₦airaland Forum

.

legalwealth:
It is easycliq line that gives 10% on every recharge and 100% bonus on data purchased.

Which network are you using?

MTN

Please, are there any restrictions on the bonus data? Could you please break down the steps on how to accumulate that much data on Etisalat?

-Lord

legalwealth:
Wow! !!
Etisalat Nigeria just dashed me 500MB to be used for 7 days whereas they as well do give me over 20GB for just N9,000.
Thanks to etisalat!

Had it been MTN;the stingy network provider can copy them,accessing the Internet in Nigeria must have been more superb.

Besides,have you been given any FREE MB as well?If yes,how many MB or Gig?

How is that you get "over 20GB for just N9000" on Etisalat? I'd really like to know, and if you can't share it on here, then shoot me a mail.

That I admit is a better package than the N8000 -- 7.5GB + 5GB (12:30 AM to 4:30 PM) subscription I use currently.

-Lord

Nokia did what was best for business! The MS deal was awful because MS was the other party holding the pen not because Nokia didn't make a calculated decision.

Android OS was free to use, meaning hundreds of OEMs to compete with. If instead we choose to go with the top 5 that command the Android sub-smartphone industry, we're still talking tight-end competition with lower per-unit net margins.

Windows mobile OS was captivating (at least the preview sort of opened up that box), and believe it or not AndroidOS (with material design), iOS (7+), BB 10 have all taken inspiration from WinP 8 flat design.

Nokia wanted to make the best of that opportunity and initially made a break for it, throwing Samsung and HTC off balance in WP and cementing their place as the leader. Their only dilemma was that iOS and AndroidOS were still on an upward march. Very different from the Symbian era when they ruled supreme with nothing to worry about from other OSes.

Nokia WP phones have the best cameras in the smartphone world, the build of the high-end devices are impressive and would take Samsung lines of phone from S3-S5 to the cleaners (and stand toe-in with HTC and Sony). Take the Lumia 1020 and 1520 as case studies.

The Windows store is empty no longer, and the OS emphasizes why UX is of prime importance in how pleasurable it is to use.

For those asking why Nokia did not go on the Android track while sticking with Windows like Samsung, it'd interest you to know that Nokia had Android prototypes before they signed on with Microsoft. They did a couple of in-house deliberations and the board ratified that WP was the best option after all pros and cons had been chewed on. Additionally, it is myopic to believe that with Microsoft paying Nokia to use the WP OS, and using them as the face of WP (Microsoft WP ads used Nokia Lumia phones n surface pro tabs) they wouldn't have a clause in the contract that prohibited Nokia from building phones with the Android OS baked in. If I was the one making the deal, I'll add that clause in plain n simple terms. Sure the Nokia X, n XL try to put a lid on this theory, but not really. The OS on both phones were WP styled with an Android kernel, reason why without rooting both phones, run-off-the-mill android apps could not work on it. Another reason is that the timing of the device launch was at when Microsoft n Nokia had called it quits on their previous arrangement, opting for a buy-in/sell-out for Microsoft/Nokia respectively.

Yes, it's a shame that Nokia is slowly dwindling out of the mobile phone industry, we'd miss them, but it doesn't mean we'll stagnate. Businesses don't stay forever, iOS n Android will soon hit the burner, all it takes is for one fella to bring up something we didn't think we had need of until it was brought up, some risk-hog OEM to adopt it, major OSes downplay it, and FTW we're all screwing over our fan-boy flags and switching on either as early-adopters or smoothing off with the wind of change.

And finally, why can't you all Android peeps do BB a whole lot of good by not dragging them into every 'fail' smartphone discussion. BB 10 is as smooth as iOS, with same power in the hood as Android devices (Check out Z30 specs and the upcoming Passport). BB has the enterprise market under her belt (an insurance package), still has a service quality we will never grow tired of--security (Apple with more than half a trillion dollars in valuation couldn't keep some raspy hacker from iCloud photos. And are our memory so short-lived to forget PRISM?). For the app-huggers, take this: 90% of Android apps can be sideloaded on BB 10.2, BB10.3 to increase that count. That's a highly diverse app ecosystem by any measure.

The Blackberry Passport will be my switch from BBOS7 to BB 10, I'd still hold my LG G3 close by (I'm not close-minded). Having four competing OSes is best for all of us, at least we'd be sure our preferred OS will make devices that touch on our complaints (eg Apple making big-sized phones, adding NFC; essentially proving Steve Jobs wrong when he asserted that "no one will ever use big sized phones" himself forgetting that the 3.5" debut iPhone was itself a big sized phone by 2008 standards), and if they don't listen we make our switch (eg Blackberry previously asserting that touch screens were a fad). This is in preference to one or two major OSes dictating the pace and insulting us to our face when we demand for a feature and we're replied with "We don't think you need what you're demanding": Da F***!

Coming from a BB 9860, iPad Air, and LG G3 user...

ladywriter: @Nchewi, while i was in Nigeria, i used Glo. (I reside in Ghana now and i am still using Glo). I was using the 6Gig then, which was around N5,000.00 and I had a generator that was always running (at least when NEPA took light). Then (2012), I was making around $400 (then the exchange rate was N157.00) so multiply 400 x 157 = N62,800.00 / month, so if i remove my N5,000 internet data cost and another N5,000 for fuel. I will still have N52,800.00. Nepa and internet data cost should not be an issue, if you are determined to succeed. I upgraded my skills and now I make much more than that. That is one vital thing about making money online, you don't sit still, there are thousand and one opportunities of making money. The more knowledge you have and put to use, the more money you make.

