you can see beyond i.e there are millions of things that happen around us that we cannot see. How then can you use your eye and observation as a yardstick for existence when you cannot see everything that happens around you?

When your tool is insufficient, do you say the job cannot be done, or do you try another tool?

You have tried logic and reasoning, they haven proven to be insufficient.

Try faith.

Which of the faith, Christian, Islam, Hindu? smh

HealerH:
[s] I said i discovered God with critical reasoning and I can boast about it before any atheist because what he was unable to do is what I did.

One lazy God-seeker came asking me to show them the God I discovered? Lol.

You called yourself a scientific thinker. Yet you ask me to show you a result of an experiment you never was present to witness. Are you telling me you'll believe this result if I present it to you?
I suppose No. I'm giving you a benefit of doubt of common sense. As a scientific thinker, you probably want to analyse the method I used to discover God and see if it respected the scientific norms of research. (This text in parentheses doesn't concern the current reflection but I'm putting it here to remind you of a very important absurdity I will be revealing in another commentator's post. The person criticised me for not taking metaphysical considerations in a reflection I did whereas everybody reading this post knows this post is targeted at atheism and atheism don't make room for metaphysics in a dogmatic way. Whereas the person I'm currently replying wants to know the scientificity in my discovery of God, another person wants to know why I didn't limit scientificity of reflection and give room to metaphysics. Confused people trying to drag me into their confusion)

Back to the current reply.
What are the scientific norms of research? I won't list them all. I'm just going to point out one that my critique is ignorant of. It is the norm which demands that the same apparatus/apparati used in an experiment be used in any other experiment that wants to ascertain the authenticity of the first experiment. Now the fundamental apparatus I used in discovering God is my reason. Someone is asking me to give them the result of my experiment so that they can verify it with their own reason. Anyone told you reason has a scientifically determined universal standard? Are you not a quack scientist for not knowing this?

I stated it clearly in my post that each person make their experience of God (discover God) in a relative way that can never ever be universalized. And in all my text, you never found me universalising any particular experience made of God.



Another person countered my scientific comparison of "adherence without proof" to one's maternity and to God. He said the two are two different things that should never be conpared. Lol.
This is the commentator I meant when I said someone criticised me for not making room for metaphysics in my analysis. Now let me hit him the akpako of wisdom.

First off, bear in mind the object of my reflections is the philosophy of atheism. And I stated in the beginning of my text that atheism is a failed attempt to discover God with reason and this attempt rejects FAITH (Metaphysics). I'm on this post to confront atheism on their own terrain. My terrain is fundamentally metaphysical (I'm one of the most profound metaphysicians to ever walk on earth. Help me drink 200 liters of water if you feel I boast a lot). I refused to use my main weapon (metaphysics) to confront atheism. I used pure science that was 100% percent constructed on reason.

I used universal laws of science/reason in my confrontations (I don't know where else to insert this peace of knowledge so I try to put it here. I hope it doesn't digress from the current discussion. It's about the nature of scientific method. Do you know, science don't give a damn what your result is. What interests science is the procedure that led to your result. That's why this fellow is not asking me to show him the God I discovered so he can believe in him but because he wants to analysis the procedures I used). Lemme show you one or two examples of a universal scientific law before going on.
1+1=2. This fact is true anywhere on earth (anyone who defies it does it through dogmatism). Anywhere on this planet, whatever you throw up must fall down to earth (whoever tells you otherwise is being dogmatic and tell that person to get the hell out of my post). Anything on this planet that is corporal must have mass and occupy some space. These are universal scientific laws. Atheists adhere to them and I decided to have this intellectual rendezvous with them on these laws.
Now the problem I discovered in atheism was not specifically on these laws: it was in the reverse version of the laws. If one of the universal laws of science stated that whatever is thrown up must fall down, the reverse version implies that whatever that fell down MUST have been thrown up. These is where atheists made a caricature of themselves.
To formulate this reverse version in words, it means that «anything that is in motion started from somewhere» and this "somewhere" must have an experimental proof before the experimental truth of it's destination can be accepted. Atheism rejects a definitive affirmation on the "somewhere" of existence because they all know it is above reason. It is purely metaphysical. Then they try their best to find out the "to where" (destination) of existence. Can someone come from nowhere and arrive at somewhere? Common sense is not that common fellas.
I think I've digressed a lot already on this commentary.

