Wiegraf's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Wiegraf's Profile › Wiegraf's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 (of 162 pages)
bolaino: Any sensible human being who values life should be scared of islam, a religion that preaches death to any body or group of people who objects to it's teachings should be treated with caution,You do realize brave != stoopid, yes? I am disappointed in you, my hippie, peace loving, hypocritical, free thinker. You acknowledge it's dangerous, yet you want me to go through with it just to make a point? You're both foolish and heartless.. Do note, I am from a muslim family, live in the north, and an open atheist. Work, facebook, ask me, etc. But on a site that values anonymity, you want me to broadcast my details? Interesting.. bolaino: comments like these make me question the sanity of most atheists, in your quest to prove to the world that u are smart, u come out as the bible puts it "the FOOL who says in his heart, that there is no good" smh.Like I already said, you certainly sound like religious sheeple. You certainly qualify as far stoopidity is concerned. Own to your foolishness oga, give this bastard some satisfaction, please? It won't cost you much, but it may mean a lot to me. |
bolaino: smh, typical ranting of a radical atheist, Godless and unhappy, well, if u feel hurt that I'm calling u chickenlittle, u could jump off a cliff for all I care.That's all. At least acknowledge your stoopidity, just for me. So I can leave with a smile on my face. My good eediot, be the bigger man.. |
bolaino: why do u guys think I'm a christian? I'm not a christian, I'm an agnostic, an agnostic who believes in the supernatural, well, as an agnosticYou certainly act the part; foolish. And note, not all xtians are foolish, but this is sheeple foolish. You could have labeled this thread "Why less attacks on muslims?", or "Are atheists unfair to muslims?", but you chose "Are atheists on Naiaraland scared of muslims?". Really, that's the first thing that came to your mind, that we're scared? And look at this nonsense in your op bolaino: but atheists do not go about condemning these evil acts, but they go about telling. Howling and crying about how pastors are robbing gullible people blind of their money through tithes and offerings,We howl and cry? Really? Do you really think the criticism is haphazard? bolaino: I don't bother much with muslims, cos it's obvious they are doing it wrong,Interesting.. You yourself don't bother with muslims yet you have the gall to ask us why we don't? Heck, asking might have been fine actually, but insunuating we're afraid? So, you're the only one who could have valid reasons? And this your reason sef.. Che.. bolaino: the reason I think freethinkers lambaste christians a lot is cos christians go about with this kind of "God complex chosen people mentality" and dats what grinds my gears about christians, in islam if u are a good man doing good things, but u're not a muslim and u die, u'll be going to paradise, (that's understandable) but in christianity, you might be the "goodest" man in the world but if u don't accept jesus as ur savior then, you're a goner, that's one of the most absurd tenets of christianity.Which universe has an allah that lets disbelievers/kaffirs into heaven, do tell? Or kaffirs don't do good things? I've already given you my reasons, though I really don't know why I'm indulging you (probably immaturity). Nothing to do with this whargarbl. Wait, actually, I don't give muslims a free pass.. bolaino: The reason I brought this out was, that if we are to be honest with ourselves, we'll agrEe that christians are better at taking criticism than muslims, no muslim would allow you insult, SAW, lol, without resorting to murder, but christians take insults and criticisms, (not in the best manner though) without resorting to violence.And if you look through my posts, you'll note I acknowledge that, time and again. I even support xtians having their own section as I cannot see why muslims are rewarded (if you can call the cancer of having your own section because you cannot share your toys that) for doing something as egregious as threatening people. For one, it sets a bad precedent. If xtians want their own section, they should get it. In fact, as they're being rewarded for their (relatively) good behavior with a section of theirs, the muslim one should be deleted and they should be made to share with us (and any other xtians willing to play) in a neutral section until they grow up. But I don't own the site, yes? And the owner is in it for the money, yes? Assuming you genuinely do not want to come off as a troll, I'd recommend not posting blindly |