What I don't get though is the recent trend in Nairaland of the lost treasure of "writing gigs". I don't suppose it's awful, African writers who get the spotlight are often from South Africa, and Kenya. So, adding Nigeria to the mix doesn't sound bad. Especially with Paypal dropping the whole criminal scare, and the apparent benefits of more cash entering the economy.

But hey, it's not all joie de vivre for tyro writers, writing is almost always a starting out gig to earning online, so it should be taken as such (unless you feel strongly about writing and take it as a profession). $1000 sounds like a good estimate, but unless you've got some amazing writing skills (hard for the average educated nigerian) and a bit of luck in finding good clients ready to take you up on the grim possibility that you're a newbie writer with a difference, you'd most likely hover around the $300-$600/mo mark. And even with that, you'd still have to churn articles at finger-blistering rate, doing runs of several hours at a time.

Okay, so that may come off as scary, but look at the bright side, at $300/mo you'd be earning 2.5 times the minimum wage, and at $600/mo, you can make a joke of a bank teller with a straight face. Oh, and as a Nigerian, you can tough it out on the challenges.

And just a few tips to pocket, don't just market your writing skills, market yourself. I could keep going for hours on the importance of marketing yourself, but I wouldn't like to walk down that road. Just know that it's important.

Still on tips, think outside the box to increase your earnings: for example, taking on more work than usual and outsourcing while keeping a tangible profit is bedding ground to owning your own writing agency. Find a good web developer/designer and some SEO expert to be part of your team and a single invoice of yours could go into four figures. That's just one idea, investing your cash in something worthwhile online or offline can safeguard your lifestyle with passive income.

And if you're feeling like Soros, you can think as though there's no box, bludgeon into something you previously knew little to nothing about [but looks promising], and rip-off as much as you can from it while others are taking numbers in queue.

And finally a word out to the OP, many great writers I know carrying the craft online are ladies. Makes writing online feel like nursing profession-wise, but this ain't about stereotyping, I'm just going to give you a thumbs up. Good work trying to genuinely help folks, not all of us are cut out for that.

~Lord

arbitrage: Can a Virtual Private Service (VPS) provider increase your internet connection service speed through their Virtual Private Network (VPN) server that you are connected through for anonymous browsing? I asked this question because ordinarily, VPN service is meant for you to connect to online resources and websites that will not allow your primary country IP to connect. For example, to use US PayPal account or enjoy some Netflix video services and such like from Nigerian internet connection (e.g. Swift Networks or Airtel), you must "hide" your Nigerian IP to be able to connect to such USA-targeted website. But when you now visit the VPN networks' sites to use their free or pay for foreign IP address VPN service (like openVPN, anonymox, HideMyAss, etc), they often advertise various high speed connectivity in several Mbps as you can see 16 Mbps in my attachment below. Is that true that they can really increase my speed if I subscribe to their service, knowing that they are not my original and primary ISP but our regularly sluggish MTN, Airtel or Swift? If my Nigerian ISP connection is just 56 kbps, can a VPN server connection give me their advertised speed when my real IP connection is natively slow? Share your idea please. I often hear people talk of other VPN tunnelling tools like myfreedom as being fast. Is it the tunnelling connection that makes it faster or my Nigerian ISP must be fast in itself to get a reasonable speed from VPN proxy connection?

Okay, so I'm not exactly that knowledgeable about networking to give you the technical details. But that's a good thing, because at least you'd get to understand my point faster.

Now to the question, the simple answer is that VPNs don't exactly increase your speed. Speed could appear faster if they ran cloud services or optimized their caching system (like the difference in speed between browsing with firefox and maxthon). But something as dramatic as increasing your 58kbps connection to 100kbps is not achievable.

Well, as to the reason behind setting up supposed misleading ads, the ads are for those with high speed connections who'd like to not have to sacrifice their speed for the immediate benefit of the VPN.

High-speed connections going as high as 100Mbps are all the rage in the developed world, getting 16Mbps would sound petty but usable to a subscriber from that part of the world. We on the flip-side of the globe with top-speed connections only going as high 10Mbps, would see that (the VPN's 16Mbps speed ad) as a good thing, simply because we'd be able to "max" out our connection.

Finally, the top VPN providers are on top of their game on this one, faster SSD servers are becoming cheaper, better caching modules are been developed by independent teams, the efficacy of server management is getting better. All of this hold high promises of better speeds for VPN users, but not high enough if you're stuck with a low-speed connection (your example of 58KBps comes to mind).

~Lord

arbitrage: I couldn't believe it as I resumed the PayPal services on my site, cashlander, instead of the past personal PayPal account transfers that led to fund reversals in April. Another nairalander who used a lady name, Mary Ajayi, with USA PayPal account Linda Dyer, ldyer58884@AOL.com just collected my naira few days ago for the $518 he sent, only to submit chargeback to PayPal yesterday. Can you see how fraudulent and dubious Nigerians can be? The former guy who claimed his sister was robbed in the US on her way to send moneypak to him for my payback of PayPal reversals is still nowhere to be found. May God help us!

I sure hope he does. I'm always disgusted my chargeback scams, still, in all honesty it's the crime culture, just about anyone can do it.

