Governments trying to censor internet content - please sign the petition

[Mikey]

Dear User,

Facebook pictures, blog posts, and even online petitions could be censored in under a new proposal from India. It's critical to stop this plan to censor the Internet now before it spreads to other countries.

According to the New York Times this week, India's Minister for Communication and Information Technology, Kapil Sibal, told Facebook, Google, and other Internet companies that India wants to pre-censor all content before it's posted online -- and if those companies won't do it, that government will do it itself.

Ritesh Singh, an engineering student from the India Institute of Technology in Kharagpur, has used Change.org to spark a nationwide outcry. The government is weighing their options, and Ritesh tells us that international support can tip the scales.

Click here to sign Ritesh's petition calling on Minister Kapil Sibal and India's government to not block freedom of speech and drop the idea of censoring Internet content.

Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other websites are increasingly the place people around the globe go to say what they're thinking. Under the plan floated by India's government, anything you post on those sites would be screened before it's shared with your friends, so the government can make sure nothing is objectionable.

Censoring what you post online isn't just an invasion of your privacy -- it's a violation of your freedom of speech.

While India's proposal may seem radical, the world's biggest democracy isn't alone in wanting to control the Internet. This year alone, countries from the United Kingdom to the United States, and from Egypt to Syria, have all proposed censoring online content. But India's idea is the most direct threat yet, and it needs to be stopped now.

Thousands of Indians have signed Ritesh's petition to stop Internet censorship, but they need you to join them. International pressure could be just what India needs to drop its radical proposal to decide what's posted online.

Join Ritesh's campaign to stop India -- and the world -- from censoring what people post on the Internet.

http://www.change.org/petitions/indi...ensor-facebook

Thanks for being a change-maker,

- Michael and the Change.org team

We should all take a few minutes and sign this petition. I and many others here do not want the government to act as a "middle man" for every post or whatever we make on the internet. It would affect this site, sites of other fetishes we're interested in, and other types of things that we do on the internet. I'm a user from the United States and there are bills in Congress that are trying to force a version of this to be passed. These people are petitioning to prevent that from going into law as well. Again, please take a few minutes and sign this.

[gemiwine]

Srry but the Satanic Gov will do whatever the hell they want becuz we have no control of it just like presidents who get elected and laws that get establish. Our votes, endorsments, and protest speeches are worthless and a waste of time and energy like false promising educational institutions. I say lets not vote for anybody next year. Do not believe that we have liberty and a voice.

[1313Jr.1313]

Srry but the Satanic Gov will do whatever the hell they want becuz we have no control of it just like presidents who get elected and laws that get establish. Our votes, endorsments, and protest speeches are worthless and a waste of time and energy like false promising educational institutions. I say lets not vote for anybody next year. Do not believe that we have liberty and a voice.

yeah, the words you say will never make it to the internet... oh wait, you mean the fact that this was around 4 hours later is proof that you're just trolling again? yeah, i bet you believe in the tooth fairy and murderous death machines being manufactured in germany as well... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow)

what you say may have bearing on some level, but one hundred trillion wouldn't exist without all of the zeroes.

[FartLove88]

So india can control the internet in the ENTIRE world !? Come on ...

[gemiwine]

yeah, the words you say will never make it to the internet... oh wait, you mean the fact that this was around 4 hours later is proof that you're just trolling again? yeah, i bet you believe in the tooth fairy and murderous death machines being manufactured in germany as well... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEvfD4C6ow)

what you say may have bearing on some level, but one hundred trillion wouldn't exist without all of the zeroes.What's your point sheep?

[gemiwine]

So india can control the internet in the ENTIRE world !? Come on ...No the gov which consist of multiple countries use the internet & technology to control people like hitler did as well as the Knights Templars did to Europe in the 11 12 13 centuries.

[1313Jr.1313]

What's your point sheep?

i made my point. either you're too dumb to get it in which case you probably won't or you're just trolling in which case there's no point in trying (but if it's both and you're able to reproduce, god help us).


multiple countries use the internet & technology to control people like hitler did as well as the Knights Templars did to Europe in the 11 12 13 centuries.

ahh, i guess that answers that

save the trolling for another board... maybe 4chan where everybody else does it?

[FartLove88]

No the gov which consist of multiple countries use the internet & technology to control people like hitler did as well as the Knights Templars did to Europe in the 11 12 13 centuries.

I see ... I thought every contry in the world, has theyre own laws about the internet, not a random country who can control and decide to close or control the internet in another country.

[gemiwine]

i made my point. either you're too dumb to get it in which case you probably won't or you're just trolling in which case there's no point in trying (but if it's both and you're able to reproduce, god help us).



ahh, i guess that answers that

save the trolling for another board... maybe 4chan where everybody else does it?Why do u reply to trolls? That's why I don't understand your point while your conclusions are based on derogating. If your smart you would ignore it but you seem to really be against me or get offended when I talk about the gov.

[gemiwine]

I see ... I thought every contry in the world, has theyre own laws about the internet, not a random country who can control and decide to close or control the internet in another country.Well every country does have their own laws and Egpyt did shutdown he internet in their country but they all still work together despite these so called world wars its all just propaganda to control us mntally.

[Mikey]

India is among one of the countries trying to implement this. The article stated that this kind of legislation is being brought up in other countries such as America, Canada, Europe, Egypt, etc. They are trying to make this happen on a global scale.

[1313Jr.1313]

Why do u reply to trolls? That's why I don't understand your point while your conclusions are based on derogating. If your smart you would ignore it but you seem to really be against me or get offended when I talk about the gov.

in old cartoons a marble gets rolled down from the top of a snowy mountain and picks up snow all the way down. it rolls over hundreds of trees and by the time it makes it to the bottom it's too big to do anything about. the trees on the other side of the mountain do nothing to prevent this snowball from growing out of control. the trees it rolls over only make it larger. it would only take one bush at the very beginning of the descent to stop the potential massacre entirely.

the same applies to an opinion or even straight up lies. if nothing stands in the way, then what's to stop the people who know no better from adopting that opinion or believing those lies? nothing... maybe i'm nuts on this one (not too doubtful) but there's no harm in trying. facts based on evidence taken out of context or based on opinions that look nice tend to be believable and without anybody pointing out that that's all they are get believed and even fought for.

[gemiwine]

in old cartoons a marble gets rolled down from the top of a snowy mountain and picks up snow all the way down. it rolls over hundreds of trees and by the time it makes it to the bottom it's too big to do anything about. the trees on the other side of the mountain do nothing to prevent this snowball from growing out of control. the trees it rolls over only make it larger. it would only take one bush at the very beginning of the descent to stop the potential massacre entirely.

the same applies to an opinion or even straight up lies. if nothing stands in the way, then what's to stop the people who know no better from adopting that opinion or believing those lies? nothing... maybe i'm nuts on this one (not too doubtful) but there's no harm in trying. facts based on evidence taken out of context or based on opinions that look nice tend to be believable and without anybody pointing out that that's all they are get believed and even fought for.If you say we have freedom and we don't have to worry about what the GOV will do to us cuz everything is gonna get better next election while we're at world peace then please provide us with those facts that are not adopted by lies & opinions. Rejecting the truth dosent make it a lie nor an opinion.

[1313Jr.1313]

If you say we have freedom and we don't have to worry about what the GOV will do to us cuz everything is gonna get better next election while we're at world peace then please provide us with those facts that are not adopted by lies & opinions. Rejecting the truth dosent make it a lie nor an opinion.

no, what i'm saying is that when you're proposing a new idea or something that is against the popular belief you are the one required to provide solid evidence to support said idea. if you only provide opinions as evidence then logically nobody should back you up. the fact that people like you can not see through what they are saying is just evidence that you have not realized that that's all it is. "prove that fact x isn't true." prove that there's no life in our neighboring solar system. it's the same basic principle since you can't disprove something that hasn't been proved in the first place. the truth is that their methods is flawed and rejecting that doesn't make it a lie or an opinion.

like i said in the other thread, there is legitimate conspiracy stuff out there... you're just quoting the stuff that isn't.

[gemiwine]

no, what i'm saying is that when you're proposing a new idea or something that is against the popular belief you are the one required to provide solid evidence to support said idea. if you only provide opinions as evidence then logically nobody should back you up. the fact that people like you can not see through what they are saying is just evidence that you have not realized that that's all it is. "prove that fact x isn't true." prove that there's no life in our neighboring solar system. it's the same basic principle since you can't disprove something that hasn't been proved in the first place. the truth is that their methods is flawed and rejecting that doesn't make it a lie or an opinion.

like i said in the other thread, there is legitimate conspiracy stuff out there... you're just quoting the stuff that isn't.There's no proof we have freedom because of I.D's Social Security Cards, Birth certificates, Taxes, and Marriage Licenses. What more proof do you need I I tell you the sky is blue how can that be an opinion if you look up yourself and see its blue. Can you prove that man has set foot on the moon?

[1313Jr.1313]

that's like saying there's no proof we have freedom because gravity prevents of from flying...

to say that laws should not be in place is to ignore the consequences of a true anarchy. without means to enforce these laws they may as well not exist. without accountability there would be no means to enforce these laws. greed and corruption lie in the heart of all man so to criticize the system as a whole for the mistakes of a few while having that knowledge is just ignorant.

on that note, there's no proof that we have freedom but on the same coin there's no proof that we don't have freedom. consequences for our actions can be seen as proof that we have that freedom as without that freedom there would be no need to explicitly state that our actions may have consequences.

and yeah, i can provide evidence that man has set foot on the moon while i'm sure somebody else can provide evidence that man has not. trying to prove a point using subjective observations is hardly the way to go.

[gemiwine]

that's like saying there's no proof we have freedom because gravity prevents of from flying...

to say that laws should not be in place is to ignore the consequences of a true anarchy. without means to enforce these laws they may as well not exist. without accountability there would be no means to enforce these laws. greed and corruption lie in the heart of all man so to criticize the system as a whole for the mistakes of a few while having that knowledge is just ignorant.

on that note, there's no proof that we have freedom but on the same coin there's no proof that we don't have freedom. consequences for our actions can be seen as proof that we have that freedom as without that freedom there would be no need to explicitly state that our actions may have consequences.

and yeah, i can provide evidence that man has set foot on the moon while i'm sure somebody else can provide evidence that man has not. trying to prove a point using subjective observations is hardly the way to go.Bureaucracy which is also proof that freedom dosent exist must bethe way for you then that prevents people from thinking on their own, raising the family and gettin married without the gov consent. Sounds like freedom to me then sike.

We made it to a planet that's 250,000 miles away that has extreme freezing & burning tempatures and gravity 6x heavier than earth while surviving space debris from the sun which we are closer to. Yea right keep dreaming 13 cuz I know the broadcasted footage from the media can't b your evidence my friend.

[1313Jr.1313]

thank you for restating what i said i guess... take credit for it like your previous posts i guess... also, what you say proves my point and come back when you actually have something original to contribute? yeah, that.

[gemiwine]

thank you for restating what i said i guess... take credit for it like your previous posts i guess... also, what you say proves my point and come back when you actually have something original to contribute? yeah, that.Original like humans evolved from apes, America was founded by Christopher Columbus, Presidents are chosen by our votes, republicans and democrates are against each other, God dosent exist, Man landed on moon, America is a free country, America was founded on July 4th 1776, The Illuminati died centuries ago and don't exist anymore, College gradutes get better jobs then blue collar workers, The economy is down, Osama Bin Lade was killed on May 1st 2011 by US troops, Osama Bin Laden was behind 9/11, Obama is better than bush because hes a democrat, America is a democracy based country ruled by 3 branches of gov legslative, judicial & executive, American troops are fighting for our freedom by fighting terrorist in the middle east, There's no such thing as a conspiracy, secret society and new world order because our gov is not leaning toward communism but is trying to make it a better place for our children and family.

Sounds about right 13? *Friday the 13th did not originate from the extermination of the knights templars Oct 13th 1307.*

[1313Jr.1313]

Original like humans evolved from apes, America was founded by Christopher Columbus, Presidents are chosen by our votes, republicans and democrates are against each other, God dosent exist, Man landed on moon, America is a free country, America was founded on July 4th 1776, The Illuminati died centuries ago and don't exist anymore, College gradutes get better jobs then blue collar workers, The economy is down, Osama Bin Lade was killed on May 1st 2011 by US troops, Osama Bin Laden was behind 9/11, Obama is better than bush because hes a democrat, America is a democracy based country ruled by 3 branches of gov legslative, judicial & executive, American troops are fighting for our freedom by fighting terrorist in the middle east, There's no such thing as a conspiracy, secret society and new world order because our gov is not leaning toward communism but is trying to make it a better place for our children and family.

Sounds about right 13? *Friday the 13th did not originate from the extermination of the knights templars Oct 13th 1307.*

no, original as in something you came up with yourself instead of something regurgitated from someone else's take on someone else's take on someone else's take on someone else's take (etc) on the facts. one fact can get a thousand different interpretations on what it implies... some sound good (.99 is pretty much equal to 1) and some do not (.5 is pretty much equal to 1). then someone takes the one that sounds good and runs with it (.98 is pretty much equal to .99). it moves on down the chain and eventually something that was ridiculous before (.5 is pretty much equal to 1 so the answer is .5) seems reasonable (.50 is pretty much equal to .51 so the answer is .5). because it's been passed down and messed up so many times everything is taken as fact and people will blindly believe it because it doesn't look too far fetched.

i don't care if we don't come to the same conclusion... i just want to make sure people realize that vids like those only seem legit because they appeal to our desire to be a part of something unique and have knowledge that other people do not... a free excuse for some sort of sense of superiority? why not... not that that's the only reason somebody would follow that, but it's one reason that some people can. keep in mind though that just because the person you blindly follow isn't the gummerman it doesn't mean their interpretation of the facts are any more accurate. here's a tip for finding legitimate stuff... keep an eye out for things that DO NOT contradict themselves in the same piece. also, keep an eye out for things that stay on topic... the more they jump around the more likely it is that they just want to say something fast then let it sit while they give you more information. the reason for that is that things with no real support tend to seem more valid when there are other adding on to it and when you recall all of the different things gone over, they all seem significantly more accurate. stick to things with a single thing to prove and you'll be much closer to finding legitimate conspiracy theories. if something is trying to disprove evolution then makes mention of the illuminati, you should find a new source...

[gemiwine]

no, original as in something you came up with yourself instead of something regurgitated from someone else's take on someone else's take on someone else's take on someone else's take (etc) on the facts. one fact can get a thousand different interpretations on what it implies... some sound good (.99 is pretty much equal to 1) and some do not (.5 is pretty much equal to 1). then someone takes the one that sounds good and runs with it (.98 is pretty much equal to .99). it moves on down the chain and eventually something that was ridiculous before (.5 is pretty much equal to 1 so the answer is .5) seems reasonable (.50 is pretty much equal to .51 so the answer is .5). because it's been passed down and messed up so many times everything is taken as fact and people will blindly believe it because it doesn't look too far fetched.

i don't care if we don't come to the same conclusion... i just want to make sure people realize that vids like those only seem legit because they appeal to our desire to be a part of something unique and have knowledge that other people do not... a free excuse for some sort of sense of superiority? why not... not that that's the only reason somebody would follow that, but it's one reason that some people can. keep in mind though that just because the person you blindly follow isn't the gummerman it doesn't mean their interpretation of the facts are any more accurate. here's a tip for finding legitimate stuff... keep an eye out for things that DO NOT contradict themselves in the same piece. also, keep an eye out for things that stay on topic... the more they jump around the more likely it is that they just want to say something fast then let it sit while they give you more information. the reason for that is that things with no real support tend to seem more valid when there are other adding on to it and when you recall all of the different things gone over, they all seem significantly more accurate. stick to things with a single thing to prove and you'll be much closer to finding legitimate conspiracy theories. if something is trying to disprove evolution then makes mention of the illuminati, you should find a new source...It dosent matter what type of legitimate source of evidence I provide to you. You will still reject it and find a reason to say "its not true." I already proved to you that freemasonry is a cult by its definition. So it wouldn't be no difference proving anything else that's in connection with them. I would tell you to read the bible which is enough evidence exposing this world but its up to you to have an open mind about it otherwise you'll never learn what is really going on in this world and keep thinking "everything is ok, no worries" theory that your trying to indoctrinate me with which isn't going to work. I can only tell you once and if you reject it then thats your problem especially if you can't prove it. You can prove things differently but it will all come to the same conclusion.

[gemiwine]

Sorry to say 13 but its all over, no matter what you say at this point is irrelevant and you will finally wake up from this false reality you live in debunking everything I stated about the illuminati, freemasonry and new world order.

I will not argue with you on this one because its flooded all over the net for you to research this and see for yourself.

http://www.unelected.org/goodbye-bill-of-rights-obama-signs-ndaa

[1313Jr.1313]

LOL, that's your big end all point? a revision and relabeling of that? congrats, you're right... you might as well say that federal funding for state police is a monstrous conspiracy. they really had to reach to get something out of that one... i never said our government was saintly and you have yet to provide something legit. wake up from your idiotic way of believing everything you're "not supposed to realize." i could repost everything i've already said but it seems to not be getting through. until you realize the same mistake you keep making (like checking the sources yourself) you'll be made a fool of by every single "conspiracy theorist" that is too lazy to actually back up their facts and prefers to just speculate on things that may or (more often) may not be. if you hear about a bill being signed, do the research yourself on what it says. if people are saying the bill is fucked up, look it up and it may or may not be and if people are saying it's great then look it up yourself and it may or may not be. if you keep blindly following these idiots then you'll surely become one. if you want to better yourself find something legit and run with it. either way, don't blindly regurgitate what other people say without checking the facts or it won't just reflect badly on them, but on you as well. you have basically made the same post over and over again and this post is probably the same one posted for me as many times as well so to save time in the future i'll just refer to this as the 'gemi rebuttal' for simplification purposes.

[gemiwine]

LOL, that's your big end all point? a revision and relabeling of that? congrats, you're right... you might as well say that federal funding for state police is a monstrous conspiracy. they really had to reach to get something out of that one... i never said our government was saintly and you have yet to provide something legit. wake up from your idiotic way of believing everything you're "not supposed to realize." i could repost everything i've already said but it seems to not be getting through. until you realize the same mistake you keep making (like checking the sources yourself) you'll be made a fool of by every single "conspiracy theorist" that is too lazy to actually back up their facts and prefers to just speculate on things that may or (more often) may not be. if you hear about a bill being signed, do the research yourself on what it says. if people are saying the bill is fucked up, look it up and it may or may not be and if people are saying it's great then look it up yourself and it may or may not be. if you keep blindly following these idiots then you'll surely become one. if you want to better yourself find something legit and run with it. either way, don't blindly regurgitate what other people say without checking the facts or it won't just reflect badly on them, but on you as well. you have basically made the same post over and over again and this post is probably the same one posted for me as many times as well so to save time in the future i'll just refer to this as the 'gemi rebuttal' for simplification purposes.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:2:./temp/~c112imyOvU::

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

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year _2012

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sRIpi-ngtc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reCpV1YHuYs

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/20798

http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/ndaa-home?p=ndaa

[1313Jr.1313]

link 1, timed out.

link 2, "The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 48 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense"

what? you mean it's what i already said? moving on...

3 and 4, this is what you've been saying the gummerman has been doing forever... in your eyes what change is being made exactly? regardless, the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens so we're going on what people say that's different from the truth? i sure hope that the rest of your links doesn't fall apart when this fact is applied...

5, keep in mind that the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens... how cute to conveniently overlook that.

6, doesn't actually say anything but tugs at the emotional heartstrings with imagery... at least it tells you to think for yourself...

7, WHAT??? any history majors here care to clear up exactly what kind of government germany had pre ww2? yeah... the law is basically the same except for the straight up lie about american citizen stipulation removed from the bill and the part where it's compared to something entirely different and called the same.

8, this just says the bill is being signed... unless i missed something on this one...

so yeah, 4 are informational and give straight up fact while 4 are based on a faulty premise... like i said, do the research yourself, don't be a sheep, and see: gemi rebuttal.

[gemiwine]

link 1, timed out.

link 2, "The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 48 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense"

what? you mean it's what i already said? moving on...

3 and 4, this is what you've been saying the gummerman has been doing forever... in your eyes what change is being made exactly? regardless, the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens so we're going on what people say that's different from the truth? i sure hope that the rest of your links doesn't fall apart when this fact is applied...

5, keep in mind that the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens... how cute to conveniently overlook that.

6, doesn't actually say anything but tugs at the emotional heartstrings with imagery... at least it tells you to think for yourself...

7, WHAT??? any history majors here care to clear up exactly what kind of government germany had pre ww2? yeah... the law is basically the same except for the straight up lie about american citizen stipulation removed from the bill and the part where it's compared to something entirely different and called the same.

8, this just says the bill is being signed... unless i missed something on this one...

so yeah, 4 are informational and give straight up fact while 4 are based on a faulty premise... like i said, do the research yourself, don't be a sheep, and see: gemi rebuttal.I'm asheep for believing in martial law in america. Your a genius 13.

[gemiwine]

link 1, timed out.

link 2, "The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 48 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense"

what? you mean it's what i already said? moving on...

3 and 4, this is what you've been saying the gummerman has been doing forever... in your eyes what change is being made exactly? regardless, the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens so we're going on what people say that's different from the truth? i sure hope that the rest of your links doesn't fall apart when this fact is applied...

5, keep in mind that the substance of the bill does say this excludes American citizens... how cute to conveniently overlook that.

6, doesn't actually say anything but tugs at the emotional heartstrings with imagery... at least it tells you to think for yourself...

7, WHAT??? any history majors here care to clear up exactly what kind of government germany had pre ww2? yeah... the law is basically the same except for the straight up lie about american citizen stipulation removed from the bill and the part where it's compared to something entirely different and called the same.

8, this just says the bill is being signed... unless i missed something on this one...

so yeah, 4 are informational and give straight up fact while 4 are based on a faulty premise... like i said, do the research yourself, don't be a sheep, and see: gemi rebuttal.Those are your opinion and theories if I'm a sheep then I'm the one who dosent follow the shepherd unlike you that follows the bandwagon of liberty soon will shit yourself after you find out you were the one who was mislead by the shepherd will one day wake up to reality and realize your just a slave even tho your only freedom is from religion but your still the farm animal who owns nothing regardless from what your gov institution spoon feed you and indoctrinated you into believing in the lies over the truth about who you really are.

If you think your birthday is the day you came out the womb then you truly are a idiot in sheeps clothing.

[1313Jr.1313]

Those are your opinion and theories if I'm a sheep then I'm the one who dosent follow the shepherd unlike you that follows the bandwagon of liberty soon will shit yourself after you find out you were the one who was mislead by the shepherd will one day wake up to reality and realize your just a slave even tho your only freedom is from religion but your still the farm animal who owns nothing regardless from what your gov institution spoon feed you and indoctrinated you into believing in the lies over the truth about who you really are.

If you think your birthday is the day you came out the womb then you truly are a idiot in sheeps clothing.

so let me get this straight... i straight up rebut everything you just said giving you reasons why the people you're blindly following are misleading you and telling you to think for yourself rather than listening blindly to our government OR random conspiracy theorists and this is the pile you give back in return? seriously? just a long winded way of saying that you don't feel like doing the research yourself and would rather attempt to belittle me to avoid needing to acknowledge that i'm right on this one? it's not like it's particularly hard to do research on this stuff... if, however, this is just what you could come up with in the short time you were here 21 hours ago and wanted to wait a day to mull it over before giving an ACTUAL response then next time just go ahead and wait the extra day instead of attempting to insult my intelligence ::great

[gemiwine]

so let me get this straight... i straight up rebut everything you just said giving you reasons why the people you're blindly following are misleading you and telling you to think for yourself rather than listening blindly to our government OR random conspiracy theorists and this is the pile you give back in return? seriously? just a long winded way of saying that you don't feel like doing the research yourself and would rather attempt to belittle me to avoid needing to acknowledge that i'm right on this one? it's not like it's particularly hard to do research on this stuff... if, however, this is just what you could come up with in the short time you were here 21 hours ago and wanted to wait a day to mull it over before giving an ACTUAL response then next time just go ahead and wait the extra day instead of attempting to insult my intelligence ::greatI have done the research already I'm telling you to research it yourself. Look up John Todd, Bill copper explaining the illuminati new orld order etc. Research Aleister Crowley and all the other new agers and satanist in connection with him. That's what I'm telling you to look it up yourself after I tryed to provide you with evidence because I already know al this but u need to look it up. I tell every1 that instead of going back and forth with them thinking they know wht the hell is going on base on their college bullshit.

[1313Jr.1313]

i have done my research as well and i'm not saying that underground societies or the new world order or satanists are so ridiculous you should be institutionalized, but the evidence you have provided on this act DOES NOT support the conclusion you gave due to one large fault in the premise of what all of that evidence is based on. i mean, yeah... people kept piling more and more on top of it but it had no support from the get go. there was a rumor about a very specific inclusion in the bill and practically overnight it had spread as though it were a fact instead of what it was: a rumor. then everybody else buys this because it's right in front of them instead of doing a negligible amount of research to get the facts.

[gemiwine]

i have done my research as well and i'm not saying that underground societies or the new world order or satanists are so ridiculous you should be institutionalized, but the evidence you have provided on this act DOES NOT support the conclusion you gave due to one large fault in the premise of what all of that evidence is based on. i mean, yeah... people kept piling more and more on top of it but it had no support from the get go. there was a rumor about a very specific inclusion in the bill and practically overnight it had spread as though it were a fact instead of what it was: a rumor. then everybody else buys this because it's right in front of them instead of doing a negligible amount of research to get the facts.Their is no rumor that martial law is in America like it never happen before plenty of times in history. What you have to understand is just like 9/11 is a plan attack in order to come up with these new laws effecting our rights. The same way it will happen again with a plan attack would cause them again to react in the same way on a rigorious level. There are private troops in a federal base here in Houston preparing for it to go down. I passed by it plenty of times since 2010. 12/12 or before that date will be the start of it, not the end of the world that the majority of the public believe which is a distracton to what's going to happen on that day and there's plenty of evidence all over the net about that. Its not a theory of mine to this conspiracy nor my opinion after so much investigation about it including biblical evidence. Its going to happen regardless of rumors, warnings, media and people who say its not so.

[1313Jr.1313]

so now you're changing the subject? ok, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCwTac

don't let the monkeys catch you... your move?



if you don't have a response, don't just change the subject and spout random conspiracy bullshit.

[gemiwine]

so now you're changing the subject? ok, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCwTac

don't let the monkeys catch you... your move?



if you don't have a response, don't just change the subject and spout random conspiracy bullshit.Link dosent work. I'm not changing the subject about the bill of rights soon to vanish from martial law. I really don't care about your anti-conspiracy theory bullshit neither cuz you can't prove its no conspiracy at all can you? You can't prove that our government is not ran by high rank occult members who worship Satan as their grand leader of this world for centuries.

