₦airaland Forum

No body here is addressing issues or presenting any argument, is the Noetic bug infecteous?

muhsin:
Atheism is equavalent to madness, even a pure one.

If we present the arguments of the atheist side by side with the beliefs of the Muslim to a neutral observer, which person would be considered insane?

babaearly:
There is no purpose in life in Atheism.

I had presented my purpose in life. Why do you not present yours as opposed to concentrating on the non purposefulness of mine.

ojesymsym:
Have you forgotten so soon that within a week of Ribadu's arrest of Ibori, he was quickly sent to kuri, jos, before his eventual removal.
Please, i use God to beg u, dont take sides with these thieves, except of course u like the way our nation jetting backwards or u (which i believe is wrong) are one of them.

Me take sides, Never!!. I am very neutral.

I am sorry i did not follow the bribery allegation saga, so i did not know Ribadu charged Ibori with attempting to induce a police officer, which i suppose is a serious offense.

I know Ribadu charged Ibori with corrupt enrichment but was not aware of the other one.

I think the problem is not Ibori but the system that produced Ibori. Because the system is still mass producing other Ibori's. I would be happier if we all fight and hound other Iboris like Yerima, Nnamani, Odilli, OBJ, and the other 32 former governors Ribadu talked about.

I suspect Ribadu because he had not come out to tell us what exactly went on during his tenure, on why he was pursuing a political agenda. When ever he releases a book on his tenure i will buy it whatever the cost.

The fact that Ibori was a criminal is no news to us. We knew before he was imposed on us by the powers that be in 1999.

I do not understand why some puritans abhor alcohol, they might as well ban eating meat, eggs (excess will cause high levels of cholesterol in the blood and subsequently heart attack), Sugar as excess will kill you through diabetes, coffee, and intact most foods.

Why single out only alcohol?

I am puzzled about Ribadu's tactics, can a Ribadu fan please fill me in.

Is bribery of a police office no longer an offense in Nigeria. If Ibori bribed him with $15 million dollars, why did Ribadu not charge Ibori to court immediately in his personal capacity or his capacity as EFCC chairman. At least Ribadu was on sit for about 6 months after Ibori lost immunity. Does it make sense to deposit the money with the central bank and then go to press about 3 years later. What is the status of the money at CBN. Can an individual deposit dollars at CBN? who ones it, is interest being generated on it.

To me it looks like blackmail money. If you do not do what i ask of you, i will go to the press.

I want explanations from Ribadu's people

sexyLeamon:
I get various answers, basically, it's whatever you want it to be? So say the purpose of life is to acquire fame and wealth, what's gonna happen to your fame and wealth once you're in your grave? You're not gonna be benefiting from it no more, right?

That's why am a believer in God, we pray and remember God every single day, and we are encouraged to remember death so that we are not OBSESSED with this life, because whatever material things we earn here, they'll be of no use to us in the grave. Whatever good we do here will benefit us in Heaven, if we get there.

So what is the true purpose of life according to Atheism then?

My dear sexy, i am in the mood to indulge you with my answer and i will not claim to hold forth for all Atheists or all shades of Atheism.

before I attempt an answer lets me analyze your statements.

You say some Atheists say the purpose of life is whatever you want it to be. I will only agree with that statements if you substitute Purpose with destiny. I believe your destiny is what ever you want it to be within educational, social, physical, medical, gender, etc. limits. Although you can sometimes achieve your destiny even with those limitations. For example it would be almost impossible for an autistic child to become a professor of physics. Like wise it would be near impossible for a woman to carry heavier weights than men.

About some people saying than the purpose of life is to acquire fame and wealth. I can say that can only be said by a person living in poverty. Because according to his terrible experience of life, his purpose to existence would be a struggle against poverty. He will not be able to think of anything else. That is the situation a lot of black Africans face. That is why this purpose is not restricted to atheism or any religion but most poor Africans. You will even see majority of African religionist embracing religion because of the promise of escape from poverty.

You said you remember God every day. I am interested in knowing how you remember God. You remember things you have previously had interactions or physical encounter with. So please enlighten me with your description of your God and the remembrance of that description.

Now how can you be encourage to remember death? have you died before and thereby remembering that state.I think you mean think of death. Me as an Atheist do not think of death, i remember life, I want to live life to its fullest and as you people say live life abundantly. i want to wake up everyday looking forward to living that day, hour by hour, minute by minute. Death will come when it will come.

I am not a believer or an aspirant for heaven. I cannot survive in that environment, where i will monotonously sing praises to your god till eternity, with no free will, no challenges, nothing new to learn or aspire to, to me that is worse that hell.

Now the purpose of my life is the same as the purpose of existence, the purpose of the universe, the galaxies, the stars, the planets and in fact all other living thing. The purpose is the same, to be born to live our our lives, and make our contribution to the survival of the universe.

I have lived fairly successfully, I hope to make a contribution to mankind by educating people around me both formally and informally ( I believe ignorance is the greatest decease plaguing mankind and the cause of most of our problems), and at the end contribute half of my genes to the human gene pool (so part of me will live forever).

