₦airaland Forum

You want iice to promise you to see Thor? The only thing with better odds is that the sun won't go out tomorrow.

Resident Evil 3D. They should make Four Weddings and a Funeral 3D too.

I've not even seen Social Network. Shey na for jungle you still dey watch film pass me?

At long iwasabouttototallyloseit last!

Jay, you is welcome anytime.

JK. Ape obey! Do you know that yeye anthem?

Maybe mini me added up all the ratings to arrive at a cumulative of 75%. Men, thanks for jump starting this joint.

I've stopped being picky about movie details. I judge them nowadays by how good I feel after seeing them. My rating of The Expendables is gonna be clouded by the fact that I thought I was gonna rate it 7% before I actually saw it.

The cast is indeed legendary. And legendary in the real sense of the word. Nostalgia nearly killed me with Dolph. Jet Li coulda been done without though. Plus he's not yet a legend anyways. I don't know where Chuck Norris was. Or Jean Claude. It woulda been complete with them. But still. Great stuff. Though put together, save Willis, they all have the acting ability of a drunk Clive Owen. Not to mention a dozen plastic surgeries.

There seems to be a resurgence of John Woo type action films and I'm not complaining. The A-Team and The Losers constitute some. Notice the 'The's in all of em? Machete is another one though way better. The stories of these type of films are characteristically ridiculous. What excuse can you have to kill indiscriminately? A bad plot, that's what. I'll not even talk about the acting. Me, I loved seeing giant bullets and bigger knives and humongous explosions. The film is really terrible if you pick it apart and scrutinise separately but as a whole, it's really quite cool.

I rate it 45%.

Are you freaking serious? In Lagos too! You can't get the thing in a quick sand in the middle of the sahara

Wall Street. Very realistic ending. Michael's still got it. Shia is a natural. If the movie was shorter, it'd have been lended more oomph.

Well, that one is weird.

Which film is Titanic 2?

Sup teeluv? Lol again, Wacky.

Glad you found one movie to take you there. Seems like they come fewer and further in between.

Vexille. Story very techy. I like. Graphics, top notch. Reminds me of the days of Titan A. E. Great movie.

So this is an old thread sef. Thought it similar to the other one. I rarely even see good movies again. The ones I don't wanna see again means I've been traumatised.

Lol, Wacky. Shyamalan is just going thru a rough patch. He'll awe us all soon enough. Even if by nothing else but the law of averages.

At topic: The Matrix: Revolutions, Blade: Trinity, Transformers 2, Almost all Nic Cages' films since The Rock, Elektra, Daredevil, G. I. Joe. Valhalla Rising even though I kinda liked it. Plenty more that will dull my shine by mentioning.

Ahem

Cutting corners

@e36991. I am already Yoruba Yoruba

@e36991

Yes.

Orinkinla for mod

Actually I've not seen St. Thomas' 'proofs' elaborated like this before. Was this how he originally postulated them? Anyways, it's safe to say that the first three proofs are saying the same thing. They're all integrating an infinite fraction and arriving at God. The unmoved mover. The uncaused causer. The ever present causer and mover of all things that now you see and later, you don't. All three proofs realize a backward infinity and seek to arbitrarily set limits upon it and call this God. Never mind the callous smugness of saying "presto! God exists!", why does it have to be a sentient being? For all intents and purposes, the Big Bang is God. His argument is same with mine, only it stops when it got tired. Who made God? Nobody? Then why is it impossible to believe that no one made us too? It must certainly be easier for Mr. No One to make us than the terribly perfect, omniscient, omnipotent, omnietc God.

The fourth argument is actually endearing. Aquinas must have been battling inside himself. This argument is ridiculous and is still in the same vein as the first three. An infinity that must peak and the peak being God. I'll discount it simply this way. If the fact that there are varying goodness means that there must be a peak of goodness and this is God, I might say that there will also be a peak of evil and this is the devil (or whatever you like) which cancels out God in every respect. Bear in mind that it is inconsistent logic to be the extremes of two things at once. You can't be the hottest coldest thing.

The last proof is the one that I haven't been able to shake off. I still kinda believe in it halfway but not in the way he put it though. But since it's largely the same thing we think here, I'll leave this one. Suffice it to say that it is a paradox. You see a law and automatically think someone must have been responsible for it. We count one to ten but it is because we have chosen to work in base ten. We might've chosen to work in base 12 or 4. We'd still get on with life. Order, elegance etc are not tangible and do not constitute scientific theory let alone proof. It's just the human romantic tendency. It reminds me of when some scientist(s) picked up regular radio waves from outer space (now called pulsars I believe) and thought it might be aliens trying to communicate. We in turn broadcast radio waves to the universe hoping they'll be intercepted by intelligent beings. Never mind that our sun might have gone out before they receive the waves let alone determine their source. There's also the sequences of numbers. If I write a number sequence 2,4,6,8,10,12 up to 30. There are an infinite different formulas that can produce this sequence, most of which are probably so complex, it'd take a super computer weeks to compute, let alone generate. Bottomline: elegance proofs nothing.

