₦airaland Forum

That would have to be the University of Ibadan, easily. It's not close.

Funny guy. R.I.P.

Wow

shymmex: He was drafted last season but he's tall.. He's like 7'1..

I didn't even know Obasohan was Benin - I thought he was Yoruba.

Oh, you mean this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festus_Ezeli

Yeah he's an Igbo guy from Benin.

I also wonder why they didn't include him.

ola_pluto: Its a good thing that we feel bad losing to Lithuania. We're ranked 21st, they're ranked 4th. I just pray we can keep the scores low against USA and Argentina. France we can beat. That should be our ticket to quarter finals

@ the part in bold, wow. I had no idea the Lithuanians were ranked that high.

shymmex: Why didn't your Benin son, Ezeli, play for Nigeria??

There's an Edo (Bini) guy on the team - Obasohan.

BASKETBALL
1. Oyedeji Olumide
2. Diogu Ikechukwu Somto
3. Oruche Richard Dean Chukwuma
4. Ugboaja Ejike
5. Dagunduro Adeola Adedokun
6. Oguchi Chamberlain Nnaemeka
7. Aminu Abdul Alade
8. Ibekwe Ekenechukwu
9. Archibong Aniekan Okon
10. Aminu al Farouk
11. Obasohan Derrick Osamuuyi
12. Skinn Anthony Oludewa
13. Ayodele Bakare – Head Coach
14. Sani Ahmed - Coach
15. Francis Gbiri - Admin. Personnel
16. Tijjani Umar - Team Leader


Who is this Ezeli guy?

suyu: Even his white mother has a black African ancestor.........wow

Well, African American. John Punch was from Virginia.

I posted the link because going off of the research, he would be part Kenyan (Luo), part European/white, and part AA in terms of ancestry.

I just thought it would be relevant in light of some of the things discussed on this thread.

Wait a minute. Is Nigeria really playing America and Argentina next?

Those are two very good teams. I think Nigeria will have a chance against Argentina though.

Disappointing, but hopefully they play better in the next games.

Deep Sight: In WHAT could it all exist? In nothingness?

In itself. I don't see why it has to exist within something else.

Deep Sight: Exactly. Which simply conveys the point I was making. Even if an external observer did not know that the woman was pregnant, she actually WAS pregnant. As such, in relation to the Horizon example, even if we cannot observe the pre-trigger, it necessarily must have been there already.

No. It's not about observation. The effect that was talked about pertained to absolute horizons, not apparent horizons. The absolute horizon is not observer dependent. The point is the "effect" (growth in size) occurs temporally before (when looking at time in the "forward" direction) the "cause" (increase in the mass of the black hole (and consequently, its gravitational pull)). This makes it seem as though the horizon was "anticipating" the increase in mass of the black hole from swallowing up the matter.

The existence of a "trigger" is not being denied of course, as I said earlier.

I'm no expert on family matters, but even with the financial factors involved, I don't think this is a wise choice.

If David Mark does actually run for election in 2015, this article should be dug up at that time and re-posted on every single website that Nigerians frequent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Botswana

Don't know much about Botswana. Sorry.

Maybe you should pose this question on a South African forum or - even better - a Botswana forum and follow the discussion that ensues.

Oh yeah and I came across that site a while back. The creator of that site (unamusementpark) and most of those who comment there are just dumbasses.

.

Even though he believes that a sergeant in the army is better than a university graduate, nobody knows if Mr. Mark can write his name. But we know that he can open offshore accounts in New Jersey and the Cayman islands. We know that is the place he hid most of the Gulf oil windfall for himself and his boss, Babangida. We know that is where he hid proceeds from NITEL deals he cooked up as Minister of Communication when he famously said that poor people had no need for phones and as such he siphoned the money allocated to his ministry. We know that he spent about 6 million British pounds sterling to purchase significant interest in the 18-hole St Margaret’s Golf Club in Ireland. We know he owns a 2.5 million British pounds sterling home on Thames River in London. We know he has millions and millions of pounds sterling in trust for his numerous children and wives all over Europe and America. We know this because his nasty divorce from wife number five, Victoria Preye, exposed some of his hidden investments.

David Mark is a lucky bastard. If an American newspaper places its searchlight on him for just 24 hours, as soon as the report comes out, Interpol, FBI, Scotland Yard, KGB, SSS, MSS, BNI, ICPC, EFCC etc will all be fighting over whose handcuffs will be on David Mark’s hands, legs, waist and ankles.

Ouch.

Strong words.

I've never seen such a total verbal demolition of a Nigerian politician from a journalist.

Yeah, later.

Deep Sight: Lol. What are we existing in. What is the universe existing in. What is everything existing in.

You impose an eternal external timeline on the universe with no evidence. Why is this idea so necessary for you?