That is my purpose.

Any questions?

Deep Sight, this is where i vehemently disagree with you. Fidelity to a single spouse is a positive law in some societies but it is a highly unnatural law.

Let me explain,
Studies had shown that our basic natural instinct is polygamy. Even studies of our closest surviving evolutionary relative - the Gorilla had shown that it is unnatural for a male Gorilla to practice monogamy. You have a dominant male controlling a harem of females. Just as it is with the Gorilla, it is part of our Natural Male ego and pride to posses a harem of ladies and that was why all powerful kings in antiquity had tens if not hundreds of wives - and there was nothing unnatural about it. Besides i do not know a religion that expressly ban polygamy.

But us humans (the renaissance Europeans) found out that conflicts arising from multiple wives and fights among men (especially powerful ones) were retrogressing development of such societies. So they realized that promulgating Fidelity to a single spouse would go a long way into easing a lot of conflicts within such societies, coupled with a more stable atmosphere for children to develop. So fidelity was made a Positive law.

But monogamy in some society is not practicable. The Arabs during Mohammad times were always at war, war with each other and war with invaders, so it could be understood that their male population must have been highly depleted.   Now promulgating a degree banning polygamy was not feasible, so you can understand the context into which Mohammad made the Law that allows a man to marry up to 4 wives.

Now even the western world is still grappling with its monogamy laws because it is unnatural to the male specie of homo sapiens. You will see a man marry one wive but keep numerous mistresses. At times also a man will easily divorce when he finds his legal wife sexually unattractive in order to be free to have sex with another.

Yes sexual infidelity in marriage according to western laws is a crime and you can go to jail for it. Even in our laws they is a crime of Adultery which is punishable with up to a maximum of five years ( i think), but i do not think the law had been tested yet. It would be funny for a woman to take her husband to court for sleeping with another woman and charging him for adultery.

I am not in support of polygamy in today's societies but tell you monogamy is positive but unnatural law.

Tell me what you think

I give it you you that you are brilliant lawyer. But in the end we are saying the same Thing, Natural Laws ensure survival and thriving of a specie. Naturally man being the most intelligent would have more elaborate Laws both Natural and Positive.

Do you consider sexual fidelity as defined by Marriage to a single partner a Natural law or a positive law?

Allta:
Thanks Wirinet, I'm not seeking to dispute Evolution as a Theory, in fact, I've found it's studies very interesting. Now I know that Evolution can't explain what was, before the formation of the earth and how the earth was formed. I just want to move up the scale if you know what I mean, something Religion and TOE can't provide. I will look more into Astronomy, parapsychology and cosmology, it's a good thing I will be doing some meteorological satellite systems and design of satellite payload study this year.

Could Evolution itself be an intellectual work of "THE GOD"; even the "THE BIG BANG" must be created by something, I mean, things don't just exist from non-existence. Anyways, thanks for your help, I shall further my studies in this line, it'll be nice to know where those hydrogen molecules came from to cause a "BIG BANG" which led to the formation of the universe.

I really appreciate you appreciation, it give me great joy to see someone trying to bust out of the cage we subject our minds to and attempt to understand the wonderful and beautiful world of limitless possibilities our there.

I guess you are some sort of engineer so it would be fairly easy to grasp astronomy and cosmology, I had been studying astronomy since i was 14 and i still learning new wonderful things everyday.

I think you should understand the way science works, the Big Bang Theory is the raining champion now with extensive and when i say extensive i mean observation by prominent astronomers and physicists like Edwin Hubble, Allan Sandage, Steven Hawkings, martin Swartzschild, and hundreds of others, who dedicated their whole lives to letting us understand the universe. There are two theories of the creation and state of the universe - the Big Bang Theory and The Steady State Theory. In the beginning the steady state theory won among scientist including Einstein himself, but with observation from  more powerful telescopes Big Bang Theory carried the day.
Also hydrogen did not cause the Big Bang, It was the Big bang that cause hydrogen, which went on to form all the other elements in the universe.

Mr Deep Site, I like you and i like your drive to understand life and existence in general. But i see you still carry two baggages in your mind. The heavy baggage of religion (the christian variety0 which like most of us was forcefully imposed on us by our parents and our society, and your lack of science training, as you opted to read Law. But i must confess you have a scientist mind in that you a highly left brained person. I doubt you can you your left hand for anything other than supporting your right hand.

It is a pity you do not understand evolution. Now let me answer the following question you post.

Here's the question again.

You said sin is meaningless for you. Only crimes prescribed by Human Laws exist for you.

So i ask: In countries where there are no human laws stating that cannibalism/ murder / rape/ are crimes, would that serve to make such acts right in those countries?

In other words: If we do not legislate against murder, would murder be ok?

To me sin is also a meaningless term, even in the Bible, sin kept changing meanings. What is a sin by one person or a group of persons becomes god ordained when the exact act is done by other person. Sin changes according to the requirements of societies that defines it.

