₦airaland Forum

Yooguyz: A woman brought her child.That child had probably be between 9 and 10, and said this child had never spoken before please pray for this child. I laid my hands on this child and i said IJN and the child said amen! I had not prayed yet i just said IJN and the child who has not spoken before spoke.
http://www.c4an.org.uk/testimonies/1.php?testimonyID=6
now thats the dimension of power i have always talked about

Even if this were true (and it almost certainly isn't), late talking could be brought about by many different things, like autism. In quite a few cases, the child is usually gifted in abstract problem solving, so much so they are said to have

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_syndrome

By some. This because the man himself had all the traits in that article (which includes late talking of course). He also failed a french exam woefully leading to his 'failing jamb' more or else, and never bothered to learn how to spell in english (ai kan simpathaiz, inglish is arbitrari, no lows rili).

So, some might have some sort of disability, others simply see no reason to talk until later. Either ways, no miracle here. Kid just happened to start talking when a god of man was around. Perhaps pressure of the event made him finally crack, or he was tired of uncle ade spitting on him, or found his breath foul, etc.

But of course everything one doesn't understand = god. Praise be to him, etc...

SpicyMimi: No one was born to be a Gay or a Lesbian! These are choices we chose or made by ourselves, just like smoking, drinking etc
We made these horrible choices ourselves. Am gonna use my my self as a case study.
I as a person used to be lured by my bestie while i was in pry school...i really enjoyed wt ever we did then and thought it was d best. But as i grew up, and found out how God hates such acts i was filled wid regrets and decided to back out of such acts! Whenever my best frd comes close to me, i just move away even though i wanted it as bad as she does, bt becuase i foundout that it isnt right, so i told my self i wont partake in such again. It wasnt easy though, i prayed to God nd He was able to deliver me completely, to d extent that i found it irritating later on. I told my bestie to stop, bt she tried bt didnt try hard enough! She knew she could stop bt couldnt...for ur info she is also attracted to boys aswell making her bisexual....so my point is this, we were not created this way, its just one of those absurd things d devil tempts us into doin, just like he tempted eve wid d apple...so its a decision we make..we can choose to be gay nd choose not to be one, its a matter of choice nd d moment u choose to be gay or lesbian its alwys kinda difficult to back out. So, Plz say No to Gayism and Lesbianism!!!

Are you attractive?
Did you make any videos?

Nigerians, we're so incredibly foolish it beggars belief. We deserve every single thing we get. In fact, we seem to work very hard to achieve the cancer that is nigeria. Really, every time I see some eediot sheeple complaining about the state of this country I'm tempted to slap him/her.

leonshom: Thank you for dis !

Eh, I hope you know I wasn't chastising him, as he's more or else correct. So is @okey in a sense. If you mean logical as in mathematical, the obvious answer would be agnostic atheism with a nice focus on the 'atheist' part. Then again, like striktly says, I am an atheist so I would likely say that, no?

Especially as this is NL, where very few actual discussions take place. It's more everyone haranguing everyone else for having different views. (Though to be fair to us non-affiliated quite a few religious try to rob others of their rights with barely believable impunity.)


Edit: come to think of it, agnostic atheism isn't a religion. My bahdt here as well...

greatgenius: lol ok.. so what exactly I am supposed to be looking for. Btw what does the spiritual mean to you.. I see you are confusing the little concentration excercise I wanted you to do with auras.. and oh complementary colors are not the same as the auric pairs of colors..

It translates to magic? I can't give you a proper definition since it's a fairly meaningless term to me, but what you call spiritual I possibly may call something else. So if you give me your definition (hopefully lucid) I might be able to give you a definition of whatever phenomena you call 'spiritual'

Ok, so what are auric colors? And these aren't complementary colors, they are just pics which demonstrate that brains fill in the gaps when perceiving. This is one of the reasons our subjective experiences cannot be trusted as objective 'truths'. Even collective experiences which cannot be verified by apparatus other than human perception cannot be trusted, let alone personal experience.

Negro_Ntns: you cannot come up with a credible history line for nigeria pre 1914. do you see how. things get tangled up when relating historical timelines?

And biblical ones are accurate?


hehehehehehheheheheh

When did Sauron land in middle earth?

Logicboy03: Of course not!