Do you know how many have been banned from those caves? You must have missed the part where @mac is the mod. Perhaps the fact that muslims had to threaten for their own section should have given you a clue, no? Why do you think they did that? But of course, you have a persecution complex. It's all about you, yes? The only religion on this rock.. I, personally, was banned from islam for stating that [s]they would find no fault in Islam even if it ra.pes their mothers[/s]. True, this statement is factually correct (not saying that I fabricate stuff, mind you). In fact I could say "when", not "if", considering honor killings, etc (inb4 the disingenuous, cherry picking cultural bits of "they are not islamic" ), but it's fairly blunt, no? Their mock outrage is amusing. My favorite examples to highlight the foolishness of you and your bretheren are the even more foolish.....muslims. etc etc But of course, in your twisted mind, it's all about xtians.... You're the dominant, most visible group in this environment that we're allowed to (rightly) criticize, and you constantly insist on mixing church and state, get used to the criticism. If you can learn to separate those two you'd receive much less heat. Edit: BTW, not an xtian? You still come across as just as foolish....David Blaine is supernatural, and now this.. so it's hard to believe. You're at least a 'free thinking' theist, no? |
Op, you've heard of natural selection? |
hisblud: Another common trait of an athiestI'm not. You win |
^^^ At least consider professional help.. I'm serious. I've come across foolish before, but never on this scale, never of this nature. Even vedaxx.. I'm completely baffled... |
sakaguchi: Well, just to ask both sides one question, how many millenia ago was the first man created, what race was he, what country was he created, who were the spouse of his children?hironobu? |
hisblud: hisblud: hisblud: hisblud: hisblud:https://guycodeblog.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/clutch/2012/04/speechlessTH.gif |
hisblud: WEIGRAF!! no need to claim the money... am contented with my 'peanuts'. But for you, that is not satisfied, come over and see things for YOURSELF!Let me explain how it works in the rational word, foolish non-muslim (seriously, it's a better deal). For me, that isn't making any silly claim, I don't have to do $hit. You're the one claiming the moon is one big waina, not me. Now, are you willing to prove yourself, put your money where your mouth is, and go get it tested objectively, or are you just continue displaying signs of some form of gonorrhea of the brain? Again wiegraf: Please don't waste our time.Glad to see you're taking this wiegraf: consider shutting your stoopid, vacuous, asinine trap.to heart though |
hisblud: Hmm, grammer only this atheists are ranting on this thread. Since you say there is no supernatural and hence no God, you are foo.ls! Only fo.ols say there is no God. Now the god the ombatse worship is a witness to reality of the supernatural. Because even the bible attest to the existence of other gods -.I see. However I disagree, my Harry Potter books claim voldermort is the most powerful being in the universe. He can even split his soul and put it in inanimate objects, can your dog do that? Allah is also more understanding of my needs actually, and is still rather fiery, so he'll probably spank your jewish dog silly and give me my 72 virgins. It's a much better deal I think. Really, I think it would be foolish of you to accept yahweh's offer when there are much better deals around. hisblud: And one manifest his powers against power of a gun, not penetrating its believers, then am sorry you have been deceived by naturalism. Lets make a deal, come down to lafia nasarawa state, i will direct you to the hospital to see first hand what really happened to those men who died and ask doctors, Roadsafety personnel who attended to the dead and the injured. If a god manifest himself, you dont believe, if the One manifest, you wont have the opportunity to believe. Better be agnostic than an atheist. Agnostics are closer to the supernatural.It works likes the intangible, invisible, bullet proof vests your ancestors, in their thousands, wore to fight of the few hundred evil oyinbo with very real, physics based guns? The vests they wore on the way to their graves and slavery? Please don't waste our time. Use it for yourself, or better yet, prove us all wrong and earn yourself a million dollars by taking this challenge. You'll get to shut us up as well of course. Else, consider shutting your stoopid, vacuous, asinine trap. What are you waiting for? |
Born 2be Rich: If you dont understand some statements simply say so instead of going into childish rant mode in here...I wont follow you to exchange words, because i believe am bigger and better than that...My good brah, I may have started the labeling by calling you what you really are, an animal, a 'lower' one, like a pig, maggot or something similar, but you've already starting exchanging words. You've already accused me of being uneducated, no? So don't try to somehow play the bigger man now that you feel some heat, pull out the indignation, etc. It's silly. But kudos, you're onto something here, I have no issues with being immature. Born 2be Rich: I was simply explaining to Niflheim that it isnt everything the white man says we should belive...Niflheim belive that there was nothing like magic or witches aka supernatural occurences especially when he asked a white guy( i hope you even know what