₦airaland Forum

I have to agree with the jurisdictions that would jail you for the sort of nonsense that is the op, op.

Now, good folk, some of you seem to have a grudge with the scientific method. So here, show how the scientific method has or could fail us, ie in matters related to it.

As a bonus, list out the domains you think are beyond the purview of science.


Note, if you're a mo.ron, don't reply. There are many other threads were you could indulge in folly. (I know mo.rons don't know they are mo.rons, but it still needs saying).

And I may not reply immediately, but meh...

Let's ignore my lifestyle choices, for the most part. But let's say I recently got a new pair of slippers. They are very nice, thank you. Here's the thing, I often spend minutes/hours looking for them. I usually find them in a corner of the room, perfectly placed no less. Now note, this is a corner, 'lungu', which before one accesses gymnastics are required. Also I live alone.

I am NOT the one placing them there..

Recently I've also been having good dreams so this is what I think is happening; while asleep, a spirit comes over to use my slippers (remember they are very nice) and gives me good dreams to prevent me from waking up. It's the only reasonable explanation.

I need to know, how do I get rid of this spirit? Should I even bother, as, is it a good spirit? The dreams I get in return are rather nice.

(And yes, the above story is genuine, why would I make up something as dry and foo.lish as that?)

I'm becoming very distressed, any and all recommendations are welcome. Thank you

https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/324/640/1fa.png

https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/282/352/9b2.png

https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/284/284/d85.jpg

https://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/282/349/433.jpg

https://31.media.tumblr.com/4afa3fb69e3e258c61113610f89ee5d4/tumblr_mmiauvO0901sqrfeso1_500.jpg

https://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/283/099/3b5.jpg


And do note (though you'll misunderstand)

I've often thought about this. The problem is his omniscience, he'll know I want to bash him over the head with the machete I will be holding.

A possible solution is to use a contradiction to show how by the laws of nature (which religitards would call his laws) and more importantly, logic, he cannot possibly exist. Even if he does exist at the time he'll then be mandatated to kill himself. Something similar was used in 'hitchhikers guide to the galaxy'.

Then again, he's omniscient. So he should know he doesn't exist. Contradiction, see?

Mourinho is a joke

Energy, like say gravity, that needs to be defended with threats, just like good 'ol yahweh. Requires mumbo jumbo to work. Featuring, but not exclusive to, incantations, sacrifices etc. You can even speak to them using talking dollies (what thread was that again sef?), after you give some dude N100 ie. Find your pastor and pay your tithes, the holy spirit will show up then. Also, pray a lot.

Oh what is this, this 'energy' is some sort of manifestation of 'the ancestors'? They're 'alive' and with us? And they can make us faster than usein bolt and bullet proof as well? Or is it faster than a speeding bullet and able to leap over skyscrapers? I'm guessing like xtian prayer, it can also cure HIV?

You complain about vir.gin births and jewish zombies?

And even more bizarrely, call yourself an atheist??

Folly comes in all shapes and sizes.

Seems muslims are the major culprit, naturally. These are the same folk that throw a party anytime there's a new sheeple in their ranks while fully cognizant of their apostacy laws. Ie, they celebrate new converts while acknowledging that should said convert change his/her mind the penalty is death, at their own hands.



I'll let your imagination stew on it. And note, that's not all. The women especially get a lot more than just their freedom of conscience taken away. Hard to figure out exactly what are they celebrating, no? Slaves celebrating the arrival of new slaves?

Yet there are people who think the west should just roll over and indulge these robbers. Do they let cults in their ranks that kill former members thrive? Do they entertain laws that seek to discriminate against a population??

Islam is a special case, and should be treated as such. Even they think themselves special, no? They have all sort of nice things, just for themselves. Small, eg, their own section on nairaland, to more significant, eg their very own human rights charter. Complete with sharia compliance, their right to kill you or a loved one should one become apostate.