[1313Jr.1313]

Link dosent work.

the link isn't to a video, it's to youtube's jokish error troubleshooting page and it works fine.


I'm not changing the subject about the bill of rights soon to vanish from martial law.

i explained that what you said was based off of rumors that were later proven false and you changed the subject by talking about at least 4 other generic conspiracies that are only relevant if you stretch for it. you want to get back on topic? find new evidence for your claim and throw it up here, otherwise stop quoting things that were based on a faulty premise.


I really don't care about your anti-conspiracy theory bullshit neither cuz you can't prove its no conspiracy at all can you?

i am not anti-conspiracy and have already stated this multiple times. stop ignoring the words that i post just as i don't ignore the words you do. i am anti-fallacy and the shit you're spewing is fallacious as fuck. learn to do research, then DO the research.


You can't prove that our government is not ran by high rank occult members who worship Satan as their grand leader of this world for centuries.

and you can't prove that out of all of the stars in the universe that there is one with the exact same molecular structure and mass as our sun... ever here of argumentum ad ignorantium? http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/ignorance.html yeah, i'm willing to bet cash that the majority of everything you say (and the sources you cite) has and will fall under this category. thus far you do not disappoint... try again.

[gemiwine]

the link isn't to a video, it's to youtube's jokish error troubleshooting page and it works fine.



i explained that what you said was based off of rumors that were later proven false and you changed the subject by talking about at least 4 other generic conspiracies that are only relevant if you stretch for it. you want to get back on topic? find new evidence for your claim and throw it up here, otherwise stop quoting things that were based on a faulty premise.



i am not anti-conspiracy and have already stated this multiple times. stop ignoring the words that i post just as i don't ignore the words you do. i am anti-fallacy and the shit you're spewing is fallacious as fuck. learn to do research, then DO the research.



and you can't prove that out of all of the stars in the universe that there is one with the exact same molecular structure and mass as our sun... ever here of argumentum ad ignorantium? http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/ignorance.html yeah, i'm willing to bet cash that the majority of everything you say (and the sources you cite) has and will fall under this category. thus far you do not disappoint... try again. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SN01867:@@@L&summ2=m&

*Subtitle D: Detainee Matters**- (Sec. 1031) Affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force includes the authority for U.S. Armed Forces to detain covered persons pending disposition under the law of war. Defines a "covered person" as a person who: (1) planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for such attacks; or (2) was part of or substantially supported al Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. Requires the Secretary to regularly brief Congress on the application of such authority.

Detainee - person held in custody, esp. for a political offense or for questioning.
Not for terroristic reasons which would make more sense of the title of the section.

Political Offense or in french terms "laissez majeste" is defined as an offense against a sovereign power; or an attack against someone's dignity or against a custom or institution held sacred.

A terrorist attack isn't a political offense. http://www.jstor.org/pss/4508236

Sovereign-monarch, king, queen, a group, body of persons, or a state having sovereign authority.

Sounds like every country matches this description including the US.

Sovereignty - "For centuries past, the idea that a state could be sovereign was always connected to its ability to guarantee the best interests of its own citizens. Thus, if a state could not act in the best interests of its own citizens, it could not be thought of as a “sovereign" state." Quoted from C.G. Bateman.

There's no country that acts in the best interest of its citizens including the US.

"There exists perhaps no conception the meaning of which is more controversial than that of sovereignty. It is an indisputable fact that this conception, from the moment when it was introduced into political science until the present day, has never had a meaning which was universally agreed upon." Lassa Oppenheim, an authority on international law

To sum all of this, 1: Their not against any sovereign country 2: Their not against any political offenses 3: Their not against any sacred institutions being attacked and 4:Their not against any terrorist or terrorist threats as we all know there's no proof that any terrorist hijacked a plane and caused 2 of them to demolish 2 buildings. So it wouldn't make sense to issue this bill if the US is the only terrorist out there that's not being detained as the "covered person". The US, Taliban, and Al qaedo and its assosiated forces all work together with the US and been for years to make a false war to sacrifie its people and kill each other for nothing while shit keeps happening because there's no single terrorist but our gov and other govts of the world. So this bill should apply to the US rulers not its citizes oherwise it would be martial law.

[Mudofale]

I have some questions..
1.) If I did not come out of the womb on the day my birth certificate says, then when was I born? Or was that just some wacky metaphor you threw out to make people think? Can't even tell at this point...
2.) If our presidents are trying to enact some master plan to change everything, why are they doing it? What is the grand scheme of the entire thing? Are they just doing it to have complete and under control of everything and everyone? Just confused on the point of theorizing, hypothesizing and distributing information that doesn't seem to fit together with a final piece of solid information.
3.) Calling someone "ignorant" or "foolish" or whatever you want to label most of the world, or Americans doesn't make much sense. For one thing, just because you believe a certain way doesn't mean the rest of the world is going to follow in your grand scheme plan of taking down the gov't and all these secret organizations. For one thing, how you can say "The gov't controls our lives by creating ways of tracking us blah blah blah" really? Try and create an entire nation where there is no gov't, no policies, no laws, no paper work, nothing. See how long it last. It'll last about as long as it'll take you to read this entire post if you actually read it. A gov't with no control over it's people isn't a gov't at all, it's just a figure head like the Queen of England. Just like the first American written laws, no one followed them because they had no backing, nothing that forced people to follow them. This isn't much of a question I guess, just general queries. I may be a sheep, I may be ignorant. But ignorance is bliss, right? Last time I checked freedom isn't defined by anyone, it's a general idea created by everyone who believes in it.

[gemiwine]

I have some questions..
1.) If I did not come out of the womb on the day my birth certificate says, then when was I born? Or was that just some wacky metaphor you threw out to make people think? Can't even tell at this point...
2.) If our presidents are trying to enact some master plan to change everything, why are they doing it? What is the grand scheme of the entire thing? Are they just doing it to have complete and under control of everything and everyone? Just confused on the point of theorizing, hypothesizing and distributing information that doesn't seem to fit together with a final piece of solid information.
3.) Calling someone "ignorant" or "foolish" or whatever you want to label most of the world, or Americans doesn't make much sense. For one thing, just because you believe a certain way doesn't mean the rest of the world is going to follow in your grand scheme plan of taking down the gov't and all these secret organizations. For one thing, how you can say "The gov't controls our lives by creating ways of tracking us blah blah blah" really? Try and create an entire nation where there is no gov't, no policies, no laws, no paper work, nothing. See how long it last. It'll last about as long as it'll take you to read this entire post if you actually read it. A gov't with no control over it's people isn't a gov't at all, it's just a figure head like the Queen of England. Just like the first American written laws, no one followed them because they had no backing, nothing that forced people to follow them. This isn't much of a question I guess, just general queries. I may be a sheep, I may be ignorant. But ignorance is bliss, right? Last time I checked freedom isn't defined by anyone, it's a general idea created by everyone who believes in it.The day you were alive inside your mothers stomach is your birthday is not hard to figure out if you learn how to think for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfnJ1rOFK7o

This will answer your question about your corrupt gov who wants to control you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R85eo2rA70

[1313Jr.1313]

LOL, holy fuck. i take ONE DAY off and your logic degrades this much? really? buddy, neither youtube link has evidence for anything. i mean, i'm honestly half sure you didn't even post the correct links and just made a mistake. secondly, in your post before mud's you just stated a bunch of things that are related in subject alone. normally you are supposed to tie it together somehow to allow them to be connected in a cohesive way. here's an example of what you just did only more obvious due to its ridiculousness and if you disagree with it then you disagree with yourself since it's the same logic.

1) tomatoes are fruit.
2) fruit is sometimes used as a derogatory term referring to one who is gay.
3) one who is gay means one who is happy.
THEREFORE tomatoes must be happy.

now, for part two.
1) tomatoes are inanimate objects.
2) inanimate objects feel no emotions.
3) happiness is an emotion.
THEREFORE tomatoes can not be happy.

and now, the clincher.
1) tomatoes must be happy.
2) tomatoes can not be happy.
3) the above logic is contradictory.
THEREFORE the above logic is incorrect.

the beauty? because it's your logic, if you agree with this line of reasoning (and thus agree with yourself) then you agree that what you are saying follows false logic. IF on the other hand you disagree, then you disagree with your own logic and contradict yourself which invalidates your own argument. that being said, i'm fairly certain it's not going to change what you're going to post in the future (perhaps just the order and wording) so i'm going to make a prediction. IF you come back to this thread and decide you want the ridiculousness of what you're posting pointed out to you, you will post another video with very little support and more than likely a crumbling foundation OR you will throw out random barely related statements and call it an argument.

[gemiwine]

LOL, holy fuck. i take ONE DAY off and your logic degrades this much? really? buddy, neither youtube link has evidence for anything. i mean, i'm honestly half sure you didn't even post the correct links and just made a mistake. secondly, in your post before mud's you just stated a bunch of things that are related in subject alone. normally you are supposed to tie it together somehow to allow them to be connected in a cohesive way. here's an example of what you just did only more obvious due to its ridiculousness and if you disagree with it then you disagree with yourself since it's the same logic.

1) tomatoes are fruit.
2) fruit is sometimes used as a derogatory term referring to one who is gay.
3) one who is gay means one who is happy.
THEREFORE tomatoes must be happy.

now, for part two.
1) tomatoes are inanimate objects.
2) inanimate objects feel no emotions.
3) happiness is an emotion.
THEREFORE tomatoes can not be happy.

and now, the clincher.
1) tomatoes must be happy.
2) tomatoes can not be happy.
3) the above logic is contradictory.
THEREFORE the above logic is incorrect.

the beauty? because it's your logic, if you agree with this line of reasoning (and thus agree with yourself) then you agree that what you are saying follows false logic. IF on the other hand you disagree, then you disagree with your own logic and contradict yourself which invalidates your own argument. that being said, i'm fairly certain it's not going to change what you're going to post in the future (perhaps just the order and wording) so i'm going to make a prediction. IF you come back to this thread and decide you want the ridiculousness of what you're posting pointed out to you, you will post another video with very little support and more than likely a crumbling foundation OR you will throw out random barely related statements and call it an argument.Wow now that has to be the best evidence I have seen so far debunking the new world order & martial law so I don't have to worry about the gov turning on us, great job 13. You just build my hopes up for next year.How was your satanic holiday celebration? Did Satan/Santa give you what you wanted?

[1313Jr.1313]

Wow now that has to be the best evidence I have seen so far debunking the new world order & martial law so I don't have to worry about the gov turning on us, great job 13. You just build my hopes up for next year.How was your satanic holiday celebration? Did Satan/Santa give you what you wanted?

woah woah woah, lol. i could understand you generalizing that debunking to all kinds of crap, but the crap it will debunk is only that following the same line of faulty logic. i never said your conclusion was wrong, just how you got there. that's generalizing again and i'm not going to be the one to commit ad ignorantium. this is literally the exact reason i tell you to do your own research rather than just believing what you're told. if you find something that proves ANY of your hypotheses WITHOUT using the above logic then go ahead and post it, but don't go posting shit that uses shit logic after being told that that logic is shit and expect me to believe that shit.

also, the roots of a celebration are irrelevant... the actions we take in the celebration are relevant. santa is irrelevant. the fact that early evidence of jesus showed him running around with a magic wand like dumbledore are irrelevant. we follow the customs of our culture and what those customs indicate is proper during this particular celebration is spending time with our loved ones and taking a minute to think of the needs of others rather than our own.

[Mudofale]

The day you were alive inside your mothers stomach is your birthday is not hard to figure out if you learn how to think for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfnJ1rOFK7o

This will answer your question about your corrupt gov who wants to control you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R85eo2rA70

So what your saying is that I'm actually over 3 billion years old? Because according to you, the moment of my "birth" is when I was "alive" in my mothers "stomach" which actually is incorrect... fetus don't even live near the stomach... But, following your logic that would mean that the living organism that is me today, the moment that came to be is the moment of my birth, which would mean that the first time a organism split is the day that every organism in the entire universe came to be. So, I guess ill be celebrating my 3 billionth birthday in a few months. So can I retire then? You aware that every person is alive before their egg is even fertilized? You develop afterwards, inside and outside of the womb. A women has her eggs from the day she is born until she uses them all, or loses them all through her menstrual cycle... I mean come on... 1313Jr was right, your links had nothing to do with the point you were trying to prove. All the link talked about was what your birth certificate stands for... doesn't say anything about when you actually were born... Because I have at least 15 eye witnesses in my family that can tell me or you for a fact I was born on that specific day. But, take it as you will. Continue to believe every little dribble of information someone tosses your way and blindly lead yourself into a self consuming abyss of paranoia and theories.

I could raise a kid and teach him that people are emotionless animals that kill everyone and everything that holds no value to them. That kid would grow up to be a mass murder. Why? Because I taught them that, they were brain washed since birth to believe that killing is the way of life, everyone has to kill for things to continue. Is that kid a bad person for killing people? No he is not, because he was taught a specific way and he believes a certain way because he was raised that way. No one grows up and decides to take over the world because they're bored. Something in their life conditioned them to think that way. And calling people foolish for believing what they see is just plain stupid, they were raised a certain way so they live a certain way, simple to understand but people fail to understand that every day...

[gemiwine]

[QUOTE=Mudofale;103210]So what your saying is that I'm actually over 3 billion years old? Because according to you, the moment of my "birth" is when I was "alive" in my mothers "stomach" which actually is incorrect... fetus don't even live near the stomach... But, following your logic that would mean that the living organism that is me today, the moment that came to be is the moment of my birth, which would mean that the first time a organism split is the day that every organism in the entire universe came to be. So, I guess ill be celebrating my 3 billionth birthday in a few months. So can I retire then? You aware that every person is alive before their egg is even fertilized? You develop afterwards, inside and outside of the womb. A women has her eggs from the day she is born until she uses them all, or loses them all through her menstrual cycle... I mean come on... 1313Jr was right, your links had nothing to do with the point you were trying to prove. All the link talked about was what your birth certificate stands for... doesn't say anything about when you actually were born... Because I have at least 15 eye witnesses in my family that can tell me or you for a fact I was born on that specific day. But, take it as you will. Continue to believe every little dribble of information someone tosses your way and blindly lead yourself into a self consuming abyss of paranoia and theories.

The day your mom was pregnant with you is your birthday. You were still alive before you came out the womb but man has indoctrinated everyone into believing you weren't alive into you came out the womb therefore is your birthday and you have to celebrate it without researching its satanic origins.

I could raise a kid and teach him that people are emotionless animals that kill everyone and everything that holds no value to them. That kid would grow up to be a mass murder. Why? Because I taught them that, they were brain washed since birth to believe that killing is the way of life, everyone has to kill for things to continue.

Yea so for life to continue I have to kill inosent people, kids, destroy their homes, poison their food, water and create diseases in order fo life to continue? Please provide me some evidence that makes it true to nature that killing solves all the problems of the world to make it peaceful and safer enviornment for our children and improve the economy because that sounds ignorant from being brainwashed with religion and dogma.

Is that kid a bad person for killing people? No he is not, because he was taught a specific way and he believes a certain way because he was raised that way. No one grows up and decides to take over the world because they're bored. Something in their life conditioned them to think that way. And calling people foolish for believing what they see is just plain stupid, they were raised a certain way so they live a certain way, simple to understand but people fail to understand that every day.

A kid can be taught that but it dosent mean he will do that unless he's trained physical in fighting and weapon handling to match his perception of thinking that way is what you forgot to mention but will suffer the same fatal repercussions as an assassin. That's why people hate religion ecause its similiar to brainwashing when raising a kid to become an oblivious slave.

[gemiwine]

woah woah woah, lol. i could understand you generalizing that debunking to all kinds of crap, but the crap it will debunk is only that following the same line of faulty logic. i never said your conclusion was wrong, just how you got there. that's generalizing again and i'm not going to be the one to commit ad ignorantium. this is literally the exact reason i tell you to do your own research rather than just believing what you're told. if you find something that proves ANY of your hypotheses WITHOUT using the above logic then go ahead and post it, but don't go posting shit that uses shit logic after being told that that logic is shit and expect me to believe that shit.

also, the roots of a celebration are irrelevant... the actions we take in the celebration are relevant. santa is irrelevant. the fact that early evidence of jesus showed him running around with a magic wand like dumbledore are irrelevant. we follow the customs of our culture and what those customs indicate is proper during this particular celebration is spending time with our loved ones and taking a minute to think of the needs of others rather than our own. Lets see again no evidence from you debunking anything after I did my research that you can't debunk because you never proved to me that freemasonry is not a cult and man has been on the moon just a few examples. You follow the customs of your CULTures to spend time with your loved ones and to think of the needs of others without taking action or buying them things that they don't need. Makes sense that we have to do that once every year on a holiday but I can't debunk that actually I can see spending time with others and giving is not something you do as a culture and tradition. You do that everyday, season to season its human nature in all man & women but if its something we do on a particular occasion than it becomes a cult or CULTture made by man to follow that dehumanizes us so how can you call me a sheep if you follow man made customs of CULTures that does not indicate that it is proper based on no evidence showing that it is if you don't learn the origins of your celebrations otherwise its stupid to believe that christmas or any holiday is about sharing and giving if its roots are based on occult & pagan practices.

[Mudofale]

[QUOTE=Mudofale;103210]So what your saying is that I'm actually over 3 billion years old? Because according to you, the moment of my "birth" is when I was "alive" in my mothers "stomach" which actually is incorrect... fetus don't even live near the stomach... But, following your logic that would mean that the living organism that is me today, the moment that came to be is the moment of my birth, which would mean that the first time a organism split is the day that every organism in the entire universe came to be. So, I guess ill be celebrating my 3 billionth birthday in a few months. So can I retire then? You aware that every person is alive before their egg is even fertilized? You develop afterwards, inside and outside of the womb. A women has her eggs from the day she is born until she uses them all, or loses them all through her menstrual cycle... I mean come on... 1313Jr was right, your links had nothing to do with the point you were trying to prove. All the link talked about was what your birth certificate stands for... doesn't say anything about when you actually were born... Because I have at least 15 eye witnesses in my family that can tell me or you for a fact I was born on that specific day. But, take it as you will. Continue to believe every little dribble of information someone tosses your way and blindly lead yourself into a self consuming abyss of paranoia and theories.

The day your mom was pregnant with you is your birthday. You were still alive before you came out the womb but man has indoctrinated everyone into believing you weren't alive into you came out the womb therefore is your birthday and you have to celebrate it without researching its satanic origins.

I could raise a kid and teach him that people are emotionless animals that kill everyone and everything that holds no value to them. That kid would grow up to be a mass murder. Why? Because I taught them that, they were brain washed since birth to believe that killing is the way of life, everyone has to kill for things to continue.

Yea so for life to continue I have to kill inosent people, kids, destroy their homes, poison their food, water and create diseases in order fo life to continue? Please provide me some evidence that makes it true to nature that killing solves all the problems of the world to make it peaceful and safer enviornment for our children and improve the economy because that sounds ignorant from being brainwashed with religion and dogma.

Is that kid a bad person for killing people? No he is not, because he was taught a specific way and he believes a certain way because he was raised that way. No one grows up and decides to take over the world because they're bored. Something in their life conditioned them to think that way. And calling people foolish for believing what they see is just plain stupid, they were raised a certain way so they live a certain way, simple to understand but people fail to understand that every day.

A kid can be taught that but it dosent mean he will do that unless he's trained physical in fighting and weapon handling to match his perception of thinking that way is what you forgot to mention but will suffer the same fatal repercussions as an assassin. That's why people hate religion ecause its similiar to brainwashing when raising a kid to become an oblivious slave.

You truely are stupid. Im sorry, I just have to say it. You literally take everything for it's literal meaning, someone could tell you they just ran 10000 miles to get to your house and you would call them a liar and slam the door in their face.

Also, a chicken isn't considered born until it comes out of it's egg. Want to know why? Because before that it is developing inside of the egg... Of course your alive before you come out of the womb. But your also alive before your egg is even fertilized. They don't consider you to being a human being until you actually develop chromosomes BECAUSE you could be anything. The only thing that separates humans and animals are about 4 chromosomes (I think, not sure, biology class feels like it was so long ago....) So they consider your BIRTH to be the day you come out of the womb, which is the same thing as a chicken coming out of an egg. Are you saying that chickens are born before they come out of the egg? Do you even understand what the word "Birth" means? It seems like you don't the way your trying to justify yourself. Starting to think I might actually be smarter then you. Well, im not stupid but, i'm thought you were at least intelligent... Guess I was wrong. I would waste more time explaining myself but I feel like you wouldn't even comprehend a taco if someone showed you how to make it...

[1313Jr.1313]

Lets see again no evidence from you debunking anything after I did my research that you can't debunk because you never proved to me that freemasonry is not a cult and man has been on the moon just a few examples. You follow the customs of your CULTures to spend time with your loved ones and to think of the needs of others without taking action or buying them things that they don't need. Makes sense that we have to do that once every year on a holiday but I can't debunk that actually I can see spending time with others and giving is not something you do as a culture and tradition. You do that everyday, season to season its human nature in all man & women but if its something we do on a particular occasion than it becomes a cult or CULTture made by man to follow that dehumanizes us so how can you call me a sheep if you follow man made customs of CULTures that does not indicate that it is proper based on no evidence showing that it is if you don't learn the origins of your celebrations otherwise its stupid to believe that christmas or any holiday is about sharing and giving if its roots are based on occult & pagan practices.

any idiot can draw links between two words... "CAN'T SPELL CULTURES WITHOUT CULT LOLOLOL"... you can't spell slaughter without laughter either... does that mean slaughter is something joyous to laugh about? now, to keep things separate for you...

1) i have proved that the logic behind your conclusions thus far has been flawed. you are saying that i haven't because you are too lazy to come up with new evidence that isn't flawed (or just can't). i've even explained in detail why what you are saying now is flawed because you are saying nothing new on the subject.

2) an act has no meaning beyond what we give it. now if you are saying that i am a sheep for following man made customs then you are a sheep for doing the same thing with your irrational skepticism... the difference is that what i do is rational. this holiday gives us an excuse and time of to dedicate to the loved ones we do not always see. if such a time didn't exist then i would never see my family that lives on the other side of the country. the roots of this holiday are irrelevant. my birthday is the celebration of the date i came out of my mother's womb. the roots being that my parents fucked 9 months or so previous does not come up on that day.

3) traditions are something that man has had since the beginning of recorded history so using the fact that they exist as evidence of cultery or anything else other than their existence is idiotic.

in conclusion, it is obvious that you're just too lazy/tired/otherwise unable to come up with a real answer to my posts so you'd look SIGNIFICANTLY better to just not respond until you can. as for mud's side? i'll let him point out how horrible your logic is for that nonsense since it's completely unrelated to what we were talking about in the first place which was the part where YOU are the sheep to be blindly believing everything that's thrown at you as long as "you're not supposed to know" about it.

[Mudofale]

in conclusion, it is obvious that you're just too lazy/tired/otherwise unable to come up with a real answer to my posts so you'd look SIGNIFICANTLY better to just not respond until you can. as for mud's side? i'll let him point out how horrible your logic is for that nonsense since it's completely unrelated to what we were talking about in the first place which was the part where YOU are the sheep to be blindly believing everything that's thrown at you as long as "you're not supposed to know" about it.

It's like my grandpa would tell me, you can teach a man all the knowledge in the world, but if he lacks common sense or logic, then he is still the dumbest person on this planet. Such wise words I try to follow to this day. Just certain things you can't teach people, just have to hope they already have it.

[gemiwine]

any idiot can draw links between two words... "CAN'T SPELL CULTURES WITHOUT CULT LOLOLOL"... you can't spell slaughter without laughter either... does that mean slaughter is something joyous to laugh about? now, to keep things separate for you...

1) i have proved that the logic behind your conclusions thus far has been flawed. you are saying that i haven't because you are too lazy to come up with new evidence that isn't flawed (or just can't). i've even explained in detail why what you are saying now is flawed because you are saying nothing new on the subject.

2) an act has no meaning beyond what we give it. now if you are saying that i am a sheep for following man made customs then you are a sheep for doing the same thing with your irrational skepticism... the difference is that what i do is rational. this holiday gives us an excuse and time of to dedicate to the loved ones we do not always see. if such a time didn't exist then i would never see my family that lives on the other side of the country. the roots of this holiday are irrelevant. my birthday is the celebration of the date i came out of my mother's womb. the roots being that my parents fucked 9 months or so previous does not come up on that day.

3) traditions are something that man has had since the beginning of recorded history so using the fact that they exist as evidence of cultery or anything else other than their existence is idiotic.

in conclusion, it is obvious that you're just too lazy/tired/otherwise unable to come up with a real answer to my posts so you'd look SIGNIFICANTLY better to just not respond until you can. as for mud's side? i'll let him point out how horrible your logic is for that nonsense since it's completely unrelated to what we were talking about in the first place which was the part where YOU are the sheep to be blindly believing everything that's thrown at you as long as "you're not supposed to know" about it.Cult & culture have similar meaning which is why I linked them. You haven't proved anything with any evidence that's contrary to mine. Dude you never looked for any links of sources, docs or references to post on here contrary to my links as evidence to debunk the subject on martial law and Novus Ordo Seclorum. Why don't you research my bullshit then post it so I can see what I'm incorrect on instead of adopting your words alone?

Why don't you research my "irrational skeptism" and post it on here to show me how I'm a sheep following man made customs since you can never elaborate about your claims. What you do is what every other person does who dosn't knw or care about the roots of holidays the diference is that you can't prove that's its irrelavant that the origins of them don't have a cause & affect on people who celebrate it. Prove that these irrelevent holidays gives us time to fellowship with our family & friends if its roots do not pertain to that. You dnt knw why you celebrate your birthday because you don't knw the roots & history behind birthdays so if that's irrelevant then celebrating them is.

Traditions are right in the same category as cult and culture by their definitions alone if you can prove that its not otherwise and has been made by man for man to follow it.

What answer do you expect me to give you if you can't give me any evidence to show me so I can check its legitimacy.

[1313Jr.1313]

Cult & culture have similar meaning which is why I linked them.

CULT: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents

CULTURE: a : the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations
b : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time (popular culture) (southern culture)
c : the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution or organization (a corporate culture focused on the bottom line)
d : the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic (studying the effect of computers on print culture) (changing the culture of materialism will take time — Peggy O'Mara)

similar? that's a stretch. i'm assuming miriam webster is a legitimate source for this one? they are only similar in spelling and crap like that. are they easily confused? on paper, sure, but they are not similar in definition. i'll give you one thing though, a cult is technically a TINY subsect of culture just as a man is a tiny subsect of the universe. just as man is not interchangeable with a universe, a cult is not interchangeable with a culture. what you did was not link them, but confuse them.


