₦airaland Forum

Image123:
My case is different as it were God delivered me from poverty over time.

Happy for you.

peggywebbs:
Really? Viral diseases don't have cure? Is that what you're sticking with? If you have said they haven't found a cure for viruses...then I can understand completely. However, to rule out the possibility is just outrightly ridiculous.

Anyway I should get back to my work. There is certainly a cure somewhere for viruses. We just hope they allow someone find it.

I am not ruling out the possibility but you demanding they find a cure for a viral disease is a demand borne of ignorance of what is so far obtainable. Something as simple as the common cold still doesn't have a cure but you want a disease that has been known for all of 2 years to have a cure.

peggywebbs:
So the CDC is a sketchy website? Or the UK Gov too? I didn't make a prediction. I only stated facts as reported. It is going to be what it is so better brace yourself. Nigerian government needs loans so they'll comply with anything.

The CDC doesn't say we need boosters every 6 months so you obviously did not get that information from CDC. Where ever you got it from will most certainly be some sketchy website. None of the ones you've cited have said such a thing.

peggywebbs:
I need not say much. Here this explains it all. 6 months boosters... even the CDC website indicates it and I've listed it among my sources.

https://www.contagionlive.com/view/booster-doses-will-be-6-months-apart-not-8

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/boosters-to-be-added-to-nhs-covid-pass-for-travel

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/are-we-going-to-need-covid-19-boosters-every-6-months-what-experts-think

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/booster-shot.html

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03592-2

None of these say we will need boosters every 6 months so I don't know why you are citing them.

peggywebbs:
See how they decieve you...read the image you sent again...it says 2 weeks after... they didn't commit themselves. Now you know all of these are subject to change... when the CDC updates its rules. I'll be here again when it happens and will let you know.

LoLz. So you did make a prediction. You seem to enjoy contradicting yourself.

If anyone is being deceived it's probably you since you get your information from sketchy websites and sources.

peggywebbs:
No, its every six months, you haven't been following the news. People were grumbling so they started with only the vulnerable around 65 and older will take third boosters...but now they've mandated it for everyone. Israel is already on their fourth booster.

I didn't contradict myself about the population crisis. I already mentioned the first category, why would people create diseases? Its called bioweapons. They gradually improve on it and we'll target it at whoever they want. So eventually a good size of population is reduced. Now those profiting from it isn't it obvious? By now we should be talking about a cure. But instead we are managing symptoms..so we end up depending on drugs. They keep profiting and getting richer. All I want to hear is a cure for this nagging disease. I also want China investigated. Dr Fauci is being accused of sponsoring gain of research functions but he keeps denying it. And worse WHO and the CDC are refusing to investigate China. We here in Nigeria have a nonfunctioning research facility. We are only consumers and that's just sad. If another group of people throw in another virus, we will still be held handicap and nobody will be held responsible. Again those profiting will still be having a raining day. When did medicine become a thing of managing symptoms...what happened to groundbreaking research that brings about a complete cure?

Viral diseases don't have cures, if you don't know, now you know.

Yes you are contradicting yourself. How will you kill off your clientele if your goal is increasing profit? That makes no sense.

peggywebbs:
No, its every six months, you haven't been following the news. People were grumbling so they started with only the vulnerable around 65 and older will take third boosters...but now they've mandated it for everyone. Israel is already on their fourth booster.

I didn't contradict myself about the population crisis. I already mentioned the first category, why would people create diseases? Its called bioweapons. They gradually improve on it and we'll target it at whoever they want. So eventually a good size of population is reduced. Now those profiting from it isn't it obvious? By now we should be talking about a cure. But instead we are managing symptoms..so we end up depending on drugs. They keep profiting and getting richer. All I want to hear is a cure for this nagging disease. I also want China investigated. Dr Fauci is being accused of sponsoring gain of research functions but he keeps denying it. And worse WHO and the CDC are refusing to investigate China. We here in Nigeria have a nonfunctioning research facility. We are only consumers and that's just sad. If another group of people throw in another virus, we will still be held handicap and nobody will be held responsible. Again those profiting will still be having a raining day. When did medicine become a thing of managing symptoms...what happened to groundbreaking research that brings about a complete cure?

Also it is a lie to say you won't be considered fully vaccinated if you don't take the booster.

peggywebbs:
No, its every six months, you haven't been following the news. People were grumbling so they started with only the vulnerable around 65 and older will take third boosters...but now they've mandated it for everyone. Israel is already on their fourth booster.