And make no mistake about it, they support this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bV710c1dgpU

MUSLIM OVERLORD: When Muslim organizations invite Shaykhs who speak openly about the values of Islam, the Islamophobic western media starts murdering the character of that organization and the invited speaker. The question these Islamophobic journalists need to reflect upon is; are these so called ‘‘radical’’ views that they criticize endorsed only by these few individuals being invited around the globe, or does the common Muslims believe in them. If the common Muslims believe in these values that means that more or less all Muslims are radical and that Islam is a radical religion. Since this is not the case, as Islam is a peaceful religion and so are the masses of common Muslims, these Shaykhs cannot be radical. Rather it is Islamophobia from the ignorant western media who is more concerned about making money by alienating Islam by presenting Muslims in this way. Islam Net, an organization in Norway, invited 9 speakers to Peace Conference Scandinavia 2013. These speakers would most likely be labelled as ‘‘extremists’’ if the media were to write about the conference. But how come this conference was the largest Islamic Scandinavian International event that has taken place in Norway with about 4000 people attending? Were the majority of those who attended in opposition to what the speakers were preaching? If so, how come they paid to enter? Let’s forget about that for a moment, let’s imagine that we don’t really knew what all these people thought about for example segregation of men and women, or stoning to death of those who commit adultery. The Chairman of Islam Net, Fahad Ullah Qureshi asked the audience, and the answer was clear. The attendees were common Sunni Muslims. They did not consider themselves as radicals or extremists. They believed that segregation was the right thing to do, both men and women agreed upon this. They even supported stoning or whatever punishment Islam or prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) commanded for adultery or any other crime. They even believed that these practises should be implemented around the world. Now what does that tell us? Either all Muslims and Islam is radical, or the media is Islamophobic and racist in their presentation of Islam. Islam is not radical, nor is Muslims in general radical. That means that the media is the reason for the hatred against Muslims, which is spreading among the non-Muslims in western countries.

He asks an excellent question in the bolded

We need to cover this up, keep the truth from those who follow God and keep our agenda alive. They must never know there are things in this world which the carnal mind cannot comprehend...

Who is our agent in the UK sef? Why did Satan allow this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/weirdnewsvideo/10497811/Mystery-alien-like-creature-seen-in-Bristol-harbour.html

God save us. End time things...

Reyginus: I will address this. But what do you think of my response to your first poser.

It was useless, that's why I asked again.

And I do not speak of yahweh, I invoke him only when I want to mock you, fool. Even with all the computing power in the universe, it would be impossible to make yahweh look reasonable. You cannot divide by zero. So I speak of PIKKIWOKKI, sometimes called GOD??!!, the everything that is the ultimate sum of nothingnesseseses. He doesn't really care what you call him though, He's certainly not as vain as yahweh.

So, the question still stands


And on random related notes

I am omniscient, can I know everything?

If a tree falls in a forest and there's no one around, does it make a sound?

Silly atheist, science is not complete. There are people, for instance, that point out virtual particles can be explained without invoking "nothing", they are simply caused by ripples in other fields, and they even have formulas etc which account for them.

Like this guy

Strassler: The best way to approach this concept, I believe, is to forget you ever saw the word “particle” in the term. A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle. A particle is a nice, regular ripple in a field, one that can travel smoothly and effortlessly through space, like a clear tone of a bell moving through the air. A “virtual particle”, generally, is a disturbance in a field that will never be found on its own, but instead is something that is caused by the presence of other particles, often of other fields.

.......

But if two electrons pass near each other, as in Figure 1, they will, because of their electric charge, disturb the electromagnetic field, sometimes called the photon field because its ripples are photons. That disturbance, sketched whimsically in green in the figure, is not a photon. It isn’t a ripple moving at the speed of light; in general isn’t a ripple at all, and certainly it is under no obligation to move at any one speed. That said, it is not at all mysterious; it is something whose details, if we know the initial motions of the electrons, can be calculated easily. Exactly the same equations that tell us about photons also tell us about how these disturbances work; in fact, the equations of quantum fields guarantee that if nature can have photons, it can have these disturbances too. Perhaps unfortunately, this type of disturbance, whose details can vary widely, was given the name “virtual particle” for historical reasons, which makes it sound both more mysterious, and more particle-like, than is necessary. [Students of math and physics will recognize real photons as solutions of a wave equation, and virtual photons as related to the Green function associated with this equation.]