If you've had most of your business relationships with Asians, you'd see they're considerably worse off. Indians give me the scare anytime, and for all the wrong reasons.

So, as a matter of fact, I think you should protect yourself and your business, knowing bad eggs would always find their way into a good basket.

It's good news he didn't succeed, I wish ya the best as well as the lots of honest Nigerians online going about their business genuinely.

~Lord

Quite frankly, I'm sick of the Israeli-Arab romance or fiasco or whatever it is.

Still the fundamental issue here is that, Israel has stolen the fundamental rights of the Palestinians. And while the West can scream foul about China's grip on Taiwan (that is doing way better than Palestine by the way), they've gone all dumb on Palestine's predicament.

But that's alright, because they've always been double-standard sniveling a-holes since world power moved to Europe, a number of millenia ago.

Governments are always going to have their own selfish agenda, and would overlook crimes committed by their allies, same like parents defending their kids even when they're blatantly wrong. It's human nature, another important and I believe more moral human nature is to develop empathy for those that are caught in the storm.

This conflict would last for only God knows how long, the less innocent women and kids who get to die, the better for my conscience.

~Lord

arbitrage: Go to cashlander.com

Hello bro. I sent you a message, please get back to me at your earliest convenience.

Vavavoom: Excellent response. One thing citizens can do is to take hold and drive the process via a forum. We can look at what has worked somewhere( SA, Egypt...mortgage exist for as low as 2,700 Rand/month! for a new car) else, factor in variable economic indices and put forward our proposal to government for consideration. We shouldn't ALLOW the investors ( banks, government, and assembly plant owners) to toss us wherever they choose to lean. Let us join them in the policy via a protection council.

Nice input. But I'm afraid of the effectiveness of setting up such a council in our 'fine' country. I've thought hard about the idea, and all I can seem to crank up is the many ways this can easily fall apart or lose credibility.

I'm still hopeful though and if there's any of such council, I'd like to know, probably be part of what goes on there. For a country that has given us a banner to live under for the last 5 decades, a lot of us sure don't care about her trajectory.

~LordAdam

anonimi: While I agree that a car should not be a luxury, IMHO a car should not be the means for EVERYDAY transport.
Our state & LGAs should live up to their constitutional RESPONSIBILITY of providing COMFORTABLE, sustainable MASS transit system of buses, light rails, metros, underground, boats, ferries etc to move people DAILY to/fro work & their businesses while TAXING HEAVILY those who want to use their cars (driving alone) into MULTIPLE city centres.

This is the way of the future because we cannot continue to have traffic jams/go-slows with the attendant soci-economic & environmental costs it implies.

Your post highlights a roadmap to a Nigeria of 2-3 decades from now. I'm piping on what's obtainable in a few years time.

You've got a brilliant idea. But it's like making regulations for newer foreign investors looking to set up industries, to compulsorily use more green initiatives than is pragmatic or pay heavy taxes. Of course that makes for a good show of eco-conscience, but that's simply counter-intuitive when we haven't gotten to respectable level of industrialization yet.

Cars are not just meant to commute people to work, you can't rule out the convenience of having a family going out on the weekends or to a place of religious worship in a moderately-sized sedan or SUV.

A larger percentage of the national budget caters for recurrent expenditure, much larger than that earmarked for capital expenditure. And I get that you were referring to the state/local governments, still I'm guessing the stats won't be too far apart.

Let's take things slow. Nigeria is changing, and those who care to observe could tell. Contrary to what some might want us believe, it's not pegged on any one person. I see good stuff in opposition-held states and same good stuff in other states. Let's make this work, I'm not saying we should forsake our ideologies of how the country should be run, but think of it--politics benefits the politicians, what the rest of us get is the crumbs.

If anyone still wants to play their drum, fine by me (I've got my own pills to swallow) and I hope he or she gets something tangible in return. Personally, I just think we should mark our scripts and advocate for what's right for us as individuals, our families and our fellow countrymen.

~LordAdam

Double post.

I too look forward to having the Germans set up plants, although I'm sure they'd be watching closely for the outcome of this "Korean rush-hour", before committing millions of Euros into setting up plants here.

As far as the price goes, I don't mind paying the same price of previously imported cars for Assembled-in-Nigeria cars, since the money would go into creating more jobs, and increasing the nation's revenue.

A car shouldn't be a luxury, an average earner should be able to purchase one (new or used). I'm looking up to the dealers to tag up with the banks to structure a financing option where even the civil servants can acquire a car without coughing out their savings. Say an installment-based package. I know some packages of this sort already exist, but most of them I've reviewed are way out of the reach of the average earners.

Things are beginning to shape well for the country, now let's hope the political-backed milieu of security challenges hit the back burner.
~LordAdam

Sagamite: person, trust me, I don't need to strike about salary.

How I no go fit chop when I know more about patient care than you that call yourself a "Doctor"?

I know you have reached the point and I know it hurts. Awwwwn!

https://www.nairaland.com/1407845/expatriates-indepth-analysis-corruption-nigeria/10#17679651

I always do my best to get people to that point early.

Thanks for the link.

~Lord

arbitrage: Go to CashLander.com to buy and sell your funds at N195 and N150 respectively.

Used the website for withdrawal. Please check your mail. I've forwarded the details there.

Peterken05: @lord adam, can you pls leave him alone, i know his type

Yes I would. I've grown sick of replying him!