You haven't proved anything with any evidence that's contrary to mine. Dude you never looked for any links of sources, docs or references to post on here contrary to my links as evidence to debunk the subject on martial law and Novus Ordo Seclorum. Why don't you research my bullshit then post it so I can see what I'm incorrect on instead of adopting your words alone?

oh, i proved everything i claimed. if links are what it takes then here you go:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/resources/handouts-demos/writing-the-paper/fallacies
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/659/03/ this is the easiest to understand and most applicable to your crap
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/fallacies_list.html this one is also easy to understand and equally applicable

i looked at every link you posted and every single one of them was fallacious. not almost every one, but every single one. that is evidence enough to invalidate the method your links have used to come to their conclusions. regardless of your level of dedication for these fools, not even you can agree that bad logic leads to good results. i even pointed out their flawed logic but i guess you needed a link to find out what logical fallacies were.

and if it wasn't obvious on the martial law thing, i was using YOUR links as evidence against your conclusion. look it up instead of being a sheep.


Why don't you research my "irrational skeptism" and post it on here to show me how I'm a sheep following man made customs since you can never elaborate about your claims. What you do is what every other person does who dosn't knw or care about the roots of holidays the diference is that you can't prove that's its irrelavant that the origins of them don't have a cause & affect on people who celebrate it. Prove that these irrelevent holidays gives us time to fellowship with our family & friends if its roots do not pertain to that. You dnt knw why you celebrate your birthday because you don't knw the roots & history behind birthdays so if that's irrelevant then celebrating them is.

it doesn't take research to state that attempting to objectify something that is ultimately subjective can only end in failure. just as you can not number levels of love, you can not take one person's appreciation for something and apply it as an absolute to everybody.

also, simple claims need no elaboration unless it's only for confusion purposes which is usually only the case when the simple claim is false but needs to be treated as true.


Traditions are right in the same category as cult and culture by their definitions alone if you can prove that its not otherwise and has been made by man for man to follow it.

TRADITION: cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions

the ONLY link they have is their relationship with society... either way, are you really using whether or not man made something as evidence of cult activity or something? your point has become obfuscated by contradictions... are you even still making a point?


What answer do you expect me to give you if you can't give me any evidence to show me so I can check its legitimacy.

fine, all of the links in this post. until you disprove every single one of them, every conclusion you have come to in this thread using your links is invalid.

i love when the answer is something as simple as logic.

[Mudofale]

i'll give you one thing though, a cult is technically a TINY subsect of culture just as a man is a tiny subsect of the universe. just as man is not interchangeable with a universe, a cult is not interchangeable with a culture. what you did was not link them, but confuse them.


Actually, a cult is a sub culture. Related? Not really, a culture defines a large mass of people. While a sub culture is a smaller group within a culture with specific idea's or traits. Only thing that actually connects them by word is the fact that they are apart of cultures. But thats like saying an apple is the same thing as an orange because they're both fruits... Trying to connect invisible dots with fishing wire is what hes trying to do. No one sees the connection because it doesn't really exist unless you look at it really REALLY closely and look at all aspects and magnify it as the main idea...

[1313Jr.1313]

the cult you are referring to is something more along the lines of a cult classic or a cult hit. that would be a subculture or occasionally an anticulture but this is not what he is referring to... much like read and read... very similar in definition and the same spelling, but technically different definitions (doubtful that it would come up though in that specific scenario).

[gemiwine]

Actually, a cult is a sub culture. Related? Not really, a culture defines a large mass of people. While a sub culture is a smaller group within a culture with specific idea's or traits. Only thing that actually connects them by word is the fact that they are apart of cultures. But thats like saying an apple is the same thing as an orange because they're both fruits... Trying to connect invisible dots with fishing wire is what hes trying to do. No one sees the connection because it doesn't really exist unless you look at it really REALLY closely and look at all aspects and magnify it as the main idea...Cults & cultures both have a large & small mass of people. There's no big seperaton between the 2 if they all relate to the same concepts of interests. Ever heard of "The culture of cults?" The only difference is culture is just a portion of cult and just sounds more unpresumptuous with its definition then cult. The vocabulary is not spelled in that way for nothing which is understandable to there connections.

[gemiwine]

CULT: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents

CULTURE: a : the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations
b : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time (popular culture) (southern culture)
c : the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution or organization (a corporate culture focused on the bottom line)
d : the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic (studying the effect of computers on print culture) (changing the culture of materialism will take time — Peggy O'Mara)

similar? that's a stretch. i'm assuming miriam webster is a legitimate source for this one? they are only similar in spelling and crap like that. are they easily confused? on paper, sure, but they are not similar in definition. i'll give you one thing though, a cult is technically a TINY subsect of culture just as a man is a tiny subsect of the universe. just as man is not interchangeable with a universe, a cult is not linterchangeable with a culture. what you did was not link them, but confuse them.



oh, i proved everything i claimed. if links are what it takes then here you go:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/resources/handouts-demos/writing-the-paper/fallacies
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/659/03/ this is the easiest to understand and most applicable to your crap
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/fallacies_list.html this one is also easy to understand and equally applicable

i looked at every link you posted and every single one of them was fallacious. not almost every one, but every single one. that is evidence enough to invalidate the method your links have used to come to their conclusions. regardless of your level of dedication for these fools, not even you can agree that bad logic leads to good results. i even pointed out their flawed logic but i guess you needed a link to find out what logical fallacies were.

and if it wasn't obvious on the martial law thing, i was using YOUR links as evidence against your conclusion. look it up instead of being a sheep.



it doesn't take research to state that attempting to objectify something that is ultimately subjective can only end in failure. just as you can not number levels of love, you can not take one person's appreciation for something and apply it as an absolute to everybody.

also, simple claims need no elaboration unless it's only for confusion purposes which is usually only the case when the simple claim is false but needs to be treated as true.



TRADITION: cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions

the ONLY link they have is their relationship with society... either way, are you really using whether or not man made something as evidence of cult activity or something? your point has become obfuscated by contradictions... are you even still making a point?



fine, all of the links in this post. until you disprove every single one of them, every conclusion you have come to in this thread using your links is invalid.

i love when the answer is something as simple as logic. Cult - a particular system of religious worship,especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies. 2. an instance of great veneration of a person,ideal,or thing,

Synonyms: band,body,church,clan,clique,creed,denomination,fa ction, faith,following,party,persuasion,religion,school,s ect

Culture - the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts,letters, manners, scholarly pursuits,etc.

Synonyms: ability,accomplishment,address,aestheticism,art,ca pacity, civilization,class,courtesy,cultivation,delicacy,d ignity, discrimination,dress,elegance,elevation,enlightenm ent, erudition,experience,fashion,finish,gentility,good taste,grace, improvement,kindness,learning
,manners,nobility,perception, polish,politeness,practice,proficiency,refinement, savoir-faire, science,skill,tact,training,urbanity

Origin: 1400–50; late Middle English: tilling,place tilled (< Anglo-French) < Latin cultūra. See cult,-ure


Tradition: the handing down of statements,beliefs,legends,customs, information,etc.

Society is not the only link to culture from its definition if culture is based on observing the arts, legends & ideas of tradition.

Synonyms: attitude,belief,birthright,conclusion,convention,c ulture, custom,customs,ethic,ethics,fable,folklore,form,ha bit, heritage,idea,inheritance,institution,law,legend,l ore,mores, myth,mythology,mythos,opinion,practice,praxis,ritu al,

They all seem pretty similar on account of their definitions and synonyms. College is a cultural instituition, freemasonry is a cult just like scientology, and holidays are a tradition like culture. Why not research the roots of our so called customs & what they really indicate to us so we can arise from being followers of fallacious customs you partake in.

I know the definition of fallacy but I'm waiting on you to prove that martial law and the new world order is fallacious based on the fallacious bill that you fail to prove its predication to follow its predications aren't counterfactual . Your level of knowledge and discernment must be the reason for your credulous thinking.

Its no logic nor my opinion that a gov is ran by cults, cultures, traditions, sects, religion, monarchs and fallicious ideas that all result in bloodshed from its adverse & amiss directons by its leaders. So why is it a logic at all that the gov wants to control the internet that may be in a grevience with others who disagree on its functionality on content. All I did was tell him that the gov can do whatever they want and we can't stop them then you came trolling to me like you were going to prove your point about the subject at hand.

[1313Jr.1313]

Cult - a particular system of religious worship,especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies. 2. an instance of great veneration of a person,ideal,or thing,

Synonyms: band,body,church,clan,clique,creed,denomination,fa ction, faith,following,party,persuasion,religion,school,s ect

Culture - the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts,letters, manners, scholarly pursuits,etc.

Synonyms: ability,accomplishment,address,aestheticism,art,ca pacity, civilization,class,courtesy,cultivation,delicacy,d ignity, discrimination,dress,elegance,elevation,enlightenm ent, erudition,experience,fashion,finish,gentility,good taste,grace, improvement,kindness,learning
,manners,nobility,perception, polish,politeness,practice,proficiency,refinement, savoir-faire, science,skill,tact,training,urbanity

Origin: 1400–50; late Middle English: tilling,place tilled (< Anglo-French) < Latin cultūra. See cult,-ure


Tradition: the handing down of statements,beliefs,legends,customs, information,etc.

Society is not the only link to culture from its definition if culture is based on observing the arts, legends & ideas of tradition.

Synonyms: attitude,belief,birthright,conclusion,convention,c ulture, custom,customs,ethic,ethics,fable,folklore,form,ha bit, heritage,idea,inheritance,institution,law,legend,l ore,mores, myth,mythology,mythos,opinion,practice,praxis,ritu al,

They all seem pretty similar on account of their definitions and synonyms. College is a cultural instituition, freemasonry is a cult just like scientology, and holidays are a tradition like culture. Why not research the roots of our so called customs & what they really indicate to us so we can arise from being followers of fallacious customs you partake in.

I know the definition of fallacy but I'm waiting on you to prove that martial law and the new world order is fallacious based on the fallacious bill that you fail to prove its predication to follow its predications aren't counterfactual . Your level of knowledge and discernment must be the reason for your credulous thinking.

Its no logic nor my opinion that a gov is ran by cults, cultures, traditions, sects, religion, monarchs and fallicious ideas that all result in bloodshed from its adverse & amiss directons by its leaders. So why is it a logic at all that the gov wants to control the internet that may be in a grevience with others who disagree on its functionality on content. All I did was tell him that the gov can do whatever they want and we can't stop them then you came trolling to me like you were going to prove your point about the subject at hand.

huh... it would appear that you didn't actually read what i posted. you need to disprove fallacies otherwise the ones i pointed out in the evidence you've provided is sufficient to disprove what you said. you say that you know what fallacy is then say that i said "martial law and the new world order is fallacious" when i really just said the evidence you provided is fallacious. the idea isn't fallacious as that wouldn't make any sense whatsoever... i have proved every point i have set out to prove and disproved everything you've posted using bad logic (hint: it's most of what you've posted). i have already done my job and i just sit here and wait for you to give evidence that isn't riddled with fallacy. it is not my job to disprove something when it hasn't been proved in the first place.

here's a little flowchart for you:
can you spot anything that i failed to disprove? -------> yes -------> reread the thread
. |
. |
.\ /
no
. |
. |
.\ /
exactly

[splat]

Funny thread. Fallacy on top of fallacy.

It's like a poor-logic dinner. We're going to start off with a lovely appeal to force soup, spiced with false cause and appeal to false authority. For tonight's specials, we offer our pan seared ad hominem fillet, cooked to reducto ad absurdium, served over appeal to the people. We also have a fine roast of false cause, lightly breaded.

Long story short, Gemwine, you're an idiot. I mean, come on. Use some discretion, man. Not everything you see on the internet is true.

[Mudofale]

Still don't get why hes using such bad examples. He is literally comparing an orange to an apple and saying they're the same thing because they're both fruits, yes I realize I said that before but I just want him to see how stupid his point is... Similarities are found everywhere, just because something is similar to something else doesn't mean they are the same thing. Two kids, same family, look very much a like. One was born in december, other was born in february. Are they the same people? No, they aren't, just because they're similar doesn't mean they're the same... Can't stress that enough. I want to believe what he is saying and say it's 100% true! But he just makes no sense... hes trying to make 2 + 2 = 5 but you'll never make me believe it unless you provide me with an answer to an actual question I asked that makes even the slightest bit of sense...

[lololo]

Lol gemiwine, you're funny.

[gemiwine]

huh... it would appear that you didn't actually read what i posted. you need to disprove fallacies otherwise the ones i pointed out in the evidence you've provided is sufficient to disprove what you said. you say that you know what fallacy is then say that i said "martial law and the new world order is fallacious" when i really just said the evidence you provided is fallacious. the idea isn't fallacious as that wouldn't make any sense whatsoever... i have proved every point i have set out to prove and disproved everything you've posted using bad logic (hint: it's most of what you've posted). i have already done my job and i just sit here and wait for you to give evidence that isn't riddled with fallacy. it is not my job to disprove something when it hasn't been proved in the first place.

here's a little flowchart for you:
can you spot anything that i failed to disprove? -------> yes -------> reread the thread
. |
. |
.\ /
no
. |
. |
.\ /
exactlyYou didn't prove that college is not a ripoff, paper money has value, martial law & the nwo dosent exist, freemasonry is not a cult, & the ndaa bill is to detain people who were behind 9/11 & who are associate with AQ & his forces.

Also if you can, prove that the gov dosent want to censor or control the internet.

[gemiwine]

Funny thread. Fallacy on top of fallacy.

It's like a poor-logic dinner. We're going to start off with a lovely appeal to force soup, spiced with false cause and appeal to false authority. For tonight's specials, we offer our pan seared ad hominem fillet, cooked to reducto ad absurdium, served over appeal to the people. We also have a fine roast of false cause, lightly breaded.

Long story short, Gemwine, you're an idiot. I mean, come on. Use some discretion, man. Not everything you see on the internet is true.I never said everything on the internet is true. The internet is just a network filled with data. So the same data most of the time can be found outside of it. John Todd & Bill Copper were talking about the same material that's now found on youtube & all over the net before it was ever available on the net. So what is it that I should be discreet about sense you can't be complex and provide some truth but call me an idiot, how intelligent of you.

[gemiwine]

Still don't get why hes using such bad examples. He is literally comparing an orange to an apple and saying they're the same thing because they're both fruits, yes I realize I said that before but I just want him to see how stupid his point is... Similarities are found everywhere, just because something is similar to something else doesn't mean they are the same thing. Two kids, same family, look very much a like. One was born in december, other was born in february. Are they the same people? No, they aren't, just because they're similar doesn't mean they're the same... Can't stress that enough. I want to believe what he is saying and say it's 100% true! But he just makes no sense... hes trying to make 2 + 2 = 5 but you'll never make me believe it unless you provide me with an answer to an actual question I asked that makes even the slightest bit of sense...I just defined both words and provided the synonyms for them so that's a bad example? The book called "culture of cults" must be then because I never said anything about apples & oranges. Maybe this will be a worser example. Martial arts is a culture & also is a cult because of their religious backgrounds. You right I am stupid I should of went to school so I can be smart that's why I make no sense about anything because I tryed to make 2+2=5. So much for thinking that culture & cult are NOT THE SAME.

[1313Jr.1313]

LOOK AT ME, I'M COMMITTING AD IGNORANTIUM

yes... i can see that. i believe you've been called out on that before? oh yeah, by me. i then explained to you what it was and you concurred that you understood what it was... and yet here you are, doing it again... i will tell you again, i proved that the sources YOU were using to make your claims were fallacious and if you wanted to continue making your point you'd have to find new sources.

[splat]

I never said everything on the internet is true. The internet is just a network filled with data. So the same data most of the time can be found outside of it. John Todd & Bill Copper were talking about the same material that's now found on youtube & all over the net before it was ever available on the net. So what is it that I should be discreet about sense you can't be complex and provide some truth but call me an idiot, how intelligent of you.

Then here is a source of mine, from the internet. http://www.squidoo.com/moonismadeofcheese

It proves that the moon is made of cheese. I found it on the internet. Since infromation on the internet must come from outside the internet, and information outside the internet is true, then this information on the internet is true. Even if it seems absurd, you can't prove that it's NOT true. And if you have any evidence, it must be a lie.

This is your logic, which is fallacious. I believe it's called Begging the Question.

You see my point, I do hope? Then again, you give lead a run for its money in the density department.

[Mudofale]

According to rugrats, the moon is a giant cookie that Tommie (I think it was him) took a bite out of. Explains so much.

[splat]

According to rugrats, the moon is a giant cookie that Tommie (I think it was him) took a bite out of. Explains so much.

Exactly. And it must ALSO be true, with my cheese theory, because neither of us have been to the moon to prove either theory wrong.

[1313Jr.1313]

it would also be ad ignorantium. ad ignorantium is basically saying that it MUST be true because it hasn't been disproved or MUST be false because it hasn't been proved.

[gemiwine]

yes... i can see that. i believe you've been called out on that before? oh yeah, by me. i then explained to you what it was and you concurred that you understood what it was... and yet here you are, doing it again... i will tell you again, i proved that the sources YOU were using to make your claims were fallacious and if you wanted to continue making your point you'd have to find new sources.I knew you couldn't prove it. Making a statement calling it fallacy is not proof plus its no need to look for any new sources which basically will tell you the samething maybe in a different point of view and you still wouldn't believe it. The bible is the best source that exposes this gov and the ones behind it but all you will say is fallacy based on know evidence proving that so I don't know what else to tell you.

[1313Jr.1313]

I knew you couldn't prove it. Making a statement calling it fallacy is not proof plus its no need to look for any new sources which basically will tell you the samething maybe in a different point of view and you still wouldn't believe it. The bible is the best source that exposes this gov and the ones behind it but all you will say is fallacy based on know evidence proving that so I don't know what else to tell you.

ok, not even going to touch on the part about the bible being misinterpreted by you more than likely since you are probably nothing too special when it comes to internet people quoting the bible (no offense, but very few people do it effectively). i do not have to disprove something that you have yet to prove. if you can back up what you are saying without using fallacy then i will have to go out of my way to disprove it and find an alternate reason for every piece of evidence you provide. luckily for me, thus far you have provided zero evidence.

[effingbillgates]

luckily for me, thus far you have provided zero evidence.

This is the correct response to anybody who wants you to argue with the bible. Holding up a book that thinks the world is 6000 years old is not evidence in itself, and it doesn't create a thing that needs disproving. Provide specific evidence outside of a book of fairy tales, and I'm sure 1313Jr.1313 will have a more interesting response.

As it is, there are several centuries of philosophy now that take for granted a Godless universe, so there is no need for anybody to suddenly get wound up about the authority of the bible in the 21st century. The bible as it is now has been edited and translated to fit so many different agendas of different civilisations and individuals through history that you'd have to be insanely blinkered to believe the bible contains the words of God even if you believed in God.

Faith is just pompous, self-unaware trolling, as far as I'm concerned. And fundamentalist Christians are no better than any other hardcore religious people either; trying to "correct" non-believers or believers in the "wrong" thing is how most wars start.

[gemiwine]

ok, not even going to touch on the part about the bible being misinterpreted by you more than likely since you are probably nothing too special when it comes to internet people quoting the bible (no offense, but very few people do it effectively). i do not have to disprove something that you have yet to prove. if you can back up what you are saying without using fallacy then i will have to go out of my way to disprove it and find an alternate reason for every piece of evidence you provide. luckily for me, thus far you have provided zero evidence.like I said the new evidence will just be old evidence to me the only difference is that its by another person at an older time frame for example Bill Copper & John Todd exposing the nwo before it could be found on the net. I know the truth that college is a bogus institutional business to take your money, paper currency is worthless and soon will be replaced by a new one, the ndaa bill is not to detain people behind 9/11 since we know its the gov, a new world order has been in the plans for centuries since genesis in the bible by nimod up to this point in modern society. What you fail to notice since you don't read the bible is that the leaders of this country know the bible well enough to use it as an advantage to conquer just as constantine did. You just fail to do research yourself and disaprove me based on your pride & ego which only has a limitation so you can call it whatever you feel at the end of the say I know the truth & you can't prove that I don't know nor you can't disaprove my evidence. I'm not going to make you believe anything after I already tryed to tell you to look it up yourself is what I tell everybody.

[gemiwine]

This is the correct response to anybody who wants you to argue with the bible. Holding up a book that thinks the world is 6000 years old is not evidence in itself, and it doesn't create a thing that needs disproving. Provide specific evidence outside of a book of fairy tales, and I'm sure 1313Jr.1313 will have a more interesting response.

As it is, there are several centuries of philosophy now that take for granted a Godless universe, so there is no need for anybody to suddenly get wound up about the authority of the bible in the 21st century. The bible as it is now has been edited and translated to fit so many different agendas that you'd have to be insanely blinkered to believe the bible contains the words of God even if you believed in God. Faith is just pompous, self-unaware trolling, as far as I'm concerned.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd8Rjdro9vM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-RAyIJ0tNo&feature=related

[effingbillgates]

You just fail to do research yourself and disaprove me based on your pride & ego which only has a limitation

Why do you not accept any philosophy written since the 18th century as adequate criticism of your one stupid book? It isn't "research" to have one book of "truth" surrounded by a bunch of ranting conspiracy theory books/blogs expanding it into whatever lunacy you can imagine.


so you can call it whatever you feel at the end of the say I know the truth & you can't prove that I don't know nor you can't disaprove my evidence. I'm not going to make you believe anything after I already tryed to tell you to look it up yourself is what I tell everybody.

People who think they have answers or truth to life are simply blinkered to how much more complicated the world is. The most proud people in the world picked up a lazy self-help book when they were 17 and it made them think everything was very simple and straightforward. Well do a bit more research and realise you're wrong, then we might start having a discussion.

[effingbillgates]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd8Rjdro9vM

Ooooh wow. If only somebody else had made a youtube video saying "EXPOSED: Why Bible Readers Refuse To Read Any Other Book" I would have surely won this battle of wits.

I can tell from the title that your link wasn't relevant to what I was saying - it would have been a stock reply to any non-believer, as per usual. You'll be pleased to know I gave it about as much attention as you gave the words I wrote - ie. none whatsoever. I didn't watch it beyond the obnoxious title.

EXPOSED: A person on a fart fetish forum can't be arsed to discuss the bible because he isn't 13 years old anymore, and because there's plenty more interesting and difficult stuff published than just one book that claims to have all the answers, thanks.

[1313Jr.1313]

like I said the new evidence will just be old evidence to me the only difference is that its by another person at an older time frame for example Bill Copper & John Todd exposing the nwo before it could be found on the net. I know the truth that college is a bogus institutional business to take your money, paper currency is worthless and soon will be replaced by a new one, the ndaa bill is not to detain people behind 9/11 since we know its the gov, a new world order has been in the plans for centuries since genesis in the bible by nimod up to this point in modern society. What you fail to notice since you don't read the bible is that the leaders of this country know the bible well enough to use it as an advantage to conquer just as constantine did. You just fail to do research yourself and disaprove me based on your pride & ego which only has a limitation so you can call it whatever you feel at the end of the say I know the truth & you can't prove that I don't know nor you can't disaprove my evidence. I'm not going to make you believe anything after I already tryed to tell you to look it up yourself is what I tell everybody.

then post the same evidence from a different source. maybe there won't be fallacy in this one and we can have an actual discussion about it. if there is i'll just point it out and you can go back to complaining that i refuse to listen when really i just don't want to put up with any conclusion derived from fallacy.

and about the bible... have YOU read the bible? it is half of the reason i am no longer a practicing christian (still believe in god, but it's nigh impossible to believe in christianity after reading the bible). place the bible along side other cult materials and you'll understand what i mean. if you ignore the fact that it's been around for a long time, it is identical to most brainwashing cult literature. i am not going to say that no good can come from christianity, but if god intended for us to have no free will he would have simply made it so.

and those videos? like i said, VERY FEW PEOPLE DO NOT TAKE THE BIBLE OUT OF CONTEXT when they quote it... i did like the second one aside from the whole irrelevant thing but when you realize where it's going (what he's setting up for the future parts) you're like, wait... how can it get there without skipping some crucial steps in the logical chain? turns out the answer is it can't.

[1313Jr.1313]

it would have been a stock reply to any non-believer, as per usual.

this... to pretty much all of what is said off topic... just plain this...

[effingbillgates]

It's not even true that I'm refusing to read the bible. But if I ever do read it I'll treat it the way I treat other books - as one book in a massive library to be queried and questioned with all the rest.

I'm sure that I'll think it has some lovely allegories and makes some nice points, and historically it'll be an intriguing read if I can find one that isn't too up to date. I'll read it like a kind of poetry, which as we all know requires us to be open to ideas, and to be touched by language. The problem is when people think that it contains unquestionable truth, and then go out of their way to ignore anything in life that shows them wrong. Every now and then culture changes to such an extent that, to stop seeming extreme, they start pretending that certain parts were always meant metaphorically, but you still get Christians who believe the world was made in 7 days and is 6000 years old.

In any case it's a strawman to say people refuse to read the bible. What's being refused is the ranting from those who think the bible is anything other than a book that was written a couple of thousand years ago, and then rewritten and distorted by leaders of many different civilisations through history with their own agendas to fulfill. It's not rocket science. Even the most blinkered of Christians should be able to grasp this at least.

[gemiwine]

Ooooh wow. If only somebody else had made a youtube video saying "EXPOSED: Why Bible Readers Refuse To Read Any Other Book" I would have surely won this battle of wits.

I can tell from the title that your link wasn't relevant to what I was saying - it would have been a stock reply to any non-believer, as per usual. You'll be pleased to know I gave it about as much attention as you gave the words I wrote - ie. none whatsoever. I didn't watch it beyond the obnoxious title.

EXPOSED: A person on a fart fetish forum can't be arsed to discuss the bible because he isn't 13 years old anymore, and because there's plenty more interesting and difficult stuff published than just one book that claims to have all the answers, thanks.LOL yea you right nver go on a fart fetish forum discussing the truth.

[effingbillgates]

LOL yea you right nver go on a fart fetish forum discussing the truth.

The "truth" in what sense? Go on.

[gemiwine]

It's not even true that I'm refusing to read the bible. But if I ever do read it I'll treat it the way I treat other books - as one book in a massive library to be queried and questioned with all the rest.

I'm sure that I'll think it has some lovely allegories and makes some nice points, and historically it'll be an intriguing read if I can find one that isn't too up to date. I'll read it like a kind of poetry, which as we all know requires us to be open to ideas, and to be touched by language. The problem is when people think that it contains unquestionable truth, and then go out of their way to ignore anything in life that shows them wrong. Every now and then culture changes to such an extent that, to stop seeming extreme, they start pretending that certain parts were always meant metaphorically, but you still get Christians who believe the world was made in 7 days and is 6000 years old.