Everything is field, field is everything. Even, obviously, what we call 'space'

So, can something come from nothing?

So many people complaining. He was even a terrorist.

[size=15pt]He's definitely not going to heaven.[/size] Deal with it.

Can something come from nothing, fool?

NP indignation over the use of the word fool BTW. The Bible says you're a full, therefore you're a fool. Simple

You're likely looking for zaria @tex.. Technically speaking the base is in KD, but there's an airplane school (what do they call them again?) in Zaria. Zaria (kd as well) is usually associated with the military for various reasons

random of sorts; I currently live in kd

Deep Sight: ^^^^ Delude yourself. I have seen the end from the beginning as you have shown a determination to fail to address the core issues here. Wiegraf's turn out on this thread has been scandalously low minded and abysmal. He hops on your nonsense about cultural values after advocating force as the proper tool for the determination of morality. Bunkum. Trash.

What do you want me to do, give you some cabin? It's not my fault you're spouting nonsense, you don't even seem to understand your own position. Why take it out on me? You just realized I'm childish? And do you really not have any mirrors around? After all the antics, the whinning, appeals to emotion, contorting left right centre everything said in your attempts to demonize my position, petulance for pages after you've been shown to be vomiting dross etc etc, you now play the victim? Oh the indginity, lol

For instance, have I not been speaking about values from page 1?! And where do I state that violence is the only way to impose a will? When I claimed you were trying to impose your will on us, were you perhaps using a cutlass to get your point across? Or Mandela that just died, he was at one point a terrorist (to some, subjectivity, see?), but I do believe he eventually imposed his (legendarily stubborn) will without any bloodshed, no? In fact, it seems he averted a bloody civil war, no? Mostly by being the bigger man, and listening to every side. In other words, acknowledging other wills as equally important, that there is more than one standpoint to every issue, and bringing these wills to the negotiating table. Ditto Gandhi and the rest...

Ditto everyone with regards to navigating through life. Actually, every single living thing, in a sense, possesses a will. You, in the meantime, my 'natural' proponent, can please proceed to show how lions eat without using force. I'm sure those zebras etc willingly comply.....

On a semi related random note, have you seen cloud atlas?

http://www.tangdou.com/v38/dAMcMgOjwzzDwA2.html

It says a lot about 'natural' orders. Eg, the natural order slavers followed.

The writer acknowledges this

op: And more importantly, if you are a church/mosque leader. Don't take advantage of people who come to you for hope. It is the most cruel thing ever. A woman today made a testimony of almost losing a child. She was probably poor.

Is this the only ill he noticed with rampant religiousity?

If he thinks we bother with religitards just because, then he may be confused. For instance, I could care less if one worships a broom at home. My issue is they should keep there, something they clearly can't do. And note, 'religitard'. Not every religious person is one of those, just as not every black man is a ni.gger (not every ni.gger is black as well, but we do seem to have a lot of ni.ggers).

Deep Sight: I just looked at your link, and it is obvious you are not ready to discuss anything. There is nothing there that discloses anything meaningful in terms of this discussion.

Hmmm.. You have nothing of value to add? Why not just say you have nothing of value to add, rather than pretend you have a point? It seems pointless

Now now, perhaps just my opinion (it isn't, but meh), but let's see how irrelevant that link is....

Deep Sight: 1. On what basis can anyone condemn the actions or moral choices of any one else?

On his/her personal value system

Deep Sight: 2. On what basis should any criminal laws exist or be made?

On the society in question's cultural value system

Does that help? Is there something particularly wrong with this answer? Perhaps you'd prefer it if it had miracles, fairies and skydaddies? And even if one squeezed a skydaddy or two in there to humour you, exactly how would the skydaddy go about defining this absolute "objective" moral code?



But wait, you do have something to add, my bad....