Deep Sight: The example seeks to show you the absurdity in what you say: no horizon will mysteriously rise to meet something without an impetus: the fact remains that you may not have observed the physical attractions that would have caused such: and not that it was uncaused: or preceded its cause. Such is illogic, my friend.

The point of the example is that claims about what constitutes the "normal" sequence of events are ultimately based on assumptions which have not been proven to be superior to all other assumptions.

And I already discussed this in that other thread, but if you view things from the perspective of a positron and if a positron is in fact an electron going "backwards" through time, then "effects" precede "causes." I don't see why the same couldn't be the case here.

I did not say the change in the horizon was uncaused. I said the "effect" would be actualized before the "cause." Has it occurred to you that a black hole is so strange an object that it could possibly surmount supposedly normal temporal restrictions on its behavior?

Deep Sight: O, so do you assert that eternity exists only in our minds?

Tell me that.

It's just a mental abstraction for now as far as I can tell. Do you have evidence of it existing?

And you know this while observing from perception?

No. But I see no reason to assume that cause would precede effect when another formulation can be constructed quite well without need of that hypothesis.

Deep Sight: Just to add, so you understand: somethings in nature occur because of a thing yet to occur. That in itself shows that the first "occurrent" thing had a cause: the future "occurrent" thing. A vague and crude example would be a woman developing milk in her breasts for a yet to be born baby. The fact is that the triggers were there for the yet to be born baby. Simples.

This is a bad comparison.

I'm not a gynecologist and I don't think you are either, but it seems obvious here that hormonal changes of some kind would bring about lactation in a woman's b.reasts because of the pregnancy itself. In other words you can go back in time and say that the fertilization of her eggs is the root cause for the lactation.


My point was that ruling out the "first cause" or "prime mover," whether that prime mover is a God like entity or not, on the basis of it needing a prior cause may not necessarily the case. Basically I disagree with the assumptions underlying the argument of the opening post of this thread.

Deep Sight: Still discloses a cause, mate, pre or post.

Right. So how does that "defeat my postulation"?

Deep Sight: Such only holds true for self existent things, my friend. Such as eternity, and its consequences.

As far as I can tell, eternity is a concept, not something existing or self-existing.

You should also note that there is a difference between the occurrence of events and the perception of occurrence of events.

This is not about perception, but occurrence.

Deep Sight: In addition, assuming that this is correct, these words (bolded in red) already disclose a cause, and as such, defeat your postulation.

No one said that there were no "causes." My point is about the position in time of apparent "causes" and "effects".

And the point of that excerpt is that the horizon grows because matter reaches it, but according to our ordinary thinking it should grow when the matter reaches it. But the horizon does so before the matter reaches it, putting the effect before the cause. The author (Thorne) is not asserting that a black hole is some sort of conscious entity waiting in the background, planning to swallow up matter.

I should point out, in light of certain comments earlier on this thread, that we are always operating under certain assumptions and these assumptions may not always hold for every situation.

Take for example, the idea that "cause" precedes "effect" with respect to anything that progresses "forward" through time. This assumption does not always hold in all situations, a good example being this:

"They [Penrose and Israel] especially could not conceive of jettisoning it [the apparent horizon] in favor of the absolute horizon. Why? Because the absolute horizon - paradoxically, it might seem - violates our cherished notion that an effect should not precede its cause. When matter falls into a black hole, the absolute horizon starts to grow ('effect') before the matter reaches it ('cause'). The horizon grows in anticipation that the matter will soon be swallowed and will increase the hole's gravitational pull. Penrose and Israel knew the origin of this seeming paradox. The very definition of the absolute horizon depends on what will happen in the future: on whether or not signals will ultimately escape to the distant Universe. In the terminology of philosophers, it is a teleological definition (a definition that relies on 'final causes'), and it forces the horizon's evolution to be teleological. Since teleological viewpoints have rarely if ever been useful in modern physics, Penrose and Israel were dubious about the merits of the absolute horizon. . .Hawking and James Hartle were able to derive, from Einstein's General Relativity laws, a set of elegant equations that describe how the absolute horizon continuously and smoothly expands and changes its shape, in anticipation of swallowing infalling debris or gravitational waves, or in anticipation of being pulled on by the gravity of other bodies." - Kip Thorne, Black Holes and Time Warps, p. 419 (Chapter 12: 'Black Holes Evaporate')

[Penrose = Roger Penrose, Israel = Werner Israel, Hawking = Stephen Hawking]


In a different area of physics (quantum entanglement), the Klyshko advanced wave model and other advanced wave models exhibit a similar kind of thinking with respect to sequences of events.

Anyway, the point is, the "cause" for some things may not have to follow the standard temporal behavior that seems to apply to most things.