KenGali: Easy queasy!!!!!
You spent your time up there telling me about how things are organised without providing a single proof about who or what did the consistent organisation we see everywhere. What crap are you talking about essence.

Of course when you look at an internal combustion engine, it seems perfectly logical to have something for ignition, some timing rod, or even a crank shaft, except someone made it carefully. Similarly. When you look at that the sun, our great nuclear reactor and all the harmful rays it spews, it seems logical to have a shield, the ozone, but again someone thought of it.

When I tell you that I spent more than half my life studying intelligent designs, I mean my science class, so have no doubt about my education. How ever on your own side, I think you need to go beyond classical theories, to appreciate my view point. Classical Mechanics is only a subset of a much larger Reality. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed is just a classical theory, I believe I spoke about something different, the inter convertibility of energy and matter, the famous E=MC^2 from Einstein, the dual paradox of light photons behaving like particles and again like waves, or the ability of gravity to attract and prevent escape of light in black holes. Do get yourself up to date, am sure when you do and appreciate how complex and beyond classical theories the world is, you will appreciate intelligent design.

Last you want to retain beliefs until you can prove otherwise. Yet you are here talking about Atheism without any conclusive proof or alternative evidence of non-conscious processes that randomly and intelligently design complex functioning entities. Do yourself a favour and take your own advise, stick to what is obvious and leave elusive shadows.

I hope you can see that if I extend your argument above about the Pyramids of Egypt, you can also not conclude that they were not built by Aliens, which is the equivalent of Atheist saying there is no God without any solid scientific proof. Finding contradiction in religious text is not a proof that there is no God.

Hate to start off as a grammar nazi, but that's "easy peasy". What do you mean by proof of what brought the organization about? The Library of Congress is overflowing with scholarly papers if you need more proof. Mind you, I'm not jumping into conclusions, none of us was here when the Big Bang occurred, heck there was no earth then. Hence, in science we speculate. We look at physical reasons to support a theory and the more confident we are about an assertion the more we critique it. Today, scientists still debate about what caused the Big bang, when it happened, how long it took Earth to become habitable and what has transpired on earth from then till now: that's science, rationally seeking out possibilities and backing them up. And as far as we know, no one can say for certain--100%-- that they knew exactly how any of those events went down. That's a far cry from your convenient sit-on-a-rocking-chair it just has to be God, and I'm 100% certain.

While science's usual stance is, this is as much as we know and are open to different opinions now or in the future as long they follow universally accepted standards: religion says, we don't need that, we're certain--there's no need to disturb our minds.

Yuck, classical theories are meant to bring science into layman perspective, so don't excuse my preference for simplicity as a weakness. Einstein's theory on relativity is about to eat the dust, no thanks to the Huge-LQG. The Huge-LQG is the first super structure to be discovered, it is approximately four billion light years across and in a mean way debunks the cosmopolitan principle that one large part of the universe looks like another large part. Previous estimates of the largest part to fit this theory were at about 1 billion light years wide, the Huge-LQG shot a laser through that figure. I'd hate to turn this to a science debate, but if a big new idea like this came up in established religion, trust me there'd be a split in a modest scale or blown-up conflict in the worst-case scenario.

And yes, there is a considerable number of religious scientists in the world, but that number is diminishing at a rate that'd make the Inquisitionists cringe in their grave. Not to mention that the next generation of scientists who are part of more liberalizations and societal awakenings are either debunking the God phenomenom or just staying conservative while questioning established religion.

If you took a poll in a top-notch research facility in any of the G8 nations, you'd be surprised at the number of people who don't go to any religious place of worship even though their CV might read Christianity, Islam, Hindu or whatever under religion. If you're so dumb as to not know what that means, I'd help you--skip this religious freedom shit you stand more chances on losing funding if your supervisor learned you believe in Intelligent design in preference to evolution. In fact, there's been countless cases of victimization reports by religious folks in the realm of the specialized sciences.

Sure you may see Christian doctors, Hindu chiropractors; but in the deep realm of science, you're either for God or for science. Ever heard of don't bring God into my lab/office. You can ascribe open scientific sources to Intelligent design, I couldn't care less. But do not label them as proof, nor do you in any way imply that religion and science are buddies, especially in contemporary times.

Ain't giving you another reply. I'm not trying to convince you to drop Intelligence design, that's a wasted effort. I'm just concerned about how you'd come on a puublic forum and say a self-sustaining universe functioning at the observable moment without any external influence is proof that God exists. It's ridiculous and misleading. And then to question your hypocrisy in thinking it best to devoid yourself of religion while still encouraging it's usefulness or remotely stating that it is necessary for a better society. If it's so great, why not stick with it? God may not be evil, but religion that I know, understand and see is very evil. It kills, maims, murders, as well as incite people to commit all manner of ills that'd dumbfound a conclave of the most vicious gods ever worshiped.

4b+ people are still held in religious shackles, we don't want any new ones in Science. So take your ideas to a college forum of religious theologians, you'd be more appreciated there.

KenGali: Again you are mixing religious tolerance with secularism. Secondly you seem to think that only atheist are Scientific. Kindly note that some of the fundamental advances in mathematic were made by Moslem scholars. That you were told that the time saw tolerance of non religious view does not translate that the view holders where not religious. You mentioned Newton, note that his treatise on the falling apple is one of the fundamental ideas used by theologians in concluding the existence of God.
Galileo was more a victim of an age that was not open to ideas than the Christian religion. The bible texts as written in the book of Genesis is totally compatible with Galileo's ideas. The religious men were simply sticking to there own interpretation and ideas of the universe, while Galileo had an Alternative which did not contrast with his belief. I hope you know Galileo was a very religious man. A devote Catholic.

