₦airaland Forum

They will vote for him, then come to nairaland and start fighting afonja Igbo war

Oh Thank God our director and supreme leader is alive.
Waiting for IPOB agitation version 2.0.0

[quote author=StrawberryGloss post=61466208][/quote]Why the mention ma'am

supersystemsnig:
Oh my brov, i'm shocked we agree on this...


People are indeed wrongly fed....Like people believe every competitor should be an hater...

I had a friend, he was number one, i was number two, and we were the best of buddies...

He threatened me in Physics, I destroy him in Chemistry....Our differences brought out the best in us...Our friendship is now over 15 years with no strife between us...


People are just wrongly fed...If one marries his/her perfect replica, where will the zing emanate from?..

You are very correct bro.

kimbraa:
Actually, our parents did abide by same rules. Like I said, it's nature. For the fact that they are coming together from different backgrounds and upbringing then their interest are divergent.

Incompatibles does not mean they can't stay together. If they rightly use it, it can be a turn around for them. Only if we are talking about interest.


Character incompatibility is a no for marriage

supersystemsnig:
Interesting...But one thing the oP says i disagree with, Kimbraa also spoke about

Differences in interest doesn't mean it won't work oh..We just keep been spoon-fed rubbish doctrine...Opposites can marry and bring their different strengths to compliment one another..I've seen two people i told way back 2007, were incompatible, everyone said so, but guess what, it's ten years today, i saw this individual and i laughed...


Who says people with different interests can't go well? It's all about do both parties love one another enough to deal with the weaknesses/shortcomings off one another. If there's love, fixing issues is a small matter, when people choose to bail out, it's either there wasn't love, or it wasn't strong. In this case, i'll suggest the love wasn't strong enough, or he can't deal with her downsides...



Many times, we should marry/date our opposites and not the other way around so both parties bring their individualities together infuse it into oneness and make it work...Too many people are looking for people with similar interests, but na lie, marry/date your opposite...
We should date/marry our opposites if we can tolerate their weaknesses and if they choose and are willing to become one with us...

Opposite in interest can be a positive combination. People only fail to bring out the best in their negativity.

xPx =h
These are incompatibles but have been the basis of uncertainty principle.

People are wrongly fed, and that is the basis of our problem

LordKO:
Goodness knows no religion - this invalidate your value of belief position. God's just and for all that exist because he created and own's all. . . you and I are the imperfect manifestations of the perfect him, therefore, in one's act of goodness I see him (God).

Being good and religious are two different but similar thing.

Someone can be good but not religious/God fearing.

Florblu:
Yes.
Check your dictionary for the meaning#EvilGrin

You should have made a contribution than all this.
Kindly respond to the post

cruchenutii:
Anyway OP. Its the nature of Humans generally. Same way as man wanting a Freak in the Night and Angel in the morning. Better to just roll with it than try to fight it. The only issue is Women are more complicated beings than Men.

I mean, you need to play Women's game at some point if you really want to settle down. If your girlfriend likes Bad-boys in relationship. You just have to become a bad boy to keep her. And if she later demands good guy in marriage. You just have to switch as well.

Issue is, only few people can do two roles at a time.

You are very correct. They are sensitive beings and I guess people are playing their games.

Thanks for the contribution.

Some desperately need bad boy to date and God fearing man to marry

Bro, I had a similar issue till a condition came out and I took advantage of it.

If I had just told her frankly, she would have hurt herself. An emotional being, but such people are stronger than you think..

If she have a reason to leave you, she won't think twice, that's who they are. So stop thinking and do it immediately.

But you must take advantage of something about the relationship which you have been thinking about, leverage on it. Break it and move on.

LordKO:
@OP

It's obvious that you've an erroneous understanding of what "a God fearing person" is, therefore, the reason why you concluded that people do long to marry such a persons but fears/avoids dating them.

Every sane, sound and responsible person I know will give anything to date a God fearing person and equally marry same. Unfortunately, it's always a herculean task to come across one.

A God fearing person isn't necessary s/he that belong to a religious denomination, that goes to either church or mosque, and openly profess God/Allah as his Lord and personal saviour. No.

A God fearing person is someone that's a proponent and practitioner of goodness. This kind of person neither intentionally practice evil nor servility. The most notable hallmarks of a God fearing person are libertarianism and conscientiousness.

A God fearing person us a person who holds the law and love of God in high esteem. The person knows the value of his/her belief. In all times, this person upholds his belief and reaffirms their faith.

