₦airaland Forum

kokoye:
The Angels & Demons movie is different from the book. same concept but a whole lot of differences.

I love it!

I was so so not happy when I watched that movie. So many things were changed. That's why I'm bothered about them doing a movie on "The Lost Symbols".

I also read the e-book. The hard copy novels I read, I borrow.

I don't like watching movies before I read their book. The suspense would have been lost already, which is what primarily makes a book a good read for me. That's why I haven't read The Da Vinci Code till date, 'cos I watched the movie already.

vedaxcool:
It seems you are unable to understand my point or contend with the arguement, as I asked why don't people wait for GOD to bring them food rather than go out and hustle?

I'll answer this from a religious perspective.

When you go out to hustle, you are helping yourself.   This cannot be compared to fighting for God.  Fighting for Allah means you are helping Allah who is supposed to be 'all-powerful'.   Or isn't he?

kokoye:
Thank God for google.

just kidding.

lol. . . naah, I read the book last year September.

Yeah, the statement was made by Robert Langdon in Dan Brown's "The Lost Symbol".   I love Dan Brown!

alimat 2:
I will tell her that Muslims are the real followers of her so called Jesus

lol. . . so Muslims are real followers of a so-called Jesus?

[quote author=bashy_demy link=topic=497785.msg6600367#msg6600367 date=1282217882]So cause Islam is religion of peace and it should be allow to be molested without retaliation huh?[/quote]If you guys are as 'peaceful' as you'd want us to believe, then 'retaliation' shouldn't even be in your vocabulary at all, not to talk of 'violence'.

[quote author=bashy_demy link=topic=497785.msg6600367#msg6600367 date=1282217882]if its keep re-occurring then we should just fold our arms and keeping getting molested?[/quote]Yes please, FOLD your arms! Allah is 'powerful' enough to fight for himself, isn't he?

[quote author=bashy_demy link=topic=497785.msg6600367#msg6600367 date=1282217882]Well i think there is a freedom of religion so why would they be preaching against other religion to the extent of going into the school mosque on first juma't  in the month of ramadan this is uncall for.[/quote]Yes, I completely agree that it's uncalled for. But it's equally uncalled for that the aggrieved party should respond with violence. Whatever happened to dialogue?

javalove:
How is this a fallacy  Islam is a religion of peace and total submission to the will of Allah the Almighty. . .Do u have a problem with this definition?

I'm honestly not interested in dragging this issue with you, as it has been dealt with extensively on this forum on countless occasions. Religion of peace, but won't hesitate to retaliate at any provocation. Yeah, that's the definition of peace.

acaolly1:
Fellow Nigerians, Islam is a religion of peace.

Fallacy of all fallacies.   When "Islam" and "peace" appear to complement each other in a single sentence, I think, oxymoron.

Sagamite:
When I was in boarding school in secondary school, I entered every single complex/building/quarters. The ones I am allowed in and even the ones I was not allowed in including Principal's House and Girl's Hostel (Yes, it is my religious duty).

The only building I never entered even when it was empty was the Mosque.

Why?

Because their was a doctrine amongst both muslim students and teachers that any unbeliever that enters should be beaten. And at least I saw 2 people assaulted for such in my [b]13 years in secondary school.[/b]

LWKMD

Sagamite:
There needs to be a self-search global islamic conference about why some muslims are raised on and use violence to resolve issues and how to stop it.

Those years of intense flogging received in their childhood gotta account for something - they need to pass it on to others. . . lol.  You really need to see the way children are flogged mercilessly at their "Ile-Kewu", for even the slightest offences.  No real surprises they grow up, violent.

MyJoe:
Replace "pugnacious" with "incendiary". Meanwhile, someone please call the fire service!

It's all unnecessary, of course. I noticed the little misunderstanding of a statement in a post that led to it all earlier.

LOL.  You're right.  Those of us that know Tudor understand where he's coming from.   He's always been against perceived double standards, even if exhibited out of the context of his preconceived notions.   Sagamite, on the other hand, is just being an "objective police".

I wonder when Tudor became female.  She used to be male!

Sagamite:
You be OAU boy.   The school produces some few thinkers despite Nigeria's educational mess.

Well, I wouldn't exactly say that I'm a product of OAU.  I was already in the religion of "Objectivity and Intelligence" before I became a student of the school.

Sagamite:
I also had a place in OAU before leaving for Jand.  

