It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Sit tight, a bigger bang is coming"

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:07 AM
reply to post by Now_Then

Why do people like yourself have to have everything spelled out to them? Irony is a word that I think everyone understands the meaning of...

Do I have to emote "sarcasm on" and "sarcasm off" for people like yourself? You thought that I really believe we are all going to be killed by this? When I gave you so many subtle and not so subtle cues?

It was supposed to be funny.

From the link you so "kindly" referred me too.

The context I was using being number eight.

9 dictionary results for: Irony Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
i·ro·ny1 /ˈaɪrəni, ˈaɪər-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ahy-ruh-nee, ahy-er-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -nies.
1. the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning: the irony of her reply, “How nice!” when I said I had to work all weekend.
2. Literature.
a. a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated.
b. (esp. in contemporary writing) a manner of organizing a work so as to give full expression to contradictory or complementary impulses, attitudes, etc., esp. as a means of indicating detachment from a subject, theme, or emotion.
3. Socratic irony.
4. dramatic irony.
5. an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.
6. the incongruity of this.
7. an objectively sardonic style of speech or writing.
8. an objectively or humorously sardonic utterance, disposition, quality, etc.

The meaning of sardonic:


Scornfully or cynically mocking. See synonyms at sarcastic.

[French sardonique, from Greek sardonios, alteration of sardanios.]

Sorry for going off topic but that really tweaked me.

Please dont correct me again especially when I was trying to inject a little humor into the thread.


posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:12 AM

Originally posted by Now_Then

Or have I just been watching far too much star treck?

Since you incorrectly corrected me, I will correct you properly.

It is "Star Trek" as in to trek through the stars....

On topic: Will we ever stop trying to invent a bigger rock to smash things?

Edit to add more:

Originally posted by Now_Then
reply to post by TrentReznor

The linear smasher workes on a different principle
[edit on 15/9/2008 by Now_Then]

You even edited that one and still missed it.

Originally posted by Now_Then

Originally posted by WERE_ALL_GONA_DIE
Somone correct me if im wrong but isnt Anti-matter one of the most volitile things that we know about in the universe?

Yhea I think you will find it is THE most volatile thing in the universe
[edit on 15/9/2008 by Now_Then]

Sorry but you deserved it. Try not to be so rude next time, it sometimes bites you back.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by LoneGunMan]

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:28 AM
Information is useful at times...
Particle physics is a little obscure, but understandable.
There is little to worry about and much to learn from the experiments that will be carried by the CERN collider. Antimatter and black holes are some of the possible "side effects", yet so minuscule that they would be absolutely harmless. For example: a black hole with the mass of an orange, would have the mass = an orange! Not too scary...

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:12 AM

Originally posted by ben420
Oh great, more fodder for doomsday threads.

Im still waiting for the world to end.. Wasn't it supposed to end on the 10'th ? You know when they turned the thing on? Thats what all these ignorant people were screaming in terror about..


posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:46 AM
reply to post by wolfmanjack

Actually it was about the particles colliding. That has not happened yet

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:46 AM
My question is this, might the LHC or a future LHC debunk religion? If it shows us how it all began then the God as a creator theory/belief would surely be thrown out of the window? Mind you, I suppose there will be some sort of religious loophole to make it all fit, there always is.

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:49 AM
reply to post by Corum


Hypothetically at least, the LHC is only exploring the particle physics as it pertains to the Big Bang, and post.

The Big Bang however was not the beginning of creation, it was the start of the 'Known Universe'. Science acknowledges that 'something' existed prior to the Big Bang, they just can't measure anything pre-Big Bang.

At least that's how I understand it.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in