It's true that on average, people do not want to date them or those that date them seem to date to deceive them. But when it comes to marriage, they are most sort for.

supersystemsnig:
Lol @ Your brain is very active.


Haven't you noticed people have a long list of what they want from people but won't reciprocate the same thing in the list, its selfishness brov...

It's true. They have long list of requirements, yet they find it unnecessary to improve themselves or those around them.


They are always frustrated on the long run. They always realize at last that they do not know what they want

And they end up settling for less.

Florblu:
Because they want to eat their cake and have it

They?

supersystemsnig:
So many similar threads the same, i think the thread should be edited oP, let's not use the word godfearing, but nice...So allow me rephrase, why do people want to date or be in a relationship with a nice person, but would reciprocate the treatment they get?, WHY ? It's simple brov, selfishness,self-centeredness,self-love,self preservation

They want to eat the meal but hate to participate in preparing it


They want to eat , but won't go to the market to buy the ingredients


They want finished materials but don't want to actively involve themselves, hence self preservation...They are pointers to knowing these kinds. The moment, you see anyone taking counter measures before an incidence happens, they have self obsession issues and have this problem..if a person says stuffs like:

if tomorrow comes, you should not say,

When it happens, you will say

So that you will not say

It's the demon schooling them and tutoring them, pushing them out of the relationship....It's a problem and too many times, people are not aware they have these issues...but will find fault in the other party and pin problems on them...

Wow, supersystemsnig, nice one bro. Your brain is very active.

I will reply briefly.

LordIsaac:
Self centredness and misplaced priorities.

I don't understand? Please explain more.

I think relationship is a small model of marriage where the guy serves as the husband and the lady becomes the wife. How come our requirements and needs becomes different in marriage than in relationships.

Come and explain further sir

Happy Sunday

This question have been bothering me for sometime now.

Why do ladies/guys want to marry a God fearing partner but do not want to date same God fearing partner? Why do people want it all hard and hurt in relationship but want it gentle in marriage?

Someone with good answers should please comment.

AgentOfAllah:
I imagine it's me you've referred to as SonOfAllah? Does my moniker make you uncomfortable?
Yes, I'm an atheist, but I doubt my atheism is based on any doctrine. If anything, it's based on the lack of one.

Lol. Sorry, I wasn't that observant.

Alright @your belief. Everything about God personal. Miracles can't be mass produced so you can't physically prove the existence of God to anyone. I think its the reason he made Himself God.

Wishing you all the best.

vaxx:
I am walking on two premises, if you are really following me..one on the contegency and the other on probability....

Natural philosophy is the most accepted means of thruth...therefore we can't have a discussion without it. Though I agree it has limitations...


philosophy is the eye glass of natural philosophy... An intelligent natural philosopher must work under the perspective of mainstream philosophy... Meaning scientists need to work with a particular attitude towards or way of regarding something by using sophia(wisdom)

So , lets treat your alternative one by one according to how you list them. Using both natural philosophy and mainstream philosophy...


..1 it can't be a lizard... A lizard isn't intelligent enough to create a universe like ours..

A lizard can not create a being more intelligent than it(human)

2...multi intelligent being can't be possible, it will lead to confusion and disagreement.... One may wish to create a universe where there will be no darkness and another may wish to have a universe with multiple of brightness... This will lead to serious chaos and anarchy....


3 the creator can't transform himself to a physical universe.. Why?

he will be subjected to the same universe theory he created and that will render the transformation useless.. he is external

4 the creator can not die.. Why?


He is not a contingent being.... He is a Necessary things and a neccasry thing cannot either come to be, nor cease to be. Only contingent things, like us, do that...


Your alternative will not be possible..




So should i post you my hypothesis base on the law of probability





1

I like this. Supersystemsnig, sonofAllah, and other guys, let's focus it this way.

I am a Christian, and I am convinced through my personal experience and beliefs that God exists. I have listened to atheists on the subject matter, and I am still convinced they are wrong.

Most of them base their belief on a doctrine and not the reality on ground. They may be right, but I think they are wrong. But I need more of this.

sonofAllah, are you an atheist? I have one as a friend. I would like to hear your view

supersystemsnig:
Bros your posture is that of a fighter...Why not read all the comments i shared and see if its different what what you're typing first?


If having a nobel prize is what it takes to get your attention, then give me a few more years...As you don dey take style complete the ones that called us names


I am tired, im exhausted

Sorry, I didn't know you were saying the same thing with me. Lol. I just saw the thread started with nothing and something Theory. So I jumped to see how it's progressing as the subject will surely change through discussions

AgentOfAllah:
I do like you already!