I didn't contradict myself about the population crisis. I already mentioned the first category, why would people create diseases? Its called bioweapons. They gradually improve on it and we'll target it at whoever they want. So eventually a good size of population is reduced. Now those profiting from it isn't it obvious? By now we should be talking about a cure. But instead we are managing symptoms..so we end up depending on drugs. They keep profiting and getting richer. All I want to hear is a cure for this nagging disease. I also want China investigated. Dr Fauci is being accused of sponsoring gain of research functions but he keeps denying it. And worse WHO and the CDC are refusing to investigate China. We here in Nigeria have a nonfunctioning research facility. We are only consumers and that's just sad. If another group of people throw in another virus, we will still be held handicap and nobody will be held responsible. Again those profiting will still be having a raining day. When did medicine become a thing of managing symptoms...what happened to groundbreaking research that brings about a complete cure?

This is directly from CDC, nowhere does it say every 6 months.

InTheCloudySky:
The best yogurt ever. So yummy & creamy, and healthy to boot.

Wifey makes something similar. She blends yogurt and fruits then puts it in a popsicle mold and freezes it. Comes out cold, delicious and healthy.

peggywebbs:
I don't do prophecy. I'm stating facts. In US they already told them, they would need to take booster shots for Pfizer every 6 months. While for Mordena it's 5 months. According to them due to the waning vaccine.

While those who don't have their boosters after 6 months of the vaccine will be regarded as not fully vaccinated.

https://www.thelocal.fr/20211110/france-to-deactivate-health-pass-for-over-65s-who-dont-get-vaccine-booster/?amp

It is what is it. You asked me what their agenda was and I said sterilisation doesn't fit into it. Anyway, here's what I think. So far we have 3 categories of people in the world now, the first are those who create diseases, second are those who fear diseases and the third are those who profit from diseases.

Make of it what you will but sterilisation doesn't fit in their agenda. And I have nothing against medicine or vaccines. I'm not into pastopreneurs and this is the first time I'm finding myself on the other side of medicine.

The CDC didn't say the booster was to be taken every 6 months, for now it's the 3rd booster shot to be taken after 6 months (something parents in the modern era are familiar with) and the ongoing evaluation for repeat is annually just like the flu vaccine.

In your previous post you said they want to end population crisis. If they are profiting from making people sick why would they want less population? They'd want more people to be sick not less so you just contradicted yourself.

Hismasterpiece:
lol

I am going to assume you won't ask. Here's an alternative, take a historical note of the poor among your congregation and see how many of them are no longer poor over time.

Hismasterpiece:
I'm sure that's not how they phrased it.. they couldn't have explicitly said that they copied one another

Matthew is a creative reinterpretation of Mark,[53] stressing Jesus' teachings as much as his acts,[54] and making subtle changes in order to stress his divine nature: for example, Mark's "young man" who appears at Jesus' tomb becomes "a radiant angel" in Matthew.[55]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew

Take note of the references and do well to search them through.

peggywebbs:
If you're paralyzed or dead, you won't be useful to them either. Besides the vaccine doesn't end at two doses. You will be required to take it every 6 months.. If you fail to..your COVID card will expire. So what's the point?

Is this supposed to be a prophecy or prediction?

DeepSight:
It primarily centres around that (and some consequential incongruities), but do note that that alone is significant enough. And that is because the core existential questions - "why something instead of nothing" and "can something arise from nothing" - are probably the most central and important questions in existential thought throughout the ages. They are therefore not questions to be approached either lightly or flippantly - and certainly not with an egregious degree of dishonesty, dis-ingenuity or blatant mendacity and incongruity.

When ancient peoples came up with the concept of zero, they knew they were referring to the absence of any quantity or element whatsoever. When the existential question "can something arise from nothing" is asked, we also know that by nothing, we mean no-thing whatsoever. For anyone to address that very question by pointing to something - anything - an existent quantity or element of any kind, and then defining that thing as "nothing" in order to answer this question is the height of ridiculousness. That that person is "acclaimed" or "eminent" does nothing whatsoever to redeem the ludicrous fallacy at play here. Not even celebration by fellow "intellectuals" does anything to bequeath logic into the illogical. And you can imagine just how much worse it is, just how cringeworthy, when someone comes along and says that if we cannot observe a thing, it is justified to say that it is nothing. This sort, of statement, in an age long after the invention of the microscope.

As for Krauss, he even goes so far as to say that there are different types of "nothing."