Let me define what sin is from the evolutionary perspective, Sin is any action that is detrimental to the long term survival of a group of animals or a whole specie.

So taking your example above, cannibalism can be beneficial to the individual in the short run, but will have disastrous consequences to the specie and even the individual in the long run. Because feeding feeding on members of your family or specie would soon deplete the specie to the point that it will be unable to survive and would rapidly go extinct. Also cannibalism would disrupt cooperation and harmony within a population that practices it and survival is better ensured by agglomeration and cooperation of  same species. that is why a hawk will never   feed on the chicks of another hawk but will readily hunt chicken chicks.

Murder follows a similar reason like cannibalism, unprovoked murder of a close family member or clan is frowned at while murder of another race or tribe is tolerated. That is why to the Jewish people of the Bible, killing of an Egyptian or Palestinian would attract only a foot note but the killing of another Jew is regarded as a grave sin even by their God.

There had been worst murders than 9/11 through out history, in Europe Kings could start a war in which tens of thousands of people were murdered defenseless at the wimps of a king or power full lord and no body would consider it a sin.
So you see it was the promulgation of these new laws (sins) that enable our present civilization to thrive.

Again I ask you to Seek further and ye shall find!

i answered your riddle about 8 hrs ago, i do not know why my posts are deleted sometimes.

Here was my response;

Deep Sight:
Let's take the Deist Discourse now to Numbers: and we won't be letting up until the motley gang of NL Atheists ACCEPT that Atheism is far more improbable than Theism.

I got this off the Net (i have modified it a bit to crystalize the point) -

Consider the following sentence:

"The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog"

What are the chances of that sentence occurring by random
chance?

It's easy to find the answer. It has 43 letters and spaces.
Excluding things like apostrophes and semicolons and numbers,
there are 26 upper case letters and 26 lower case letters to
choose from. So there are 52 to the power of 43 possible
combinations of letters.

52^43 = 6.139652×10^73

Which means the chances of this sentence occurring randomly are
1 chance in

61,396,520,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

This is the probability of just this sentence, not to talk about the probability of an entire developed human society.

NOTE:
There are more than 10^200,000 possible code combinations in the DNA of
the simplest known micro-organism in the world, Nanoarchaeum.

Bur there are only 10^80 particles in the universe!


By Perry Marshall

Deep site, i give you more credit than you are displaying, if you do not understand something carrying extensive research, understand the topic at hand before reaching a conclusion from other peoples sites.

Let lets deal with your analogy,

Your above example makes sense in a theoretical isolated condition but in a practical situation it is hogwash. Why?, because you have to factor in the environment.

If in your above example "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" the environment put in certain restrictions on which letter that can stand together, then the odds are exponentially reduced. For example if T always goes with H, then any other letter coming after T would not be viable and therefore would not survive. After a Q the next letter must be a u, the number of letters after a Z is also very limited especially as a second to last letter of a word ie E, O and Y. So the probability of the statement "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" arranging itself naturally goes from almost zero to a certainty when the environment set the rules given enough time.

Deep Sight:
Let's take the Deist Discourse now to Numbers: and we won't be letting up until the motley gang of NL Atheists ACCEPT that Atheism is far more improbable than Theism.

I got this off the Net (i have modified it a bit to crystalize the point) -

Consider the following sentence:

"The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog"

What are the chances of that sentence occurring by random
chance?

It's easy to find the answer. It has 43 letters and spaces.
Excluding things like apostrophes and semicolons and numbers,
there are 26 upper case letters and 26 lower case letters to
choose from. So there are 52 to the power of 43 possible
combinations of letters.

52^43 = 6.139652×10^73

Which means the chances of this sentence occurring randomly are
1 chance in

61,396,520,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

This is the probability of just this sentence, not to talk about the probability of an entire developed human society.

NOTE:
There are more than 10^200,000 possible code combinations in the DNA of
the simplest known micro-organism in the world, Nanoarchaeum.

Bur there are only 10^80 particles in the universe!


By Perry Marshall

Deep site, i give you more credit than you are displaying, if you do not understand something carrying extensive research, understand the topic at hand before reaching a conclusion from other peoples sites.

Let lets deal with your analogy,

Your above example makes sense in a theoretical isolated condition but in a practical situation it is hogwash. Why?, because you have to factor in the environment.

If in your above example "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" the environment put in certain restrictions on which world that can stand together, then the odds are exponentially reduced. For example if T always goes with H, then any other letter coming after T would not be viable and therefore would not survive. So you see the environment sets the probabilities. And given enough time every probability would be tried out and the most stable sentence would survive.

1. Please define the term "Atheist"

2. Please give us your personal reasons for calling yourself an Atheist.

3. Please explain to us why in your view, people who believe that the Universe was created by a Supernatural Mind are deluded/ suffering from a virus.

4. Please indicate what you might think of people who suppose that elements such as DNA, staggering in their complex customization for purpose, could have emerged by chance, or as the product of a universe without a mind.