While it is true that a small amount of nuclear reactions occur at the core of the earth, it is not quite the same as that of the sun's. The type of reaction at the earth's core is fission, whereas the suns reaction is fusion. The earth's core is mostly an alloy of iron and nickel in solid and liquid forms. As you may know, all heavy elements from iron onwards cannot spontaneously undergo nuclear fusion. Not even in the sun. This is because the nucleon binding energies of the subsequent product of fusion will be larger than the binding energies of the individual parts. Earth gets a significant amount of heat from nuclear reactions, no doubt, but these are just residual elements undergoing radioactive decay.


You are right! Although, it is not exactly that subatomic particles didn't exist. More accurately, they popped in and out of existence in matter-antimatter peers. But atoms most definitely formed after the Big Bang.


Agreed!

Yeah. All true. I was just trying to explain that nuclear reactions that started after Big Bang can't start a Big Bang. I have not in my reading on Big Bang seen it being associated with nuclear reactions.

Yes, it is true that atoms are formed after Big Bang. It took time for even stars to be formed after Big Bang.

I have forgotten but I think the sun releases some ironic materials to the earth. That validates your point that irons and heavy elements don't undergo nuclear fusion.

supersystemsnig:
My brov @ Lastly, chemist have no say at all in the explanation of the Big Bang....Let's not go here biko Nu...


Let's talk something else abeg...Been at this for over four hours now...I'm ph.ken tired...Read all i shared earlier, i've explained everything explicitly....

Yeah I followed your point and you tried anyway.

Point is, some physicist believe that Big Bang never happened. Lol. What they believe is Big Bang Cosmology.

Chemistry is limited to the beginning of universe. Physicist forms chemistry. You don't give a Nobel Prize in chemistry first. You do it in physics. The universe is governed by the General Theory of relativity. You must understand that these things are theories, mathematical and no one experienced it. But their features make us to believe they were true.

We are all in Big Bang and it keeps happening on us. The universe is expanding, creating new spaces.

I think I was supposed to be seeing a philosophical understanding of nothing and something.

Using nuclear reaction that happened after Big Bang to explain Big Bang is somewhat confusing.

supersystemsnig:
If you can't pick up, pick a brick, i expressed my points, researched and dug up truths and all pointed to all i shared...It's a pity, we can't peaceably interact and happily discuss,anyway i'm just an uneducated bread seller,so no beefs...

You are wrong. The Big Bang can't be explained by Chemical reactions similar to nuclear reactions. Not, it's a flawed way of seeing it. You have not been to an astronomy class, and perhaps, you got most things from text. Well, they are more to it than you read. Many do not know that the singularity which the Big Bang Theory started is just a mathematical expression.

Big Bang is a theory, and it's predictions have been seen to be true, yet, it has its own weakness.

Traditional Big Bang theory posits that our universe began with a singularity — a point of infinite density and temperature whose nature is difficult for our minds to grasp. However, this may not accurately reflect reality, researchers say, because the singularity idea is based on Einstein's theory of general relativity .

At that point, they believe, the universe underwent an extremely brief and dramatic period of inflation, expanding faster than the speed of light. It doubled in size perhaps 100 times or more, all within the span of a few tiny fractions of a second.

The bold thus make null and void your comparison of the point of inflation to nuclear activities. You need to be cautious at your use of some distinct words in talking about Big Bang.

Lastly, chemist have no say at all in the explanation of the Big Bang

supersystemsnig:
The beginning of existence was more geo chemical interactions, seeing it from one plane, i.e. physics doesn't provide the details you may seek.

Binding energy, energy required to break stable molecular bonds and release massive continuous and lengthy chain reactions are within the boundaries of physics and chemisty, it requires thorough understanding of both fields to grasp...I have provided texts explaining things earlier, check and you'll confirm and validate my positions...


The energy of the plasma as its been called operates on this principle, and guess what, this is what is coming to replace crude oil, the energy of the vacuum it is called...Put it down brv

Happy weekend, any drinks for me? Email it

Well I wasn't at Big Bang but I can confidently tell you that it didn't involve those.

It's not possible to explain Big Bang with chemical reactions. For instance, the death of the sun can't produce an earth like environment. If Big Bang was actually a chemical reaction similar to nuclear reactions, they wouldn't be a living environment like ours.

Like I said, I am a B.Sc holder and I can't speak authoritatively.

Those who are not physicists make the mistake of speaking confidently about it. I can't, I would rather learn than kill a subject that I am loyal to.