In any case it's a strawman to say people refuse to read the bible. What's being refused is the ranting from those who think the bible is anything other than a book that was written a couple of thousand years ago, and then rewritten and distorted by leaders of many different civilisations through history with their own agendas to fulfill. It's not rocket science. Even the most blinkered of Christians should be able to grasp this at least. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySheyYPB4Qo

[effingbillgates]

Don't expect me to click on that. Communicate using your own words or forget it.

[gemiwine]

The "truth" in what sense? Go on.The truth about your gov & your culture.

[gemiwine]

Don't expect me to click on that. Communicate using your own words or forget it.Well let's see. The catholi church taught you & many that the bible is false & has been translated to fit their agenda. True but they didn't tell you that the catholics know that the bible is true & is twisting scripture, using it to conquer the world. Its pretty simple if you open your mind instead of listening to other fairy tale books called politics & philosophy sorry if I spelled it wrong but the link can explain it better than I can.

[gemiwine]

Don't expect me to click on that. Communicate using your own words or forget it.
Well you won't convine me that the bible is false if you can't prove it. Its easy for anyone to believe that wthout any proof, why you think its so accepted by many people like you? What you fail to realize is these same people who convinced you that the bible is nothing but fairy tales know that the bible is true & using it to conquer the world like constantine did. Let's see genesis explains the serpant telling man he can be like God now you got peopl today like our gov trying to be like God by estalishing their own ungodly laws. Revelation explains michael the archangel defeating the dragon in heaven. So why you have movies like "dragon slayer" "star wars" "star trek" "clash of the titans" & other movies & series promoting fallen angels & so many ideas based on supernatural beings that had to come from the bible?

[effingbillgates]

The truth about your gov & your culture.

In what sense?

[effingbillgates]

Well let's see. The catholi church taught you & many that the bible is false & has been translated to fit their agenda. True but they didn't tell you that the catholics know that the bible is true & is twisting scripture, using it to conquer the world. Its pretty simple if you open your mind instead of listening to other fairy tale books called politics & philosophy sorry if I spelled it wrong but the link can explain it better than I can.

I'm not going to visit that link. What you've just said is a load of rubbish by the way.

The bible is a book that people support through blind faith, and you are doing the same old thing of saying "prove it wrong" rather than taking responsibility yourself for proving it right. I could pick anything that couldn't be proved wrong, and really really believe it if I wanted to. It wouldn't make it true.

Science and philosophy (written by lots of different people, all contradicting one another, but since there is no such thing as absolute truth this is part of the fun) build ideas upon empirical evidence, and when new evidence emerges to challenge their conclusions, they are flexible enough to change them and make new conclusions. Call it fairy tale logic if you like but it's not about belief. Philosophy isn't about trying to reach absolute truth anymore - it hasn't been for about 300 years.

People who believe in absolute truth are ignorant because they're blinkered to how multiple the world actually is, and they usually try to force their "truth" on other people in some way. You've taken to trolling internet forums with your unfounded gibberish, which I'll admit is better than trying to start up wars with your unfounded gibberish. So bravo for that, but either way it's still unfounded gibberish.

[effingbillgates]

Well you won't convine me that the bible is false if you can't prove it. Its easy for anyone to believe that wthout any proof, why you think its so accepted by many people like you?

Not believing in something that somebody else has decided is true isn't itself some kind of belief; it's just a sensible way of not being a gullible fuckwit. The onus is on you to prove it if you think I have to believe it too. If I told you that you have a miniscule elephant up your arse somewhere - one that isn't visible through X-rays or any modern scientific methods, but is definitely there and I really really believe it, how would you prove me wrong?

Seriously that's the same level as what you're saying. In the end you'd say "look there is no elephant up my arse unless you're able to prove it," which is exactly the correct response, and that's the response you're getting from everyone who isn't following you. But it's hilarious that you're so determined to believe this thing - this elephant up your arse, or the bible being God's word rather than the writings and rewritings of people with human agendas - that you're saying everyone who won't blindly follow you is swallowed up by some kind of negative belief of their own.


What you fail to realize is these same people who convinced you that the bible is nothing but fairy tales know that the bible is true & using it to conquer the world like constantine did. Let's see genesis explains the serpant telling man he can be like God now you got peopl today like our gov trying to be like God by estalishing their own ungodly laws. Revelation explains michael the archangel defeating the dragon in heaven. So why you have movies like "dragon slayer" "star wars" "star trek" "clash of the titans" & other movies & series promoting fallen angels & so many ideas based on supernatural beings that had to come from the bible?

What a load of shite. Misunderstandings and ill-informed assumptions all strung together, and you even have the conspiracy thing thrown in of "these people who have convinced you it's untrue actually know it's true and are ruling the earth" or somesuch rubbish.

Nobody "convinced" me that the bible is untrue. It's just that it's a good idea not to blindly believe any book that's thrown at you. You wouldn't do that with Kant or Hegel, would you, so why are we all supposed to do it with the bible?

Oh yes, I remember now. It's just "true" and that's that. That's the brilliant answer we're all supposed to just accept. A bloke on the internet said it was true, so it must be correct.

[effingbillgates]

The day your mom was pregnant with you is your birthday. You were still alive before you came out the womb but man has indoctrinated everyone into believing you weren't alive into you came out the womb therefore is your birthday and you have to celebrate it without researching its satanic origins.

This is brilliant! I might make a comedy character based on you. First of all it's funny that you've mixed up "birth" and "conception"; secondly it's funny because you've formed a conspiracy out of it! Am I getting your meaning correct: we've been indoctrinated to believe that life doesn't begin until people actually leave the womb, and general use of the words "birth" and "birthday" prove this? LOL.

It'd get boring after a few minutes though.

[1313Jr.1313]

oh god. seeing you link to that video almost made me pee my pants laughing (i already kind of need to go but still). you do realize that the full video is being used in philosophy classes right? i am not even shitting you. it is one of the few videos out there to commit EVERY fallacy in the book. i am going to assume you are trolling, since even a BASIC understanding of ANYTHING i've said or linked to would allow you to see right through that clip. the only thing people are uncertain about is whether that video was made that way on purpose or not. you either have absolutely no concept of logic or are just trolling this thread... i mean, look at it from my perspective... you are arguing with a guy who is calling your evidence fallacious and you go out and post the video that some philosophy majors know by heart as they've had to watch it multiple times... come on man, i mean, it's just a bit TOO coincidental, no?

[gemiwine]

Not believing in something that somebody else has decided is true isn't itself some kind of belief; it's just a sensible way of not being a gullible fuckwit. The onus is on you to prove it if you think I have to believe it too. If I told you that you have a miniscule elephant up your arse somewhere - one that isn't visible through X-rays or any modern scientific methods, but is definitely there and I really really believe it, how would you prove me wrong?

Seriously that's the same level as what you're saying. In the end you'd say "look there is no elephant up my arse unless you're able to prove it," which is exactly the correct response, and that's the response you're getting from everyone who isn't following you. But it's hilarious that you're so determined to believe this thing - this elephant up your arse, or the bible being God's word rather than the writings and rewritings of people with human agendas - that you're saying everyone who won't blindly follow you is swallowed up by some kind of negative belief of their own.



What a load of shite. Misunderstandings and ill-informed assumptions all strung together, and you even have the conspiracy thing thrown in of "these people who have convinced you it's untrue actually know it's true and are ruling the earth" or somesuch rubbish.

Nobody "convinced" me that the bible is untrue. It's just that it's a good idea not to blindly believe any book that's thrown at you. You wouldn't do that with Kant or Hegel, would you, so why are we all supposed to do it with the bible?

Oh yes, I remember now. It's just "true" and that's that. That's the brilliant answer we're all supposed to just accept. A bloke on the internet said it was true, so it must be correct.Another follower of Immanuel Kant and his theories and opinions on truth. Its too bad he's been debunked many times as well as philosophy itself has no truth. If there's no absolute truth then why are you trying to implant that idea as truth? Makes no sense does it? I don't blame you for attacking christianity itself is corrupted only by so many that abuse it. I been there before with the "god dosent exist" "the bible is bullshit" bangwagon and I never met a person with that mentality to ever backup his attacks with evidence but alway leads to ranting. You must of had a bad experience an felt let down by the church building and your faith lol. I don't think fraternal orders and occult studies wouldn't exist if the bible was all a lie and God was just a made up character. I guess evil dosent exist either so the truth is if I shoot myself in the head I won't die because there's no such thing as death that's wht the bible taught me and many things about life. Dang I should of listen to Kant and other smart theorist that can help me realize that there's no such thing as anything but lies. I'm dig he's grave so I can ask him if he can save me because I been brainwashed by God and his book.

[effingbillgates]

Another follower of Immanuel Kant and his theories and opinions on truth. Its too bad he's been debunked many times as well as philosophy itself has no truth. If there's no absolute truth then why are you trying to implant that idea as truth? Makes no sense does it? I don't blame you for attacking christianity itself is corrupted only by so many that abuse it. I been there before with the "god dosent exist" "the bible is bullshit" bangwagon and I never met a person with that mentality to ever backup his attacks with evidence but alway leads to ranting. You must of had a bad experience an felt let down by the church building and your faith lol. I don't think fraternal orders and occult studies wouldn't exist if the bible was all a lie and God was just a made up character. I guess evil dosent exist either so the truth is if I shoot myself in the head I won't die because there's no such thing as death that's wht the bible taught me and many things about life. Dang I should of listen to Kant and other smart theorist that can help me realize that there's no such thing as anything but lies. I'm dig he's grave so I can ask him if he can save me because I been brainwashed by God and his book.

I stopped at the part where you clearly didn't understand what I was saying about there being no absolute truth, and you ignored my point that not blindly believing something is different from having "faith" in non-belief.

If all you're going to do is repeat yourself without taking into account what people are saying, or deliberately twist everything into utter nonsense, then I'm done with this as well; life is too short to argue with trolls.

[1313Jr.1313]

so wait... if there is no absolute truth then what are you posting exactly?

[effingbillgates]

You mean how can somebody say "there's no absolute truth" in anything other than a relative way? Well I agree that's the paradox at the heart of a lot of modern philosophy (late 18th century onwards for me), but even though it's an old paradox it's still a lot more interesting and new than saying a bible has truth in it and we must believe it.

If you read a lot, or travel a lot, or whatever you choose to do a lot, you're going to see a lot of inherent contradiction in the world you explore. I had already observed that philosophers contradict each other and disagree with one another, because that is what happens when you read a lot of varied things. But the troll still thought he was getting one up on me when he said Kant had been "debunked many times" in the past. Well it's not about getting one book and seeking truth in it, as I already said. Only people with limited experience and imagination think that the world is simple enough to be summarised by one book of riddles.

[gemiwine]

I stopped at the part where you clearly didn't understand what I was saying about there being no absolute truth, and you ignored my point that not blindly believing something is different from having "faith" in non-belief.

If all you're going to do is repeat yourself without taking into account what people are saying, or deliberately twist everything into utter nonsense, then I'm done with this as well; life is too short to argue with trolls.LOL Kant was just a confused philosopher with his misundersdtandin of the bible and as a result came up wth his idea that "there's no absolute truth." That's mans word you follow yet you critisize me for following the bible & says its not Gods word well the truth is the bible makes more sense then Kants words & books by 1000s of philosophers its no wonder philosophy is just based on theories & opinions not so much the real truth giving the fact that Kants point of views could never been proving at all. At least the bible proves itsef everyday exposing modern day society like the freemasons, illuminati, babylon, "the queen of heaven Diana" thought to be mary in those church building as well as the so called picture of Jesus which is just the antichrist based on the fact that the bible says not to make heavenly images just to name a few examples of why that book proves itself more than these theorist you follow. I'm suprised you don't follow aliester crowely another philosopher, occultist & theorist.

[effingbillgates]

LOL Kant was just a confused philosopher with his misundersdtandin of the bible and as a result came up wth his idea that "there's no absolute truth."

Something tells me you've never read Kant...



That's mans word you follow

No I don't: the point is that I don't follow anyone's word, and nor should you. See how tiresome this conversation is? Read what you're replying to instead of thinking that you don't need to.



yet you critisize me for following the bible & says its not Gods word well the truth is the bible makes more sense then Kants words & books by 1000s of philosophers its no wonder philosophy is just based on theories & opinions not so much the real truth giving the fact that Kants point of views could never been proving at all. At least the bible proves itsef everyday exposing modern day society like the freemasons, illuminati, babylon, "the queen of heaven Diana" thought to be mary in those church building as well as the so called picture of Jesus which is just the antichrist based on the fact that the bible says not to make heavenly images just to name a few examples of why that book proves itself more than these theorist you follow. I'm suprised you don't follow aliester crowely another philosopher, occultist & theorist.

Absolute bollocks, and once again you clearly haven't read a word I've said. You're like those people who see patterns in a piece of toast and say "doesn't it look like Norman Cook?" That's all you're doing: (A) vaguely resembles (B). It's not proof of anything.

God always picks the best of the best to spread His word, doesn't he? Aliens have a similar knack.


Let me make this easier for you: simply tell us what empirical evidence you have that the bible is God's word. That's all you need - I'm not even going to ask you to prove that God exists. Simply show the empirical evidence that you're using to determine that the bible is "the real truth" rather than some nice allegories written by normal humans 2000 or so years ago. Most Christians simply "have a feeling", or know because a clever vicar told them it was true, but I'm sure you can do better than that.

Modern philosophy is fully aware that it's nothing but opinion and theory, and that's what's nice about it. It's part of a larger discourse in which people are considering different possibilities for the world, seeing what fits, yet still having the ability to say "this might not be true, even if it fits". What's objectionable about religion is that people following one always insist that it contains "the real truth" without any evidence to back up this obnoxious claim. Yes, I've heard lots of ways that the bible's allegories vaguely fit present day events, but that's just the nature of allegory; not evidence that the bible contains "truth" of any kind.


If you can not supply the evidence that I'm requesting, then your belief that the bible is "the real truth" will be immediately put into the drawer marked "opinion and theory", and this conversation will be over. So respond carefully!

[gemiwine]

Deuteronomy 18:10-12 KJV

There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

http://www.fillthevoid.org/Children/TheBattle/ForbiddenPractices/WhatisaForbiddenPractice.html
http://logosresourcepages.org/Occult/truth_witches.htm
http://www.shoutingfromtherooftop.com/necromancy.html
http://www.cuttingedge.org/FREE001a.html

Acts 7:43 KJV

Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5tKhuhGTpc&feature=fvwrel (Cult Of Saturn/Satan/Remphan/Moloch/Saturnian)

I'm sure any wise person would know if these verses are false then obviously these things spoken of wouldn't have existed & occur to this day.


This is proof from a scientific point of view.
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

If you decide not to look at any of these links I'm just going to tell you to research it on your own after I tryed to prove it to you. You claim I believe in the bible because I feel it is true. Its true based on the evidence presented and faith is believing without evidence presented which is not based on emotion so I don't care how you feel about the bible being a fairy tale book. Your not going to convert me into adopting darwins theories and other philosophers confusing logics about life & religion. I'm not religious, I don't have a religion, I had my misunderstandings of the bible for quite some time but finally came to a better understand through research and experience. Once you get caught up in logic, theories, debates, politics, science, culture, philosophy, sociology and other peoples perspectives about their own take on the origins of life and humanity without going to the bible that has that only source of knowledge that makes more sense then the opinions of men then I would be confused about the bible too and say there's no such thing as truth when in reality it is truth. You just have to do alittle more research and get your head out the box because the same people that condemn the bible by calling it flawed know that its true scripture in a atempt to confuse you and make you believe we don't know the truth.

[Mudofale]

Alright, I only looked at 3 of the links you provided. And from reading them all I have to say is, thanks for wasting an hour of my life... I mean really? That Youtube video was over an hour long... I watched the first 10 minutes of it and wanted to burn the person who created it on a stick.

One thing, how can you turn something simple as "Saturn has a hexagon on it's north pole, it's the 6th planet, on the 6th day" Which I could have sworn Saturday was the 7th day... It's just absurd... I can say the same thing about my life... I've worked 6 hours each day 6 days a week for the past 6 weeks.... OMG MY JOB IS A BUNCH OF SATANIST! That's what that sounds like... They literally try to turn everyone into crazy people by making them question every part of their life. What I found to be dumb was the fact that after the first 2 minutes they actually started stating that most christians aren't even Christians. What kind of world do we live in that we follow a religion blindly then suddenly were rejected because were following the religion the wrong way. As for the other links giving us "proof" that the bible is real and god is real etc etc. That is a bunch of random facts gathered to make an ant seem like an elephant. You can't quote the bible and say that it's your proof considering most of the information on those links were verses taken out of context so when you read them they made half sense. Which brings me to another point, why does everyone assume that the people who created the bible were idiots? They clearly created a book that over 25% of the worlds population follows, I doubt they spent all of 15 seconds drafting idea's then decided to write it down. It took our (United States) founders over 15 years to create a final documentation to represent our entire nation for many years to come, what makes you think they didn't spend over 100 years perfecting a religion? Sure, the bible has parts that are true, but you can't make someone follow a religion or a book for that matter that has some facts that say "This is the word, no other word is any higher... blah blah" When there are glaring points that make no sense.

I asked it before and ill ask it again, why would "god" create man in his image when we are controlled by our emotions and our emotions dictate how we live our lives. If we are created in his image, then god is a murder, rapist, idolizer, and a fool. Because, we are him, and by the transitive property that makes him what we are.

Please stop posting your youtube links... they just make me angry at how foolish people are... they literally post a video with random gum wrapper facts they find on wikipedia then blow it out of proportion and block the comments because they realize people can see the bull shit in the videos and they don't want to hear it... Just stupid.

Im also confused on how we got on the subject of "Is god real, and is the bible true?" From talking about "The gov't is out to get everyone!"

[Mudofale]

Something tells me we are going to start arguing about "Do aliens exisit on earth?" in the next week. I can see it coming.

[1313Jr.1313]

i get odd hunches on occasion but they're usually right so bear with me.

official guesses here. gemi, when your arguments are shown to be invalid you spam more nonsense (equally invalid btw). you are looking for something to put you above the rest which means you somehow feel below the rest or are now feeling superior due to your current belief system. you refuse to change your views on this which means they're well established and a good portion of everything you believe in relies on them and you aren't willing to even consider that you've made a mistake. hatred for the government probably blah blah blah you don't care, but i'd guess red state. preaching on a fart fetish forum of all places so i'm willing to assume you have plenty of practice blindly preaching to give yourself that sense of righteousness which would indicate blah blah blah you don't care about the how, just the what.

final verdict? let me know if ANY of this is wrong.
-male
-early twenties (21-24 or so)
-black (or half black)
-mid us red state... texas or kansas... that general area (if texas AND half black then the other half would be hispanic)
-i'd say average height... maybe a little taller but not by too much
-thin... not unhealthy but not fat by anybody's definition
-either glasses or a limp
-high school education, but either "some college" or an aa... not more than that. my guess there would be college dropout and now working or picked up a job either in or right out of high school that you've kept or transitioned from. big fish in a small sea transitioning to small fish in a big sea sort of thing.
-drive either a hand me down car suitable for one or a bike... either way it's your baby

genuinely curious if ANY of this is correct, but i have a hunch most of it is.

[gemiwine]

Alright, I only looked at 3 of the links you provided. And from reading them all I have to say is, thanks for wasting an hour of my life... I mean really? That Youtube video was over an hour long... I watched the first 10 minutes of it and wanted to burn the person who created it on a stick.

One thing, how can you turn something simple as "Saturn has a hexagon on it's north pole, it's the 6th planet, on the 6th day" Which I could have sworn Saturday was the 7th day... It's just absurd... I can say the same thing about my life... I've worked 6 hours each day 6 days a week for the past 6 weeks.... OMG MY JOB IS A BUNCH OF SATANIST! That's what that sounds like... They literally try to turn everyone into crazy people by making them question every part of their life. What I found to be dumb was the fact that after the first 2 minutes they actually started stating that most christians aren't even Christians. What kind of world do we live in that we follow a religion blindly then suddenly were rejected because were following the religion the wrong way. As for the other links giving us "proof" that the bible is real and god is real etc etc. That is a bunch of random facts gathered to make an ant seem like an elephant. You can't quote the bible and say that it's your proof considering most of the information on those links were verses taken out of context so when you read them they made half sense. Which brings me to another point, why does everyone assume that the people who created the bible were idiots? They clearly created a book that over 25% of the worlds population follows, I doubt they spent all of 15 seconds drafting idea's then decided to write it down. It took our (United States) founders over 15 years to create a final documentation to represent our entire nation for many years to come, what makes you think they didn't spend over 100 years perfecting a religion? Sure, the bible has parts that are true, but you can't make someone follow a religion or a book for that matter that has some facts that say "This is the word, no other word is any higher... blah blah" When there are glaring points that make no sense.

I asked it before and ill ask it again, why would "god" create man in his image when we are controlled by our emotions and our emotions dictate how we live our lives. If we are created in his image, then god is a murder, rapist, idolizer, and a fool. Because, we are him, and by the transitive property that makes him what we are.

Please stop posting your youtube links... they just make me angry at how foolish people are... they literally post a video with random gum wrapper facts they find on wikipedia then blow it out of proportion and block the comments because they realize people can see the bull shit in the videos and they don't want to hear it... Just stupid.

Im also confused on how we got on the subject of "Is god real, and is the bible true?" From talking about "The gov't is out to get everyone!"I got all that but where is the proof from you that this is all a stupid? Who are you to tell me to stop posting youtube links? Why can't you prove me wrong but instead rant on about your emotions? So far no one hasn't disaproved any of my "claims" but says "its not true because I said so." I said it a million times I don't care if you believe it or not I have a free will to post anything on a forum regardless unless you can ban me for posting something you don't like which is not up to you. I'm not making anyone believe anything if they don't want to & your not making me believe what you are trying to say against me at the end of the day you are just a slave who dosent know who you are worshipping and following. I'm sure if I talked about some random tv shows & movies I would get a better response but when it comes to the truth like always it starts into a war based on the responses y'all give about it. So if you want to believe everything that college, tv shows, local news, cnn 7 books written by men inspired by men that taught you about governments & science then be my guest while I'll be blind & stupid by learning the truth from the bible instead of being concerned about a man made, brainwashing education and propaganda material by the pagan leaders of this country & from gullible people like you stuck in the matrix who's so dependent on the system of craft willing to defend for it by defending me keep it that can't prove their point but rationalize with emotion because of your misunderstandings of the bible from being too consumed with deceptional teachings about mans own ideas & creation of

Don't get mad just prove that the bible and its scriptures are all false exposing the government who practices these thing that God told them not to. Prove that Saturn is not apart of our everyday lives and the government are not practicioners of religion to control us with. You don't even know who the the funding fathers are because the truth is this country has been founded upon & controlled by all race of people from different religious backgrounds and how old the bible really is that's been around longer then most people think.

I don't see any rules on this forum that says you can't talk about certain subjects otherwise this thread would have been locked by now but if this offends people too much then for the safety of everyone please lock it so we don't have to worry about a crazed person trying to spew his anger on something he dosent have to respond to that easily triggers his emotion.

[gemiwine]

i get odd hunches on occasion but they're usually right so bear with me.

official guesses here. gemi, when your arguments are shown to be invalid you spam more nonsense (equally invalid btw). you are looking for something to put you above the rest which means you somehow feel below the rest or are now feeling superior due to your current belief system. you refuse to change your views on this which means they're well established and a good portion of everything you believe in relies on them and you aren't willing to even consider that you've made a mistake. hatred for the government probably blah blah blah you don't care, but i'd guess red state. preaching on a fart fetish forum of all places so i'm willing to assume you have plenty of practice blindly preaching to give yourself that sense of righteousness which would indicate blah blah blah you don't care about the how, just the what.

final verdict? let me know if ANY of this is wrong.
-male
-early twenties (21-24 or so)
-black (or half black)
-mid us red state... texas or kansas... that general area (if texas AND half black then the other half would be hispanic)
-i'd say average height... maybe a little taller but not by too much
-thin... not unhealthy but not fat by anybody's definition
-either glasses or a limp
-high school education, but either "some college" or an aa... not more than that. my guess there would be college dropout and now working or picked up a job either in or right out of high school that you've kept or transitioned from. big fish in a small sea transitioning to small fish in a big sea sort of thing.
-drive either a hand me down car suitable for one or a bike... either way it's your baby

genuinely curious if ANY of this is correct, but i have a hunch most of it is.So my age, weight, height, eye vision, citizenship, martial status & wether or not I went to college & what kind of transportation I have has a lot to do with the fact that I'm making invalid poins about the gov, college & the bible? Up to this point you haven't proved to me anything nor corrected me with any proof about any of my claims in any of your responses but rant and talk about me. So while your still ranting on about how invalid I am about the bible, college & the gov I'll be waiting for you to prove your point with some valid evidence instead of preaching about your feeings & opinions about me. What's funny is your only proof that the internet will die in 2012 was a youtube link and a website link. So why dnt you post some links in contrary to mine that totally debunks my "claims" you call it.

[1313Jr.1313]

So my age, weight, height, eye vision, citizenship, martial status & wether or not I went to college & what kind of transportation I have has a lot to do with the fact that I'm making invalid poins about the gov, college & the bible? Up to this point you haven't proved to me anything nor corrected me with any proof about any of my claims in any of your responses but rant and talk about me. So while your still ranting on about how invalid I am about the bible, college & the gov I'll be waiting for you to prove your point with some valid evidence instead of preaching about your feeings & opinions about me. What's funny is your only proof that the internet will die in 2012 was a youtube link and a website link. So why dnt you post some links in contrary to mine that totally debunks my "claims" you call it.

firstly, i am VERY good at what i do. i have diagnosed excess fluid in the brain through eye contact. i am saying that i got a hunch and was curious as to whether or not i was right. that is why i was asking if this was true or not. the fact that you denied none of it would imply that it's all true (which tbh is what i expected... these hunches aren't often wrong). also, the fact that you mentioned eye vision and not the limp means it would be glasses? i really do want to know if i'm right on this one so please in your next response let me know if i'm right and what i'm not right about.

second, you are right about my proof of the internet's potential death in 2012. to be fair, i also had 2 websites along with the youtube link, but upon doing the research they were fallacious and i was just being stubborn at the time because i didn't want to have to reconsider my beliefs. upon learning that they were flawed, i no longer held what they had said as beliefs (not sure, but i believe i even apologized about them?). their logic by the way was solid, but the premise for their argument was flawed (which means their logic was as well but aside from that it wasn't).

third, the conclusions you are drawing are not necessarily invalid. there is neither proof in existence that god does or does not exist. as such there is no concluding evidence that the bible is truth or fiction. your claims are nothing more than claims and they have no evidence. if i were to claim that the moon is made of cheese and link to a bugs bunny cartoon our claims would be equally valid. aside from my most recent 2 posts, i have provided in every post proof that your conclusions are faulty. you saying that i haven't doesn't make it so.