Oh, I see what you mean. You thought it weird that muslims don't have authority figures, not that atheists should have such figures. My bahdt

Logicboy03: @ Everyone, I was pointing to the fact that both Islam and Atheism do not have an established authority figure.


That is the point

Atheism is supposed to have established authority figures?

And yes, ayatollah's, etc. Even sunnis sort of have hierarchies and what not. I can't see how it's different from say catholics vs protestants, unless I'm missing something.

Ihedinobi: You first

Hmmm, I'm not sure what to think about this response. The confusion has taken out the fight in me. Decently played good ser, decently played...

striktlymi: Sorry about the joke! I felt it would be the most effective way of passing across the underlying message.

I do know the culprit! My gut tells me it is ........ He alone had the motive to do such and my gut feeling is yet to let me down.

PS: It's been quite a while I saw ur post. Welcome back!

Actually, I like jokes. But yes, sorry op for derailing.

Ty for the bolded oga. I've been around more or else, just busier than usual (and I can't find my bb charger lol, too lazy to go find another)

striktlymi: Good morning Wirgraf,

The impostor is out for about 52 weeks!

So you tell jokes?

That asides, hhahahahaahahahha. Do you know who it was though?

striktlymi: ^^^

Good afternoon Leon,

Hmmm...what would you have me say? This is the way this thread would go:

Atheists:

'All religions are illogical and their followers are a bunch of deluded individuals"...


Pagans:

"All these foreign illogical religions should be kicked out of Africa and let all embrace our very logical local gods"

Muslims:

"Islam is the most logical and there is only one true God whose name is Allah...if you think I am lying check the bible and see the 101 conradictions in there...you infidels better come and follow the true religion of Peace"

Christians:

"The bible says that Christianity is the only way to Christ and everyone outside Christianity will definitely be-friend HELL...as such Christianity is the only logical way to God"

Agnostics:

"Well my friends its possible that there is God but we are not certain sha...anyways make we all do am as we like joor...free style is the logical way to go joor..."

Hindu, Budhist, Grail message...etc:

"What about us?...we have been so marginalized that no one cares to bother about what we think...Remember that even the bible says narrow is the way and only a few people will find it...since we are few then our religion is the most logical"

Sir, the point is everyone would claim that their religion or otherwise is the logical one to follow. I assure you of one thing: CONFUSION!!!

Thank you!

Is this the real mi or the impostor?

Ihedinobi: I know, right? I'm just as confused too.

You're trying to witty as well, or is this plain stoopidity?

Ihedinobi: Sure I did. Did you think about it before you typed it up? Because everything you said just demands authority. Why should we listen to you? On what authority do you refer to Christian child-raising as child abuse? On what authority do you proclaim good to be possible without God? In fact, what do you mean when you say the word, God? Because you confuse issues when you divorce 'Good' from 'God'?

On what authority do you proclaim that human moral judgment evolves at all and has indeed evolved? From what origin did the evolution take off? Where is it now? And how did it get there?

Errmm, what exactly does the bolded mean?

frosbel: ^^

sorry David to intrude, leave these guys to continue with their delusions, they are time wasters, time is better spent on important and productive issues.

Of course we continue to engage those who are innocently looking for the TRUTH or who are misinformed.

If believing in 'nothingness' rocks their boat , good for them.

Good night and God bless !

Bros, when y'all can show this 'truth' i, and likely most other atheits, will consider it. Till then perhaps consider shutting up?

davidylan: Just a snippet of some of the words cyrexx has used - see this mofo, catankerous brain, davidickhead... perhaps i should just repeat them to you. I'm 100% positive you would take it as "debatable".



Again the nauseating resort to lies and dishonesty. I'll take the sick bag again.

I would refrain from responding to the obvious lunacy cyrexx and yourself would rather indulge in soon as you run of out gas to defend your ridiculous plagiarized points of view.

My batteries run out, quoting on this device is a chore, so i'll have to come edit it later

Do note, my good hypocrite that somehow deludes himself into thinking he has the moral highground, i speak of you reffering to his original post as 'vitriol', not his responce to the attack you made on him. Did you miss that, i would have thought that was blatantly clear, considering i even quote it, no? I hope this isn't a deliberate attempt by you to lie your way into looking like the good guy, hmm?