Pray tell, what may distinguish one type of nothingness from another type, in existential terms? The very fact that there exists anything to point to as a distinction already admits the existence of something.

He, and those who parrot his views (and there are many - sadly even among people I admire such as the late Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins), look us straight in the face and say that objects are "nothing," They actually say that things are nothing and expect a silent worshipful superstitious awe to follow. In truth, they could easily be more honest and simply look for another word for the objects they wish to insist are nothing. No amount of posturing, no amount of books, no amount of acclaim, and no amount of eminence will ever render an existent thing "nothing."

Not in physics and not in any other discipline.

Its nothing but a very bad joke: alas we live in a world in which anything that drops from the mouth of a scientist is taken with the very same irrational superstitious awe with which religious people often cling to the words of their prophets, leaders and priests. This is something to take note of, because genuinely free scientific inquiry is often endangered in a world in which there are professors in many disciplines, who are denied tenure or office, and who are "excommunicated" for daring to hold different views from those held by their colleagues of the mainstream. Indeed, many academics now privately admit that they dare not express some of their true views publicly for fear of this sort of "excommunication." Most scientists will not dare raise any question today against the Theory of Evolution for example, even when there are genuine scientific questions to ponder.

This can only remind one of Giordano Bruno and Galileo Galilei.

Yeah you aren't the first to call out Krauss for his use of words in a seemly disingenious way. I understand his argument and agree with most of it but I also understand why people get angry with him.

DeepSight:
Pardon me old friend. I have a long standing irritation with the st.upidity of Lawrence Krauss.
So reading from one who worships him was always bound to scratch a nerve.

For some people, the height of intelligence and enlightenment simply means swallowing the words of "acclaimed scientists." Even against the most elementary and most obvious logic. We are familiar with this sort of pedestrian and even slavish rigidity in thought.

PS: I don't think its fair to suggest that intolerance is limited to theists.
Many atheists are extremely intolerant in the modern world. In fact its now a fad for such persons to refer to or regard any person who happens to believe in God, or even in spirituality, or even in the existence of the immaterial - as some sort of ignorant, backward or idiiotic person.

Even as an agnostic myself, even if agnostic-deist - I do not take such a position.

Aside from the issue of a universe from nothing what is your beef with Krauss?

hupernikao:
You need to read me well.

What I wrote is quoted below.



Two elements
1. Believing in God
2. Atheism

Are elements (plural). Hence I am referring to two things.

One is a belief in God. The other is atheism (lack of belief in God), Not "believing in atheism".

I hope it's clear now.

Ok it's clear.

DeepSight:
I have to be agnostic as to this. Anything further will amount to presumption.

I can however say that I lean in the direction of the origin of all things being something akin to what I call an infinite field of potentialities. The way I conceive of this, is not as a conscious being, even if it may birth conscious beings.

Such an infinite field of potentialities may, in this remit, hypothetically or theoretically spawn any number of beings, dimensions, universes, realms or realities.

It is not impossible however, to my mind, that this universe is the product or work of a mind or a being or a group or set of beings. One day, at a sufficiently advanced stage of development, even humans may create universes.

Interesting.

HellVictorinho3:
I don't know if you can be of any financial assistance here....

So, I am asking if you can introduce me to someone that can be of any financial assistance....
That's because I don't know what to do right now with my brother stuck in jail texting me everyday...... while I'm trying to do the best I can do for myself.....

Unfortunately,if I send a recharge card of 500naira to him,
Those guys or that guy or whoever it is or they are will take 200naira and give him the balance.....



What is the meaning of these things

Why is your family not helping him? Why is the burden of helping him falling to you?

PastorM:
God has given us freewill. The choice is invariably ours so it does make sense that if you are an ex-alcoholic not to mix with your alcoholic friends. God will not come down and take that beer bottle out of your hands.

I know it's a bit difficult for you to comprehend but it is what it is.

If the alcoholic is claiming an almighty god power freed him then he should have no issue with people drinking around him, after all he believes all things are possible with this god. That here is the difference, your belief in an almighty power. If like all human beings you know you can be influenced then you take precautions. If you take precautions despite being a believer in an almighty power then you are no different from the nonbeliever leading up to my conclusion that your god is not real.

I had to go through this process so that in case you couldn't grasp it, you'd understand my point.