[gemiwine]

firstly, i am VERY good at what i do. i have diagnosed excess fluid in the brain through eye contact. i am saying that i got a hunch and was curious as to whether or not i was right. that is why i was asking if this was true or not. the fact that you denied none of it would imply that it's all true (which tbh is what i expected... these hunches aren't often wrong). also, the fact that you mentioned eye vision and not the limp means it would be glasses? i really do want to know if i'm right on this one so please in your next response let me know if i'm right and what i'm not right about.

second, you are right about my proof of the internet's potential death in 2012. to be fair, i also had 2 websites along with the youtube link, but upon doing the research they were fallacious and i was just being stubborn at the time because i didn't want to have to reconsider my beliefs. upon learning that they were flawed, i no longer held what they had said as beliefs (not sure, but i believe i even apologized about them?). their logic by the way was solid, but the premise for their argument was flawed (which means their logic was as well but aside from that it wasn't).

third, the conclusions you are drawing are not necessarily invalid. there is neither proof in existence that god does or does not exist. as such there is no concluding evidence that the bible is truth or fiction. your claims are nothing more than claims and they have no evidence. if i were to claim that the moon is made of cheese and link to a bugs bunny cartoon our claims would be equally valid. aside from my most recent 2 posts, i have provided in every post proof that your conclusions are faulty. you saying that i haven't doesn't make it so.Lol I been on this form for yars so you are correct because I might have told you where I stay & my race maybe not my whole description & I drive 2 seater & couldn't afford time t go to school from working long hours with good pay but aside from that. I know the bible can't be fiction if it lines right up with todays society especially from the fact that this book has massive bloodshed behind it by the roman empire, druids, celts, jesuits & the knights templars that killed many who touched it. The occultist & major scientist of the world know that the bible is real its just the fact they choose not to follow it. I'm not here to save people & tell them to go to church and jump around inside those buildings I'm just proving my point that the governments laws & so called news propaganda are flawed because their on a whole other agenda for a nwo but its fine with me if you wanna called it flawed, invalid, fallcious, fiction, fable & apocryphal.

[Mikey]

Please view, it was upped on the 4th. I am really worried now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xNAhA9Ozm8&feature=player_embedded

[Mudofale]

I am, and at the same time i'm not. For one thing, if they really think censoring the internet will do anything except aggravate 75% of the nation then go for it... I mean, if artist believe "This will boost my sales if people can't buy it for free!" Then they're crazy, if thats the reason I can't find music online anymore or ANYTHING free on the internet anymore then fuck them and their music. I definitely won't be buying anymore albums, I think most people would do the same thing. I don't even download that much music anymore, but movies and such that I download, not to mention all the youtube videos I watch.. the internet would become so dull... Who ever's idea/ plan was to stop piracy or organization over the internet and trying to prevent it is going to find a larger problem by doing it... All and all, it'll be an interesting 2012.

[Mudofale]

I got all that but where is the proof from you that this is all a stupid? Who are you to tell me to stop posting youtube links? Why can't you prove me wrong but instead rant on about your emotions? So far no one hasn't disaproved any of my "claims" but says "its not true because I said so." I said it a million times I don't care if you believe it or not I have a free will to post anything on a forum regardless unless you can ban me for posting something you don't like which is not up to you.


I would dissprove your points IF you actually had a point, no one is agreeing with you your points for the simple matter that they are invalid sources. I can literally post www.wikipedia.com and say THERE IS MY PROOF. But it would be discredited because anyone can change the information on it, same with the links you provide us with, they are websites created by random people who gather random facts together and create RANDOM theories that they THINK are proof. Just because you provide a link to something doesn't mean it needs 10000 more links to discredit it, the simple fact that your providing links with little information even related to the topic at hand or any proof that the information on the links are true just doesn't even deserve the time wasted proving it wrong... You literally linked us to a site about witch craft and called if your proof about the bible, what on earth does witch craft have to do with proving god exist? Please tell me, it was literally a site that looked like it was someones history project and they added some creepy music and cartoon animations on it and you probably saw it as solid evidence for proving your religion.



I'm not making anyone believe anything if they don't want to & your not making me believe what you are trying to say against me at the end of the day you are just a slave who dosent know who you are worshipping and following. I'm sure if I talked about some random tv shows & movies I would get a better response but when it comes to the truth like always it starts into a war based on the responses y'all give about it. So if you want to believe everything that college, tv shows, local news, cnn 7 books written by men inspired by men that taught you about governments & science then be my guest while I'll be blind & stupid by learning the truth from the bible instead of being concerned about a man made, brainwashing education and propaganda material by the pagan leaders of this country & from gullible people like you stuck in the matrix who's so dependent on the system of craft willing to defend for it by defending me keep it that can't prove their point but rationalize with emotion because of your misunderstandings of the bible from being too consumed with deceptional teachings about mans own ideas & creation of

You will be blind and stupid for learning the truth from a SPIRIT GUIDE, the bible is nothing more, nothing less, then a book to guide your spirit to inner peace. It puts you on a path to respect everyone and everything around you without causing harm to anyone. How do you not understand that... The bible is not a history book, the bible is not a news article, it is simply a guide that tells you how you SHOULD live your life is you so choose to live a one with personal values. Yet for some reason you keep preaching about it as if the bible is the holy word of the world, it will solve all your problems by reading a single verse, it will tell us what happened to the people on Ester island AND MORE. Get a grip on reality please... The bible has yet to officially been proven true, or false so stop using it as your valid source...



Don't get mad just prove that the bible and its scriptures are all false exposing the government who practices these thing that God told them not to. Prove that Saturn is not apart of our everyday lives and the government are not practicioners of religion to control us with. You don't even know who the the funding fathers are because the truth is this country has been founded upon & controlled by all race of people from different religious backgrounds and how old the bible really is that's been around longer then most people think.


The bible only applies to people who believe in what is in them, just like laws only apply to people who abide by the United States Constitution, if I went to Canada and preached about how you can't download stuff from the internet without permission they would simply laugh at me because they don't believe in our ways of life. Same with people who don't believe in the god or the bible, the only reason no one cares about it is because they don't believe in it. Should they? Maybe, but that is not up to you decide, you trying to force everyone to believe in what you do is doing the exact opposite of what the bible is trying to say to you, if your too blind to see that then im sorry your in that religion.



I don't see any rules on this forum that says you can't talk about certain subjects otherwise this thread would have been locked by now but if this offends people too much then for the safety of everyone please lock it so we don't have to worry about a crazed person trying to spew his anger on something he dosent have to respond to that easily triggers his emotion.

Only reason is aggravates people is for the simple fact that every time I read your post I literally have to read every sentence twice just to make sense out of it... Have you ever heard of spell check? And do you ever read your post over before posting them? It's like a 5th grader it is trying to argue about his bed time... I don't have the best grammar skills (very poor ones for that matter) but I at least can fall back on spell check to fix my mistakes that I miss. Not to mention you don't understand the simple fact that your points aren't worth reading because of the fact you give links to things that look like a 3 year old made it...

[1313Jr.1313]

Lol I been on this form for yars so you are correct because I might have told you where I stay & my race maybe not my whole description & I drive 2 seater & couldn't afford time t go to school from working long hours with good pay but aside from that. I know the bible can't be fiction if it lines right up with todays society especially from the fact that this book has massive bloodshed behind it by the roman empire, druids, celts, jesuits & the knights templars that killed many who touched it. The occultist & major scientist of the world know that the bible is real its just the fact they choose not to follow it. I'm not here to save people & tell them to go to church and jump around inside those buildings I'm just proving my point that the governments laws & so called news propaganda are flawed because their on a whole other agenda for a nwo but its fine with me if you wanna called it flawed, invalid, fallcious, fiction, fable & apocryphal.

check your posts... you have let slip very little. you have roughly 130 posts so it wouldn't take too long to check. my point was that you are not as much of a mystery wrapped in an enigma as you may think. people aren't as complicated as they think and there are no exceptions.

the bible was vague and varied enough to line up with ANY civilization at any point in time ever if one is willing to look; most cult readings are as well. that is why people get behind it and it has kept (and probably always will keep) such a following. nobody in the world is going to argue that there's no such thing as the bible. it is a real thing. there's one within 50 feet of me right now. just because something exists, that doesn't make it true. the idea itself is contradictory.

also, i never said that the gummerman's not full of shit. i said that the conclusions you were coming to were using faulty premises and fallacy to get there.


Please view, it was upped on the 4th. I am really worried now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xNAhA9Ozm8&feature=player_embedded

if the people run things then there's no way it will pass and if big corporations run things then there's no way it will pass. there is already a huge following to stop sopa so hopefully we're covered. right now we're just in the initial panicking stage of things so hopefully this clears up soon.

[splat]

i get odd hunches on occasion but they're usually right so bear with me.

official guesses here. gemi, when your arguments are shown to be invalid you spam more nonsense (equally invalid btw). you are looking for something to put you above the rest which means you somehow feel below the rest or are now feeling superior due to your current belief system. you refuse to change your views on this which means they're well established and a good portion of everything you believe in relies on them and you aren't willing to even consider that you've made a mistake. hatred for the government probably blah blah blah you don't care, but i'd guess red state. preaching on a fart fetish forum of all places so i'm willing to assume you have plenty of practice blindly preaching to give yourself that sense of righteousness which would indicate blah blah blah you don't care about the how, just the what.

final verdict? let me know if ANY of this is wrong.
-male
-early twenties (21-24 or so)
-black (or half black)
-mid us red state... texas or kansas... that general area (if texas AND half black then the other half would be hispanic)
-i'd say average height... maybe a little taller but not by too much
-thin... not unhealthy but not fat by anybody's definition
-either glasses or a limp
-high school education, but either "some college" or an aa... not more than that. my guess there would be college dropout and now working or picked up a job either in or right out of high school that you've kept or transitioned from. big fish in a small sea transitioning to small fish in a big sea sort of thing.
-drive either a hand me down car suitable for one or a bike... either way it's your baby

genuinely curious if ANY of this is correct, but i have a hunch most of it is.


Do me next.

[gemiwine]

I would dissprove your points IF you actually had a point, no one is agreeing with you your points for the simple matter that they are invalid sources. I can literally post www.wikipedia.com and say THERE IS MY PROOF. But it would be discredited because anyone can change the information on it, same with the links you provide us with, they are websites created by random people who gather random facts together and create RANDOM theories that they THINK are proof. Just because you provide a link to something doesn't mean it needs 10000 more links to discredit it, the simple fact that your providing links with little information even related to the topic at hand or any proof that the information on the links are true just doesn't even deserve the time wasted proving it wrong... You literally linked us to a site about witch craft and called if your proof about the bible, what on earth does witch craft have to do with proving god exist? Please tell me, it was literally a site that looked like it was someones history project and they added some creepy music and cartoon animations on it and you probably saw it as solid evidence for proving your religion.


You will be blind and stupid for learning the truth from a SPIRIT GUIDE, the bible is nothing more, nothing less, then a book to guide your spirit to inner peace. It puts you on a path to respect everyone and everything around you without causing harm to anyone. How do you not understand that... The bible is not a history book, the bible is not a news article, it is simply a guide that tells you how you SHOULD live your life is you so choose to live a one with personal values. Yet for some reason you keep preaching about it as if the bible is the holy word of the world, it will solve all your problems by reading a single verse, it will tell us what happened to the people on Ester island AND MORE. Get a grip on reality please... The bible has yet to officially been proven true, or false so stop using it as your valid source...



The bible only applies to people who believe in what is in them, just like laws only apply to people who abide by the United States Constitution, if I went to Canada and preached about how you can't download stuff from the internet without permission they would simply laugh at me because they don't believe in our ways of life. Same with people who don't believe in the god or the bible, the only reason no one cares about it is because they don't believe in it. Should they? Maybe, but that is not up to you decide, you trying to force everyone to believe in what you do is doing the exact opposite of what the bible is trying to say to you, if your too blind to see that then im sorry your in that religion.



Only reason is aggravates people is for the simple fact that every time I read your post I literally have to read every sentence twice just to make sense out of it... Have you ever heard of spell check? And do you ever read your post over before posting them? It's like a 5th grader it is trying to argue about his bed time... I don't have the best grammar skills (very poor ones for that matter) but I at least can fall back on spell check to fix my mistakes that I miss. Not to mention you don't understand the simple fact that your points aren't worth reading because of the fact you give links to things that look like a 3 year old made it...Overall your responses are nothing more than opinions & feelings about your view on the bible which you can prove its true so why are you trying to state your claims about it as a fact if you cant prove it. Witchcraft is a practice that was taught by fallen angels or by what people call them "aliens" angelic non human beings with Godlike abilities. The reason why its definion means female sorcery is because in Genesis explains the fallen ones taking the mortal women as wives, teaching them to be like God. If you research then I wouldn't have to tell you something that simple to figure out if you open your mind since you believe in the history books. I already told you I'm not forcing nothing on anybody & I don't have a religion. I'm more of a person who can explain and prove things better through verbal communication instead of typing but I'm done proving my point. I don't know how else you an prove the bible if you don't. Define & explain the meaning behind what's said in those verses but I tryed I guess. I don't care what you say about me which changes nothing about the truth unless you can disaprove it which I doubt you or anyone that could from my experience.

[effingbillgates]

Its true based on the evidence presented and faith is believing without evidence presented which is not based on emotion so I don't care how you feel about the bible being a fairy tale book.

Since you failed to answer my question, I will now not be entertaining your nonsense anymore, as agreed.

[Mudofale]

Overall your responses are nothing more than opinions & feelings about your view on the bible which you can prove its true so why are you trying to state your claims about it as a fact if you cant prove it. Witchcraft is a practice that was taught by fallen angels or by what people call them "aliens" angelic non human beings with Godlike abilities. The reason why its definion means female sorcery is because in Genesis explains the fallen ones taking the mortal women as wives, teaching them to be like God. If you research then I wouldn't have to tell you something that simple to figure out if you open your mind since you believe in the history books. I already told you I'm not forcing nothing on anybody & I don't have a religion. I'm more of a person who can explain and prove things better through verbal communication instead of typing but I'm done proving my point. I don't know how else you an prove the bible if you don't. Define & explain the meaning behind what's said in those verses but I tryed I guess. I don't care what you say about me which changes nothing about the truth unless you can disaprove it which I doubt you or anyone that could from my experience.
SO THATS IT, I knew you were just a lunatic spitting off random non-sense... You believe aliens are "fallen angels" who come down and teach people "witch craft" because they're more advanced then you are? Do you seriously believe you are the only living being in this massive universe with advance abilities to traverse the universe? We can barely travel past the moon without having to come back to dock for fuel or even survive long enough to make it to mars, the closest planet to us... Actually, were pretty primitive compared to other organism. Were barely a million years old (our current state of evolution) I think it's in the 600,000's though. But ill leave it at that. All your beliefs and idea's are now falling on deaf ears just for your ignorance that I actually saw in your earlier post, and now I am certain of it from just reading the first 3 sentences of that post. Have a nice life in your box...

[Mudofale]

Do me next.

I want to find out as well, but at the same time i'm scared to find out because the truth hurts... Hmm...

[1313Jr.1313]

Do me next.

if i happen to get a hunch about you, you're on, lol. then again if i could just have those hunches at will, i'd go on the road and just make a killing out of it.


Overall your responses are nothing more than opinions & feelings about your view on the bible which you can prove its true so why are you trying to state your claims about it as a fact if you cant prove it.

please tell me i'm not the only one who finds this majorly ironic.

[gemiwine]

if i happen to get a hunch about you, you're on, lol. then again if i could just have those hunches at will, i'd go on the road and just make a killing out of it.



please tell me i'm not the only one who finds this majorly ironic.LOL I meant to say cant. I dont have a computer so its hard typing without delayed key functions from my phone.

[effingbillgates]

please tell me i'm not the only one who finds this majorly ironic.

You're not the only one.

Gemiwine is somebody who's too stupid to know he's lost the argument (as per this comedy sketch: hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYFQZFL0yoo). You're not going to get anywhere by trying to continue this with him. It's probably best to appreciate that he'll never realise why he's wrong, and quit while you're ahead.

[gemiwine]

SO THATS IT, I knew you were just a lunatic spitting off random non-sense... You believe aliens are "fallen angels" who come down and teach people "witch craft" because they're more advanced then you are? Do you seriously believe you are the only living being in this massive universe with advance abilities to traverse the universe? We can barely travel past the moon without having to come back to dock for fuel or even survive long enough to make it to mars, the closest planet to us... Actually, were pretty primitive compared to other organism. Were barely a million years old (our current state of evolution) I think it's in the 600,000's though. But ill leave it at that. All your beliefs and idea's are now falling on deaf ears just for your ignorance that I actually saw in your earlier post, and now I am certain of it from just reading the first 3 sentences of that post. Have a nice life in your box...So we are advance enough to come up with supernatural powers on our own? Sounds like the lunatic would be you from your evolution theories that can't be proven to be true. No wonder hitler killed so many trying to make people believe that. I wonder if were just as advance as aliens then why can't we travel up to mock 5 speeds like they do? Why do witches have to summon spirits in order to use their powers? Obviously you do zero research on this stuff to know where practioners in the occult get their hidden knowledge from & why they answer to a higher power more superior & advanced then humans. So I guess in genesis 6:4 when the fallen ones made offsprings of giants from the mortal women is a bunch of nonsense but wonder why they make so many movies & series like "supernatural" "fallen" "clash of the titans" "immortals" & others that's been copyed from that same story in the bible.

[gemiwine]

You're not the only one.

Gemiwine is somebody who's too stupid to know he's lost the argument (as per this comedy sketch: hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYFQZFL0yoo). You're not going to get anywhere by trying to continue this with him. It's probably best to appreciate that he'll never realise why he's wrong, and quit while you're ahead.LOL oh I'm so lost why don't you point me to the right direction. Your so smart but couldn't you disaprove any of my evidence but rant on by calling me names. I know I'm stupid so why are you still reinstating it? Is this additional evidence proving your right & I'm wrong?

[effingbillgates]

LOL oh I'm so lost why don't you point me to the right direction. Your so smart but couldn't you disaprove any of my evidence but rant on by calling me names. I know I'm stupid so why are you still reinstating it? Is this additional evidence proving your right & I'm wrong?

You didn't prove anything. You gave no evidence. You even failed to show me how we can be sure that the bible is the word of God. That's the only thing that I asked for: empirical evidence for the bible being true rather than some stories written by normal humans 2000 years ago. Since your entire position in this argument depends upon the authority of the bible rather than you saying anything meaningful, I think it's reasonable that you provide this one thing.

You failed to do this one very basic thing, gemiwine; ergo you lost.



Incidentally, I have not called you a single name. You being stupid is relevant because you can't even grasp how to have the discussion we're supposedly having. If you were even remotely communicating with us rather than just mindlessly spamming various stock Christian/conspiracy phrases and youtube links, your stupidity wouldn't be an issue, and I wouldn't have mentioned it.

[splat]

Also, it's Mach, not mock. And Mach 5 has been done.

While I personally accept the possibility of angels, aliens, spirits or whatnot (particularly Hermes Trismegistus), your evidence is poor. Modern films do not prove that the myths of the past actually happened. It simply proves they have heard of them.

For example, right now I'll say that there is a hippo who lives on jupiter. Next week, someone write a novel about him. Since someone wrote the fiction about the thing I said in the past, does that justify the past event and make it true?

[gemiwine]

You didn't prove anything. You gave no evidence. You even failed to show me how we can be sure that the bible is the word of God. That's the only thing that I asked for: empirical evidence for the bible being true rather than some stories written by normal humans 2000 years ago. Since your entire position in this argument depends upon the authority of the bible rather than you saying anything meaningful, I think it's reasonable that you provide this one thing.

You failed to do this one very basic thing, gemiwine; ergo you lost.



Incidentally, I have not called you a single name. You being stupid is relevant because you can't even grasp how to have the discussion we're supposedly having. If you were even remotely communicating with us rather than just mindlessly spamming various stock Christian/conspiracy phrases and youtube links, your stupidity wouldn't be an issue, and I wouldn't have mentioned it.You must be stupid if you can't figure out the bible is Gods word. You can't even prove that its not Gods word without ranting on about your opinions about it trying to turn it into a fact. Its no wonder you can't convince me its a fairy tale book I you cat tell me exacty from the scriptures is so false about it. You tell me exactly what is not true about the bible not being Gods word with some real proof so I can have a better understanding if your really that smart since I'm stupid.

[splat]

Gemwine, this has already been explained many times. We don't have to prove your argument false, you have to prove your argument true.

[effingbillgates]

You must be stupid if you can't figure out the bible is Gods word.

And yet you haven't managed to show me this, even though me staying in this conversation depended on you providing this apparently very simple evidence.

If your very life depended on it, I still think you'd be unable to show that the bible is God's word.



This is your debating position:

You: I am right and you are wrong. My book is true and yours are all false.

Everybody else: We don't agree with your authority. Prove that your book is true.

You: Erm. No. Prove that I am wrong!

Everybody else: We're not the ones obnoxiously claiming that our book is true. We work with evidence and don't make unsubstantiated claims. If you think your book is true, then to give your position authority so that we listen to you, you NEED to prove that it's true. If you can't prove it's true, we don't care. If you can't prove it's true, you're just a wrong person going around thinking that they're right, and we don't lose anything if you fuck off.

You: YOU FAILED TO PROVE ME WRONG LALALALALA

Everybody else: Very well then! Fuck off!


I am at the very last line - the "Very well then! Fuck off!" stage of this discussion. I'm not going to go around in circles with you since you're not even grasping your responsibility here. I've had enough of this. I am sure you will keep encountering the same problems through your life if you don't approach debates differently, but you're no different from most Christians in this respect, so you might be perfectly happy with that situation.

I wish you the best of luck for the future, as I mean no personal hard feelings, but this is my last post in this thread.

[1313Jr.1313]

LOL I meant to say cant. I dont have a computer so its hard typing without delayed key functions from my phone.

i assumed you meant to say can't. if you meant to say can then it wouldn't have been ironic, just a terrible position to take after everything you've said thus far. either way, everything you said he is making a mistake of is something you have already messed up on. ad ignorantium. that is the one to look up. splat and effingbillgates are straight up right about this one. if you are closed minded about this stuff then that's not on us and trust me, you have opened nobody's eyes to this matter. what you are doing is not spreading the word of christ, but belittling it.

i used to be a hardcore christian as well but as penn said, nothing will generate atheism faster than reading the bible. while my faith in god remains, my faith in the bible and christianity does not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk0K1zgCDtE

[gemiwine]

You didn't prove anything. You gave no evidence. You even failed to show me how we can be sure that the bible is the word of God. That's the only thing that I asked for: empirical evidence for the bible being true rather than some stories written by normal humans 2000 years ago. Since your entire position in this argument depends upon the authority of the bible rather than you saying anything meaningful, I think it's reasonable that you provide this one thing.

You failed to do this one very basic thing, gemiwine; ergo you lost.



Incidentally, I have not called you a single name. You being stupid is relevant because you can't even grasp how to have the discussion we're supposedly having. If you were even remotely communicating with us rather than just mindlessly spamming various stock Christian/conspiracy phrases and youtube links, your stupidity wouldn't be an issue, and I wouldn't have mentioned it.I explained in acts & Deut what was taking place then in the OT & NT is what's taking place now about people in the occult, sacrificing humans & kids as worship to Saturn in all religions. If you can't see that's what your gov & other countries are doing today then your just as blind & stupid as me. How can you be sure the bible is Gods word? Read it yourself instead of finding unrealible sources that you heard from athiest about their feelings & views about the bible trying to turn it into a fact without evidence supporting it. Denying Gods existence & his word by making images of false Gods like the false image of Jesus for example & other pagan practices is predicted in that same false book from the OT to the NT is evidence proving its accuracy, exposing todays governments & their religion.

Romans 1:21-23, 25 KJV

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Deut 5:8, Exodus 20:4, 2 Kings 17:16, Jeremiah 16:20, 7:9, 11:12, Numbers 25:2, 1 Chronicles 16:26, 1 Cor 8:5-6, Psalms 81:9, Judges 3:7, Amos 5:26, Isaiah 44:10

http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/gods/explore/main.html
http://www.mesopotamia.co.uk/gods/explore/main.html

The roman empire tryed to get rid of the bible & killed as many citizens they could who touched it but instead tricked you and the millions into believing in the lies about the bible because they counterfit the bible by making different versions of them like the ones we have today seperating the kjv to discredit it since its the most authentic of them all. This is why we have the quran & other false religious books which are just a counterfit of the bible implanted with different stories similar to the real stories of the bible. All this information is all over the net & in history. I'm not making you believe anything. I'm telling you to look it up yourself but derogating me isn't going to help your facts about me become any better.

[gemiwine]

i assumed you meant to say can't. if you meant to say can then it wouldn't have been ironic, just a terrible position to take after everything you've said thus far. either way, everything you said he is making a mistake of is something you have already messed up on. ad ignorantium. that is the one to look up. splat and effingbillgates are straight up right about this one. if you are closed minded about this stuff then that's not on us and trust me, you have opened nobody's eyes to this matter. what you are doing is not spreading the word of christ, but belittling it.

i used to be a hardcore christian as well but as penn said, nothing will generate atheism faster than reading the bible. while my faith in god remains, my faith in the bible and christianity does not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk0K1zgCDtESo Penn turned you into a atheist? His view points were good but his evidence was poor. I refuse to believe something without investigating it with research before accepting another persons word on it. Atheism is a religion itself & leads to confusion & violence since it lacks credability & solutions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXMsXncm1X8

[1313Jr.1313]

not once have i said i was atheist. after reading the bible (before having seen that episode of bullshit mind you) i found i could no longer believe in CHRISTIANITY or most other organized religions for similar reasons. his evidence was the same bible you are using and if his evidence is bad then so is yours. if his is good then it contradicts your conclusions which would make yours bad then as well. it's really lose lose for you which indicates that you can't exactly be right when even agreeing with you means you're wrong.

regardless, reading every word of the bible is more than enough to get people to stop believing in christianity at the very least. my belief is god has no logic behind it other than faith. i understand that god can not be proved real and there is no evidence out there that supports the idea of god other than that other people have believed in god.

all you have done is make claims and provide no valid evidence. just for a second, let's assume that those vids are correct. do you really believe that they would be allowed to stay up for more than 2 seconds? the fact that the evidence is easily obtained contradicts what it is trying to prove... let alone the fact that the logic is horrible.