1. Atheist is someone with a lack of belief in any God, a person who denies or disbelieve the existence of God or Gods.

2. I call myself an atheist because up till today i do not know what a God is. What is presented to me in all "sacred" books and myths is very similar to a very powerful (in terms of military and political power), egocentric and erratic tribal monarch (king), who wants absolute submission and control of his subjects, and rebellion can result in fatality.
A list of such Gods includes, Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Thor, Sango, Jupiter and hundreds of others. Since i am unable to believe in any god presented to me, i therefore regard myself as an atheist.

3. I do not think they are deluded or suffering from a virus, i just believe they are Ignorant or fearful ( most religions are driven by fear). They are yet to define what a "supernatural mind" means, let them explain how a mind can exist outside a living thing.

4. The DNA has not been shown to require a mind supernatural or natural to form. Given the elements, the right conditions and enough time, the most stable chemical compounds ( amino acids) would naturally be synthesized. Eventually a self duplicating compound (DNA)would emerge.

Those are my own answers.

Allta:
@Atheists or other Evolutionists in the house, I'm still waiting for the answer to my question:

IMO, Evolution has no physical proof of origin, just as there is no "physical proof of God", not yet anyways. If you think Evolution is complete, then where did the Sun comes from? formed about 4.57 billion years ago when a hydrogen molecular cloud collapsed? what's the origin of those hydrogen molecular clouds?What's the origin of this giant molecular cloud?

I am not trying to convince you of anything. Trying to show a religious fundamentalist proof of evolution is as difficult as trying to show the police IG proof that Ribadu visited Gani's house. What ever proof you bring will be discarded.  but if you want science fact, then i must tell you that that evolutions has tons of proof. You might not agree with some of the proofs but to claim that evolution has no proof is absurd. Evolution had been studied in universities around the world for over 200 years and the process has been substantially understood, although there are still many gray areas scientists are still debating.

Evolution of living things have nothing to do with the formation of the sun or the universe. For that you have to venture into the field of Astronomy or cosmology. The same way the evolution of computers has little to do with how electricity was discovered.
Finally hydrogen is the building block of the universe, infact the universe is still some 78% hydrogen. All other elements were derived from hydrogen.

davidylan:
Actually it seems to me that you are fond of lying because even the bible did not write every detail [/b]on how the world was created, meaning there is plenty we dont know about and [b]are still learning.
I  have never seen a christian claim to know everything about our existence. We've had enough of dirty, dishonest, despicable and repulsive lies from the likes of you.

The Bible did not provide ANY DETAIL on how the world was made. It only made pronouncements like;

kolaxy:
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, 

And we are to take that as the details of the creation of the universe, it did not even go on to give us the description and essence of what a god is.

Then the content of the earth and everything within sight (remember sight of the ancient Mesopotamian author)  was created by "and God said". Now is there any details in that. We were not even told in what language god was speaking, the exact sounds god spoke and the other persons, things or beings god was speaking to. Also how many Gods were there in the beginning. and that is what some people will call details.

When are religionists especially the Abrahamic Variation ever in support of learning. Infact they kept civilization in ignorance for a better part of 17 millinia. They are opposed to learning, to them everything a man needs to learn is already contained in their book handed down by their god, and others not within can only be learned from revelation directly from their god. Searching for any other knowledge like the origin of the universe or man is sheer rebellion leading to hell.

Can anyone tell me why the Europeans have largely eliminated this parasite and we cant? Nah lets just blame God no?

Back to your issue - the same God who created the malaria parasite also created measures by which man could adequately deal with it. The europeans and Americans and even asians have developed measures to completely eradicate mosquitoes from their countries. It is not God's fault that AFricans are completely useless.

David don come again. Europeans eliminate the malaria parasite? now that  along with your mutation being the cause of cancer would be the worse goof on Nairaland. 

Please Mr biologist, tell use when mosquitoes were ever in Europe. Tell us how mosquitoes are able to survive the cold in Europe. Even a person who had only read integrated science knows that the first contact Europeans had with malaria was when they came to Africa (black Africa). And they did not even know what was killing them so they called Africa White Mans Grave yard until the discovery of quinine.

Please stop spreading misinformation around to support your faith.

I know you argue to irrational dimensions, so i will provide a link to educate you on the malaria zones of the world.

Here is the link http://www.malariahotspots.co.uk/mapInteractive.asp.

Allta, Thanks for your idea regarding worm holes, i had read about them in the past but did not pay any attention to them. I see wormholes as depicted by films as science fantasy. Maybe wormholes can operate on the subatomic level (and i even doubt that) but it is shear fantasy to expect it to exist on the material level (matter). The energy involved with those theoretical objects is so enormous that matter cannot possibly retain its material properties inside. All matter would be converted to energy just like what happens in a black hole. How do you expect humans to survive the travel to and inside a black hole or a worm hole when we cannot survive a travel through the core of the sun, and the energy levels of the sun is infinitesimal as compared to a black hole. The problems with blackholes is that it cannot be observed directly since light cannot escape from it, so we are left with all sorts of conjecture and hypothesis on what happens inside. But we know that all matter is stretched into a one dimension phase just before passing into the
Chandrasekhar limit (point of no return).