Deep Sight: ^^^ Please don't get confused so early in your involvement. We understand the OP when he talks about morality evolving and we know very well that that is not a Theory of Evolution issue.

When I speak of the implications of the theory of evolution vis-a-viz morality, I do so to show those who think that all that we are is derived from evolution, that they are wrong. If that were the case, and if that were to hold true and consistent, they should subscribe to significantly different moral paradigms, and be willing to do humanity great genetic and evolutionary favours by exterminating weak genes. That is a point wholly different from the argument on moral subjectivity which has been the main issue on this thread. It is a point I simply thought to draw the attention of our evolutionists to, for their consideration - on the matter of subjectivity! They need to wonder why it should be wrong for a Hitler to think that way, for example.

If indeed we are a product only of evolution, please can you tell me if there was anything wrong with the viewpoint of those who sought superior genetic progression by eliminating the weak and inferior?

And if you say there was something morally wrong with such: then please tell on what basis you say so - remembering of course, that the OP and his cohorts declare all morality to be subjective.

Thank you.

...It does remind of a muskeeto question though; do you know chickens are a type of fruit?

Btw, all this coming from someone who labels homosexuals 'unnatural'. Exactly who is doing the genetic screening?? And on what basis?! Exactly how does this 'nature' thing you allude to work?? Somewhat baffling..

And do you label people who don't believe in santa as well? What do call them? "Strict common sense users?"

Joshthefirst: sorry, I skimmed your post. You make even less sense these days. I don't bother sometimes. Just look at the enlarged. Just proves you'd still grab at crap to sound good to yourself.

So, vestigials don't exist?

Thank you, kind ser

aManFromMars: And we have welbeck.

Ah, I see

If it helps,mourinho is just as clueless as moyes

I'm watching Torres, crying. And I like Torres..

At least we have hazard/mata..

What is Suarez doing?

Joshthefirst: when did I imply this happens within a generation? It seems you are the one with special needs.




Maybe you didn't even read the op. Its good to read the op wiegraf before lashing out in butthurt because of a belief scientists hold to be true today without scientific proof.

Ah, I see. I gave you too much credit. You don't even know what bu.tthurt is. You haters will grasp any straw....

Anyways, you're confused as to how this

https://dailycollegian.com/media/2013/01/OnyxDog86-Wolf-Pic.jpg

Could become this?

https://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/7000000/Toy-Dog-Wallpaper-dogs-7014288-1024-768.jpg

^This under 5,000 years of artificial selection

You're confused as to how nature, given thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or millions, or hundred of millions of years could invoke even more drastic changes?

The question should be "why wouldn't new species evolve?", not the other way round.

Same way you clowns love to claim entropy means evolution is impossible. Erm, no. It means nature must always interact, never staying stable. It means evolution must occur, of all sorts of systems. Nature must always mix and match, nothing is stable, that is what makes this universe tick. Eventually entropy will make everything useless as far as we're concerned, but we're a long, looooooonng way away from that.

And it seems you're even denying shared ancestry and DNA evidence, vestigials and evolution of microorganisms in labs

But jewish man less than 6,000 years ago tricked by talking snake? Yeah, much more plausible and scientific.

No one has seen a species evolve, therefore it isn't science...... Did you watch the planet evolve, bros? So astronomy, paleontolgy, etc aren't science. Actually, what in the world makes you, great pupil of answeringgenesis, know better than 99% of proffessional scientists involved with biology as to what science is? The bible?

Kayi..

Note; You're right about one thing though, finally the broken clock is correct. Obviously, I don't really pay attention to what you post.....

Op, considering you're clinically re.tarded your confusion is understandable. Hint; evolution does NOT imply parents give birth to the members of other species within a generation. Not at all.....

As I'm not a special needs teacher I'll leave you to your folly.

anulaxad: A compelling argument,I must say but NO they did not.

Thats why they treated there people like shiit,killing there fathers and selling there brothers all in the name of money and power.

If you do not believe me go and research about slavery,and the benin empire.