When confronted, you throw insults and try to play the victim, then run off. It's really sad. Just like how in the other thread when i asked you to explain how an analysis means an alternate theory you tossed out the mother of all cop outs; "i've been peer reviewing for years, therefore i don't need to explain myself to you". Rather incredible isn't it? An appeal to authority, from you. Isn't one of your common themes accusing atheists of 'copy/paste' and accepting their white master scientists assertions on faith? Yet here you were boldly lying, then making an appeal to uthority before bailing. Now you call me a luntic for pointing out your hypocrisy then you bail out

Frankly brah, you're a rather disgusting wh.ore for jesus yet you hve the nerve to call someone else disgrace. I don't think your behavior is very christ-like, is it? Own up to your hypocrisy and at least you'll be fine, rather than trying to play the victim

I'll be back to edit and add quotes...

davidylan: Save the hypocrisy dude... i responded (as you would have done) to cyrexx's unwarranted attempt to make no attempt to address the issues of the thread but preferring to go on a vitriolic tirade. If you have a problem with that then sorry... its unfortunate i cannot be of help.

My posts have not been hypocritical... call them so as long as it makes you sleep better at night.

Using the word 'vitriol' is stretching it, rather debatable, don't you think? So, you responded in this manner because you perceived (note, perceived) an unwarranted attack from him?

davidylan: @ cyrexx... it is absolutely safe to say that atheists like you give all atheists out there a bad name.

Thankfully i have had a chance to interact with logical thinking atheists like Nferyn, mazaje, tudor and co... people like you are a dime a dozen... empty heads who have nothing but ad hominems when they run out of gas.

Did you point out to him that he may have been off topic anywhere in this post? Scientist, unless you're retar.ded, how does this not look like a personal attack? Let's look at the original post

davidylan: When you want to falsely accuse others... make sure you're not much worse. You have no moral foundation to make the claims you make. Sorry if it hurts that i prefer to unmask the hypocrisy, sheer ignorance and lack of intelligence that is the hallmark of many of you around here.
Save your "respect"... this is an anonymous online forum which has zero impact on our real lives. It really isnt needed and your alleged importance is grossly over-stated.

Folks like you lack the cerebral fibre to debate... so little wonder you lash out with spittle-flecked vitriol every 2 secs. I would suggest you get psychiatric help.

So, hypocrite, you engage in personal attacks, then make a statement like the bolded. That looks like hypocrisy to me. I ask you, good ser, do you think you "moral foundation to make the claims you make"?

davidylan: It appears the only point attempted to pass across here is a personal attack. When you have something else more cerebral to say wake me up. Someone pass me the sick bucket please...

And your attacks on cyrexx have been cerebral? Are you remotely aware of how hypocritical just about every.single.post you make is?

davidylan: Save the nonsense. Had i made the exact statements cyrexx made you would be boiling with faux apoplexy.

So? But yes, if you made them to me of course I would, and not necessarily faked. They would have been among the most brazenly hypocritical, silly, ironic, etc comments I've come across on these boards, just like the post I quoted.

For instance, what is this? You call my post nonsense despite making the wonderful post I quoted? Which do you think qualifies as being utter drivel, hmmm?

davidylan: When you want to falsely accuse others... make sure you're not much worse. You have no moral foundation to make the claims you make. Sorry if it hurts that i prefer to unmask the hypocrisy, sheer ignorance and lack of intelligence that is the hallmark of many of you around here.
Save your "respect"... this is an anonymous online forum which has zero impact on our real lives. It really isnt needed and your alleged importance is grossly over-stated.

Folks like you lack the cerebral fibre to debate... so little wonder you lash out with spittle-flecked vitriol every 2 secs. I would suggest you get psychiatric help.

An attempted joke?

fellis: Stop trying to open pleep's old wounds

Heh heh

Plarp: i think you need the kleenex

haha its funny how the big strong dyke starts crying when she sees a man to save her

You make a lot of assumptions that are off, like you're fueled by emotion. Emotion would hinder objectivity, no? The article is rather silly imo, the way you present your case is as well (unless you have left over butthurt/biz with fellis from somewhere else, that's why I ask her). I'll leave you to your antics though.