[gemiwine]

not once have i said i was atheist. after reading the bible (before having seen that episode of bullshit mind you) i found i could no longer believe in CHRISTIANITY or most other organized religions for similar reasons. his evidence was the same bible you are using and if his evidence is bad then so is yours. if his is good then it contradicts your conclusions which would make yours bad then as well. it's really lose lose for you which indicates that you can't exactly be right when even agreeing with you means you're wrong.

regardless, reading every word of the bible is more than enough to get people to stop believing in christianity at the very least. my belief is god has no logic behind it other than faith. i understand that god can not be proved real and there is no evidence out there that supports the idea of god other than that other people have believed in god.

all you have done is make claims and provide no valid evidence. just for a second, let's assume that those vids are correct. do you really believe that they would be allowed to stay up for more than 2 seconds? the fact that the evidence is easily obtained contradicts what it is trying to prove... let alone the fact that the logic is horrible. I wasn't serious about questioning you about atheisim but I understand where you coming from. Christianity is just a title & was never a religion in the first place only because the catholics made it out of that from their ideas of practices to correlate to it by merging their pagan practices into christianity. Church buildings, Sunday service, praise service, church denominations, tithes, alter calling, minister of music, choir band, collection plate, nuns, confessions, prayig with beeds, praying to the dead, praying to mary, bowing to statues, heavenly images, cross symbols, excorsism, holy mary queen of heaven, praise dancing, speaking in tongues & other similar religious practices were all created by the catholic church to corrupt christianity with this deception. The bible dosent even mention these things to be practice in order to be a christian and so forth. It only mentions not to participate in these traditions but exposes religion so it makes sense today you see this kind of activity that was talked about in the bible if you do your research on it. Its the same with the different versions of the bible predicting in the NT that people will try to change the bible.

Penn failed to touch on these subjects that would come to a better understanding about the bible. At the same time its a choice to believe. Real christians never had any type of military nor monarch athority to make people believe in the true God of the bible. As far as history goes real christians were killed & persecuted for having a bible & spreading the word about christ by pagan rulers who pushed their religion of false Gods & Goddess on people through fear & intimadation but later blended in their same religious principles in christianity. The images of Jesus & mary are really Horus the sun God & Isis the Goddess of fertility.

Call it fallicous but its no coinencidence for this being predicted in the bible centuries before it happen to see it going on today for a human alone to think of this which is why it had to be inspired by God through the holy spirit working in these humans that makes it easier to understand the words in the bible. Its not my logic nor my personal opinionated ideas about this. Its all researched if you choose to look it up rather than believing me. Blaming the bible for destroying your beliefs is like blaming your parents for giving birth to you. There's no proof that an ordinary human could predict these events discussed in the bible that is happening today without any spiritual guidance from God no matter how advance science & technology is.

[Mudofale]

So we are advance enough to come up with supernatural powers on our own? Sounds like the lunatic would be you from your evolution theories that can't be proven to be true. No wonder hitler killed so many trying to make people believe that. I wonder if were just as advance as aliens then why can't we travel up to mock 5 speeds like they do? Why do witches have to summon spirits in order to use their powers? Obviously you do zero research on this stuff to know where practioners in the occult get their hidden knowledge from & why they answer to a higher power more superior & advanced then humans. So I guess in genesis 6:4 when the fallen ones made offsprings of giants from the mortal women is a bunch of nonsense but wonder why they make so many movies & series like "supernatural" "fallen" "clash of the titans" "immortals" & others that's been copyed from that same story in the bible.

Im going to stop your rant at the start of it, because clearly, like every other post, you can not read. It's not even that you don't read the post but the simple fact that I am 100% convinced you can NOT read for shit. When did I say humans were advanced? I said we are PRIMITIVE, our galaxy is like a fetus compared to some of the other galaxies that are close to us that hold life... And for some reason you find it hard to believe that for some crazy ass reason some other being in this massive universe is capable of doing things on it's own because it spent it's time to solving problems and moving forward instead of spending everyday trying to prove everyone wrong with a load of bull shit that no one will, or wants to believe? The only reason we can't move at the speed of light without turning into vapor is simply because our bodies are too frail to sustain such high velocities on this planet. If we wanted to move something at the speed of light in outer space then so be it, but we still lack the resources to move something at tremendous speeds and capable of maintaining that speed. Why do you think cars weren't invited until recently? Because people decided they needed a quicker way to get around other then horse and wagon or by foot, so they took a resource, refined it, and made a system that runs on that resource, but that resource has it's limits when it comes to speed, that is why rockets and shuttles don't use simple diesel fuels but instead they use nitrous-oxide or something of the nitrous realm (forgot the correct name, wasn't the greatest at chemistry lol). Please don't argue a point you don't even understand...

If your going to state claims that people are witches because they actually understand physic's and how things ACTUALLY work then so be it, you will still be a lunatic in my book for that exact reason. I bet im a witch because I realize these things and you don't, is that it? I've been visited by fallen angels and learned their secrets and practice it every damn day. Just aggravates me how ignorant you can be and for some reason still believe you are correct and self righteous... You have no clue whats going on in the world around you because your head is stuck in some book that won't tell you beans for anything other then how to live your life. The reason I don't believe in most religions is simply because I understand how a lot of things work and religion doesn't link up. Im not saying every religion that exist is the dumbest belief in the world, I think Buddhist have a calm way of presenting themselves to the world without trying to force everyone to think they're going to burn for eternity if you don't do exactly what they say. If a religion makes someone believe in their self to better their self and the people around them without disrupting the world, then so be it. But from what I know (was a major christian) and what I have seen, christianity seems to just be a giant hoax to get people to follow orders and people follow it blindly because they're afraid of what will happen if they don't, or they like what they hear because it makes them believe in themself. And that is why I don't devote myself 100% to religion.

Ill leave it at that for now, because you hardly even read past the first 2 lines of a post anyway so why bother even actually leaving these long paragraphs... Who knows.

[1313Jr.1313]

I wasn't serious about questioning you about atheisim but I understand where you coming from. Christianity is just a title & was never a religion in the first place only because the catholics made it out of that from their ideas of practices to correlate to it by merging their pagan practices into christianity. Church buildings, Sunday service, praise service, church denominations, tithes, alter calling, minister of music, choir band, collection plate, nuns, confessions, prayig with beeds, praying to the dead, praying to mary, bowing to statues, heavenly images, cross symbols, excorsism, holy mary queen of heaven, praise dancing, speaking in tongues & other similar religious practices were all created by the catholic church to corrupt christianity with this deception. The bible dosent even mention these things to be practice in order to be a christian and so forth. It only mentions not to participate in these traditions but exposes religion so it makes sense today you see this kind of activity that was talked about in the bible if you do your research on it. Its the same with the different versions of the bible predicting in the NT that people will try to change the bible.

Penn failed to touch on these subjects that would come to a better understanding about the bible. At the same time its a choice to believe. Real christians never had any type of military nor monarch athority to make people believe in the true God of the bible. As far as history goes real christians were killed & persecuted for having a bible & spreading the word about christ by pagan rulers who pushed their religion of false Gods & Goddess on people through fear & intimadation but later blended in their same religious principles in christianity. The images of Jesus & mary are really Horus the sun God & Isis the Goddess of fertility.

Call it fallicous but its no coinencidence for this being predicted in the bible centuries before it happen to see it going on today for a human alone to think of this which is why it had to be inspired by God through the holy spirit working in these humans that makes it easier to understand the words in the bible. Its not my logic nor my personal opinionated ideas about this. Its all researched if you choose to look it up rather than believing me. Blaming the bible for destroying your beliefs is like blaming your parents for giving birth to you. There's no proof that an ordinary human could predict these events discussed in the bible that is happening today without any spiritual guidance from God no matter how advance science & technology is.

i am going to say up front that i can not believe in the bible either. i also never said that penn was perfect in that episode, BUT given that it's only half of an hour it did a damn good job. the funny thing about predicting the end without giving specifics is that you can NEVER be proved wrong. if the end doesn't come then it just hasn't come YET and if it does then you can claim to be right. the bible teaches things that were (at least partially) not completely culture reliant which means it was meant to preach messages between different cultures. this means that it would be able to apply at any time, in any culture, with any person. that's the funny thing about ambiguity... it tends to fool people into thinking something is true when really anything so ambiguous may be true. the bible never said specifically that the american government was going to lie to its citizens and all the other crap that's going on. speaking of secret societies is pointless as they will always exist. technically speaking, this forum has a secret society consisting of the administrators and moderators who can operate behind closed doors. ambiguity allows claims to be put to a situation it wasn't meant for but where it holds true so the person who made the claim can claim to have foreseen whatever situation it happens to be true about.

let me put it this way, my previous hunch about you consisted of the following:

-male
-early twenties (21-24 or so)
-black (or half black)
-mid us red state... texas or kansas... that general area (if texas AND half black then the other half would be hispanic)
-i'd say average height... maybe a little taller but not by too much
-thin... not unhealthy but not fat by anybody's definition
-either glasses or a limp
-high school education, but either "some college" or an aa... not more than that. my guess there would be college dropout and now working or picked up a job either in or right out of high school that you've kept or transitioned from. big fish in a small sea transitioning to small fish in a big sea sort of thing.
-drive either a hand me down car suitable for one or a bike... either way it's your baby

while some of that can be generalized to a lot of people, most of it is specific enough for it to not apply to everyone. i'm not claiming i'm a god or anything, but that is an impressive amount of specific information to give out. now, how impressive would it be if it looked like this instead?

-male
-under 50 years old
-has an ancestor within 10 generations not from america
-somewhere between washington (state) and washington (dc)
-between short and tall
-between super thin and overweight
-may have had an injury sometime in your life (serious or not)
-finished elementary school... may have done more
-knows how to drive

does that apply to you? more than likely... does that apply to me? yeah... does it apply to pretty much every american under 50 on this forum? the male ones at least. this second quote is basically the bible and the american forum members are basically different times and places throughout history (and more than likely the future). THIS IS JUST VAGUE ENOUGH TO APPLY TO ALMOST ALL OF THEM just as the bible is vague enough to apply to almost all of history in almost all places. if something applies equally to all times and places, using it to support anything is like multiplying both sides of an equation by 0... you may get somewhere but you've made a critical flaw in your reasoning. that's not to say you shouldn't have faith, but the bible is not the end all be all of everything. it is an ambiguous book that can apply TO EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE FOREVER (i can even use it to prove that everything you have said thus far is false by using satan as a metaphor for you... i mean, i wouldn't... but i CAN).

[Mudofale]

Originally Posted by Ambiguous 1313Jr.1313
-male
-under 50 years old
-has an ancestor within 10 generations not from america
-somewhere between washington (state) and washington (dc)
-between short and tall
-between super thin and overweight
-may have had an injury sometime in your life (serious or not)
-finished elementary school... may have done more
-knows how to drive

You should have said between Hawaii and Washington d.c. since he likes to point out minor insignificant details that barely correlate to the subject at hand.

Also, he'll probably just say "You still haven't proven why the bible isn't true, blah blah blah blah, your just making assumptions without any proof, blah blah blah, im right until proven wrong, blah blah blah." Guess we wait for the offender to return to the scene of the crime.

[1313Jr.1313]

i also said most to cover that, lol.

[gemiwine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?1&v=Ll9LN79gB3M&noredirect=1

[gemiwine]

Im going to stop your rant at the start of it, because clearly, like every other post, you can not read. It's not even that you don't read the post but the simple fact that I am 100% convinced you can NOT read for shit. When did I say humans were advanced? I said we are PRIMITIVE, our galaxy is like a fetus compared to some of the other galaxies that are close to us that hold life... And for some reason you find it hard to believe that for some crazy ass reason some other being in this massive universe is capable of doing things on it's own because it spent it's time to solving problems and moving forward instead of spending everyday trying to prove everyone wrong with a load of bull shit that no one will, or wants to believe? The only reason we can't move at the speed of light without turning into vapor is simply because our bodies are too frail to sustain such high velocities on this planet. If we wanted to move something at the speed of light in outer space then so be it, but we still lack the resources to move something at tremendous speeds and capable of maintaining that speed. Why do you think cars weren't invited until recently? Because people decided they needed a quicker way to get around other then horse and wagon or by foot, so they took a resource, refined it, and made a system that runs on that resource, but that resource has it's limits when it comes to speed, that is why rockets and shuttles don't use simple diesel fuels but instead they use nitrous-oxide or something of the nitrous realm (forgot the correct name, wasn't the greatest at chemistry lol). Please don't argue a point you don't even understand...

If your going to state claims that people are witches because they actually understand physic's and how things ACTUALLY work then so be it, you will still be a lunatic in my book for that exact reason. I bet im a witch because I realize these things and you don't, is that it? I've been visited by fallen angels and learned their secrets and practice it every damn day. Just aggravates me how ignorant you can be and for some reason still believe you are correct and self righteous... You have no clue whats going on in the world around you because your head is stuck in some book that won't tell you beans for anything other then how to live your life. The reason I don't believe in most religions is simply because I understand how a lot of things work and religion doesn't link up. Im not saying every religion that exist is the dumbest belief in the world, I think Buddhist have a calm way of presenting themselves to the world without trying to force everyone to think they're going to burn for eternity if you don't do exactly what they say. If a religion makes someone believe in their self to better their self and the people around them without disrupting the world, then so be it. But from what I know (was a major christian) and what I have seen, christianity seems to just be a giant hoax to get people to follow orders and people follow it blindly because they're afraid of what will happen if they don't, or they like what they hear because it makes them believe in themself. And that is why I don't devote myself 100% to religion.

Ill leave it at that for now, because you hardly even read past the first 2 lines of a post anyway so why bother even actually leaving these long paragraphs... Who knows.You ought to research Wicca & look up the word rant which mainly applies to you & your responses. I'm not going to go into space shuttles, horses & the galaxy which is not what I'm talking about. I meant to say about ufos going mack 5 speeds that is evidence enough proving that the are not mortal beings like us but demons who can shapshift into anything including elements of earth, wind & fire. Makes you wonder a bit why those are the 3 main elements of witchcraft. You may not know but science has its origins in religion & religion came before the bible & christianity therefore christians never were belligerent people unlike muslims, catholics, buddist & other pagan religions. Even science has its origins of killing innosents as a means to strike fear into people hence hitler & evolution theorist. What you fail to realize is the origins of science & engineering came from the knowledge of good & evil that eve sought from the serpant as well as more advance knowledge of making weapons of war, magic, astrology, enchantment, spell casting, sorcery & other divinations by demons/fallen angels that had sex with mortal women before the flood, contrary to what you want to believe. There's plenty of occultist that admit that there superior knowledge is inspired demonic forces as well as the serpant in the bible. I'm not calling people witches because they understand physics & "how things work" as you say. Witchcraft is female sorcery dealing with demonic spirits to give them power to cast spells on people or curse them even tho some gullible people believe there's a such thing as good witchcraft when its all for evil intent.

Know one is making anybody become a christian unlike other religons that use warfare as a mean to convert people into it. See Jesuits. As well as the laws of America & the orders they want us to follow that are unfair & rigorious then the laws of the bible. You don't think the laws of a country are far more sinister to people then someone telling you will go to hell If you don't follow God? That's ridiclious especially with police brutality on a high rise that instills fear into innosent people giving them less thought about the fear of being tormented in hell. Looks like the bible has less effect on controlling people then the laws of criminal justice in courts. I suggest you do some serious research with a better open mind an discover some truth on the origins of history, science & religion before you condemn a book that's been inspired by the same people who ruled this world for centuries, before the roman empire kept it hidden from people & killed anyone who had it. What's funny is they made you & others to adopt a natural aversion to the bible to keep you dumb down by their artificial education so you can't find out how it exposes their agendas for a new world order.

As far as Saturn goes since you didn't watch the whole clip "the cult of saturn" you do realize that Saturn/Satan was worshipped in pagan religion long before the planet was discovered since NASA & telescopes weren't around. Since revelations gives us the number of the beast & says the majority of the world will worship it can't be flawed since every religion has a hexagon symbol & male/female diety like the false image of Jesus & Mary. A hexagon is a 3D cube and is in the muslim religion. You should look at this its very interesting. http://www.youtube.com/profile?=1&user=TrampleOnSnakes

[splat]

Poor logic, once again. So because religion came before science, Christians are better than Muslims? What?

Also, by that logic, Jews are the better than Christians because they were around before Christians. Christians just tacked their books onto the end of a few of the Jewish texts. And by that logic, worshipers of Ba'al and Neith are better than the Jews since they did it first. And by that logic, primal skyworshipers did their thing first. So, since Christianity is older by at least three types, and is clearly a ripoff of Judaism anyway, that puts Christianity in the place of science- A newfangled lie to confuse people because it's newer than the old wisdom.

No, the truth is that truth is truth. We say it, find it and perceive it in different ways. I am not denouncing the Ancients and their wisdom. What we lost in Alexandria potentially set us back thousands of years. What I am saying is that all scopes of learning have their place. Spiritualism, the scientific method, mysticism, divine geometry, and infinite more. They all show us reality, but in fragments. To claim that one book of one type of religion is the only answer is like saying that only one verse of the bible means the whole bible.

[gemiwine]

Poor logic, once again. So because religion came before science, Christians are better than Muslims? What?

Also, by that logic, Jews are the better than Christians because they were around before Christians. Christians just tacked their books onto the end of a few of the Jewish texts. And by that logic, worshipers of Ba'al and Neith are better than the Jews since they did it first. And by that logic, primal skyworshipers did their thing first. So, since Christianity is older by at least three types, and is clearly a ripoff of Judaism anyway, that puts Christianity in the place of science- A newfangled lie to confuse people because it's newer than the old wisdom.Christianity was a never a religion you like the catholic church that merge paganism in christianity trying to turn it into a religion. That's why you have church buildings, cross symbols & images thinking its christianity when its not. Jews in the bible is reffering to the true followers of Jesus & Revelation exposes the fake jews as the synagogue of Satan, like the Judaism religion & hexagon symbol that symbolizes Saturn & the ones that killed Jesus.
Revelation 2:9
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Revelation 3:9
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

I never said anything about christians being better than muslims. The muslim religion was created by the catholic church to carry out its same agenda as the Jesuits did who made people convert into their religion through warfare & combat. Other religions had practiced this as well just like the nazis. Christians were killed & persecuted by religious empires that have their backgrounds in science not saying that christians are better than scientist. I'm saying people have a misunderstand that christians have cause wars & problems throughout history when evidence proves that as a lie which is why stated religion not falling under followers of christ. Its not my logic go look it up yourself If you think I'm making it up. I may not be correct but I assume you don't read the bible enough to understand.

Spiritualism, Mysticism, the scientific method & divine geometry shows us the reality of what exaxtly? All those methods have originated in religion of worshipping false Gods that have kept people under bondage, in fear & ignorant of the truth. All aspects of life & reality came from the bible & has been more accurate with its occurrances then any other book inspired by fable attraction.
1 Timothy 1:4
Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
2 Timothy 4:4
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

[Mudofale]

You ought to research Wicca & look up the word rant which mainly applies to you & your responses. I'm not going to go into space shuttles, horses & the galaxy which is not what I'm talking about. I meant to say about ufos going mack 5 speeds that is evidence enough proving that the are not mortal beings like us but demons who can shapshift into anything including elements of earth, wind & fire. Makes you wonder a bit why those are the 3 main elements of witchcraft. You may not know but science has its origins in religion & religion came before the bible & christianity therefore christians never were belligerent people unlike muslims, catholics, buddist & other pagan religions. Even science has its origins of killing innosents as a means to strike fear into people hence hitler & evolution theorist. What you fail to realize is the origins of science & engineering came from the knowledge of good & evil that eve sought from the serpant as well as more advance knowledge of making weapons of war, magic, astrology, enchantment, spell casting, sorcery & other divinations by demons/fallen angels that had sex with mortal women before the flood, contrary to what you want to believe. There's plenty of occultist that admit that there superior knowledge is inspired demonic forces as well as the serpant in the bible. I'm not calling people witches because they understand physics & "how things work" as you say. Witchcraft is female sorcery dealing with demonic spirits to give them power to cast spells on people or curse them even tho some gullible people believe there's a such thing as good witchcraft when its all for evil intent.

Know one is making anybody become a christian unlike other religons that use warfare as a mean to convert people into it. See Jesuits. As well as the laws of America & the orders they want us to follow that are unfair & rigorious then the laws of the bible. You don't think the laws of a country are far more sinister to people then someone telling you will go to hell If you don't follow God? That's ridiclious especially with police brutality on a high rise that instills fear into innosent people giving them less thought about the fear of being tormented in hell. Looks like the bible has less effect on controlling people then the laws of criminal justice in courts. I suggest you do some serious research with a better open mind an discover some truth on the origins of history, science & religion before you condemn a book that's been inspired by the same people who ruled this world for centuries, before the roman empire kept it hidden from people & killed anyone who had it. What's funny is they made you & others to adopt a natural aversion to the bible to keep you dumb down by their artificial education so you can't find out how it exposes their agendas for a new world order.

As far as Saturn goes since you didn't watch the whole clip "the cult of saturn" you do realize that Saturn/Satan was worshipped in pagan religion long before the planet was discovered since NASA & telescopes weren't around. Since revelations gives us the number of the beast & says the majority of the world will worship it can't be flawed since every religion has a hexagon symbol & male/female diety like the false image of Jesus & Mary. A hexagon is a 3D cube and is in the muslim religion. You should look at this its very interesting. http://www.youtube.com/profile?=1&user=TrampleOnSnakes

Im trying to figure a polite way to call you and ignorant, mentally challenge, bastard. Once again your trying to argue a point in which you DO NOT understand. The only reason my post seem like rants is for the simple fact that you keep preaching about how true the bible is while at the same time providing proof that says stuff like "Why I believe the bible is true..." You expect people to prove you wrong with your examples that can be some random Joe Smoe with a computer and too much spare time... I can't even prove you wrong about aliens because of the simple fact that you don't seem to be able to comprehend simple physic's, for that matter, you lack common sense. If you want everyone to think like you do the world would destroy it's self in a matter of minutes. It would be like a world wide salem witch trial. I guess the only reason I keep responding/ coming back to this thread is in hope that you will finally some day say. "Your all right, I was a blind fool. I made no sense." But, until that day...

Just don't understand how you can find so much information on the internet, random information for that matter, but yet for some reason you can't seem to find simple things like "The how to's of the human body" or "Physic's for dummies" something like that... Read the first chapter of some random 5th grade physic's book then think back to your post... You will save yourself some humiliation.

I really want to just fly a F-16 into your house/ apartment/ cardboard box/ sleeping bag, just to show to you simple laws of physic's... Then maybe it'll start to sink it. Or are all those books wrong too because the gov't manipulates them and chooses what it says and what it can't say? You can't argue with math... I really wish I was a quantum physicist so I could just unload 10,000,000 pages of gravity, earth, the universe, atoms, molecules all over the place. But alas, im just some random guy with random information... Please wake up some day, the world is completely different then your making it out to be.

To sum things up.
1.) You lack common sense.
2.) Your researching skills are of poor quality.
Improve on these two things and then we can have an actual debate / relevant conversation.

[1313Jr.1313]

The muslim religion was created by the catholic church

i'm just going to point out that these words were typed out by you...

[Mudofale]

i'm just going to point out that these words were typed out by you...

I saw that same line, didn't Muslims come before Catholic's?

[gemiwine]

I saw that same line, didn't Muslims come before Catholic's? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIlEZnXFO70&feature

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCFHxrZPJH0&feature

[Mudofale]

Once again, your links didn't answer my questions... One was telling how they were connected and the other was talking about the difference between the two... Didn't bother going past the two minute mark because it would have just been a waste of time. If anything, you should have quoted 1313Jr. because they were more prevalent to him then me. Not sure if they actually answered his questions but they were related to a degree. What I don't understand about your responses is that all you do is spout off about what you think, then when someone questions what you believe you give a random link to something that merely mentions the topic and call it your proof. Why do you make a formal argument, present your case, then back it up with quotes and evidence from LINKS and CREDIBLE SOURCES. Instead of just giving links and not explaining what the link is about, who made the site, what the site has on it, or even going more in-depth about the link... Makes me not want to click on the links you keep posting because they rarely (actually haven't seen one) are related to the actual question at hand.... I also noticed I am poking more holes in your fact finding then your actual theorizing... Seems a bit ironic.

[1313Jr.1313]

didn't even remotely answer any question i have ever asked ever... also, those are from the same video...

[Mudofale]

didn't even remotely answer any question i have ever asked ever... also, those are from the same video...

That video had over 70 parts to it... each of them at least 10 minutes long. That's one long ass documentary... wonder who actually watched all 77 parts... Or bought the DvD for that matter.

[1313Jr.1313]

i've watched the full thing. "know your enemy" and mine's bad logic, so why wouldn't i?

[gemiwine]

Once again, your links didn't answer my questions... One was telling how they were connected and the other was talking about the difference between the two... Didn't bother going past the two minute mark because it would have just been a waste of time. If anything, you should have quoted 1313Jr. because they were more prevalent to him then me. Not sure if they actually answered his questions but they were related to a degree. What I don't understand about your responses is that all you do is spout off about what you think, then when someone questions what you believe you give a random link to something that merely mentions the topic and call it your proof. Why do you make a formal argument, present your case, then back it up with quotes and evidence from LINKS and CREDIBLE SOURCES. Instead of just giving links and not explaining what the link is about, who made the site, what the site has on it, or even going more in-depth about the link... Makes me not want to click on the links you keep posting because they rarely (actually haven't seen one) are related to the actual question at hand.... I also noticed I am poking more holes in your fact finding then your actual theorizing... Seems a bit ironic.Here is more proof by Alberto Rivera http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/04apr/catholicislam.html

[1313Jr.1313]

oh man... after reading that i almost forgot that there's such a thing as well founded conspiracy... rule#1: if you're planning on getting followers that are remotely intelligent, spell correctly. otherwise, people will question more than your ability to spell, and if questions will unravel what you are saying then it will not be a sweater of truth but a pile of lies.

[gemiwine]

oh man... after reading that i almost forgot that there's such a thing as well founded conspiracy... rule#1: if you're planning on getting followers that are remotely intelligent, spell correctly. otherwise, people will question more than your ability to spell, and if questions will unravel what you are saying then it will not be a sweater of truth but a pile of lies.Can you point out exactly what is mispelled?

[gemiwine]

Dear User,

Facebook pictures, blog posts, and even online petitions could be censored in under a new proposal from India. It's critical to stop this plan to censor the Internet now before it spreads to other countries.

According to the New York Times this week, India's Minister for Communication and Information Technology, Kapil Sibal, told Facebook, Google, and other Internet companies that India wants to pre-censor all content before it's posted online -- and if those companies won't do it, that government will do it itself.

Ritesh Singh, an engineering student from the India Institute of Technology in Kharagpur, has used Change.org to spark a nationwide outcry. The government is weighing their options, and Ritesh tells us that international support can tip the scales.

Click here to sign Ritesh's petition calling on Minister Kapil Sibal and India's government to not block freedom of speech and drop the idea of censoring Internet content.

Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other websites are increasingly the place people around the globe go to say what they're thinking. Under the plan floated by India's government, anything you post on those sites would be screened before it's shared with your friends, so the government can make sure nothing is objectionable.

Censoring what you post online isn't just an invasion of your privacy -- it's a violation of your freedom of speech.

While India's proposal may seem radical, the world's biggest democracy isn't alone in wanting to control the Internet. This year alone, countries from the United Kingdom to the United States, and from Egypt to Syria, have all proposed censoring online content. But India's idea is the most direct threat yet, and it needs to be stopped now.

Thousands of Indians have signed Ritesh's petition to stop Internet censorship, but they need you to join them. International pressure could be just what India needs to drop its radical proposal to decide what's posted online.

Join Ritesh's campaign to stop India -- and the world -- from censoring what people post on the Internet.

http://www.change.org/petitions/indi...ensor-facebook

Thanks for being a change-maker,

- Michael and the Change.org team

We should all take a few minutes and sign this petition. I and many others here do not want the government to act as a "middle man" for every post or whatever we make on the internet. It would affect this site, sites of other fetishes we're interested in, and other types of things that we do on the internet. I'm a user from the United States and there are bills in Congress that are trying to force a version of this to be passed. These people are petitioning to prevent that from going into law as well. Again, please take a few minutes and sign this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EsiT2YRwM8

[Mudofale]

i've watched the full thing. "know your enemy" and mine's bad logic, so why wouldn't i?

How long was it? At least 12 hours by my guess. Seems rather excessive for a documentary on such a broad topic, but I guess thats why the DvD is so long because of how broad of a topic it really is.

[Mudofale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EsiT2YRwM8

Oh look, were getting back on topic.

[1313Jr.1313]

how about observer, idiocy, kalashnikov... actually, prove to me that everything there is spelled correctly. oh snap, your own logic there...

and mud, it was stupid long. at a certain point you just start laughing so hard it's tough to actually keep paying attention.

[gemiwine]

how about observer, idiocy, kalashnikov... actually, prove to me that everything there is spelled correctly. oh snap, your own logic there...

and mud, it was stupid long. at a certain point you just start laughing so hard it's tough to actually keep paying attention.I didn't see any mispelling if your talking about the article by Alberto.

[Mudofale]

and mud, it was stupid long. at a certain point you just start laughing so hard it's tough to actually keep paying attention.
I can watch comedy sessions for hours on end, I can read for hours on end as well. But have someone talk to me about random stuff they're probably getting off google.... I can barely take my hour and a half long classes with the teachers who can't seem to gather their thoughts so they say um and uhhh every other word...

[1313Jr.1313]

I didn't see any mispelling if your talking about the article by Alberto.

he keeps spelling "fact" when he means to spell it as "false"

[Mudofale]

he keeps spelling "fact" when he means to spell it as "false"

Now 1313Jr. I don't think he understands your sarcasm like I do. Mostly because I use the same kind. If you don't point out the obvious, draw a circle around it, then type up a 15 page essay as to why this statement is interpreted this way, have at least 30 college professors proof read it count it as viable, he won't understand it.

[1313Jr.1313]

it's not sarcasm, lol. either the guy kept using the wrong word or is a liar.

also, he hasn't read a 2 paragraph post i've written... you think he'll read a 15 page essay?

[gemiwine]

Can anyone prove that the catholics didn't created the Islam religion? I'm just going to ignore the ranting.

[Mudofale]

Can anyone prove that the catholics didn't created the Islam religion? I'm just going to ignore the ranting.

Can you prove they did in a simple manner? Political debates are short and concise for a reason. The average person has an attention span of 7 and a half minutes. But you keep posting these 4 hour long you tube videos and calling them your proof, expecting people to watch the entire thing for some crazy ass reason... Thats like me proving 3+3= 6 by using complex algebra and physic's that involves the earths rotation and the mass of the moon just to prove that simple equation. Cut out all the fluff and give a simple answer with proof to back it. Taking someone else's work and calling it YOUR proof is called plagiarism, just say it in your own words then provide links IN that proof. Simple as that...

[1313Jr.1313]

ad ignorantium.

again, can you prove that catholics did create it using actual facts?

[gemiwine]

Can you prove they did in a simple manner? Political debates are short and concise for a reason. The average person has an attention span of 7 and a half minutes. But you keep posting these 4 hour long you tube videos and calling them your proof, expecting people to watch the entire thing for some crazy ass reason... Thats like me proving 3+3= 6 by using complex algebra and physic's that involves the earths rotation and the mass of the moon just to prove that simple equation. Cut out all the fluff and give a simple answer with proof to back it. Taking someone else's work and calling it YOUR proof is called plagiarism, just say it in your own words then provide links IN that proof. Simple as that...I already gave you proof from a former Jesuit who was in the catholic church. I only gave you a 10 minute clip explaining the connection between the two. I didnt tell you to watch all 77 videos was your chose. I gave you what you asked now its time for you to prove me wrong with your evidence.

[gemiwine]

ad ignorantium.

again, can you prove that catholics did create it using actual facts?Again can you prove the catholics didnt create it using your facts?

[1313Jr.1313]

Again can you prove the catholics didnt create it using your facts?

that is called ad ignorantium. the burden of proof does not lie with the man making no claims.

[gemiwine]

that is called ad ignorantium. the burden of proof does not lie with the man making no claims.

More proof using "actual facts" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKJSGA4fP3c

[Mudofale]

More proof using "actual facts" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKJSGA4fP3c

I already told you probably 3 times... Why don't you explain yourself for once... God.. It's like you make up all these theories and hypothesis in long post with no links. Then you randomly pop up links and say here is my proof... That is not how you win an argument or persuade anyone, that is how you make people lose interest. Simply make a statement, back it up with facts (your links) IN THE SAME POST, then we have something to work from. Right now your just giving random hour long documentaries from youtube and saying PROOF as if we saw the entire video... Why would I waste my time watching a video that for one most likely isn't even related to the topic, two I would have to watch the entire thing to decide wether or not I can count it as valid, and 3 I have no idea if the video even makes sense BECAUSE YOU WON'T EXPLAIN THE LINKS YOUR POSTING. On second thought, you probably haven't even looked at the links your posting, thats why your not explaining them. I'm probably right, and unless you can prove me wrong I am clearly correct. See what I did there? Two can play at the ignorant game, but we both lose because it's a hopeless game.

[1313Jr.1313]

More proof using "actual facts" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKJSGA4fP3c

so wait... you're saying that efficient architecture, (assumed) similarities in a VERY vague silhouette, and quotes that can be taken over a hundred different ways (he says that "your enemy" = "jesus" and that's what was intended in the original writings...) are supposed to be "actual facts" that prove your point?

fine, the sun is hotter than pluto. that is a fact. pluto is colder than the sun. that is a fact. ice is colder than warm milk. that is a fact. therefore, what you're saying is wrong. i used 3 INDISPUTABLE facts and tossed a conclusion out there the same way your evidence has to prove you wrong. you are wrong unless you can prove that the sun is not hotter than pluto, pluto is not colder than the sun, and ice is not colder than warm milk. have fun dealing with your own logic.

[gemiwine]

so wait... you're saying that efficient architecture, (assumed) similarities in a VERY vague silhouette, and quotes that can be taken over a hundred different ways (he says that "your enemy" = "jesus" and that's what was intended in the original writings...) are supposed to be "actual facts" that prove your point?

fine, the sun is hotter than pluto. that is a fact. pluto is colder than the sun. that is a fact. ice is colder than warm milk. that is a fact. therefore, what you're saying is wrong. i used 3 INDISPUTABLE facts and tossed a conclusion out there the same way your evidence has to prove you wrong. you are wrong unless you can prove that the sun is not hotter than pluto, pluto is not colder than the sun, and ice is not colder than warm milk. have fun dealing with your own logic. Why would I make something up that's been discovered by Alberto? Is Alberto lying about this & if he is can you help me by proving it? Its funny you call me dumb, stupid, etc yet you can't provide any real proof from your own research because your to busy trying to research me that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Stop focusing on me & prove the subject at hand otherwise you mudo, splat, & eff are just ranting diatribes. Leave Bertrand Russell out of it

[effingbillgates]

Good grief this is still going on. 1313Jr.1313 and Mudofale: you are either feeding a troll, or communicating with somebody who's far too braindead to take onboard what you're saying to him. If he's a troll you're only giving him what he wants by watching those moronic conspiracy videos for an hour or more. And if he really is as stupid as he's making out then it's pointless - I gave up pages ago, and look he hasn't made any progress since then.

[gemiwine]

Good grief this is still going on. 1313Jr.1313 and Mudofale: you are either feeding a troll, or communicating with somebody who's far too braindead to take onboard what you're saying to him. If he's a troll you're only giving him what he wants by watching those moronic conspiracy videos for an hour or more. And if he really is as stupid as he's making out then it's pointless - I gave up pages ago, and look he hasn't made any progress since then.Are you here to prove anythin with research or troll with rant as usual?

[effingbillgates]

gemiwine, having failed to answer the question I put to you several pages ago, you should know that you're not in a position to communicate with me in this thread.

I was recommending that two other good people on this forum stop wasting their time with you, and what you think of that is as irrelevant as everything else you're spouting, so give it up.

[gemiwine]

gemiwine, having failed to answer the question I put to you several pages ago, you should know that you're not in a position to communicate with me in this thread.

I was recommending that two other good people on this forum stop wasting their time with you, and what you think of that is as irrelevant as everything else you're spouting, so give it up.I'm tending to think its not about the subject anymore. Is it hard to prove me wrong without aspersions from you? Your question is like asking me to prove that oxygen & air is real but you cant visually see it. I cant make you visually see that the bible is true only give you facts of accurate occurences predicted that was mentioned before it happened.

[effingbillgates]

You think? Well, you're wrong. Let me leave this thread for good the way I left it before, where you'll see I said it was nothing personal, and my frustration was entirely to do with the fact that you have never provided a single jot of evidence to back up what you're saying, let alone any proof whatsoever. Asked to give your own evidence that the bible is truly the word of God you gave: absolutely nothing.

It's unbelievable that you think that you've provided anything but your own "rants", "opinions" and "emotions" from the start, hence people getting annoyed with you. The fact that you're using those words back at us shows that you're either trolling or just completely out of touch with reality*.

* After I posted this you edited your post so that it now says something completely different. Well you remember what you wrote and that's what matters. You know full well that you're not simply saying something like "air and oxygen are real". Saying that your book is the truth and that other books are not is something you need to back up with evidence, otherwise you are demanding that people accept your authority at face value. In the 21st century you do not have authority simply by telling people that your book is true and theirs are all wrong. People are more educated nowadays, and do not simply believe myths from centuries ago that have been changed by the hands of different people. The responsibility is on you to prove that your book is true, and to do that you need to prove that it is the word of God. Otherwise people will walk away from you.



From page 12:


I'm not going to go around in circles with you since you're not even grasping your responsibility here. I've had enough of this. I am sure you will keep encountering the same problems through your life if you don't approach debates differently, but you're no different from most Christians in this respect, so you might be perfectly happy with that situation.

I wish you the best of luck for the future, as I mean no personal hard feelings, but this is my last post in this thread.

Farewell.

[gemiwine]

You think? Well, you're wrong. Let me leave this thread for good the way I left it before, where you'll see I said it was nothing personal, and my frustration was entirely to do with the fact that you have never provided a single jot of evidence to back up what you're saying, let alone any proof whatsoever. Asked to give your own evidence that the bible is truly the word of God you gave: absolutely nothing.

It's unbelievable that you think that you've provided anything but your own "rants", "opinions" and "emotions" from the start, hence people getting annoyed with you. The fact that you're using those words back at us shows that you're either trolling or just completely out of touch with reality.

From page 12:



Farewell.The bible is truly the word of God because it exposes todays religion, society, government & their plan for a new world order to enslve the world. Now prove to me why the bible is not truly the word of God.

[effingbillgates]

The bible is truly the word of God because it exposes todays religion, society, government & their plan for a new world order to enslve the world.

No it does not. That is simply the nature of allegory or poetry, where you can find the nature of personal truths in everything you read - it doesn't make anything that resonates through time in a meaningful way "the word of God". There's as much truth in Rapunzel as there is in Samson and Delilah.

What you've said is like saying Nostradamus accurately predicted all sorts of things and must have been psychic, when actually he was being so vague that you can fit anything from the present day into his indeterminacy.

Thanks for trying, which is why I am granting you this reply, but what you gave was not evidence for me accepting the authority of your book compared to what I think and have read. What you have said does not prove the word of God in the slightest. Now I hope you understand that your "proof" has not been ignored or rejected; the situation is that you have not yet provided any proof. You're back to square one.


Don't forget: you saying "my book is the word of God and you are wrong for not believing me" is an exceptionally obnoxious way to relate to other people's world views. From that position you need to work very, very hard to get anybody on side who isn't extremely gullible or uneducated. You certainly can't brush this off with the reply above. You can retract that the bible is the word of God if you like, but I won't accept that your position has authority over all other narratives until your proof is rock solid.

[gemiwine]

No it does not. That is simply the nature of allegory or poetry, where you can find the nature of personal truths in everything you read - it doesn't make anything that resonates through time in a meaningful way "the word of God". There's as much truth in Rapunzel as there is in Samson and Delilah.

What you've said is like saying Nostradamus accurately predicted all sorts of things and must have been psychic, when actually he was being so vague that you can fit anything from the present day into his indeterminacy.

Thanks for trying, which is why I am granting you this reply, but what you gave was not evidence for me accepting the authority of your book compared to what I think and have read. What you have said does not prove the word of God in the slightest. Now I hope you understand that your "proof" has not been ignored or rejected; the situation is that you have not yet provided any proof. You're back to square one.


Don't forget: you saying "my book is the word of God and you are wrong for not believing me" is an exceptionally obnoxious way to relate to other people's world views. From that position you need to work very, very hard to get anybody on side who isn't extremely gullible or uneducated. You certainly can't brush this off with the reply above. You can retract that the bible is the word of God if you like, but I won't accept that your position has authority over all other narratives until your proof is rock solid.I like to see you point out some scriptures from your research proving how allegry the predictions are & how flawed they come out to be.

Nonstradamus is just a created counterfit of John in revelatons therefore can't be compared to the bible that's been around before him.

Once again putting words in my mouth that I never said. I never tryed to make you accept anyting but your trying to make me accept your belief system. I ask you just as you asked me for proof regardless of how you think I didn't give you evidence you should of countered with some of your own proves to me that you can't prove how wrong you think I am. If I'm wrong then your wrong as well because you fail to prove your right.

You only assume I'm uneducated because I read the bible & believe in it from multiple experience is straight ignorance. I gave you scriptures explaining a portion of current events taking place. Your reply is that its not evidence. Prove to me why the bible is NOT truly the word of God after al my attempts but if your so right then an educated person like you shouldn't hesitate with no problems to disaprove my blind belief so you can enlighten me with your own doctrines.

[effingbillgates]

I like to see you point out some scriptures from your research proving how allegry the predictions are & how flawed they come out to be.

What? What does "proving how allegry the predictions are" even mean? Do you know what allegories are?


Nonstradamus is just a created counterfit of John in revelatons therefore can't be compared to the bible that's been around before him.

Nothing. No evidence for Nostradamus being a "counterfeit". Coming later in a timeline doesn't make someone a counterfeit. I made the point I wanted to make about the nature of indeterminacy, and you've turned it into gibberish yet again. I don't know why I wasted my time.


Once again putting words in my mouth that I never said. I never tryed to make you accept anyting but your trying to make me accept your belief system. I ask you just as you asked me for proof regardless of how you think I didn't give you evidence you should of countered with some of your own proves to me that you can't prove how wrong you think I am. If I'm wrong then your wrong as well because you fail to prove your right.

You only assume I'm uneducated because I read the bible & believe in it from multiple experience is straight ignorance. I gave you scriptures explaining a portion of current events taking place. Your reply is that its not evidence. Prove to me why the bible is NOT truly the word of God after al my attempts but if your so right then an educated person like you shouldn't hesitate with no problems to disaprove my blind belief so you can enlighten me with your own doctrines.

Okay, I'm not getting sucked into this again; I hoped that last post would sink in somehow, but no, it hasn't.

You didn't say the exact words "my book is the word of God and you are wrong for not believing me" but I was paraphrasing the various sentiments you've expressed throughout this discussion (I thought this would be fairly obvious, actually). You insist (like most Christians) that your book is the word of God ("You must be stupid if you can't figure out the bible is Gods word" are your own gentle words), and you use this to assume you have some kind of authority that raises you above the processes of debating that everybody else has to go through.

This has been your whole stance in this discussion from the beginning. You post gibberish and then tell people they're wrong unless they can disprove the rantings that you received from somebody similar to you on the internet. These things do not constitute proof. And saying that some vague writings from years ago managed to remind you of present day events is not proof of anything, especially not that God was involved with writing them. Be open-minded enough (you like saying this to people who don't believe the bible) and you'll see that you can do this with countless other texts - this is what allegories do; it's not unique to the bible!

If you're going to say the bible is the word of God, and use this assumption to raise yourself above any number of philosophers (or whomever) that you turn your nose up at, then you need to provide proof that the bible is the word of God. This has to be the most straightforward point ever, but still you keep insisting that you have to be proven wrong first.

You have provided no proof, alright? And until you grasp this, and appreciate that the onus is on you to provide evidence for the authority you claim your book has, I do not need to enter a debate on your terms.



This is elementary stuff, and if you don't get it you're either wasting my time by trolling or so lacking in wits that you're not worth my time. That really is it from me until you realise your responsibility, as I'm not going to go around in circles with your madness.

[Mudofale]

Is it hard to prove me wrong without aspersions from you? Your question is like asking me to prove that oxygen & air is real but you cant visually see it. I cant make you visually see that the bible is true only give you facts of accurate occurences predicted that was mentioned before it happened.

If you fly into the 2nd most atmosphere (I think, channeling 5th grade science here) and took a jar that was a vacuum and filled it with air from our O zone (the area in the atmosphere made up of Oxygen molecules, impossible to breathe without your lungs collapsing. Now, take that to a lab, and lower the temperate and condense the jar until it forms a visible drop of frozen oxygen. There you have it, Oxygen really does exist WOW who knew making ice cubes or drinking water also proved that oxygen exist. Go get some table salt, boom, Sodium and Chlorine, oh wait THERES OXYGEN IN THERE TOO. Shall I go on or do you understand (to a 5th graders level) how molecules and atoms can be proven? Or do you want me to break it down to how you can distinguish them by the atom it's self, I can go all day if you have the brain capacity to actually understand it. Let me know, ill bust out my 7th grade chemistry book and quote it all day. (If I can find it somewhere on one of these book shelves)

[1313Jr.1313]

Why would I make something up that's been discovered by Alberto? Is Alberto lying about this & if he is can you help me by proving it? Its funny you call me dumb, stupid, etc yet you can't provide any real proof from your own research because your to busy trying to research me that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Stop focusing on me & prove the subject at hand otherwise you mudo, splat, & eff are just ranting diatribes. Leave Bertrand Russell out of it

i provided my facts. YOU now need to prove that the sun is not hotter than pluto, pluto is not colder than the sun, and ice is not colder than warm milk. you haven't disproved what i said therefore my conclusion that YOU ARE WRONG is still valid. stop focusing on me and prove that what i say is false, otherwise you are false.

and to effing, come on... you know how absurd this is getting. honestly though, how much can possibly go over somebody's head?

[gemiwine]

How do we know the bible is true? http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t003.html Preview link:
Fullfilled prophecies:
The remarkable evidence of fulfilled*prophecy is just one case in point. Hundreds of Bible prophecies have been fulfilled, specifically and meticulously, often long after the*prophetic writer had passed away. For example,*Daniel the prophet predicted in about 538 BC (Daniel 9:24-27) that*Christ
*would come as Israel's*promised*Savior *and Prince 483 years after the Persian emperor would give the Jews authority to rebuild*Jerusalem, which was then in ruins. This was clearly and definitely fulfilled, hundreds of years later. There are extensive*prophecies dealing with individual nations and cities and with the course of history in general, all of which have been literally fulfilled. More than 300*prophecies were fulfilled by Christ Himself at His first coming. Other prophecies deal with the spread of Christianity, as well as various false religions, and many other subjects. There is no other book, ancient or modern, like this. The vague, and usually erroneous, prophecies of people like Jeanne Dixon, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce, and others like them are not in the same category at all, and neither are other religious books such as the Koran, the Confucian Analects, and similar religious writings. Only the Bible manifests this remarkable prophetic evidence, and it does so on such a tremendous scale as to render completely absurd any explanation other than divine revelation.

Unique & Historical Accuracy: The*historical accuracy of the Scriptures is likewise in a class by itself, far superior to the written records of*Egypt,*Assyria, and other early nations.*Archeological confirmations of the Biblical record have been almost innumerable in the last century. Dr. Nelson Glueck, probably the greatest modern authority on Israeli archeology, has said:
""No archeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries.""

Scientific Accuracy: Another striking evidence of divine inspiration is found in the fact that many of the principles of modern science were recorded as facts of nature in the Bible long before scientist confirmed them experimentally. A sampling of these would include:

Roundness of the earth (Isaiah 40:22)

Almost infinite extent of the sidereal universe (Isaiah 55:9)

Law of conservation of mass and energy (II Peter 3:7)

Hydrologic cycle (Ecclesiastes 1:7)

Vast number of stars (Jeremiah 33:22)

Law of increasing entropy (Psalm 102:25-27)

Paramount importance of blood in life processes (Leviticus 17:11)

Atmospheric circulation (Ecclesiastes 1:6)

Gravitational field (Job 26:7) and many others.
These are not stated in the technical jargon of modern science, of course, but in terms of the basic world of man's everyday experience; nevertheless, they are completely in accord with the most modern scientific facts.

[effingbillgates]

Trousers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the clothing item. For the implementation of the TCG Software Stack, see Trusted Computing Group.
"Pants" redirects here. For styles of undergarments sometimes called "pants", see Underpants and Undergarment.

A pair of trousers
Trousers are an item of clothing worn on the lower part of the body from the waist to the ankles, covering both legs separately (rather than with cloth stretching across both as in skirts and dresses). The word trousers is used in the UK and Ireland, but some other English-speaking countries such as Canada, South Africa, and the United States can also refer to such items of clothing as pants. Additional synonyms include slacks, strides, kegs or kex, breeches (sometimes britches /ˈbrɪtʃɨz/), or breeks. Shorts are similar to trousers, but with legs that come down only to around the area of the knee, higher or lower than the knee depending on the style of the garment.

In most of the Western world, trousers have been worn since ancient times and throughout the Medieval period, becoming the most common form of lower body clothing for males in the modern period, although shorts are also widely worn, and kilts and other garments may be worn in various regions and cultures. Shorts are often preferred in hot weather or for some sports, and also often by children. Since the late 20th century, trousers have become prevalent for females as well. Trousers are worn at the hips or waist, and may be held up by their own fastenings, a belt, or suspenders (braces). Leggings are form-fitting trousers of a clingy material, often knitted cotton and lycra.

In North America pants is the general category term (though Ambrose Bierce found the word "vulgar exceedingly" and recommended trousers), whereas trousers (sometimes slacks in Australia, the United States and, due to a recent resurgence, the United Kingdom) refers, often more formally, to tailored garments with a waistband and (typically) belt-loops and a fly-front. For instance, informal elastic-waist knitted garments would be called pants, but not slacks.

North Americans call undergarments underwear, underpants, "long johns" or panties (the last are women's garments specifically) to distinguish them from other pants that are worn on the outside. The term drawers normally refers to undergarments, but in some dialects, may be found as a synonym for "breeches", that is, trousers. In these dialects, the term underdrawers is used for undergarments. In Australia, men's undergarments are called underwear, underpants, undies, under-dacks, dacks or jocks.

Most speakers in the United Kingdom use trousers (sometimes slacks) as the general category term; pants often refers to underwear and is rarely used interchangeably with trousers, in some Northern dialects. In some parts of Scotland, trousers are known as trews, from which the word Trousers itself comes. whilst in Scots, trousers are known as breeks. The singular form of the word is used in some compound words, such as trouser-leg, trouser-press and trouser-bottoms.
Various people in the fashion industry use the word pant instead of pants. This is nonstandard usage. The word "pants" is a plurale tantum, always in plural form—much like the words "scissors" and "tongs".

Medieval Europe
Trousers of various design were worn throughout the Middles Ages in Europe, especially by males. Loose fitting trousers were worn in Byzantium under long tunics, and were worn by many of the barbarian tribes specially Xiongnu Hun that migrated through Europe in the Early Middle Ages, as evidenced by both artistic sources and the such relics as the Fourth Century costumes recovered from the Thorsberg bog. Trousers in this period, generally called brais, varied in length and were often closed at the cuff or even have attached feet covering, although open legged pants were also seen.

By the Eighth Century there is evidence of the wearing in Europe of two layers of trousers, especially among upper class males. This under layer is today referred to by costume historians as “drawers,” although that usage did not emerge until the late 16th Century. Over the drawers were worn trousers of wool or linen, which in the 10th Century began to be referred to as breeches in many places. Tightness of fit and length of leg varied by period, class, and geography. (Open legged trousers can be seen on the Norman soldiers of the Bayeux Tapestry.)

Although Charlemagne (742–814) is recorded to have habitually worn his trousers, donning the Byzantine tunic only for ceremonial occasions, the influence of the Roman past and the example of Byzantium led to the increasing use of long tunics by men, hiding most of the trousers from view and eventually rendering it an undergarment for many. As undergarments, these trousers became briefer or longer as the length of the various medieval outer-garments changed and were met by, and usually attached to another garment variously called hose or stockings.

In the 14th Century it became common among the men of the noble and knightly classes to connect the hose directly to their pourpoints (the padded under jacket worn with armored breastplates that would later evolve into the doublet) rather than to their drawers. In the 15th Century, rising hemlines led to ever briefer drawers until they were dispensed with altogether by the most fashionable elites who joined their skin tight hose back into trousers. These trousers, which we would today call tights but which were still called hose or sometimes joined hose at the time, emerged late in the 15th Century and were conspicuous by their open crotch which was covered by an independently fastening front panel, the codpiece. The exposure of the hose to the waist was consistent with 15th Century trends which also brought pourpoint/doublet and the shirt, previous undergarments, into view, but the most revealing of these fashions were only ever adopted at court and not by the general population.
Men's clothes in Hungary in the 15th century consisted of a shirt and trousers as underwear, and a dolman worn over them, as well as a short fur-lined or sheepskin coat. Hungarians generally wore simple trousers, only their colour being unusual; the dolman covered the greater part of the trousers.