Africa was known to have been very uncivilized back then.

Wtf is wrong with you?! Exactly what is the purpose of your brain?

^^^
Yet you cannot show why? All you do is cry? How many pages now? You don't even answer any of my questions. Do you think you can mask that?...

Very free world, needless to say. But if I find your 'objective' morality repulsive and you expect me to indulge, I'll tell you the same I tell the muslims/xtians/allah/yahweh/vishna etc, kindly shove it up your a.rse. Like you were just doing to me now with my stance on the hypothesized murdering son of mine, see?

It works really simply

Deep Sight:

So fuc.king what? Sheesh.

Lemme check again, did you address this??

ME A-FUC.KING-GAIN:
Ok, so god being a member of another species has a different set of values. He decides we failed to achieve his objectives, and proceeds to flood the earth killing everyone save the most sheepish, slavish follower he could find. Genocide, at least of our species. Are you now saying that god's actions are objectively, universally good?

You do realize we humans do exactly the same thing, all the time, to other species?? And it is clearly unavoidable.

Nah...

I'll indulge though..

Deep Sight: he will not punish or discipline his son for stealing: because morality is subjective.

Well, no, that's not exactly what I said. I said I wouldn't discipline, true, but if you were following you'd realize it would be more because I probably would value my kid's life more than that of whoever was abused. Not so hard to understand, no? You can now try to stop me and impose your will on me if you disagree, as that's certainly not an objectively 'good' position, no? And that is exactly what you're doing now with all these appeals to emotion. You're rallying the masses (one of your favorite past times, regardless of whatever you claim, it seems).

Now, they will likely agree with you, claim I would be wrong, just as I would if I were in their shoes. But make no mistake about it, they do so because it is in their best interest, not because they are following some magical code. And you do know just exactly how subjective best is, yes?

I mean for instance, take your stance on homosexuality

deep sight: I think its simply unnatural.

Much as doing a squirell might be said to be unnatural.

It could also be physiological or psycological.

Sad, whichever way.

I doubt homosexuals (and many others, thankfully) consider this the 'best' view on the issue. And, what is that in your post about people being concerned? Oh holier than thou, the reason I took my time out to address your nonsense is because I remember you posting somewhere that you would fight against homosexuality. Now, do tell me how this your foo.lish opinion here is objective..... (Again, skip to the part where you tell us homosexuality is objectively evil and you begin trying to impose your 'objective' will on us. I hope you aren't hypocritical at least, and don't rain on the parade of religious bigots when they're doing their thing, whatever it might be.... oh, you do! You even exiled yourself over something similar....)

Anyways, it works both ways, this subjectivity thing. You can now spout nonsense like the quoted above, and I challenge you, see? Call you out as that nonsense is in no way objective, just as you do me and my kid. Like I have already mentioned, slavery was once 'objectively' condoned, yes? With time, we have been able to get rid of that nonsense, no objective morals needed. Just the will of the people. And the moral zeitgeist will always be changing, evolving. Just as species evolve

Like your poor understanding of evolution, claiming some species are 'better' than others (remember that?), you assume some codes are better than others. You are claiming cats are objectively better than dogs. Really? Again oh again, nonsense. Depending on the situation and objectives (read: values), one code might survive, better aid some objectives, another won't. In war people kill all the time, try doing that $hit during peacetime and see how effective it is in solving problems. The will of the people will stop my son from getting away with murder, but they'll gladly apply different standards to someone they value, eg granting immunity to diplomats and top government officials. It's then in their best interest to let them live, see? Etc etc... (In before malum in blah, it's a nonsense concept. Everyone has the right to be offended, doesn't make any deed intrinsically evil like I've already stated over and over overrrrrrr... People used to be disgusted when they saw black men dining with oyinbo at a table, I fail to see how that makes the act intrinsically evil)

And lastly, most humans tend to value a lot of stuff I would consider good, eg human rights and what not. This is what @voltron is trying to point out, you should have a little more faith in us. We generally tend to (at least in speak, even if not in deed) try improve the lot of ourselves the rest of nature, in a 'positive' sense. Let's just say we have 'good' intentions. Slavery, racism, wanton butchering etc, we're working on it. Some working very hard, gladly giving up their lives for people they will never even meet. I suppose we should just abandon that and just follow your 'natural' laws, which seem to exclude homosexuals.....