And like you, I won't graduate from here either, because I'll be leaving soon. . . (though it's my 3rd session here already.).  

[quote author=Rhino.3dm link=topic=498929.msg6592723#msg6592723 date=1282129241]^^^ But Dan Brown says everything in the novel is 'absolute truth'. Google his interview on BBC, can't post the link now.[/quote]In case you don't know, Dan Brown's novels are a genre of faction - a blend of facts with fiction.   And I doubt Dan Brown would say such a thing as 'everything in the novel is absolute truth'.

toba:
Yeah but the deist still believes in the existence of a supreme being and not live in delusion like some who dis believes no?

Living in delusion?  Well, I wouldn't know about that to be honest.  While a deist believes in the existence of a supreme being, an "agnostic deist" isn't even sure about that either, but just "feels" there's got to be "something" bigger than us, somewhere. Everyone of us (theist/atheist/deist/agnostic/etc) could be deluded for all I know.

The funny part is, neither Tudor nor Sagamite belongs to any religion.  Tudor, an atheist.  Sagamite, an "Agnostic Deist", like myself.



P.S. I've always thought of myself as an "Agnostic Deist", and in fact, thought I was probably the first to coin the term. Surprisingly, I find someone here who describes himself with the exact same words. Even more surprising is, I just found a "Agnostic Deist Association" group on Facebook.

haha! This is a classic.

When two of Nairaland's most pugnacious characters (arguably) engage in a verbal war, all I can do is grab me some popcorn and enjoy the show. I'm so loving this!

Joagbaje:
^^^^^^
that's what make it a miracle. Or Sarah and Abraham must have stolen a baby too.

When I first saw the topic, I was expecting to read something about God's promise being fulfilled, or some intense fasting & prayer session, or some really 'supernatural' event that led to this occurrence. Nothing in this story, asides, the debatable age of the woman (she actually may be 60), suggests any spiritual intervention in aiding this woman's cause. If you read the story carefully, you'll notice that it was the reporter who kept making the comparison with Abraham and Sarah. The woman's own story tells us that she used a CREAM, and she got pregnant. She supposedly used a completely natural means. Sarah didn't use any "frothy cream" and "anti-barrenness cream", did she?

That being said, I think this is a bogus story.

It's usually funny when, a topic, like this one is posted, and noetic jumps out of nowhere, and says, "Oya, where are those atheists/Muslims/unbelievers to come and debunk this?", like he's just discovered something really extraordinary to reinforce his beliefs.  More often than not, he ends up disappointed. 

I get the feeling, @noetic. I used to be like that too.

The Da Vinci Code is a novel, and it's fiction.

ceeque:
God who sent her would never allow anyone kill her, so people should be cautious in handling her case,
to avoid the wrath of God. That is my humble submission.

Madam, were you there when God was sending her?

So the girl is on facebook sef.

https://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/profile-ak-snc1/v222/104/56/n562941387_5611.jpg
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=562941387

She looks so young, so naive. Now I'm feeling so sorry for her. She probably didn't know what she was getting herself into.

Having gone through the links thehomer provided, I'm thoroughly convinced that this is just another bullshit conspiracy theory.  In case OLAADEGBU & friends missed it, here's something you should consider:

One explanation for this phenomenon is pareidolia, the tendency of the human brain to perceive meaningful patterns in random noise. Pareidolia is even more likely to occur when a person consciously tries to detect a pattern, as is the case for someone listening for intelligible phrases in backwards speech. The power of suggestion is then used to nudge the listener to hear what the presenter wants him to hear—David John Oates, for example, almost always tells the listener in advance what he should expect to hear, thereby planting a suggestion that would make the listener more likely to actually "hear" that phrase. A study has shown that when listening to the same clips without being told in advance what to expect, the results have a higher variation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_speech#Claims

Pay attention to the last line especially.   Obviously, you have been told beforehand to expect to hear, "thank you Satan".  It has already been registered in your subconscious, so your mind automatically picks it up when you get to the expected part.   You should test this with 20 other people, don't tell them what to expect, just tell them to listen, and I'm quite sure you'll get at least 10 other phrases that have absolutely nothing to do with "thanking Satan".  In my own case, I heard something like "take your seat".

@OLAADEGBU

Why would a Satan worshiper/Muslim/Whatnot allow Christian Bishops to pray for him? It tells a lot that you never post videos like this one.