I'm sorry, I'm sleepy. I'll reply the main post tomorrow.

DeepSight, I suggest you understand the scientific definition of time. You don't even need to go that far. You must have heard the phrase, 'time stood still' usually marked by everything stopping. Also think of the phrase 'turning back time' in which everything happens in reverse. Your perception of time is a rigid non-stopping flow (and this is just a perception), my understanding of time (and also that of science I believe) is that marked by events (or motion) which therefore can be stopped, fast-forwarded or slowed down i.e. the first phrase. The utterly wrong idea of time is that which can be rewound. You can't go back in time.

Bottomline, time is marked by events. No events means time ceases to exist. If something stays in one fixed way, time also stops. So there's really no time before the big bang. It was birthed when it exploded. Assuming you believe in the Big Bang. Also space is not a thing. It is a lack of thing. Lack of matter. Please understand that I speak in these terms. Maybe you'll understand me better and possibly, thehomer too.

Lol, calm down and read again. The dude believed he was AS. It was probably some actress that came to testify about being changed from SS to AA (they sabi better thing sef, why not SS to AS?). I know what horror being SS is. If I love someone and there is a chance we'll have an SS kid, we won't have kids.

e36991. You have not daaled and tu sha. You have tu sha and daaled o

I'm here cuz I miss JeSoul and I wanna take a break from being naughty. Also there's the thread.

Leaving my skepticism aside, I'd say the use of the Ten Commandments is in its eternalness. I believe Jews have upwards of six hundred odd laws they keep. Or is it six thousand? I forget. The Ten Commandments seem to have this air of 'no matter what happens, or how sophisticated you humans become, these laws can never become old fashioned or unnecessary.' That's a probable reason to me.

It'll never be right (outside of a greater good) to: kill, lie, steal, be covetous, philander etc.

Morality is quite dynamic but not wholly so. It is also a rigid thing with absolutes. I enjoyed Toneyb's first post. It contains similar thoughts to a book I read and agree with.

To JeSoul's trick question: Yes! It is not only possible, it is almost ALWAYS the case. That's why we say things like refined, barbaric, developed. It doesn't mean good or evil, it just means morality is evolving. Getting more colourful and richer and with more nuances. Going back in time, there would be lesser colours till things became black and white. An eye for an eye, that kinda thing. This is regards us though. But in God's eyes, it is another can of worms and it has shaped my opinion of Him for better or for worse.

I'm sure Maddock believes his testimony and is not lying. I on the other hand think it is a coincidence and there's probably someone who doesn't know how to do blood analysis somewhere in there. In any case, this is what Nuke says about some Christians scaring other people away. Now here is a dude that's supposed to be a bridge between you and God but religious goons have gone to create a bigger bridge to this bridge. It's so sad, it's so sad.

One of my teenage brothers almost went bonkers cuz one Tinashe something (who turned out to be very pretty) followed him on twitter. By the time I was through with him, only MJ will be able to make him go crazy about such a silly thing.

E be like say some people will mortgage their houses to perm this dude Chris' hair or get him a silver bow tie. Or very soon Christmas will be spelt Chrismas without the t. Atta boy, Yak! I hope the other one, Tuberculosis Joshua beats you to it though.

How do you kill something that never lived?

Damn, the guy doesn't know where to find a long range crook seeking missile?

My dad wants to relive his life through me. My mum is heavenly.

KAG just fall my hand run away. I like the questions. My two or three kobo will come soon

Ach! I will revert tomorrow, Deep Sight. I and Kratos just finished killing one badass and we need a break


But before I go, lemme just say that I made a typo here

Deep Sight:
Self contradictory.

Discern the contradictions - you state -

"However I don't think there's any logical reason to say He exists." - (Statement 1)

Which is scandalously contradictory to your next statement -

"Sure it is inconceivable that the universe pops out of anything. I agree." - (Statement 2)

This statement absolutely and irretrievably infers that Statement 1 is false.

You would need to ponder on this - and this alone and singularly puts a lie to the rest of your post.

It infers directly that there is every logical basis and ratiionale for the belief in a pre-existent entity - God.

Time is an intangible constant.

yada yada yada

I meant to say: Sure it is inconceivable that the universe pops out of nothing All this street english don dey finish me It is apparent that I was agreeing with your position there which is that the universe didn't just pop outta nothing.

Meanwhile, I'm glad you hauled Thomas Aquinas' butt into this. I've been meaning to kick it a while but haven't had an excuse.

^^^^Snub it

I'm glad JeSoul is getting all the love that she deserves.

It's eminently apparent that she's ineluctably the people's choice (takiing a breath) and I purposefully assert to you that she must perforce be the unanimous recipient of this award due to the inferential and overwhelming nature of the vox populi which is incontestible (taking another breath) and any argument against it is moot and dead on arrival.

1. Deepsight. Think whatever you like of DeepSight but he makes this place tick. He gets my first vote by leagues

2. Everybody else. I live a double life religion wise. Coming here made me more open and brave