Let's not even get into how you assume the universe was built just for us, and you do. As I remember you justifying the size of this universe by stating if that's what was need (ie this GARGANTUAN universe) just to support us, then that was what was needed. Yes, this is all a grand stage, for humans and god to indulge in folly.... We can do as we please with all the other life, as we're special specialestesetest

The selfishness of the religious mind never ceases to dazzle.

Well, not more to add. Not enough time to shorten that,sorry. In before more whining and shenanigans. If you've nothing to add or address, we're done, no?

[s]
And you predicted correctly, I very likely would condemn my child (depends), I just said I won't to get my point across.[/s]

Logicboy03: Would you tell a suicide bomber with a bomb that he is a terrorist?


Would you tell the truth to a nazi that jews are living in your basement?

While virtually impossible to live without fibbing, the point is, for issues such as these, if they weren't lying to themselves in the first place they likely wouldn't be in those situations.

In other words, a bunch of lies led to these troubling scenarios in the first place. When faced with these, you just continue the lying. At some point it would be nice if it just stopped. Or better yet, the lying never began..

Just like the cycle of violence....

I don't talk about stuff that's annoying, etc. That's negative, negative energy ruins everything. I'm all about rainbows and peaceful, respectful convos where we share cabin. On that note, I'm only going to mention my BFFs

In no particular order, the most funny, intelligent, witty, erudite people on the boards (note, I love everyone, even vedaxx, but spacetime issues) are

Josh (that dislikes my 'sarcasm' yet still puts me under the 'funny' list)
Uyi
Ishilove
Rationalmind (or dude? I forget which)

You guys are the bestesetestesetestest BFF's a man could hope for. I'm off to do my nails. Catch you later

Even twins with the same genes don't end up with the same fingerprints. Similar, true, but different still

Deep Sight: - - - >





Anyone who can look at the above endorsement of gender apartheid and not immediately throw up ( I have already) is not worthy to be called a human being.

[Edit: Not just an endorsement of gender apartheid, but a wholesale endorsement of all Might-is-Right situations, as morally apt.

Coolio. ]

Lemme see...
....
No, absolutely no response to this

me: Ok, so god being a member of another species has a different set of values. He decides we failed to achieve his objectives, and proceeds to flood the earth killing everyone save the most sheepish, slavish follower he could find. Genocide, at least of our species. Are you now saying that god's actions are objectively, universally good?

You do realize we humans do exactly the same thing, all the time, to other species?? And it is clearly unavoidable.

Just another silly appeal to emotions. You have nothing to add then you really shouldn't be wasting server space. It disgusts you? Take it up with reality.

Corrections though, exactly where did I endorse gender apartheid? Are you on drugs or do you really require diagrams before you get this? And I never said might is 'right', I said 'right' is subjective, and might prevails. Once again, s.i.m.p.l.e.

You are the one saying whatever is best for society as adjudged by you (or is it the majority?) automatically prevails over the wishes of others. That you are the arbiter of what is good for everyone . Just as god dictates for us all and can declare us a failed experiment, evil, and flood us. You, him, the majority or whoever are just right, SHIKENA!! Forcing everyone to just accept your will. If your insistence on wielding such authority over the will of others isn't wholesale endorsement of 'might is right', I wonder what is.

Again, I am simply saying that might prevails, that's simply how the universe works. You, on the other hand, are endorsing, even if unwittingly (I hope), 'might is right' by insisting we all subscribe to your morality just because.

Again, covering your $hit up in nice packaging doesn't make it chocolate. No matter how pretty it may seem, your morality is just that; subjective. Intrinsically not better to say that of muslims. There will always be predators and prey, and depending on which side of the fence you prefer, they will both be right.

Well done..