Modern Europe
Around the turn of the turn of the 16th century it became convention to separate hose into two pieces, one from the waist to the crotch which fastened around the top of the legs, called Trunk Hose, and the other running beneath it to the foot. The trunk hose soon reach down the thigh to fasten below the knee and were now usually called "breeches" to distinguish them from the lower leg coverings still called hose or, sometimes stockings. By the end of the 16th century, the codpiece had also been incorporated into breeches which featured a fly or fall front opening.

During the French Revolution, the male citizens of France adopted a working-class costume including ankle-length trousers, or pantaloons, (from a Commedia dell'Arte character named Pantalone)[30] in place of the aristocratic knee-breeches. The new garment of the revolutionaries differed from that of the ancien regime upper classes in three ways: It was loose where the style for breeches had most recently been form-fitting, it was ankle length where breeches had generally been knee-length for more than two centuries, and they were open at the bottom while breeches were fastened. This style was introduced to England in the early 19th century, possibly[original research?] by Beau Brummell, and by mid-century had supplanted breeches as fashionable street wear. At this point, even knee length pants adopted the open bottoms of trousers (See Shorts) and were worn by young boys, for sports, and in tropical climates. Breeches proper survived into the 20th century as Court Dress, and also in baggy mid-calf (or three-quarter length) version known as plus-fours or knickers worn for active sports and by young school-boys. Types of breeches are still worn today by baseball and American football players.

Sailors may have played a role in the worldwide dissemination of trousers as a fashion. In the 17th and 18th centuries, sailors wore baggy trousers known as galligaskins. Sailors also pioneered the wearing of jeans, trousers made of denim.[citation needed] These became more popular in the late 19th century in the American West because of their ruggedness and durability.

Fly
Main article: Fly (clothing)
A fly is a covering over an opening join concealing the mechanism, such as a zipper, velcro or buttons, used to join the opening. In trousers, this is most commonly an opening covering the groin, which makes the pants easier to put on or take off. The opening also allows men to urinate without lowering their pants.

Trousers have varied historically in whether or not they have a fly. Originally, hose did not cover the area between the legs. This was instead covered by a doublet or by a codpiece. When breeches were worn, during the Regency period for example, they were fall-fronted (or broad fall). Later, after trousers (pantaloons) were invented, the fly-front (split fall) emerged.

Trouser support
At present, most trousers are held up through the assistance of a belt which is passed through the belt loops on the waistband of the trousers. However, this was traditionally a style acceptable only for casual trousers and work trousers; suit trousers and formal trousers were suspended by the use of braces (suspenders in American English) attached to buttons located on the interior or exterior of the waistband. Today, this remains the preferred method of trouser support amongst adherents of classical British tailoring. Many men claim this method is more effective and more comfortable because it requires no cinching of the waist or periodic adjustment.

[1313Jr.1313]

is it sad that effing's post was more relevant to this than gemi's? i kind of think it is.

and gemi, you claim to be speaking fact but you have not disproved pluto being colder than the sun, the sun being hotter than pluto, or warm milk being warmer than ice.

[gemiwine]

is it sad that effing's post was more relevant to this than gemi's? i kind of think it is.

and gemi, you claim to be speaking fact but you have not disproved pluto being colder than the sun, the sun being hotter than pluto, or warm milk being warmer than ice.You haven't disaproved freemasonry not being a cult.

[gemiwine]

Credits to Ninja Iga Iga-Rya Museum

What are Ninjutsu & Ninja?

A person who uses Ninjutsu is a ninja. Ninjutsu is not a martial art. Ninjutsu is an independent art of warfare that developed mainly in the regions of Iga in Mie Prefecture, and Koka in Shiga Prefecture, Japan.*
So, do you know what kind of job ninja were doing?
Most people imagine that ninjas flew through the sky and disappeared, like Superman, waving ninja swords around, sneaking into the enemy ranks and assassinating generals... This is a mistaken image of the ninja introduced by movies and comic books.
The jobs of a ninja are divided into the two main categories of performing espionage and strategy. The methodology for performing espionage and strategy is Ninjutsu. Espionage is similar to the job of modern spies, wherein one carefully gathers intelligence about the enemy and analyzes its military strength.*
Strategic activities are skills that reduce the enemy’s military power. Ninja did not fight strong enemies by themselves. Ninja fought enemies after they had reduced the enemies’ military power. In times of peace, Ninjutsu was called an art of “entering from afar”, while in times of war, Ninjutsu was called an art of “entering from “nearby”, wherein ninja would constantly gather intelligence concerning the enemy, thinking of ways to beat the enemy, but not fighting the enemy directly. Ninja who thought rationally thought of war by intellect as great, and war by military strength (weapons) as foolish. Therefore, ninja who swing their ninja swords about can be called the lowest of the ninja.
The Ninjutsu of Iga-ryu and Koga-ryu stem from the same source, and are said to be the highest of the Ninjutsu.

Origins of Iga-ryu Ninjutsu & the history of Iga

From when did Ninja, who worked in the world of shadows, exist? Those roots are found in the “art of warfare” that began around 4000 B.C. in Indian culture, was passed to the Chinese mainland, and around the 6th century, passed through the Korean peninsula and crossed over to Japan.
In that period, a man name Otomono Sahito, who was used by ruler Shotoku Taishi, is said to be the root of the Ninja.
Have you ever heard something like this? "Shotoku Taishi could hear the words of ten people at once." Actually, there is also a theory that he used ninja to obtain intelligence beforehand. However, it is still amazing that Shotoku Taishi could remember all that intelligence...
The continental military strategy that was brought from China was developed in conjunction with shugendo, a practice involving mountain training, and adapted to Japan’s extremely hilly, narrow geography, becoming unique Japanese strategy. From this body of strategy emerged Ninjutsu. There were shugen studios in the Iga and Koka regions. Also, the houses of Todaiji and Kofukuji in the Iga region had most of the country’s warriors, and the lords of these houses adopted guerilla-like tactics, and kept the peace by containing one another. From this, Ninjutsu was developed.

Iga Ninja Republic "Iga Sokoku Ikki"

In Iga of the manorial system period, rulers and lords (guardians) did not last long. Because the people of Iga created living areas by manor in units of clans, formed an organized party of landowning farmers, and did not defer to the control of central regimes, an important 12-member council (representatives) was chosen from among the 50-60 members of the party in Iga, and they maintained safety in Iga by cooperation. This is called the “Iga Sokoku Ikki”.

The “Tensei Iga War” that crippled the ninja

In the 6th year of Tensei (1578), the ruler of Ise, Kitabatake Nobukatsu (the second son of Oda Nobunaga was adopted by Kitabatake and inherited the reins of the family) planned to attack Iga with Maruyama Castle as base, but retreated in the face of an attack from the troops of Iga. In the 7th year of Tensei (1579), Kitabatake Nobukatsu regrouped and again attacked Iga, but was defeated by the resistance of Iga’s troops. Upon hearing of this (the First Tensei Iga War), Oda Nobunaga was sorely angry, and decided to go to battle himself. In the 9th year of Tensei (1581), he led his 50,000 troops to Iga, burning all of its lands and repeatedly slaughtering adults and children alike. The Iga troops resisted to the end, but a compromise was made, and they submitted. This is the only war in which the Iga region was crippled by attack, and the 800-year manorial system of Iga region was finished, and the ninja were scattered among all lands thereafter (Second Tensei Iga War).

The three Iga Ninja Grandmasters (Hattori Hanzo, Momochi Tambanokami, Fujibayashi Nagatonokami)

The most famous group of Iga ninja is Hattori, Momochi, and Fujibayashi. Hattori Hanzo, Momochi Tambanokami, and Fujibayashi Nagatonokami are the three Iga Ninja Grandmasters.
Hattori controlled western Iga. There is a famous person who supported Tokugawa Ieyasu, named Hattori Hanzo Masanari. The Hanzo name was inherited.
Momochi controlled southern Iga. The Oe party had originally prospered in the south, and Momochi was one of the supporting families to it, but joining forces with Hattori and riding its wave of strength, Momochi was able to keep its position until the Edo period.
Fujibayashi controlled northeastern Iga. Fujibayashi Yasutake, the author of traditional Ninjutsu text “Mansen Shukai” was of this group.

The Three Great Books of Ninjutsu

Among existing traditional Ninjutsu books, “Mansen Shukai”, “Shoninki”, and “Shinobi Hiden” are called the Three Great Books of Ninjutsu.
Many traditional books were written in the Edo Period, and before that traditions were oral. It is assumed that they were written to pass on traditions and commit them to record. The are traditional texts in which the words “there is an oral tradition” stand out, and this may indicate that oral tradition was of greater importance.

Mansen Shukai, by Fujibayashi Yasutake, integrated Iga and Koka Ninjutsu, and a few types of copies are passed down in both Iga and Koka.
Shoninki, by Fujibayashi Masatake, is a traditional text of the Kishu-ryu.
Shinobi Hiden, by Hattori Hanzo is a traditional text of Iga and Koka.

How Ninja are Called

We now use the unified term “ninja”, but did you know that they were not called “ninja” in the past? Depending on the era and region, there were many different ways to call them. Let’s introduce some of those here.

The era

Asuka Era － 志能便（Shinobi）
Nara Era － 伺見（Ukami）
Sengoku Era － 間者（Kanja）・乱破（Rappa）
Edo Era － 隠密（Onmitsu）
Taisho Era － 忍術者（Ninjyutsusha）・忍者（Ninsya）

The region

Kyoto ・Nara － 水破（Suppa）・伺見（Ukami）・奪口（Dakkou）
Yamanashi － 透破（Suppa）・透波（Suppa）・三ツの者（Mitsu-no-mono）・出抜（Suppa）
Niigata・Toyama － 軒猿（Nokizaru）・間士（Kanshi）・聞者役（Kikimonoyaku）
Miyagi － 黒はばき（Kurohabaki）
Aomori － 早道の者（Hayamichi-no-mono）・陰術（Shinobi）
Kanagawa － 草（Kusa）・物見（Monomi）・乱破（Rappa）
Fukui － 隠忍術（Shinobi）

There are many other names in the different regions, but the above are the most representative.
There are various ways to call ninja, depending on their relation to being secretive, the jobs they performed, and the reading of the Chinese characters with which their names are written.

[effingbillgates]

What does a window cleaner do?

Window cleaner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the occupation. For the chemical, see hard surface cleaner.

A window cleaner (American English: window washer) is a person who maintains the cleanliness of windows, mirrors and other glass surfaces as a profession.

Window washers make about $25 dollars a day starting out and the maximum they can make is $400 in a day.[citation needed] Professional window cleaning requires mastery of special techniques using tools, most notably a squeegee. The use of proper window cleaning tools and utensils results in a better cleaning compared to home methods, such as rubbing windows with newspaper or a wet rag, using common household window cleaners such as Windex. However, some readily available household chemicals such as ammonia, vinegar (light acid), and dish detergent may be just as effective as commercial window cleaning products, which often contain these things as ingredients. Rubbing a pane of glass with a cloth can result in "stroke" marks that are visible in sunlight due to the residue left behind. Squeegees run the majority of the water off the window and leave a small amount behind which evaporates quickly. Using a squeegee for interior window cleaning may be undesirable for the excess water it gets on the sill if the mop was too wet. Licenses and a large amount of general liability insurance coverage with worker's compensation, and often an employer liability policy, is required for big window cleaning companies or those that do specialty work such as working at great heights with potentially dangerous equipment such as large scaffolds. Individuals who do basic residential or storefront window cleaning may or may not have insurance.

Window cleaners must form contracts with commercial property managers, and the selection of contractors is often carried out using a procurement system, especially for municipalities such as the city or county. This is a screening process for the organization to try to get the best service for the best price. Contractors on the list must bid on jobs independently from one another and avoid bid rigging. This becomes an extensive, complicated process, and sometimes leads to a neglect or infrequency of window cleaning and related exterior maintenance due to the high cost of window cleaning on large or tall buildings. Windows that have not been cleaned for years may not appear to be exceptionally dirty but they will be nearly permanently stained and may not come clean without harsh acids or grinding.

On tall buildings where any type of exterior descent system is used, most of the time spent by the window cleaners is sometimes the initial rigging, carrying stuff to the elevator, riding in the elevator, preparing for each descent, and navigating various other building obstacles, not actually cleaning the windows.

Depending on the type of window cleaning, different equipment is used. The most common tools are a microfiber cloth on a T handle and a squeegee. The microfiber is used to wash the window and the squeegee is used to run the water off. Household dish soap is often used for window cleaning, espeically interior, but it does not perform as well as other harsher chemicals such as ammonia or acidic glass cleaners. Dish soap is sometimes just used to soften the water before other chemicals are added. Ladders are also very common to reach windows more conveniently than using extension poles and to do skylights. Ground lifts are often used to do large, relatively low buildings which would require as many descents or more than a tall building if a rope or scaffold system was used, but to do very few windows with each descent.

For high rise window cleaning, on the exterior of tall buildings that are too high for ladders or ground lifts, or extension poles, some method of suspending from the roof must be used. But early skyscrapers did not have flat roofs so lugs or eye bolts were embedded in the building on each side of the windows and the early window cleaners wore a stout safety belt similar to those worn by electrical linemen. The windows in these types of buildings open and require the cleaner to cimb out of each one and attach to the hooks. The Empire State Building in New York City is an example of a building where this method has been used even into the 21st century. This method was extremely labour intensive and created problems as the windows became larger in width and height. But for future super high buildings with large, flat façades, it is the most convenient to use a large suspended scaffold, which are able to cover a large amount of the façade in one pass and which can hold several window cleaners. Scaffolds are also used nearly exclusively for more intensive work such as pressure washing, caulking, repairs, and other exterior building maintenance. Also very common is using a rope descent system and bosun's chair, a method of abseiling, which is more versatile but only suits one person each. Buckets are clipped onto the side of the chair and the user is seated in the chair and wears a full body harness attached to a separate line with an elastic lanyard and a device known as a rope grab should the user fall out of the chair or the primary line break. Much of this equipment was adopted from or is identical to equipment used in mountain climbing and rescue operations. Much of this equipment is not optimal though, for example, industrial rope is usually thicker and less elastic and the friction descent devices are often a different, more complex type than the simple rack and bar descender.

To attach to the roof, the window cleaner must use either a good attachment point such as a structural beam or hook, or use an independent, counterweighted roof rig or parapet clamp. Both of these are portable from building to building and are most suitable to rope descent cleaning. Permanent davits, capable of handling much more weight are often included on large buildings to suspend the much heavier window cleaning/exterior maintenance scaffolds from. Most buildings and rooftops were not designed with the window cleaner in mind, and it is not always possible to find suitable anchor points other than the parapet wall or a railing to attach the safety line to. In this case some sort of counterweight sturdy enough to be used as an anchor point, other than the roof rig or parapet clamp, must be used.

Risks include slipping on water or soap, and falling from heights. Unlike in Scotland, there is no government licensing in The United States, England or Wales - this means anyone can claim to be a window cleaner. Window cleaning is considered the most dangerous job in the UK. Several window cleaners die each year, and many are injured.

According to the IWCA training manual, the most dangerous tool in the industry is the ladder. This is because there is no protection from falling should the ladder slip or the user lose their balance. It is also because ladder use is so common in almost all forms of window cleaning.

Many window cleaning businesses are claiming that laws are about to come into force due to European Directive 2001/45/EC that will make ladders illegal for window cleaners.. However, the government denies this stipulation, as ladder use for window cleaning is "low risk and short duration":
To clarify the situation HSE is not attempting to ban ladders or stepladders, but ladders should not be the automatic first choice of access. They should only be used after a suitable assessment of the alternatives and the prevailing site conditions. The selection process for access equipment is coming under increasing scrutiny at HSE inspections. This guidance clarifies that for short duration work like window cleaning, provided a number of well-recognised precautions are taken, ladders will remain a common tool for many jobs.

During the September 11, 2001 attacks, window washer Jan Demczur used a squeegee to free himself and five others from an elevator shaft in the World Trade Center by hacking at drywall where the elevator had stopped in front of a false wall at the 50th floor.

Accidents involving falling or dropping things from great heights off the side of buildings are extremely rare due to the extensive safety measures taken and the following of strict procedures. However, when they do happen, they are often fatal. Those who use the bosun's chair method are always in a full body harness and have two separate ropes tied to separate anchor points, and all of their tools are usually tethered to the chair so even if dropped, they would not fall to the ground below. Large scaffolds tend to be more dangerous, as a trade-off to their convenience on large façades, as they are much heavier and have a tendency to swing and lose control in high winds. They have also been known to buckle and break in half, as they are often long and only supported from the ends by wire ropes, as well as relying on electric motors.

On December 7, 2007, two New York City window cleaners fell 47 stories when their scaffold gave way. Of the two brothers, 37 year old Alcides Moreno survived the incident, which made worldwide coverage. Moreno suffered serious injuries, but was able to talk within one day.

Another issue is how "green" window cleaning companies are seen to be. During the spring of 2006 Defra considered banning the non-essential use of water and extending their already tight restrictions to prevent the use of water-fed safer which reach up to 60 ft. Window cleaners could return to the bucket-and-mop method, because Health and Safety Working at Heights allows such for temporary access,. Many window cleaners and window cleaning companies argue that their usage of water is minimal in comparison with water usages of large industry and energy companies, and that their water usage accounts for a small percentage of overall water consumption in developed countries.

[gemiwine]

Credit to New World Encyclopedia

Age Of Enlightenment

The Age of Enlightenment, sometimes called the Age of Reason, refers to the time of the guiding intellectual movement, called The Enlightenment. It covers about a century and a half in Europe, beginning with the publication of Francis Bacon's "Novum Organum" (1620) and ending with*Immanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" (1781). From the perspective of socio-political phenomena, the period is considered to have begun with the close of the Thirty Years' War (1648) and ended with the French Revolution (1789). The Enlightenment advocated reason as a means to establishing an authoritative system of aesthetics, ethics, government, and even religion, which would allow human beings to obtain objective truth about the whole of reality. Emboldened by the revolution in physics commenced by Newtonian kinematics, Enlightenment thinkers argued that reason could free humankind from superstition and religious authoritarianism that had brought suffering and death to millions in religious wars. Also, the wide availability of knowledge was made possible through the production of encyclopedias, serving the Enlightenment cause of educating the human race.
The intellectual leaders of the Enlightenment regarded themselves as a courageous elite who would lead the world into progress from a long period of doubtful tradition and ecclesiastical tyranny, which had resulted in the bloody Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) and the*English Civil War (1642-1651). This dogmatism took three forms:

Protestant scholasticism by Lutheran and Calvinist divines,[1]

"Jesuit scholasticism" (sometimes called the "second scholasticism") by the Counter-Reformation, and the theory of the divine right of kings in the Church of England. (A later, religious reaction against the church's dogmatic outlook was the Pietist movement of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.)
Enlightenment thinkers reduced religion to those essentials which could only be "rationally" defended, i.e., certain basic moral principles and a few universally held beliefs about God. Aside from these universal principles and beliefs, religions in their particularity were largely banished from the public square. Taken to its logical extreme, the Enlightenment resulted in atheism. The age of Enlightenment is considered to have ended with the French Revolution, which had a violent aspect that discredited it in the eyes of many. Also, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who referred to "Sapere aude!" (Dare to know!) as the motto of the Enlightenment, ended up criticizing the Enlightenment confidence on the power of reason. Romanticism, with its emphasis upon imagination, spontaneity, and passion, emerged also as a reaction against the dry intellectualism of rationalists. Criticism of the Enlightenment has expressed itself in a variety of forms, such as religious conservatism, postmodernism, and feminism. The legacy of the Enlightenment has been of enormous consequence for the modern world. The general decline of the church, the growth of secular humanism and political and economic liberalism, the belief in progress, and the development of science are among its fruits. Its political thought developed by Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704), Voltaire (1694-1778) and Rousseau (1712-1788) created the modern world. It helped create the intellectual framework not only for the*American Revolutionary War and liberalism, democracy and capitalism but also the French Revolution, racism, nationalism, secularism, fascism and communism.

[effingbillgates]

Flying disc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Frisbee" redirects here. For the sport, see Ultimate (sport). For the amusement ride, see Frisbee (ride). For the type of UFO, see Flying saucer.

A flying disc is a disc-shaped glider that is generally plastic and roughly 20 to 25 cm (7.9 to 9.8 in) in diameter, with a lip. The shape of the disc, an airfoil in cross-section, allows it to fly by generating lift as it moves through the air while rotating.

The term frisbee, often used uncapitalized to generically describe all flying discs, has been a registered trademark of the Wham-O toy company. Though such use is not encouraged by the company, the common use of the name as a generic term has put the trademark in jeopardy.

Flying discs are thrown and caught for free-form recreation and as part of many different flying disc games. A wide range of flying disc variants are available commercially. Disc golf discs are usually smaller but denser and are tailored for particular flight profiles to increase/decrease stability and distance. Disc dog sports use relatively slow flying discs made of more pliable material to better resist a dog's bite and prevent injury to the dog.

Flying rings are also available, which typically fly significantly farther than any traditional flying disc. There are illuminated discs meant for night time play that use phosphorescent plastic, or battery powered light emitting diodes. There are also discs that whistle when they reach a certain velocity in flight.

History
The clay target used in trap shooting, almost identical to a flying disc in shape, was designed in the 19th century.
Walter Frederick Morrison discovered a market for the modern day flying disc in 1938 when he and his future wife Lucile were offered 25¢ for a cake pan that they were tossing back and forth to each other on the beach in Santa Monica, California. "That got the wheels turning, because you could buy a cake pan for 5 cents, and if people on the beach were willing to pay a quarter for it, well, there was a business", Morrison told The Virginian-Pilot in 2007.[cite this quote] They continued their business until World War II, when he served in the army Air Forces flying P-47s and spent time as a prisoner of war. Upon his return from the war, Morrison sketched a design for an aerodynamically-improved flying disc he dubbed the Whirlo-Way. By 1948 after design modifications and experimentation with several prototypes, Morrison and his business partner Warren Franscioni began producing the first plastic discs. They re-named their invention Flyin-Saucer in the wake of reported UFO sightings. "We worked fairs, demonstrating it", Morrison told the Virginian-Pilot. "That's where we learned we could sell these things, because people ate them up." Morrison and Franscioni ended their partnership in 1950. After further design refinements in 1955, Morrison began producing a new disc, which he called the Pluto Platter. He sold the rights to Wham-O on January 23, 1957 (his 37th birthday), and the following year, Morrison was awarded U.S. Design Patent D183,626 for his flying disc.

In June 1957, Wham-O co-founder Richard Knerr decided to stimulate sales by giving the discs the additional brand name "Frisbee" (pronounced "FRIZ'-bee") after learning that Connecticut college students were calling the Pluto Platter by that name, the term "Frisbee" coming from the name of the Bridgeport, CT pie manufacturer Frisbie Pie Company. "I thought the name was a horror...terrible", Morrison told The Press-Enterprise of Riverside[cite this quote] in 2007. In 1982 Morrison told Forbes magazine[cite this quote] he had received about $2 million in royalty payments and said "I wouldn't change the name of it for the world".

The man who was behind the Frisbee's phenomenal success however was "Steady" Ed Headrick, hired in 1964 as Wham-O's new General Manager and Vice President in charge of marketing. Headrick soon redesigned the Pluto Platter by reworking the rim thickness and top design, creating a more controllable disc that could be thrown accurately.

Sales soared for the toy, which was marketed as a new sport. In 1964, the first "Professional Model" went on sale. Headrick patented the new design as the Frisbee patent, highlighting the "Rings of Headrick" and marketed and pushed the Professional Model Frisbee and "Frisbee" as a sport. (U.S. Patent 3,359,678).

Headrick, commonly known as the "Father of Disc Sports", later founded "The International Frisbee Association (IFA)" and began establishing standards for various sports using the Frisbee such as Distance, Freestyle and Guts. Upon his death Headrick was cremated and, in accordance with his final requests, his ashes were molded into memorial Frisbees and given to family and close friends.[12]

Flying disc games
Main article: Flying disc games
Crosbee
Disc dog
Disc golf
Dodge disc
Double disc court
Durango boot
Flutterguts
Freestyle
Fricket (a.k.a. disc cricket, cups, Suzy sticks, crispy wickets)
Friskee
Goaltimate
Guts
Hot box
Kan-jam
Polish horseshoes
Schtick
Ultimate
In-or-Out box
In 2000 Walter Frederick Morrison publicly announced that he was not the inventor of the flying disc.

Physics
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012)
Main article: Physics of flying discs

Flying disc freestyle
Lift is generated in primarily the same way as a traditional asymmetric airfoil, that is, by accelerating upper airflow such that a pressure difference gives rise to a lifting force. Small ridges near the leading edge act as turbulators, reducing flow separation by forcing the airflow to become turbulent after it passes over the ridges.

The rotating flying disc has a vertical angular momentum vector, stabilizing its attitude gyroscopically. Depending on the cross-sectional shape of the airfoil the amount of lift generated by the front and back parts of the disc may be unequal. If the disc were not spinning this would tend to make it pitch. When the disc is spinning, however, such a torque would cause it to precess about the roll axis, causing its trajectory to curve to the left or the right. Most discs are designed to be aerodynamically stable so that this roll is self-correcting for a fairly broad range of velocities and rates of spin. Many disc golf discs, however, are intentionally designed to be unstable. Higher rates of spin lead to better stability and, for a given rate of spin, there is generally a range of velocities that are stable.

Even a slight deformation in a disc (called a "Taco," which in extreme cases looks like a taco shell) can cause adverse affects when throwing long range. It can be observed by holding the disc horizontally at eye level and looking at the rim while slowly rotating the disc.

[effingbillgates]

I trust everyone has benefited from my own careful research on trousers, window cleaners and frisbees?

Good.

[effingbillgates]

Oh, and gemiwine you might like to know See also

Tron and Tron: Legacy—science fiction films that make use of flying discs in their computerized combat.
Ken Westerfield a pioneering disc player


Alright, I hope that has helped. My own research there, not cut and pasted from anywhere else at all, and utterly relevant to the discussion as I'm sure you will definitely agree.

[1313Jr.1313]

is it sad that effing's post was more relevant to this than gemi's? i kind of think it is.

and gemi, you claim to be speaking fact but you have not disproved pluto being colder than the sun, the sun being hotter than pluto, or warm milk being warmer than ice.You haven't disaproved freemasonry not being a cult.

until you disprove what i said you had to, the conclusion that you have been completely wrong stands.

[gemiwine]

until you disprove what i said you had to, the conclusion that you have been completely wrong stands.Freemansonry is a cult based on their old history as the knights templars.

[1313Jr.1313]

Freemansonry is a cult based on their old history as the knights templars.

you have not disproved pluto being colder than the sun, the sun being hotter than pluto, or warm milk being warmer than ice. until you disprove what i said you had to, the conclusion that you have been completely wrong stands.