Oh boy u dey generate beef fellis, wetin u do?

frosbel: Anything can be supported with the bible when mistranslated, misquoted, used for ulterior motives or political reasons etc. However a simple, humble and honest student who reads the bible for himself can only derive ONE TRUTH.

You still smoking whatever makes you mistaken atheism for communism? Stop smoking that $hit.
And this your one truth, was the same 'truth' when you were catholic? Alright then, all "humble and honest student who reads the bible for himself", what is a soul? Is it immortal?

I hope you trolling op, i hope this isn't genuine stoopidity

Ok then, i choose either pikkiwokki, flying spaghetti, or the cassava stick. They're right now engaged in a great spiritual war and i'm sorry, i'm an ashawo. I'll wait to see who wins or what they can promise me before making my final desicion. Allah is looking mighty fine as well with the promise of 72 virgins, but he's so hatefull and silly even someone as selfish as me cannot overlook his flaws.

F00028: wise man once said, nothing leads us to blunder quicker than illogical comparisons

Which poor soul do you consider wise?

Muslim programming demands love for uncle moh, this is normal behavior.

Op, I'll say uncle moh may have been more influential than jesus in the same way hitler, stalin, or genghis khan may have been more influential gandhi. In other words, his influence does not necessarily portray him in good light. Particularly this, what was he doing mixing religion and politics?

davidylan: have you ever peer-reviewed papers before? My guess would be no. In that case i refuse to debate the issue with someone who obviously has no clue about the scientific process. If interested see me offline and i will show you what normal peer-review comments look like. I've been peer-reviewing for a good 3-4 yrs... its laughable to have to read the ignorant drivel you just put out.

Just answer the question oh great scientist. In what universe does the bolded in your text translate to providing an alternative theory?

And again, you accuse me of using silly tactics yet you make 2 posts where you do nothing but try to avoid the issue and run away

STOP TRYING TO MASK YOUR STOOPID

You seem bent on misunderstanding the group you're addressing. Again, I hope it's on purpose and not genuine cluelessness after 30000 gaddem posts. Great work there scientist. An appeal to authority from a reputable scientist would still be examined. Even if beyond our capabilities most of us would examine what his peers and what not have say about his ideas, look to see empirical backing to his assertions, his predictions. Let alone claims made by you... Wtf gave you a phd? Really, they let you review papers? Well, all sorts of possibilities could have led to this conundrum, like there really might be a god, but still. And this isn't even a scientific claim my good half wit. This.is.very.simple.common.sense

So again, in what universe does an assessment translate to an alternate theory?

davidylan: Not true... but of course to correct you is to waste precious time i could be using fixing dinner but let me get to this one.

Look at the section i enlarged... it says his paper was returned with a LENGTHY CRITICAL REVIEW... do you even understand what a critique is? A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory.

You would agree with me that a DETAILED ANALYSIS would also include reasons as to why the critic feels the theory he is assessing is wrong no? But of course i would be over-estimating your intelligence.

Hmm, david, my inexplicable scientist, when did the bolded translate to an alternate theory? In what language of stoopid, if you will? I'll be here all day, please show me the intelligence you've deluded yourself into thinking you possess.

As for the other post, last I checked lb was well known for one liners while I'm known for being a verbose blow hard. Yet you now claim our styles are similar. Of course you also call others disingenuous. You can't address the issues? Then it's best to shut up. Stoopidity can't be masked, you will get found out eventually. I would suggest you stop trying to do so with silly antics

davidylan: tomorrow this one too will show up demanding "respect".

I will?

davidylan: I dont criticize the scientific method, i only sneer at non-scientists who try to use the great work that others have done as a figleaf for their own personal choices. It is ok not to believe in God... to pretend that somehow your choice is based on a rational assessment and understanding of the scientific process is a complete joke. Like i will always say, science is not about copy-pasting articles from the web.

Fixing more of your nonsense

me: It is ok to believe in God... to pretend that somehow your choice is based on a rational assessment and understanding of the scientific process is a complete joke.

So, great scientist, after examining the available data you believe the earth was formed 6000 years ago? You're supposedly the expert on the scientific method I hear, so please share some of your wisdom with us.

I keep asking you to tell me what you're working on...

davidylan: That in itself is confirmation that you do not understand the scientific process... see in all my experience, i've never seen scientists who just shouted "wrong" without providing alternate evidence... a thing that you seriously lack.

