It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

I feel like I am getting closer to the truth

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by davesidious
 


ahaha.

alright. you know what?
your right
nothings going to happen in 2012

keep thinking that.




posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Dave157
 


Of course things will happen in 2012 - there are 366 days in that year, of course.

But until there is some evidence of what I should think will happen, to believe in anything is a shot in the dark. You might be convinced of something, but as there is no evidence, you don't know (in the actual sense of the word, not whatever perverse translation that is floating around in your head) what is going to happen.

So yes, I'll keep not thinking anything massively unique is going to happen in 2012, as it's ridiculous to do so without evidence. Delusional, even.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?

No proof has been presented.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?

No proof has been presented.


That doesn't mean that proof doesn't exist.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?

No proof has been presented.


That doesn't mean that proof doesn't exist.

No, but it also doesn't mean we should accept the hypothesis as fact just because evidence MAY exist.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?

No proof has been presented.


That doesn't mean that proof doesn't exist.

No, but it also doesn't mean we should accept the hypothesis as fact just because evidence MAY exist.


Maybe you should look into it.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


You can not investigate without facts. And no, there is no proof for any of those claims.


How do you know there is no proof?

No proof has been presented.


That doesn't mean that proof doesn't exist.

No, but it also doesn't mean we should accept the hypothesis as fact just because evidence MAY exist.


Maybe you should look into it.

I have, extensively, guess what?
I didn't find any.
Your turn?



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   
When someone uses the term 'thoroughly debunked', you can immediately dismiss the rest of anything they have to say. And, don't bother debating.

Sounds awfully familiar, In Nothing We Trust.


[edit on 1/18/2010 by SquirrelNutz]



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

When someone uses the term 'thoroughly debunked', you can immediately dismiss the rest of anything they have to say. And, don't bother debating.

I would assume you have evidence that hasn't been debunked?



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


Surely if you believe, you must have proof, otherwise you are being irrational.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 


If you regularly get into discussions with people pointing out the baseless nature of your assertions, then yes, I'd imagine stopping the conversation is the best you can possibly hope for.

Hint: Don't be irrational, and you can debate as long as you want, and there is nothing anyone can say that will make the debate pointless. If your argument is as shaky and ridiculous as every single 2012 believer's is, then no wonder you get so shut down



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 



Sure, but let's start with the basics - Conspiracy Theory 101: where do you stand on the subject of 9/11?

Answer that, just so I know whether or not I need to waste anymore keystrokes on you.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by hippomchippo
 



Sure, but let's start with the basics - Conspiracy Theory 101: where do you stand on the subject of 9/11?

Answer that, just so I know whether or not I need to waste anymore keystrokes on you.

That's completely irrelevant and only goes to show your ignorance.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious

People say that every year, and we're still here. It's pessimistic nonsense. Unless you have actual evidence, to believe something cataclysmic is going to happen in 2012 is pointless, as it's just as likely to happen tomorrow. So, either be scared of every day, or be scared of none of them. To not do one or the other is to be grossly hypocritical.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by davesidious]


I believe in the God of Bible and the prophecies that he gave us about these times that we are living in. They've been completely accurate to this point. That's all the evidence I need.

To me it's not a major issue of whether something major happens in 2012 or 3 months from now. It's not about specific dates.

I don't believe in extremes, such as the view that we have to either be scared every day or never scared at all. Every day is different and new. Some days are better than others. This has zero to do with being hypocritical.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by shasta9600]



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by davesidious
 



No one gets 'shot down' - certainly not me. Typically "thoroughly debunked" is their last ditch effort.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... it's real simple - if you're SO certain (either of you) that what you say is true (as I am), then put your money where your mouth is. (head over to the 2012 Bets thread)



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by shasta9600

Originally posted by davesidious

People say that every year, and we're still here. It's pessimistic nonsense. Unless you have actual evidence, to believe something cataclysmic is going to happen in 2012 is pointless, as it's just as likely to happen tomorrow. So, either be scared of every day, or be scared of none of them. To not do one or the other is to be grossly hypocritical.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by davesidious]


I believe in the God of Bible and the prophecies that he gave us about these times that we are living in. That's all the evidence I need.

To me it's not a major issue of whether something major happens in 2012 or 3 months from now. It's not about specific dates.

I don't believe in extremes, such as the view that we have to either be scared every day or never scared at all. Every day is different and new. Some days are better than others. This has zero to do with being hypocritical.

The problem with the biblical prophecies is that it could pretty much refer to any point in time in the past 100-200 years, although it is fairly alarming how fast the other prophecies are coming true.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by davesidious
 



No one gets 'shot down' - certainly not me. Typically "thoroughly debunked" is their last ditch effort.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... it's real simple - if you're SO certain (either of you) that what you say is true (as I am), then put your money where your mouth is. (head over to the 2012 Bets thread)

Or you could show me your supposed evidence...



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 


As I've already pointed out, your terms are so vague, it's impossible for anyone to take you up. Your hypotheses is untestable and unfalsifiable. In short, it's unscientific (big shock).

You are funny. Sad, but funny.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by hippomchippo
 



Sure, but let's start with the basics - Conspiracy Theory 101: where do you stand on the subject of 9/11?

Answer that, just so I know whether or not I need to waste anymore keystrokes on you.

That's completely irrelevant and only goes to show your ignorance.


Actually, it's completely relevant, for 2 reasons:

1) it is the benchmark for which I will gauge your position on other conspiracy theories - why? I believe it is the easiest one to 'prove' one way or the other.

2) when you understand the over all significance/importance of that event, you are ready to understand everything else going on around you (the necessity of black ops and government coverups).



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by shasta9600

Originally posted by davesidious

People say that every year, and we're still here. It's pessimistic nonsense. Unless you have actual evidence, to believe something cataclysmic is going to happen in 2012 is pointless, as it's just as likely to happen tomorrow. So, either be scared of every day, or be scared of none of them. To not do one or the other is to be grossly hypocritical.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by davesidious]


I believe in the God of Bible and the prophecies that he gave us about these times that we are living in. That's all the evidence I need.

To me it's not a major issue of whether something major happens in 2012 or 3 months from now. It's not about specific dates.

I don't believe in extremes, such as the view that we have to either be scared every day or never scared at all. Every day is different and new. Some days are better than others. This has zero to do with being hypocritical.

The problem with the biblical prophecies is that it could pretty much refer to any point in time in the past 100-200 years, although it is fairly alarming how fast the other prophecies are coming true.


Why is it alarming that the Bible has prophecies that refer to things that happened a 90 years ago or even 1000 years ago?
This should only confirm it's accuracy.

There's been no other time in history where all the signs and symbology have happened together like they currently are. If someone doesn't believe that after you show and explain the scriptures, then there's nothing else you can do. They're simply an unbeliever among many hundreds of millions of others.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by shasta9600]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join