The bottom-line of my lines here is that I am criticising a scientific atheism with scientific reasoning. You're typing off-point if you start criticising me with metaphysics. And the scientific criticism I put forward to atheism on maternal certainty is that this latter is unscientific and inadmissible as truth because no one experienced their mom giving birth to them. We all simply believed and had faith that the woman we call our Mom gave birth to us.

Now if you suddenly realised that existence is fundamentally metaphysical and that one must bring in an absolute being from the back-door of reason and live existence in accordance to the principles of this absolute being, why not bring in the absolute being and live your life? Why do you refuse to do it yet you are certain it needs to be done?
If you're not certain it must be done, (that is, that one's existence is determined by his idea of an absolute being) why did you criticise me saying I shouldn't compare maternity certainty with divine certainty because the admission of the latter determines the teleology of one's existence? Are you not being confused and lazy?
And are you not being a quack scientist by refusing metaphysics in the universal laws of science yet admit metaphysics in this scientific reflection I did?

I don't run away from metaphysics. It's my specialty. I'm simply being scientific in my reflection because that's the language understandable to atheists. So if you want to criticise my reflections, remain strictly on scientific criticism. If you want a metaphysical reflection on existence, go create a trade on that and invite me. I promise to give you one of the greatest metaphysical lessons ever given. Just chose a side and stick to it. Stop being shaky.





And all these ones making debate about proof of God's existence and which religion is the true religion. Get the hell out of my trade!!! I'm not here to discuss God's existence you wannabes. None of your religions interests me. Go create your own trade and discuss your God and your religion. Stop making a joke of my wisdom!

I'm here to confront the rationality in atheistic apologies. Every comment should revolve around this topic and not your mediocre religions.

Peace [/s]

Trash

MrColdsweat:
I advice you to go and properly educate yourself so that you can drop valid arguments during discussions of this sort, instead of trolling and embarrassing yourself.


You atheists just find some few things you find inconsistent in the bible, then you make silly conclusions on Gods existence. Then you start believing you are smart. Here I am, trying to educate you on the shortcomings of your tools and why they can never do the job, you are still asking me to use your tools. Is this not foolishness?

Are there proofs of God's existence? Yes of course, but you atheists wouldn't know this because you're busy littering the cyberspace with your arrogance and foolishness.

Go and check Wikipedia for ontological proofs of God's existence and stop embarrassing yourself.

] I can see the truth hurt, but you're on the right path though.

First it will provoke you, then set you free.

MrColdsweat:
Read properly next time.

My post was not to prove God's existence. It was to show the stupidity of atheism.

Just as scientific truths has its methodologies i.e hypothesis, observation etc. Divine truths has its own methodology, which is faith. And these divine truths are gotten by visions, revelations, dreams etc.

Atheists are being foolish using the metrics and workings of accessing scientific truths for divine truths. You want us to give you scientific proof of God's existence so that you can prove and experiment God in a lab.

Logic and science get where e go work anf where e no go work.

Accessing God is only through faith. I'm not saying this because the bible said so. I'm saying this because this is a common thing we experience in our everyday lives. It is only through faith something new.


Those scientists who are working tirelessly in the lab, trying to find a cure for cancer or HIV, are they not working with faith?

Do they not have faith that a cure exist? Is it not that faith that drives them to the extreme?

Faith is far much more deeper and more important than you think. Faith is the first step to every invention. With faith you get new knowledge. That is why German philosopher Immanuel Kant declared "I had to do away with knowledge, to make room for faith."

Atheists will never find God because of their insistence on the wrong tools.

Proves and evidences are malleable. They don't count when it comes to divine truths.

If you, alone, saw a man wearing diamonds all around his body, and you tell your friends what you saw, and they dont believe you, and you are unable to prove to your friends and convince them of what you saw, does that mean you didn't see the man wearing diamonds?


Proofs mean nothing. Go to a law court and see how lawyers fabricate good proofs to defend the most absurd cases.


Go and study about this thing called faith, hopefully you'll understand why faith is the only way to the divine.

In other words you can't prove your God exist, but you believe because of "faith". cool