Oga Sir me I am tired of all these assertions oh, does this topic not belong somewhere else if it is a scientific discourse?

Mr Chrisbenogor, They are not assertions. Einsteins theories had been proven again and again. In fact the structure of the universe depends on them.

this is just mumbo jumbo . . . this question does not require quotes from ALbert Einstein or his theory. Even the lay man who never went to school understands that time is an intangible but fundamental part of our lives. The day man can stop time then we can start talking about going backward.

David I can excuse you for you ignorance here, I do not expect you or the lay man to understand physics not to talk of fundamental physics.

You cannot talk of time without referring to Albert Einstein's Law of special relativity. Let me explain to you why, that is if you are interested.

According to Newtons Law of motion, Velocity(V) = Distance(D) / Time(T)
So therefore (pardon my english) Time(T) = Velocity(V)/ Distance(D)

So we can safely define time as velocity traveled per distance.

Now here comes the problem. According to Einstein distances gets shorter (including your ruler) the closer we approach the speed of light as compared to the same distance measured by a stationary observer, therefore you measure a shorter distance traveled than a stationary observer you left behind. This means for different velocities (close to the speed of light), we will be measuring longer times for the same distance as compared with that measured by a stationary observer. Effectively time would actually be slowing down for us as compared to our stationary observer, the closer we approach the speed of light, and time would actually stop at the speed of light because you would not be able to measure any distance (remember as compared to an external observer)

So you see time is tied to velocity and Einstein had shown that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Even the poster open this thread by proposing to travel back in time by employing velocity, so i do not understand why you say Einstein connection with Time is mumbo jumbo.

KunleOshob:
According to Albert einsten theory of relativity, time and space is relative and theoretically time travel is possible even though it is yet to be demonstrated physically.

According to Albert Einstein theory of relativity, time travel is not possible because the theory of Relativity makes travel at a speed greater than light impossible.

Deep Sight:
This is extremely interesting. I would like us to discuss, on a thread i will create for that purpose, the nature of TIME.

But as a teaser - Do you believe it is possible to go back in time.

If you run from point-A to point-B and it takes you 1 minute. . . You double your speed and it takes you 30 seconds. . . you double your speed again and it takes you fifteen seconds, we carry on increasing speed up till the point where it takes you no measurable time to arrive at point B. On, and on we increase the speed untill we arrive at a point whereby you arrive at point B at the exact moment that you left point A. Then we increase the speed even more, and then we arrive at a point that you arrive at Point B 1 second before you left Point A. You have crossed the Time Barrier through speed, and you have traveled to the past.

Guys. . . what do you think. . . but dont really want to derail this thread, so i'll open one on this ASAP

It will be an interesting and intellectually stimulating thread, I pray i have enough time to contribute meaningfully as i have a lot on my hands now.

As a fore runner to the anticipated thread - No it is not possible to go back in time. This same line of thought was what Einstein grappled with and he wickedly placed a limit of c. He said nothing and i mean NOTHING  can travel faster than light, and the universe seems religiously to obey that commandment. Thereby effectively placing a ban on time travel.

Deep Sight:
Wirinet -

As a pont of interest, (although you said i should not ask) - What really is the universe expanding into.

It is expanding into space, is it not?

If so, can it really be true to state that space and time were created by the big bang?

What was there say 20 seconds before the big bang? Was that a different point in time than say - 30 seconds before the big bang (never mind that we were not there to measure the time, but surely, time is a non-contingent continuum?)

Does it not emerge that space and time are infinite and limitless and cannot be circumscribed by this universe or any other for that matter?

And if they are infinite could that be useful in understanding the uncaused cause.

You had to ask!!!!. Anyway what was the universe expanding into? the answer goes beyond me. I am not an arrogant know it all Atheist, I know my limits. So scientitifically, I do not know.

But let me tell you what i know.

I know that objects in the universe (stars, galaxies and quasars) are racing away from each other, and from our point of reference, it looks as if our solar system is centric and the further an object is to us, the faster it seems to run away from us and also away from objects within its vicinity.  So that led scientist to conclude that the universe is inflating like a balloon, thereby giving the impression that all objects within the balloon are separating further and further with time. Therefore we can conclude that the universe must have been a little bit smaller today than it was yesterday, and the day before ad infinitum. So the conclusion goes that at a certain time in the past, the universe (all of energy- matter and space)must have been very small as to be called a point or singularity whereby further contraction is not possible. It is assumed this singularity must have been stable for eternity ( remember under those conditions time would not exist). Now something would then have triggered the singularity to become unstable, resulting in a rapid expansion - a bang often referred to as the big bang, thereby giving rise to time.

Now 20 seconds before the big bang is not possible because the conditions then in the universe makes time infinite or stand still. Time immediately after the big bang would be so distorted that (assuming we were there), it would be impossible to measure. Remember the Black hole, as we approach the singularity, time and space starts getting distorted, and at the centre of the black hole itself, time and space is said to cease to exist. So it would even be impossible to measure 20s or even 20mins after the big bank. This is the best explanation for the expanding universe we have today. If i find a better one i will embrace it .