the topic is about) that it is all science and i reminded him that the same white guys whom claimed that there is no witch or anything called black magic killed people centuries ago all in the sake of accussing the people of practicing black magic...why didnt the white people accuse them of practicing science thenYou see the italized? Exactly. Do I have to spell it out again? What is the answer that you expect? Which answer could possibly help your case? That the oyinbo back then were wrong and witches don't exist? If you'd be so kind, do please tell us, explicitly. Born 2be Rich: Of what benefit do i want to derieve from the killings of people...Please go through the thread again for proper understanding..Erm, yes, you expect me to know? You're begging for emotional blackmail perhaps? You should ask your fellow looneys and believers in jazz and evil spirits that beat people to within an inch of their lives for stealing pipis, or those who were tossing out children in Calabar (I think) a few years ago, or the other eediots you mention who relished burning witches through history, etc etc. You go through the thread slowly, and go through your posts, both of them. Your own words, please try not be foolish as well. |
Born 2be Rich: Did any statement made by me say that i find the killing of witches justifiableI suppose reasoning skills aren't taught in zoos. Born 2be Rich: The same westeners that are decieving you all were killing witches and wizards in their country in the past centuries ago when they burned them on a stake or hung them...Why were they killed? You are very clearly saying they were killed because they were witches, yes? It seems it never occurred to you that the killers could have been wrong, that perhaps they were mistaken (which is oh so clearly the case), or whatever other reasons. Rather, it seems that in your twisted, Neanderthal brain, the only viable, justifiable explanation for their deaths was they had to have been supernatural witches, else you wouldn't be producing this nonsense for your case of the existence of supernatural, yes? That is the only situation that justifies their deaths, yes? So I ask you again, my eediot barbarian, do you find killing witches justifiable? Do you think that is the only reason available to explain their deaths? That the killers could not have been mistaken? What are you doing out of your cage? |
*Kails*:And magic. A lot of practitioners claim they're feats are supernatural. Do say, wiccans, claim to use parlor tricks or supernatural magic? You don't think they're supernatural? If yes, on what authority do you assert that? That they don't invoke spirits, visions or whatever supernatural phenomena? Whether they're actually supernatural or not is irrelevant. The actual (non)existence of the supernatural is irrelevant as well. All that matters is that they claim their magic is supernatural, as this is clearly a completely subjective affair, or do you have an objective way to prove your version of spirits exist? They have as much objective evidence to back them up as all the others with some supernatural claim or the other; non. So, are we to assume their feats aren't supernatural yet whatever type of spirituality you speak of is so just because you say so? You are trying to separate spiritual from magical methinks, and perhaps you guys can sort it out at the next comicon, but either ways this thread addresses all (supposedly) supernatural events, not just spiritual, and some magic is (allegedly) supernatural. Frankly, spiritual or magical? Same thing. But I can ignore that for now. And why so polite? I don't exactly deserve it.. |
3cassava sticks: link the thread abegIt's fairly looong and redundant https://www.nairaland.com/1180380/victimless-crimes-yay-nay |
Avicenna: Sorry, wie. That career is (insert bad words here)Oh, I see. Unlike me, you're not lazy and actually get some work done more often than not. Damn you. Damn all productive peeps There was another (smaller) bestiality thread recently sef. That frustrated heathen @sriktly did sort of change my stance back in the older thread. Well, he actually didn't say much per se, but while mulling over stuff during the debate it occurred to me that, by my standards ie, I probably was wrong about them being victimless. Hmmm. Yes, I probably was very wrong if I were to use my yardstick.. |
WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? Lol, brah, good to see you about.. |
*Kails*: ![]() Magical events are not supernatural? google: mag·ichttps://www.google.com.ng/search?q=magic+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a I don't think we refer solely to 'magic' of the David Blaine sort, do you? |