Again, you call others disingenuous? Really. Let's take one of the biggest heavy weights as far as science goes

http://mathpages.com/rr/s3-08/3-08.htm

"The stubborn, aloof, and uncooperative aspect of Einstein's personality that he had shown as a student continued to some extent throughout his life. For example, in 1937 he collaborated with Nathan Rosen on a paper purporting to show, contrary to his own prediction of 1916, that gravitational waves cannot exist - at least not without unphysical singularities. He submitted this paper to Physical Review, and it was returned to him with a lengthy and somewhat critical referee report asking for clarifications. Apparently Einstein was unfamiliar with the refereeing of papers, routinely practiced by American academic journals. He wrote back to the editor"

So even einstein is corrected without being given an alternative answer?

Wait, why do I even have to dig up this article? Can you grasp how inane you sound? So if I told you flying spaghetti was first cause you'd need an alternate theory first before you could prove me wrong? Interesting.

davidylan: I'll give you a hint, when we have to respond to a scientific theory that we disagree with... no one will take you serious if you just write "i disagree!" What is expected is that you CLEARLY explain what you disagree with and provide COMPELLING EVIDENCE why you think your ideas are correct. Errr where have you shown that you understand that process?

And more silly nonsense. You're doing this on purpose, I hope. Let me fix it again

me: I'll give you a hint, when we have to respond to a scientific theory that we disagree with... no one will take you serious if you just write "i disagree!" What is expected is that you CLEARLY explain what you disagree with and provide COMPELLING EVIDENCE why you think HIS ideas are WRONG. Errr where have you shown that you understand that process?

Very.damned.simple
I do NOT have to provide an alternative theory. All I need do is show you how you are wrong. Again, numbers don't add up, then you are wrong. This is as simple as it gets. You understand the process now?

davidylan: The atheist is only open to anything... as long as it has nothing to do with God. You claim that the atheist is open to "objective and valid" theories... bogus nonsense. If that is the case then why is the atheist wasting his time crowing about evolution theories he cannot explain?

Evolution, cannot explain, where? What sort of scientist are you? We do not know some details accurately enough. Abiogenesis is perhaps even murkier. I'm cool with that, it means we need to go out and investigate. That's science 101, no? Science 101 should have also taught you that looking for answers to that in a fantasy book like say the adventures of peter pan or pocahontas is as stoopid and illogical as it gets, no?

davidylan: Word salad alert.

Do you have reading comprehension problems?

davidylan: The atheist.

The christian places faith in Jesus. the atheist places faith in science textbooks. no one is a blank slate, you are either on one side or the other... you pick your choice.

What in the universe is this?!

You go around claiming people are disingenuous. So, what is this? Or you've never heard these arguments before? After 30,000 posts you still don't understand the position of most atheists (not all of us, but I'll suspend that for a while)?

To clarify

davidylan: There is virtually no difference between no atheist and the christian in that case... since both start from the same point - i dont know. The christian only claims he knows BY FAITH in Jesus Christ. The atheist doesnt know because he chooses to rely on his own fallible nature.

Very silly. Very. Atheists, and again, not all of us, choose to rely on FACTS

I'm waiting for it, criticism of the scientific method from a scientist. I hope you're not there just to sabotage $hit

davidylan: Now lets look at what you said for the atheist. The idea that the atheist claims he doesnt know is actually FALSE...

In what alternare universe? Unlike you, most of us don't deal with absolutes and puerile logic. As already stated, one does not need to know the solution before one can declare a possible solution as false. Very.Simple.

davidylan: because that would presume that the atheist is actually objectively OPEN to any idea that might provide the truth.

Wrong conclusion due to wrong premise. But let me fix this for you

me: the atheist is actually objectively OPEN to any reasonable, valid idea that might provide the truth.

davidylan: In reality, the position of the atheist is - I KNOW IT IS NOT GOD... he then goes around ferreting for just about anything to justify a stance he has already made WITHOUT evidence.

Great scientist, when did you prove there was a god? Who in what universe made a claim without any evidence whatsoever except a book of fairy tales?

I'll add this though, as long as you're talking about deities, especially yahweh and other personal gods

me: I KNOW IT IS NOT GOD