So your write up is mixing a lot of ideas together. On one hand you sound like you are advocating religious tolerance, which I am for. Then you switch to the idea that religion is the only problem to advancement. Without basis of course, as most of the advancement you reference were made by highly religious man. If you were in the dark ages you will still be proud to have lived then, since you will have no idea of a more advanced life. Just like in future, some people will be looking back at us an deride the kinds of political wars we fight today and the mayhem. Do not mix up human advancement as a prize for non-religiousness, especially when you have no basis to make such conclusions. scientist all over the world are still by huge portion religious people. While we enjoy more freedom of ideas, there is still room for conservatism in the face of our new abilities to wake up long extinct species and even blow up our own planet.

How convenient of you to attribute Newton's and the Muslim mathematicians to the background of religion being okay, why dismissing Galileo as an unfortunate victim who although was religious, was still victimized by established religion. A round of applause for you. Galileo would easily have been killed for apostasy if he had dare question core religious beliefs, so eat you hat about him being a victim. And sure delve into the history books and understand Newton as a philosopher than a highly placed noble in the religious sphere: much of Newton's classical respect would be gone if he had dare made his personal convictions public. His wikipedia profile would serve as a primer.


It's no surprise you don't see a link between multi-religiousness and secularism, afterall you think the birth and death of stars is proof of God. I've clearly wasted my time trying to establish a fundamental link between both concepts. I'd ask you then, how long has Secularism existed as part of the human society?

Again, since you're so adamant to the increasing intelligence of mankind at just about the same time of diminishing levels of religiousness among people, I'd give you a shocking reminder: it is the norm in science to regard evolution as a basis for further advancement--from the documentaries, to the movies, the media, the government, academia, you can't get big research funds, high viewer ratings, public support if you don't agree that we are nearing ANOTHER ice age with a number of them occurring before humans evolved. That's of course if you're not in a third-world country with shocking levels of primitive inclinations and beliefs.

Mudley313: That nigga bible god even condones slavery which your white slave masters used in forcing your mumu-self to accept his religion without the use of your god given brain to think about the ridiculousness of the bible

And to think that the blacks were preached to and accepted the Whites as their masters is the worst form of racial conditioning. Today, the majority of the descendants of these abused blacks of old, stay conditioned to the same lies told their ancestors. Still scared of asking questions like their ancestors. Still maintaining the thought process that caused and supported slavery.

Today we preach Pan-Africanism and want to accept heroes of freedom as our own, when we are afraid to speak out for ourselves or question the status quo.

This is a painful paragon of the phenomenom that explains why Adult Elephants stay attached to trees by chains used when they were very much younger. You spit on the shallow graves of the victims of slave trade, when you tell yourself, I have no right to ask questions. This singular reason is why I wouldn't grace this thread with my presence again. The level of unresponsiveness, gullibility and utter disregard for rationality on the altar of religion is shocking. It therefore begs of reason that if the Muslims had invaded us down south during the Caliphate-expansion, we'd be as gullible as those up north, and probably have a few on here who would be willing to blow themselves up for their beliefs--after all how dare you ask questions.

Mee234: Me not seeing or finding your link between morals and empathy should not make me ur beleaguerer. When you empathize with some one, you are caring even loving that some one. That is different from keeping to the norms of your society. Moral is subjective. Right or wrong depend on place and time. Homosexuality is considered taboo in some society while some consider it freedom. U are prob'ly seeing a link between the two concept because u don't want to think that morality comes from somewhere.
my take is, some one can be good or bad without empathizing. It's not alway fear, it is the value place on deeds. If you place enough high value on good( depending on what ur soceity accept as good) deed, u will do good hence have good morals.

Maybe you need to read through our previous discussions to stay on topic. There's a link between morals and empathy. I said sure, you said not true. I've also told you that this is complex, but establishing a fundamental link is vital to understanding morals.

Giving replies to your points would lead this discussion elsewhere. Most universal morals like not committing murder impinges on empathy, I'm least concerned about local norms or customs because they're bound to change as well as have a significant number of people who dismiss societal norms.

The fact that our contemporary society frowns on homosexuality does not signal my respect for the disapproval, nor make me accept it (the disapproval) as my morals. When I discuss morals, I discuss it on the individual scale, not communal - which tends to be boggled up.

On an individual scale, and using my self as an example, I would not steal because of empathy for the person I'd be stealing from. And most times, when parents discipline, caution or try to instill morals in their kids, they do so by establishing the implicating rather than consequential reason why they (the kids) should adhere to the morals--especially when they're able to comprehend rationality.

We are adults on here, some of us have children, some are yet to: the more we give good empathic reasons to stick with certain morals the less we'd go against them. That my friend is the link between empathy and morals.

danarchy4: Before you ask about the ark, find out where the hair on your head comes from, same with nails and teeth, find out how a tiny drop of sperm could mutate into bones and giants in after time, how the earth is suspending on the atmosphere with 5 billion souls, the force that wakes a death man after mentioning Jesus name,,,, instead of giving your life to Christ, keep fooling ur self by asking silly questions.

How old are you? Product of a failed education system.