True. It is the foot wearing the shoe that really knows where it pinches. The funny thing is we acknowledge this intellectually but on a somewhat instinctual level we always want what we think other people have that we don't, we don't seem to care about what they suffer by having what they have. I was looking at Ini Edo replying people about the providence of her daughter's sperm donor and I was like wtf is she answering these people on SM. I said to myself if it was me I wouldn't bother but then again I don't have her fame or the pressures it brings so how can I know what I would do.

PastorM:
Then at least make it on-topic

It was totally on topic, what you didn't like was my conclusion.

PastorM:
That's not what I meant and you know it. Make your comments constructive and sensible.

LMAO! I guess you mean make it palatable to you. Bwahahahahaha! Sorry but I will give my opinions on your imaginary god with his imaginary powers whenever I feel like it.

DeepSight:
It could only be natural, my friend.

You see, the problem rests with the distinction people have made between the natural and the supposed "supernatural." When people dont understand a thing, they call it supernatural. However all things are natural.

This takes nothing away from the transcendence of a thing. Transcendence here, as I have repeatedly said, simply refers to the quality of being beyond this realm. Standing beyond it. Therefore transcending it. This does not mean that such a thing is not natural. In truth, all things that exist are only natural.

PS: Let me hasten to be clear however, that this is only one sense of the word "natural." I do not here use the word in the sense in which people use it when they distinguish between a natural or unnatural act - e.g: Someone might say that Heterosexuality is natural and Homosexuality is unnatural. That is a value based and potentially moral assessment, whereas I use the word in an existential sense - not natural vs unnatural, but natural vs supernatural: whereat I say that all existent things can only be natural. I hope this comes across.

In agreement so far. Does this transcendent natural something have a mind, is it a being?

DeepSight:
I should point out that I refer to what may be described as the ultimate or first cause in relation to the existence of all universes/ realms/ dimensions. Such will naturally have to be beyond :or (transcend) all realms/ universes/ dimensions.

What if the first cause is a natural process?

hupernikao:
Believe in atheism kè. Where do you see that? Me sef dey laugh here.

You:

hupernikao:
Believing in God and Atheism

DeepSight:
Fairly straightforward logic good sir: and in this I draw from the premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument which asserts that whatever begins to exist has a cause. Not only is this intuitively true, it is also self evidently true. A thing which commences, or begins, necessarily is prompted or triggered. And it could not be so prompted or triggered by itself: hence we deduce that it is so prompted or triggered by something beyond itself.

This is all that transcendence here refers to. Something beyond the thing which commences or begins.

And what if the cause is another natural process so the natural process is transcendental?

TheGidRedpiIIer:
1. I doubt if you even watched the video

2. Whenever you see anything concerning Christianity or the Christian God, you start mästurbating over the the thread like an intoxicated ape
Why expend so much energy concerning a God you claim doesn’t exist?

So now that I have jizzed all over the thread why don't you go cry to your imaginary sky daddy. LoLz.

PastorM:
You don't need to comment simply for commenting sake, my friend.

This is a public forum. Go post in a restricted blog if you don't want comments.

I don't understand how you can be dragged back if you are under the umbrella of an almighty god. More like there isn't an almighty god and you are just as malleable as any other human being.

modsfucker:
I dey tell you... Something wey the guy mam suppose chill and enjoy, na em he dey shout rape upandan... I for kukuma relax and enjoy the party and even fix date for the next appointment.

Do you know if they have HIV or other sexually transmissible diseases?

hupernikao:
For an atheist it doesn't matter, benefit is benefit and not conviction.

For most untrained psychologist, their belly is their God, where they can get, is where their worship lies. Lack of helper or help from the place they criticize is the root of their hatred. When that benefit start forthcoming back , they will deactivate their account on NL and open another to sing praises to God.

Believing in God and Atheism are elements of man's conviction. It's not changed by material benefits or circumstances.

---

Most of the ones here on NL, don't even know there are atheists who don't have access to internet or used it before, who don't have access to scientific research or evidence but hold conviction in atheism.

They think atheism starts and end on internets, on advance knowledge, on thinking critically. Very false disposition. And childish view of life. This is the reason you will hear things like: atheism exposes you to critical thinking, makes you a knowledgeable person etc...

Atheism has been before discovery of computers. Some ancient culture hold that conviction. I have known atheists even before some of the untrained psychologist here start wearing diapers. I have met uneducated atheist, educated one etc.

So if I spot at distance an untrained psychologist trying to claim atheist, you should know where I am coming from. And they know, the reason they are fighting it through and through.

Na wa o how does one believe in atheism? LMAO!