Science have not been able to conceptualize a limitless space and time. Time is the most controversial and difficult quantity of the universe, because i often wonder what really is time.

Is time really the mechanical tick tock of a mechanical clock or time is a perception, perceived only by sentient beings. That is the topic for another day.

My Friend Deep Sight,

By the tone of your post, i seem to have touched a nerve, my language must have offended you. I am very sorry for any derogatorily remark. You are indeed one of my treasured contributor along with about 5 other people  to this forum. Please accept my profound apology.

Now back to business.  

- IS A REFERENTIAL EXAMPLE ONLY directed towards demonstrating that the Atheist is only intent on, and indeed only capable of heckling, as opposed to [b]advancing original ideas [/b]of his own. It is not a statement that that seeks to serve as uncorroborated proof of any of the equations cited as heckled examples.

You cannot compartmentalize Atheists as hecklers, in fact hecklers like sinners span all religions, professions and race. About advancing original ideas, i am sorry that it is highly improbable in this 21st century to advance any original idea. We are all a composite of what we read or learnt from a pot-pourri of different sources and it is all those amalgamation of those ideas that make up what we believe. It is even those ideas that determine the perspective we look at issues.

The difference between us on the subject matter is that while i look at issues mainly from the pure scientific perspective, you look at issues from  Mathematical (abstract) and  conceptual  perspective.  so we see opposite sides of the same coin.

While conceptually the term" outside the universe" is allowed and deemed possible, Scientifically exo-universe is not allowed, because everything that exists, that is known and that is probable, is said to exist within the universe even though the universe is expanding ( don't ask me what it is expanding into  ).

Also absolute nothing or zero exist mathematically and conceptually, but in science the zero has to be quantified, that is why i asked, zero what?. Because all the space within the universe must contain something, either matter or energy (even space is regarded as something). So absolute nothingness is not allowed and does not exist in science.

Finally about your grand argument of nothingness producing something, scientifically again  THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF MASS - ENERGY IN THE UNIVERSE IS CONSTANT, had been constant since the beginning ( ), is constant now and will forever be constant. So nothing is created out of nothing, or even something.

I hope you accepted my earlier apology.

I am almost certain that UFO's cannot scientifically exist, but life on another planet in one of the zillions of solar systems out there is very probable.

Allta:
Sorry guys, but I have one small question: For those who believed in the theory of evolution, what will evolve out of men? This is an honest question please, I've just been thinking, if man evolve from something, what will evolve from homo sapiens?

Thanks for asking an honest question, and i will try and provide an honest answer.
It is extremely difficult to predict what homo sapiens sapiens will evolve into, evolution is a very slow and gradual process, before it can be appreciable you need a time span of at least 30,000 years, and that is if there is a sudden drastic climatic change.  it is not metamorphosis like some here want us to believe. Evolution is mainly driven by challenges, challenges like climate, availability of food and water, predator, decease, etc.

Now our present phase of evolution had shown that intelligence is the ultimate evolutionary advantage and not size or strength and degree of intelligence directly correlate with brain size per body weight. So we should naturally expect our brains to be bigger, which means we will evolve bigger heads.

But there is a caveat. The female pelvic which determine the head size of a human baby has reached its limit ( in terms of size), so naturally bigger headed babies are not meant to survive. (but we get around that with Caesarean section now adays). Anyway for bigger headed babies to be born the female hip would have to expand further, but any further expansion of the hip bones would make walking normally difficult. So it would be interesting to see how evolution resolve that problem.

I am only speculating and i wish there are more evolutionists to rub minds withs, as i have many questions and hypothesis regarding many aspects of evolution.

If you want to understand evolution, you will have to embark on research, both online and offline, it is a very wide and interesting subject

Deep Sight:
Dear Rosabelle, i can show you threads on this forum where Atheists have argued that we cannot be certain that 2 + 2 = 4. One atheist in particular began to assert that 2 + 2 = 4 on earth but maybe not on mars. When i talked about the existence of something, and contrasted that with nothingness, some atheists demanded a definition of what "nothing" means. At some point i asserted that the universe is something, and one of them asked me to prove that.

In summary, they  generally do not have much to say, and are content to trifle around with words and hollow questions. Beyond a collective hatred of man-made religion, they can never muster intelligible reasons for calling themselves atheists. Not that i demand proof from them, but at least some faint idea as to why they have chosen their path. . . the only reason they are able to muster is that "religion is false and corrupt."

Of course this is just like assering that a faulty car which has been used to kill people had no manufacturer, on account of its faulty and evil nature.

Unthinkable reasoning.

Your ignorance is blinding.

When you say 2 + 2 = 4, you have to tell us what the 2 represents. 2 what?. Einstein had proven close to a century ago, that when you add the speed, mass and length of physical objects, the final answer depends on the frame of reference of the two bodies and of the observer. So you cannot even compute the answer unless you know all three velocities.