Op, I get what you're trying to do and it is indeed sensible in some lights, but just a few (when did the post become this long?) notes. I wouldn't say you speak for all atheists or even the majority. We're a disparate group, only common denominator: no god. Yes, there are trends one would usually find among atheists, but again, I'm not sure you speak for the majority. For one, to clarify, evidence need not be physical per say. If it is, better. But just physical evidence on its own (which might seem like a lot) is not enough, it must be logical as well. One cannot divide by zero regardless of whatever nonsense one spews. So, how did this bit of evidence get to us? Is so and so possible, how and why? etc. Questions like these and more have to be answered. Proving the existence of a god might not even require (direct) physical evidence, logic alone might be enough, but it must be completely convincing in such a case. I wouldn't say I want to believe, why? I can live very fine without the concept of a tyrant like yahweh, or even the more benign version of gods, looking over my shoulder. Many would say 'but you need a purpose', I consider that patently foolish. I'm sentient, I can define my own purposes, just like any alleged gods would be capable of defining theirs. Religious themselves call it 'free will' methinks, they even make a big deal about it. Yet when one chooses to use said will, and common sense, to not believe in dog they get their pants all twisted in knots. (Like you've sort of observed with your op. They see no problem when they themselves, or others, use the same tools to toss out Thor and Santa though, sort of like the case of oga thomas. Hypocrisy?). So long as my purposes (and actions) do not infringe on the rights of others, it's not their business. Forcing a purpose on one (in this context) is slavery, simple. So, if indeed gods existed, I would owe them nothing. I did not ask to be created. Consider my kids would owe me nothing as well, after their childhood anything further is very much left to them (or us). If they think continuing the relationship is worth it, cool. If not, I might be disappointed, but they definitely do not owe me anything. If I were a terrible parent I would also expect them to challenge me when they can, after all they were my responsibility. I brought them into this world, they didn't ask me for a favor. Same thing with any gods, even if they did show up they would have a lot of explaining to do before I 'worship' or whatever them. Btw, the nature of belief sef. One cannot just start believing in Santa at will. Try... Etc, etc, etc, etc.. Again, just notes, so people don't misunderstand a few things and also some clarity. You're playing on their own terms (by considering their zombeism), which is cool, but they have silly terms. That 'evidence' might have been good enough for thomas, but it certainly does not mean the rest of us should be satisfied with something similar as proof of its existence, or that we should slavishly respect/worship it even if evidence did show up. Actions aren't good or evil just because dog said so, regardless of their whargarbl |
onetrack: It's strange how supernatural events never happen in front of, say, western scientists. They always have some stupid scientific explanation for everything.I hope you're being silly. It's because they're not spiritually aware, or imbued with the holy spirit, no personal relationship with Jesus, etc etc How can one be so ignorant? It's embarrassing What do they smoke before they come up with these answers? What could possibly rot the brains so? |
One thing wey dey tire me, who be d oyinbo wey dey hold d mic? Why? They couldn't find a black man where ever they were to handle that task? I understand a lots of us locals are unemployed and rather well qualified, enough to handle that responsibility. Importing an oyinbo would be needless, no? Ah, I see. They want to be able to tell sheeple 'see oyinbo dey follow join. It's approved by our slave masters, therefore, it must be true!'. Unadulterated foolishness. Nothing new, of course. Perhaps the man is a writer for the WWE or 'paloma' |
Born 2be Rich: So our fore fathers were using digitalis to perform some occultic performance in the past right?So, you find killing witches justifiable? Who let you out of the zoo? |
@op, yes. See clock makers, deist gods, etc. They are all unlikely (unless someone shows up with some evidence). Even if they could conceivably (though again, not likely) be responsible for this particular universe or just earth/homo sapiens, etc, they are almost certainly not first cause. Not unless you can show that a complex/super-intelligent god from nowhere makes more sense than simple, basic energy from nowhere. On other notes, what you're proposing is a different type of consciousness. Now, can you conceive another sort of consciousness? How will it work? Not saying it's impossible, but it's not as straight forward as assuming that a higher intelligence would inevitably lead to a different sort of consciousness to ours. And we, being intelligent, have been extending our empathy/kindness to other species. We go out of our way to help them, we don't even let people kill lab rats carelessly in some countries, we give pets certain rights (legally even), etc. We also have projects lobbying to give the same rights we have to other species that seem to be on the verge of self-awareness, sentience etc. Like the chimps you mention, elephants, etc. These species themselves have been shown to empathize with other species. Eg, elephants have been known to save members of other species even when there's no gain for them involved, chimps accept humans into their communities (even when they think of themselves as having the upper hand, in a manner of speak), etc. Point here being any sort of intelligence is likely to have empathy so long as it has emotions. Emotions are a basic requirement to consciousness, they are responsible for ambition, so a sentient being is likely to posses emotions. The trend we ourselves observe is that the more we advance, the kinder we get (just look at history), so a more intelligent species is likely to more emphatic/kinder than cruel. Note, likely. |