[quote author=n_armani]haha!!! Are you for real?? what magic do you think could divide the red sea? I'm pretty much curious o. so magic is now your standards for believing?? if it can't be achieved via magic, forget it, right?
Lord help us.[/quote]There's magic mate, miracles don't happen only in the Bible. According to an account in the Bible, Pharaoh's sorcerer's were also able to turn sticks to snakes (what kind of magic did they use). One thing is believing in God, one thing is believing in certain powers that be, that can be harnesses regardless of your belief.

The Ark story is subject to refute, it was narrated as an actual event instead of a miracle (which would make you argue spiritual). A ark the size mentioned in the Bible can not accommodate at least a pair of all land animals known today not to mention those extinct or yet to be discovered.

It's plausible that this is a fable.

[quote author=simon.jo]True there is need for an examination of the Bible. A thorough examination of the Bible have proved that it is 100% accurate. You can examine the facts for yourself.
Meanwhile you didn't give any fact to disprove Noah's Ark.[/quote]When was it proven? By whom? Show me a link or a book, maybe I missed something. All I've seen is a continuum of outrageous claims that'd only be accepted by like-religious minds. So-called Christian Scientists can make mind-boggling exertions because they're trying to proof based on the bible not willing to entertain any questioning. This evidently creates a lot of holes.

Now if you choose to chew on that cherry-picked puke, fine by me. Just don't make baseless stats on a public forum.

Lord

elvis10ten: Nice. Let me add in a little stuff, for a web based start up. Most of the the time (about 95% or so), your idea is not a unique or new stuff. Thousands of people might have thought about it and some might be implementing it.


Next, please know your limitation, don't try to be a jack of all trade. Then look for a co-founder that share the same dream or is not interested more in cash but to make a cool and successfull product. He will have to cover up your limitation. Mark zuckerberg did that, but in his case he got a C.O.O .

When you want to hire a web developer, you should hire one that can build a great website but as simple as anything to use. Oh i almost forgot scalability, efficiency, blah. You won't just hire a joomla freak or some other guys to get you a site at 15k. You would also need atleast a basic knowledge of the some technical stuff.

Forget about some stuff you read on techcrunch, etc. The stuff there and here are quite different.

Great additions. However, about the stuff on Techcrunch, don't exactly forget them, just keep them in mind.

If and when your web-based startup becomes successful, those stuff would apply to you. For example, the guys in Jumia, OLX, IrokoTV use those stuff on Techcrunch and more, else it'd be hyper-difficult to secure VC funding.

I get the point, and it's not my intention to mislead the OP or a reader: start off simple along the lines of the comment I quoted (things are always different here), but keep the best practices stuff from Techcrunch in mind (or so you can remember your diary, evernote, Skydrive, GoogleDrive etc); so when you're successful you'd apply them.

The world is going global, and I do hope we join the train rather than make ours, same way we want our Universities to be like them, we should try to model our businesses (more like in the long-term) to fit worldwide best practices. It's more applicable for web-startups.

Just my 2 cents. Actually just take it with a grain of salt.

Lord

vincencior: For pets sake why would someone question the way God does his things? If christain, i mean real christians would believe that God send christ to us and believe in everything he does including the teachings about the kingdom of God and the miracles he performed, then i see no reason for this argument. Maybe i am mistaken some people who comment on this thread as true christians. May God deliver us all especially the iniator of this thread.

Why must you be this gullible? Ask questions mister, it's different when you say I believe it's this way but can't prove it, than it's recorded by supposed men of God and so must be true.

If you ask your professor questions, why can't you ask your Preacher? According to the Bible, God communicated with his prophets, they asked him questions and he answered, the answers may have not been recorded, but surely if those guys can, you too can. Stop this laity conditioning, if you can't give reasonable reasons why you believe certain things, then you need to relinquish your certificate--it's hard to think you asked your lecturer any questions.

I'm sure that God (if he exists) would want you to know, possibly understand him. If you don't think so, then you worship a God that doesn't exist.

Certainly, some dudes here need adult supervision around sharp objects. Not to sound like I'm mocking but it's astonishing what people believe.

That an ark a little larger than two standard-sized football fields contained at least a pair of all the Animals that exist. Presently, a pair of all the animals existing, excluding those extinct or yet to be discovered, can not fit into the ark.

Then let's say a relatively smaller number of the animals existing where taken in, and the many different species and kinds we know today were offsprings of those select few, how is that not evolution?

I don't want to boggle myself down by the many intricasies that make this story fictitious. There's a sharp divide between Moses dividing the Red Sea (which can be done by magic) and Noah building an ark that accommodated all living animals.

I've had a good laugh reading through this thread, some of us have not read Jewish literature (that gave birth to the bible) you'd rofl like you'd do if you read an authentic Greek record of fables.

Serve God not for what he has, can or will do, but because you value what you have around you and want to be a beacon of joy, hope, tolerance, understanding and critical thinking; especially in times like this when people like to blame others for their misfortune or tend to be shockingly irrational.

Trying to prove God exists is foolhardy, because he most probably might not be what you posit him to be, nor do the vices you take as proofs remain infallible (a hole has/can be punched in anything you bring as proof).

roymary: I would not be replying you nor your likes if i do not tolerate/ have mutual respect. No iota of insult/disrespect in all i have written. Its all in your mind-

If you are not able to enumerate your points vividly- You might as well ignore my comments.