I know that the velocity of moving objects on earth is extremely close to zero as compared to the speed of light, that makes measurements of these quantity close to your 2+2 =4, but in outer space the story might be different.

Also there is nothing like nothingness in the universe, even a supposed vacuum contains hydrogen atoms, some degree of gravitational force, photons, cosmic radiations and a host of other particles. It is only a vacuum (nothingness) in comparism to conditions on earth.

Please you people stop this "My fathers Farm is The Biggest, Greenest, and most beautiful mentality" there is a world of excitement and grandeur out there, you only have to open your eyes to see it.

Welcome to the real world, It is like Morpheus welcoming neo after taking the Blue pill. The real world is tough much tougher than the make believe world Religionists live in. You will not have the luxury of mass appeal and security in numbers, you will be alone, lonely, sneered at and even persecuted by friends family and others. But if you persevere you will find joy in the fact that your life and destiny is in your hands and you can take it any direction you wish.

I quarrel with your appellation though, atheists differ from religionists in that they do not carry appellations, symbols, clothes and other distinguishing features to make them stand out in a crowd. You should just be glad that you are free.

presido1:
Ribadu had arrived the house of the late legal icon, at about 6:45 pm Thursday in company of his lawyer Mr. Femi Falana to pay his last respects and to condole the family of the deceased.

Culled from: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-322965.0.html

But checking the clock on the wall show some minutes to 9 or 9 on the dot (AM OR PM). I assume its 9am as the day is still bright to be 9pm for the first picture. Again is it not too bright to be be 6.45pm assuming he took the pictures immediately they arrived which is unlikely.
Am not saying he did not come to Nigeria but something smells from the two publications.

Mr Presido, what exactly is your point, tell us what the "smell" smells like. Put forward an hypothesis, like the photos were fake, or those are not gani's family, falana, and ribadu, bit look alikes. You can even hypothesis that the meeting was real but took place in another country and at another date, but put forward an argument.

Your observation about the clock and amount of daylight interesting but tell us what you conclude. To me it might  be very bright halogen lights illuminating the out side and you know nowadays digital cameras have sharp contrasts and and provide bight illumination even under poor lighting conditions.

I think Mr Akingbola should take a step further, he should also report himself to the German Police, the French Police and the the NYPD, then i would start taking him seriously.

Oborozo:
Ribadu has been in the system. He knows that in Nigeria the security system is hypocritical. You cannot see what you are not looking for. Money is the inthing here and that is where the focus is. If is possible, some people can carry Nigeria and throw it in their pocket without being questioned. what has the Man even done that some people making laws for us have not done worst. Where the Rule of Man replaces the Rule of Law anything goes!

Ribadu was not only in the system, Ribadu was part of the system and the Nigerian security system is tailored to protect the personalities in government and the Elites not the people. That was the way the British set it up and we had not changed the system since then.

Our leaders had been selling us, our lands and our resources since our encounter with Europeans and Arabs, in fact our very existence as a country, including the leadership was defined defined by that relationship.

My friends how many Laws had they made for us since the dawn of this democracy, the only Law the Law Makers are adept at is Appropriation Laws and Supplementary appropriation laws ( how to share the country's money). After that the go to sleep unless there is some controversy to fight and argue about.

Ok, I thought you were talking about my state of mind.

Me chop? I am a struggling Architect who survives by doing mainly renovations and remodeling of houses, I had never taken a Government contract and have very few friends in Government. Most of my friends are entrepreneurs.

That is how I view life, we agree on some points and disagree on some. Although Gani is one of my Heros, i disagree with him also regarding Ribadu and also on his support for the use of unconstitutional means to achieve a just aim. I believe the means of getting justice is as important as justice itself.

So peace brother

larez:
I am sorry brother, but your case clearly lacks any form of logic and all your statements allude to the fact that you have been personally affected by Ribadu's actions. The whole world cannot be blind about what Ribadu achieved. Our legislators began to[b] talk [/b]seriously about due process and even went after[b] BPE and privatization[/b], accusing them of graft. Do you hear our legislators discussing anything about due process or other issues of fairness right now? Are contracts not simply shared in-house? has graft not increased? Is anything merit based now or only about how connected you are?

Please wake up from your slumber and do not think nairaland is a place where you can bamboozle the average uneducated Nigerian. There are far too many intellects here that will shut-down your baseless argument and call you out for where your state of mind is.

Mr Larez,

As one of the few people i have a high regard for on Nairaland, i was highly disappointed by your last post. If my arguments lacked logic then point out the illogical points of my arguments point by point and proffer your own alternative logic for all to see. that is how issues are debated. I do not expect you to substitute vague, generalized and personalized statements for a valid argument.

You said Ribadu made our legislators to began to talk seriously about due process, well you have got your facts upside down, Due process was Oby Ezekwesili's idea, her nick name was in fact Madam Due Process. And besides where did all the [b]Talk [/b]of due process take us? was due process not in place during the Power contracts, Aviation equipments contracts and in fact all contracts during the last administration? Also was due process involved with INEC's contracts during the last elections?