[flash=500,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnwrojhxMFk[/flash]

Okay, I initially refrained from posting on this thread, but . . .

saintchux:
1. She dressed like a Muslim. At that point, she is a Muslim which she want to preach against it, let assume rapture took place at that time. What will happen to her? A Muslim
2. Dressing like a Muslim while she is a Christian is impersonation, as law student she should know the implication.

This has got to be the most moronic comment I've read today.  Damn!

How come we never heard about any of these so-called "prophecies" before they happened?

Besides, this. . .

Yefet:
- Future prophecies are war in Korea, and war between Israel & Iran

. . . is no prophecy. Anyone following the news will most likely predict this too, based on present indications of course.

[size=14pt]Did anyone see what I just saw on TV?   Replays show the referee and Fabiano discussing just after the second goal, with the referee gesticulating in a manner that suggests that he acknowledged the HANDBALL, and both of them just laughed it off.  FIFA has got to investigate this!![/size]

Oh please.

First of all, the "miracle" is NOT "recent". This story has been circulating the internet since 2004.

Secondly, it's a HOAX. See: http://www.snopes.com/glurge/buried.asp

u2 1 day:
its unrythmic and its unafrican, africans are known for rythm not a blarring horn mimicking the sound of a rig

THANK YOU! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!!!

Oh, by the way, The dreaded vuvuzela claims its first victim: Woman bursts her windpipe 'by blowing too hard'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1287631/The-dreaded-vuvuzela-claims-victim-Woman-bursts-windpipe-blowing-hard.html

toba:
What a story.
i'll sum it up with Pascals wager 'that the theist will have nothing to loose even if at the end we found no God'. But for those that doesnt recognise God in the doing,i may not be able to tell what will happen to them,if at the end we found theres a God

And I'll rebut with Smith's Wager.

"    As one final argument or satire on an argument, you may have heard of Pascal's wager at some point. Blaise Pascal was the famous French mathematician, philosopher, and theologian. He came up with this argument which consequently became quite famous, which went something as follows. Reason can't prove or disprove the existence of God. Weigh the odds. If the atheist is correct, we're going to die, nothing will happen, and nothing is lost. But if the Christian is correct, the nonbelievers are going to be in Hell for eternity. So it seems like the practical odds would lie with Christianity. We would wager on Christianity because the practical odds are so important. If you wager on Christianity and there is no god, you don't lose anything.

    The first obvious problem with this is it completely shoves aside the whole issue of intellectual integrity, as if you can just do a complete turn-about in your beliefs willy-nilly without suffering any psychological damage, which simply isn't possible. It would require such a gross miscarriage of intellectual integrity to do this kind of thing that it's inconceivable that someone with Pascal's kind of mind would even offer it.

    But I want to offer you a kind of counter-wager, called the "Smith's wager." Here are the premises of my wager:

    1. The existence of a god, if we are to believe in it, can only be established through reason.
    2. Applying the canons of correct reasoning to theistic belief, we must reach the conclusion that theism is unfounded and must be rejected by rational people.

    Now comes the question, "But what if reason is wrong in this case?", which it sometimes is. We are fallible human beings. What if it turns out that there is a Christian god and He's up there and He's going to punish for eternity for disbelieving in Him. Here's where my wager comes in. Let's suppose you're an atheist. What are the possibilities? The first possibility is there is no god, you're right. In that case, you'll die, that'll be it, you've lost nothing, and you've lived a happy life with the correct position. Secondly, a god may exist but he may not be concerned with human affairs. He may be the god of traditional Deism. He may have started the universe going and left it to its traditional devices, in which case you will simply die, that is all there is to it, again, and you've lost nothing.

    Let's suppose that God exists and He is concerned with human affairs -- He's a personal god -- but that He is a just god. He's concerned with justice. If you have a just god, he could not possibly punish an honest error of belief where there is no moral turpitude or no wrongdoing involved. If this god is a creator god and He gave us reason as the basic means of understanding our world, then He would take pride in the conscientious and scrupulous use of reason the part of His creatures, even if they committed errors from time to time, in the same way a benevolent father would take pride in the accomplishments of his son, even if the son committed errors from time to time. Therefore, if there exists a just god, we have absolutely nothing to fear from such a god. Such a god could not conceivably punish us for an honest error of belief.