Religion aside, i do not see the sensible logic in homosexuality. Its a failed invention and nothing genuinely productive has come out of it. You are not going to shove that insanity down my throat. Its a disorder and anyone that indulges in such act should seek physical and spiritual help.

Logic has failed the world hence the uprisings and nauseating acts that flies here and there. You are your own person and i would not choose for you---So bigotry is trivial at the end of the day.

It annoys me that people are so adamant to present acceptable notions. No wonder certain folks over here think the UK and Britain are the same, and some folks in the West think that Africa is a country. Come on, read and make research. Take a painstaking effort to ask yourself important questions.

Enough of the ranting, the APA (American Psychological Association) accepts that Homosexuality is not an illness.

www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
www.psychiatry.org/lgbt-sexual-orientation

These are .org non-profit websites and you can research more locally at a library (if you have access to one that'd provide you witha dequate resources).

It's derogatory to call it an invention, it is not, and you're wrong homosexuals have led happy lives because their homosexuality has led them to persons, communities that love them and treat them as people with rights. That's genuinely productive especially when there're lots of suicides and depression from people who are not happy with their lives.

It's no surprise you think Logic has failed the world when you think Homosexuality is a disorder or requires spiritual help (as if to regard it as a beau ideal of demonic oppression).

I really do not know how to explain to you the importance of logic, since I'd obviously be wasting my time. Go on hating, I really hope you feel good when you learn there's a group called the KKK that think Blacks like you do not have souls and are animals. So much for bigotry being trivial.

Lord

KenGali: I am not one to be indifferent or unsure about Gods existence, I just do not shove my belief down other people throats. So am not Agnostic either.
I guess you do not grasp the real direction of my pointer on multiverses. The question is that we already know that our sun will die someday. We think probably that universes are being obliterated all the time. The question is in all these randomness, why not ours yet? I do not yet want to go to the more familiar issue of the suitability of earth as a living place. But the real MaCoy is that removing purposeful design from the equation which is accompanied by a purpose, you wonder what was the essence of the billions of years of evolution if one day, the whole thing will be randomly wiped out totally, and the materials and energy recycled for another Big Bang.

Atheism is based on some illusion that we live in a stable place , where ghostly random processes can just pop out beings. It is not just that the earth is currently spinning at a whooping speed, that a bash by asteroids could knock it out of orbit, or that the sun is one day going to be a red giant and then a black hole, but also that the whole universe could become obliterated at any time. Can you sit down and do a rough mental calculation of the probability that the stability you are enjoying now was not due to a purposeful and conscious effort? It is so slim, that believing such is downright silly!

Intelligent design my dear friend, is a complete proof of the existence of a designer, a purposeful one at that. Even Cold admits that, he is only struggling with the definition of a designer as an entity with consciousness and purpose.

Last let me advise you to explore and conquer, if men were sticking only to what they know, which I assume you mean what their senses can detect, you won't even have a mere television in your house, cause you cannot see electromagnetic waves. You will probably be naked in one jungle trying to catch your next meal with your bare hands at this moment.

Now I was hoping you'd make this a hard nut to crack but like kids say it's easy peasy.

You claim to have studied intelligence design--guess what I have too, but that's the point. The point is that you obviously were doing the study with a biased mind; either that or you were doing the study while paying no attention to your science classes.

A physicist or mathematician would give you a detailed reason why our Sun is not dead yet (it's still a theory that the there are multiple universes so you'd be hard-pressed to find a pro to prove why our Universe is not dead yet). That's if you can stay long enough to listen to scientific jabber: but more lightly it has to do with the age of the Sun. You see things don't just happen in our Universe, there's an explanation, the fact that we don't know it does not mean it ain't there. Oh, and if you want to say how can the Mathematician prove that, try to remember that Newton calculated the gravity of the moon, and it's distance from earth centuries before we stepped on the moon, many particles and phenomena like the Higgs Bison, anti-matter, dark holes were proven theoretically before they were ever discovered.

If I can sit down and understand that the present cosmos is ordered, that a Comet is a space mass that entered Earth's orbit and was pulled in by gravity, instead of a fiery projectile thrown by Zeus on Olympus, then I have no trouble dismissing an intelligent design as reason for the stability. Times past earthquakes were regarded as the god's, God's judgement, today we know they're as a result of tectonic plates having a trudgy romance.

Did you miss science class when it was said that Energy can neither be created nor destroyed? If yes, why do you discuss the importance of essence? Many stars go kaboom every night somewhere in the universe & new celestial bodies (planets, asteroids, even galaxies) are formed; and you're here in your little arguably negligible microcosm talking about essence of destruction and its relationship to intelligent design. It's the kind of story you tell to people who believe Yahweh destroyed Sodom and Gomorrha with hails directly from the sky (when today it's been proven it was most probably a volcanic eruption that laid waste to the civilization that once occupied that land.

Intelligence design is simply an assumption. It is a theory likened to the one that Aliens built the Pyramid of Giza, that it was literally impossible for the Egyptians to build a pyramid that big within the time period it's being historically recorded to have been built: not to mention the engineering marvels that have been described by modern Engineers as unbelievable for the times. These are theories that are believed not proven. A believer of the Alien construction or Alien seeding or historic Alien-human interaction, can not give the Pyramid of Giza as a proof of their belief. In the same light, you can't give the complexities in the world and the universe as we know it to be a conclusive proof of Intelligent design.