Remember, Big Bang is just one of the theories of the beginning of the universe. The most acceptable anyway but that doesn't make it the true account of the beginning of the universe.

supersystemsnig:
I have been mistakening fusion with fission, Just combining two sub atomic hydrogen particles , men, i wished a chemist was here, anyway see this :



Fusion, many believe, could be the answer. It works by forcing together two types, or isotopes, of hydrogen at such a high temperature that the positively charged atoms are able to overcome their mutual repulsion and fuse. The result of this fusion is an atom of helium plus a highly energetic neutron particle. Physicists aim to capture the energy released by these emitted neutrons, and use it to drive steam turbines and produce electricity.



Now read here :


http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120810-the-quest-to-recreate-the-sun


IT IS CALLED SUN ON EARTH, AND ITS NOT JOKE ITS CALLED THE NAME...WITH OVER 10 YEARS OF RESEARCH, WE'RE JUST GETTING CLOSE TO ACHIEVING IT...SECRET SOURCES TELLS ME WE ARE CLOSE, BUT HOW CLOSE WE ARE I CAN'T SAY...MEN IF YOU KNOW WHAT NUCLEAR FUSION IS, YOU'LL UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S THE BEGINNING OF EVERYTHING...


I REST MY PEN HERE THIS WEBSITE EXPLAINS EVERYTHING I'VE BEEN CRYING ABOUT ON THIS THREAD

You are right if and only if you are talking about the sun or earth. Basically they is no difference between the sun and the earth. The activities going on at the core or the earth is similar to the one happening in the sun. All are nuclear reactions.

But when you come to the beginning of things, the universe, then I won't agree with you that it started through nuclear reactions. Lol. I might be wrong at this anyway, but I am sure that energy, time, and densities were at infinity during Big Bang.
Atoms and other subatomic particles were formed only after Big Bang (hope I am correct).

If something can come out of nothing, then you wonder what is actually nothing. lol. Nothing and infinity are just mathematical words, they surely don't exist

MissJoy29:
Contributing what?

Contributing her brain.
1. She should be ready to follow me from the start of a project to the end
2. She should monitor the progress of a project by involving herself
3. She should support me emotionally
4. She must have a say in the relationship. Her say should be such that I wouldn't have to ignore it. That means she must be creative

In all, she must be very relevant in the relationship

If I sense she already know the end from the beginning and she is just following the time to get to her already predestined end, I will fvck and leave.

Fabulousb36:
Most guys don't even know what they want all the need is a pretty lady by their side that they can brag with.

Are you serious? brag with. Where you not born in this Buharis regime. Who brag help.

Can't even be with a fishy brain simply because she is fine. Lol.

If she is not contributing, then she is as good as olosho. Ever imagined there are beautiful oloshos?

felaismyhero:
hmm,u have a point bro.but isnt it possible for the average mind to think and find ways to outsmart the politicians?.anyway the politicians arent demi gods

When you understand that money can buy vote and conscience, you will fear the power of politics

stobery:
Look at that woman in the truck

Dont you think she needs medical attention more than the 5k?

Cc: Buratai Army

That's the point. Its not what they think. All they are interested in is the politics behind it. You can't fight this people and win.

Lol. Politics is the game of the weak. They are always smarter than the average mind who thinks that fighting politicians will change Nigeria.

I can only change myself, my family, and my environment

Blooddiamond:
U were never a Biafran supporter,u can stick to ur chain slave. U and ur demented devils can keep guessing where KANU is,Biafra has been there before Kanu. Every true Biafra,we always be there come rain,come sun.
Viva Biafra

You are right. I find it quite confusing why people misuse the word Biafra and IPOB. I listened to Kanu and he was always explicit. He is the leader of IPOB.

I only realized I can't change Nigeria, I can only change myself, my family, and my environment. This understanding helped me in making my decision.

But if you think you can change the country immediately by fighting politicians, I wish you goodluck bro. Just let me know when you win

igbodefender:
Many things Shaka Momodu said are on point. Nnamdi Kanu made many mistakes including almost falling for the bait of the Northern youth groups that offered him a Biafra composed of only the South East (that would have been the worst thing to happen to South East Igbos, cutting them off from access to the sea.

Having said that, the government must now work to remove many of the injustices that gave Nnamdi Kanu points. The Igbos must stop being discriminated against. Igbo discrimination is an evil that must stop.

Thank you so much for that statement.

Aeker:
Seen, boss. I've replied you. Thank you. Alternatively, you can whatsapp me on 0701 148 8597.

Thanks.

The number is switched off. Sent a whatsapp message