    Now we came to the last possibility. Suppose there exists an unjust god, specifically the god of Christianity, who doesn't give a damn about justice and who will burn us in Hell, regardless of whether we made honest mistakes or not. Such a god is necessarily unjust, for there is no more heinous injustice we could conceive of, than to punish a person for an honest error of belief, when he has tried to the best of his ability to ascertain the truth. The Christian thinks he's in a better position in case this kind of god exists. I wish to point out that he's not in any better position than we are because if you have an unjust god. The earmark of injustice is unprincipled behavior, behavior that's not predictable. If there's an unjust god and He really gets all this glee out of burning sinners and disbelievers, then what could give him more glee than to tell Christians they would be saved, only to turn around and burn them anyway, for the Hell of it, just because he enjoys it? If you've got an unjust god, what worst injustice could there be than that? It's not that far-fetched. If a god is willing to punish you simply for an honest error of belief, you can't believe He's going to keep his word when He tells you He won't punish you if you don't believe in Him because He's got to have a sadistic streak to begin with. Certainly He would get quite a bit of glee out of this behavior. Even if there exists this unjust god, then admittedly we live in a nightmarish universe, but we're in no worse position than the Christian is.

    Again, if you're going to make the wager, you might as well wager on what your reason tells you, that atheism is correct, and go that route because you won't be able to do anything about an unjust god anyway, even if you accept Christianity. My wager says that you should in all cases wager on reason and accept the logical consequence, which in this case is atheism. If there's no god, you're correct; if there's an indifferent god, you won't suffer; if there's a just god, you have nothing to fear from the honest use of your reason; and if there's an unjust god, you have much to fear but so does the Christian."

- By George H. Smith

Princek12:
That is typical of Nairaland moderators. They see an interesting topic and, instead of placing that topic on the homepage, they clone the topic and put it in the homepage under their names or their buddy's names. Before your story makes frontpage, you have to a buddy of a moderator or the buddy of moderator's buddy. It is not really based on merit, as in Naija mentality.

And what exactly would they gain by doing this? Please let's not derail this thread with petty accusations. Thanks.

Mudley313:
thanks for stealing my thread.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-462129.0.html

oleh

LOL.  Didn't know there's a thread on this topic already.  Sorry.

Since the last Confederations cup in S/Africa, I've never for once liked the vuvuzela.  Then, at the last U-17 tournament held here in Nigeria, that was even more annoying.  Whatever happened to the good old trumpets and chants?  The sound that thing produces is horrible, I can barely hear the commentary, and it just doesn't make the matches interesting to watch on TV (I can imagine how disgruntled spectators physically present at the stadium would feel).  Thankfully, I'm not the only one who feels this way.  Even some players are complaining.  Below are some of the comments from different quarters (from goal.com)

"It is impossible to communicate, it’s like being deaf." -  Lionel Messi

"It is difficult for anyone on the pitch to concentrate. Hardly anyone likes them, but the people who do like them are those who like to blow the instruments and make a racket."  - Cristiano Ronaldo

"We love both. We love the vuvuzelas, it's part of our culture and we are used to them, we should keep going with them. I understand that some people and some players have a problem with it but we've had no problems with the vuvuzelas or the balls." - South Africa coach Carlos Alberto Parreira

"Who are they to question our culture? The vuvuzela is part of football in this country. We would not go to Britain or anywhere else and tell people how to act, it is very patronising. This World Cup is in Africa and people should embrace it for what it is." - Freddie Makke, reported inventor of the vuvuzela

"I would prefer singing. It's always been a great generator of a wonderful atmosphere in stadiums and I would try to encourage them to sing. In the days of the struggle [against apartheid] we were singing, all through our history it's our ability to sing that inspired and drove the emotions." - Danny Jordaan, tournament chief organiser

"We can't sleep at night because of the vuvuzelas. People start playing them from 6am. We can't hear one another out on the pitch because of them." - Patrice Evra

"One vuvuzela just behind you will hit you with more than 125 decibels of sound - much louder than a road drill - which will really hurt your ears and, when added to hours of partying with loud music in pubs and clubs, can cause permanent hearing loss over time."  - Audiology specialist Crystal Rolfe

"I don’t see banning the music traditions of fans in their own country. Would you want to see a ban on the fan traditions in your country?" - Sepp Blatter

"I know you hear them on TV because my kids have been on the phone asking for them, so I’ve got them in my bag already to take home. Anyone who has been at Anfield watching me knows I am louder than the vuvuzelas."  - Jamie Carragher


Nairalanders, what do you think?