Area_boy: its so difficult for me to read.. each time i hear Cleveland, i think of family guyApparently this psychic is well acquainted with messrs randi |
yahoo: A year after Amanda Berry disappeared in Cleveland, her mother appeared on "The Montel Williams Show" to speak to a psychic about what happened to her daughter.http://gma.yahoo.com/psychic-said-amanda-berry-dead-silent-berry-found-212849667--abc-news-topstories.html I don't know, I'm sure I've seen similar stories somewhere else before... Where could that be ![]() |
Qkeyxyz: Okay. Substitute hinduism/buddhism for christianity but don't say they have humanistic values, rather it is humanism which has adopted these ancient doctrines but rejecting their divine attributes.Here's my definition for humanism. I'm using the term to describe philosophies that espouse values such as these humanist site: Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new departures in thought, the arts, and inner experience—each subject to analysis by critical intelligence.Etc etc, blah blah blah Not just official organizations/schools that sprung recently. Note also that like I've already stated, I believe these are universal values that all cultures, etc, consider regardless of who or what they actually come into contact with, they are universal. Similarly to how 1 + 1 would equal 2 and any intelligent alien species would have also discovered that truth, they would also have considered humanistic (or '$species_name'-stic) values, and would evolve towards them over time. You don't have to agree with me about the above though, that's just my thing, and I don't want to get into it atm. Just note I'm not speaking of modern humanistic schools of thought when I use the word 'humanism'. |
Logicboy03: I understand your point. All religions are humanistic to a degree but then they diverge at a point from humanism.I can see what you mean as well, and I agree that perhaps the term needs to be clarified, but I think you're being too hard on the hippie that came to die for your sins, for whatever whargarbl reasons it may have had. I think you're ignoring context, in that considering the zeitgeist of the day the core principles are relatively humanistic, or forward thinking if you will. At least some of the authors designed them with that intent, even if they may have failed spectacularly. Like with lincoln (and I know you have problems with that slave master as well though I, personally, can't see how he did much wrong), for that epoch a lot of the message was rather advanced as far as humanism is concerned. There were others with similar values of course, like I said xtianity is simply an amalgam/evolution of other ideas, but its core, before foolish religionists went to various extremes (or perhaps inevitable logical conclusions likely unforseen by some of its founders), is rather humanistic when compared to other faith systems/religions of the day. Compare OT to NT to see what I mean. Again, doesn't mean NT is flawless mind you, far from it. For instance a thousand years from now people might be calling humanists of today barbarians because they do not extend humanistic principles to all life (as best they can), eg enjoying suya, but that wouldn't be too fair now, would it? I do agree that xtianity is inherently imperialistic, thereby intolerant, which egregiously violates the spirit of humanism, but it's still a fairly commendable effort. In before someone comes in and says I actually believe jesus existed. And what's with the long list of rules while posting, aren't they obvious? Che.... Perhaps we should just move to /islam |
All this is mostly stolen from 'the better angels of our nature' by stephen pinker. Some of the genesis of this lies in a peeve the author had with another of myriad illogical social customs; the curious case of restrictions placed on knives at dinner tables. This is particularly silly, surely knives are the right tool for certain jobs, yes? But even when they are allowed at dinner tables, they are mysteriously blunt. Brilliant Anyways, while doing some random meandering he comes across a little known book called 'the civilizing process', in which a prof that nearly died in obscurity made some fairly interesting observations. Ignoring that for a while, the author asks you to consider everyone, like dawkins does in 'the selfish gene', as replication devices. Strictly concerned with their own lot, mostly. Generally viewing everyone