I take strong reservations on that your last statement, What do you mean by "where your state of mind is?"

I am Back!

As I was saying OBJ had problems controlling his government, his party and the legislator in the first term because he was a neophyte at politics, but one thing you cannot take away from OBJ is his brilliance.  ICPC was  the first  Agency formed to fight corruption but it was not given enough powers and besides the chairmanship was restricted to retired judges who are very difficult to control. So OBJ decided to form another anti-corruption agency but this time with gestapo-like powers and enough funding, and he appointed a young, unknown, energetic and charismatic career police assistance commissioner of police as its chairman. Ribadu carried out his assignment with passion, his official portfolio was to tackle all sort of corruption. He started by going after some well know 419 kingpins, he befriended the media and civil society groups. He also went after some well known politicians. Even I, was very impressed and thought the system is about to change. But before long we started seeing the real intentions of EFCC.

OBJ had been in the system from the beginning and he knew that every public officer - both elected and appointed are enmeshed in corruption, in fact corruption is the live wire of ALL PUBLIC OFFICE HOLDERS. So an omnipotent agency like EFCC has millions of targets, So it was easy for OBJ to put anybody on EFCC telescopic view. The EFCC then was being used just to remove people from office. Once the person on target had been removed from office and all the noise and charade of the kangaroo court process dies down, the whole case disappears into oblivion. One case i still remember is the one of the senate president ( Wagbara i think) who was accused of receiving about 50 million bribes to get approval of the budget of one ministry ( which is the norm in the national assembly since 1999) but once the senate president had been changed, nothing had been heard of the case since then, and there are literally thousands of such cases that was handled during Ribadus time that had been forgotten. 

Ribadus next unofficial portfolio was to facilitate the third term project, he started instilling fear in all legislators and governors that anybody who is an antagonist of third term was harassed, intimidated and threatened with midnight impeachment. A lot of governors who were initially anti-third term immediately retracted and became a protagonist. A good example is Ibori, who went from an Atiku supporting third term antagonist to a fervent third term supporter. That metamorphosis ensured Ribadu was off his neck and he became a force to recon with in the OBJ's administration. The most vocal opposition to OBJ's third term project were all tagged corrupt (not that they are not) and hounded. To deal with Governors (who had immunity), Ribadu hounded, intimidated and harassed  the state house of Representatives to impeached their governors without passing due process.  Sometimes the said session to impeach the governor was held at mid night under heavy security by MOPOL. Plateau State was  grounded to a halt based on the inability of the house of assembly to sit.

Let me digress a bit, the Alams  case were nothing extra-ordinary, the money found on him on the plane at london was routine. Most Governors, Ministers and  Aids of the president ALWAYS carry hard currency on them when they travel.Because of strict banking regulations abroad (post September 11), Bank transfer of anything above 10,000 Dollars raises questions. My first cousin was a Senator and she told me that once she traveled with Mrs Alamiesegha to London sometimes in 2003 and she (mrs Alams)traveled with a suit case of physical hard currency to shop.  It must have been the Nigerian Government that prompted the British police to storm the plane and search for the money ( which is against British money laundering laws anyway).  Alams and Dariye were not the only government officials found with lots of herd currency on them, Anambra Governor in waiting (Dr?) Andy Uba  was also apprehended, tied and convicted (asked to pay a fine) for having lots of cash on him at a US airport. He said the money was to buy equipments for Obasanjo Farms. But Ribadu did not see it fit to pursue that case.

After dealing with recalcitrant Governors, his final assignment was to screen out candidates for elective offices. Anybody that Baba did not approve for political post and still insists on running for office is automatically branded corrupt. Chief among this was Marwa who was branded corrupt for doing something when he was a special attache to South Africa under Abacha's administration, and he was locked up for weeks.  Mike Adenuga and GlobaCom were branded corrupt (i cant remember the reasons Ribadu gave), which led him to flee Nigeria and went on Self Exile to Ghana.  Babangida (Mohammed) was branded corrupt not for stealing money but for having shares in GlabaCom. There were also many people branded corrupt by Ribadu who had never held any public office in their lives, and had never had a case reported against them, a good example is Tejuosho who was running against Iyabo Obasanjo.
Then Obedient OBJ's supporters were given a clean bill of health to Run for office, a god example is the Ebano Governor Chinmaroke who is alleged to have more structures to his name than the entire state.

As i have always said I have nothing personally against Ribadu, I believe he was ambitious, Young and Naive to have allowed himself to be used like that. I just want to point our that Ribadu at the end was not fighting corruption but playing politics.

mistakay:
So if no be ribadu na you nail am?OBJ na police?Comot here Mumu

mistakay,
Read my lips or is it my fingers - RIBADU DID NOT HAVE THE POWERS TO ARREST TAFA. Because since the Nigerian police was under Tafa's command, no police officer would effect the arrest of Tafa without the orders coming from a higher authority - The president.  And Yes OBJ was the commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forced, that made him the head of the police. Between you and I, who is the Mumu?