As much as I try to feel comfortable with your sense of humor, mankind have the habit of sticking to what they know till there's a literal explainable proof to dismiss what they know. Again I'd refer you to my earlier question of you ever attending a science class--surely you know of Newton's laws. I'm not saying one should not explore and conquer (it's actually our nature, we do it most times subconsciously and sometimes we continue even in the face of it being illogical): we should only dismiss an acknowledged belief when there's an unarguable reason to. For now, the known universe does not give us an indisputable reason to accept intelligent design, if anything better luck next time.

Mee234: you are right about moral having forebearance but about been inanely concerns about actions without empathy that I beg to disagree. You can be taught to be good (or bad) without you thinking of any purpose except that which you are taught will be ur reward. That is my point. Unless empathy have another meaning I don't know than I'm getting ur point.
n/b maybe ur are beleagured because you are not making urself clear enough

Empathy does not thrive on reward, it radiates selflessness. When you do good for reward and shun bad because of consequences, that's fear not empathy. Empathy is why you don't discriminate--not because you'd be labeled a phobe or worse off face jail-term or take a slap of fine--you don't do it because you would not feel eerie if you were been discriminated against.

That's what morals should be, choosing right instead of wrong because of the reason--a degree of empathy--than about the consequences or rewards. If you don't steal for the singular reason of not wanting to serve jail time, then you have no morals with regards to stealing and are not empathic.

Now that's what I'm beleaguered about, that you apparently can't find a link between morals and empathy. It's a complex subject, I know, but there's a link. Not knowing that link and trying to put an argument forward is like trying to write a movie script in English without knowing the letters of the language.

KenGali: Ha ha. Do not be too fast to copy every new trend. Your points are flawed in that mult-religiousness is not secularism. Make the distinction. Nigeria as an example is multi- religious but not secular. I put it to you again, that the world we live in today was born out of religious societies. We are yet to see what we will create by putting away religion. Do not preempt me, I have not said it will be bad, but I do know humans have a tendency to react like animals when they do not feel an innate responsibility to someone. It is still a test that my generation and yours will live out.

I will give you an example. I walked through some parks in UK, I saw seats placed by people in a religious remember of loved ones. The issue is they are all old, I did not come across such a benevolence that was of recent times. Who will bring forward the benevolence of the future? Govt?

I did not point out in my post that multi-religiousness is secularism. I think there's a flaw in your understanding to construe that from my post. I only pointed to the core moments of our celebration of human advancements at times when religious groups co-existed peacefully. It was only when each had more tolerance towards each other, that the seeds of rational thinking was born (no one thinks rationally when there is strive). Of course, these thoughts were regulated by the religious institutions, but the lesser attached these thinkers were to religion the more advancements were made. Thoughts flowed from one religion to the other, respect flourished, and if the barriers were not there believe you me they'd have gone farther than they did. For example, Isaac Newton had to cock up some of his convictions so he wasn't accused of heresy. Galilieo had it worse, all because of established religion.

Now if religion had it's way, more than 50% of the world presently would not use contraceptives, think of the implications. People are more inclined to behave more rationally when they associate and are allowed to go about with as little divisions as possible, thus multi-religiousness breeds secularism. They distinct but related, the growing number of Nigerian Atheists, Free-thinkers, Agnostics, Non-religious theists; is a testament of this archetype.

Atheists would still mourn their loved ones, they'd lay wreaths, visit the tombs of their loved ones, pay their taxes, donate to charity, protect the environment. The greater call of us all to stand up for ourselves, uphold fundamental human rights, protect our environment, say no to devious crimes and established propanda even when they're a way of life in certain places: is totally as a result of secularism. Part of that can be attributed to Evolution and or Darwinism. Think of it, if the Portuguese knew the Dodo were an indigenous specie that should be hunted in moderation because they undoubtedly have a role to play their ecological habitat, instead of just creatures of God; they'd not be extinct today.

Religion is a chain, I've been a better person since I stopped being religious, everyone I know who has stopped has too. It might be in a big way or in a small way: people have cultures, ever heard of Atheist Christians, Atheist Muslims; they're people who do not believe in God but still hang out with their family come Christmas, or any of the Eid holidays. We are a social species, it may not be out of place to argue that Religion has evolved as a result of our habits as a species to be social, but now we've evolved to the point where we recognize each other's worth without the cloak of religion. And we are gaining new strides, of course we are not perfect, no one has the magic potion but looking back at what we've achieved in the last century, I'm proud to have lived in present times and not in the dark ages were religion was mainstream and as much as 30 million people were killed during the Inquisition.

Religion still has it's ackles firmly in humanity, the respect for important figures like the Pope, the Shah, the Dalai Lama; various religious leaders in all 200+ countries in the world: is reason enough to just beat out the notion of humans becoming non-religious in the next quarter of a millennium (even if inter-stellar travel becomes possible in as soon as 2035). The Roman Catholic Church still is the world's richest organization having the largest reserves of the real currency that has value-Gold. Religious wars still happen as more people would die this year from religious crisis than from AIDS.

In this all, forgive me for not being optimistic about a few pockets of people around the world denouncing Religion for being a fraud and opting for rationalism. Like Mandela said, it's a long walk to freedom. Gandhi said, I have no problems with Christ, it's Christians I have problem with. I'm proud to not be religious, I feel letting people know the importance of rationalism and humanism predates that of the unholy assertion--follow us or face eternal damnation.

I hate the AntiSpamBots.