else as a resource, just like say a rock you might use as a tool. Salient difference being; these rocks can strike you back. So, as we now have walking rocks up and about, one has to be careful. Needless to say trust becomes an issue. We tend to do everything we can - trick, lie, steal, be good, be bad, to become successful replication devices, always with a weary eye cast at the other rocks. So of course, brute strength comes into the picture. The biggest, baddest machines tended to be the more successful replicating rocks. With time, some cooperation, cajoling and small time intrigue is involved of course, small communities to fairly bigger ones are formed, usually with some 'warlord' at the head. Chief, king, or whatever. Then something peculiar occurred, the invention of the gun. The game was changed. From here on out, you could visit as many jazz men as you wished, sparred with conan and wrestled alligators, it mattered not. I'd just bring out my gun and shoot you, end of story. (Your ancestors can confirm this, btw, ask them) However to produce guns one needed even more resources, the smaller towns and what not were unable to compete. Bigger towns, etc, were needed to protect one from these very, very dangerous competing rocks, with the head of course controlling resources. And so dynamics changed, it wasn't the biggest, baddest dudes that survived anymore, it became the best arse-lickers. The better the sycophant, the better his chances. You compete at ingratiating as best you can with the chief, and you were covered. The need for 'strong' warriors was eradicated, and 'court'-esies were born. (Along with 'court'-ships, 'court'-iers, etc) So the focus of the upper echelons now became to domesticate, or civilize, themselves. Of course this spreads down to the middle classes, and eventually the poorer (though the poorer of course are more prone to jungle justice, laws of the streets, omerta codes etc, as the guns and civility, the police etc, are focused on the source of their livelihood - upper society). So, in its bid to civilize itself, europe at one time was churning various popular books on civility. Content included good manners and habits, recommendations such as; stop pissing every gaddem place, stop spitting everywhere ffs (even at the table), get rid of that snut you gross pig, and a few addressed more deadly problems, like the problem of knives at the dinner table of some disgruntled party and how it led to some dicey situations. In the authors words; Aha! Where does this leave us in africa? Obviously, we've not civilized ourselves. We're still wild wolves. When cultures that were artificially civilized by conquerors are suddenly left to fend for themselves, they tend to regress back to a state of warlords, etc. How does this relate to religion? A basis for morality is (not so) hidden there, a fully selfish one to please those who insist humans cannot be good just because. And do note, of course, that while these 'courtesies' might have had selfish foundations, after a few generations they become ingrained in a society. In a sense, they domesticate, or civilize themselves, and become less prone to a few habits. Usually they become less violent, more organized. Same way domesticated dogs are likely to behave differently to wolves. In before talk of race, it has nought to do with that. These effects are visible within a race, for instance, compare irish and german immigrants to the usa. Kudos |
^^ Standard meaning will do. Can't copypasta atm, but basically love thy neighbor, place a focus on this world ('materialism' as the current dumb and dumber troupe calls it), reason, etc. Abandon hocus pocus when dealing with others from different cultures, etc. As religions become more 'modern' they tend to move in this direction (except you, islam). Slowly but surely as the world integrates, even if they retain their (often silly) spiritual core. Love thy neighbor is universal anyways, mistrust just gets in the way and silly, selfish, myopic religionists distort it. I intend to post on the 'civilizing process', it should be interesting. Humanism is related to ethical codes imo, no matter how you look at it |
On a broader, somewhat related note, considering the Jesus legend is an amalgam of various others and most codes seem to evolve towards humanistic ideals, humanism can be interpreted as the ideal moral code the rest strive to become, perhaps some sort of objective code even. Ultimately though it won't be 'humanism' but 'life-sm', if that makes any sense. That won't stop certain eediots from insisting there was no morality before Jesus. Jesus_f_ing_christ_literally.jpg what an asinine thing to say. |
Ihedinobi: You know, when you look beyond the things they think they are saying, you start laughing and really enjoying yourself, bro. Me and my twin were a lot like that. Try itWhere your bro sef? Hope he's doing well. Or has he aquired another handle? Ok, I'll be on my way now |
striktlymi: Empty!!!Heh heh, while that post was about you, it wasn't directed at you |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 (of 162 pages)

