Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
Originally posted by outerlimits
Well I have to say, you make some very valid points! if you can't talk about conspiracy stuff on a conspiracy site, it only leaves the Daily mirror! hahahhaahah
I agree that a conspiracy site is a place where conspiracies are talked about. I don't necessarily believe many of these conspiracies, but even if I think a conspiracy is most likely not happening, I can respect the idea that it is possible.
I have no problem with Human Alien posting his stuff, but then nobody should see a problem with me politely debating against some of his conspiracies. This is not only a conspiracy forum, it's also a discussion forum.
Not every post in a thread needs to be "I completely agree with you, OP"...
...ALTHOUGH, there is a big difference between politely criticizing a conspiracy theory and impolitely criticizing the person proposing that theory.
edit on 2/26/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)
The history of democracy -- the history of empowering people by giving them a say in their political entities—traces back to Athens to its re-emergence and rise from the 17th century to the present day. According to one definition, democracy is a political system in which all the members of the society have an equal share of formal political power. In modern representative democracy, this formal equality is embodied primarily in the right to vote.
Lynching is an extrajudicial execution carried out by a mob, often by hanging, but also by burning at the stake or shooting, in order to punish an alleged transgressor, or to intimidate, control, or otherwise manipulate a population of people, however large or small. It is related to other means of social control that arise in communities, such as charivari, riding the rail, and tarring and feathering. Lynchings were more frequent in times of social and economic tension, and often were means by the politically dominant population to oppress social challengers
Free will is the putative ability of agents to make choices free from certain kinds of constraints. Historically, the constraint of dominant concern has been the metaphysical constraint of determinism. The opposing positions within that debate are metaphysical libertarianism, the claim that determinism is false and thus that free will exists (or is at least possible); and hard determinism, the claim that determinism is true and thus that free will does not exist. Both of these positions, which agree that causal determination is the relevant factor in the question of free will, are classed as incompatibilists. Those who deny that determinism is relevant are classified as compatibilists, and offer various alternative explanations of what constraints are relevant, such as physical constraints (e.g. chains or imprisonment), social constraints (e.g. threat of punishment or censure), or psychological constraints (e.g. compulsions or phobias).
Since then, though, I have pondered that conversation. I have realized that this uneducated man had posed an important historical and theological question. Stoning, after all, was the normal Jewish method of execution. Shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion a lynch mob stoned Stephen to death - the first of Jesus’ followers to be martyred (Acts 7:58-60). But in the case of Jesus’ death stoning was not used - even though two earlier attempts had been made to stone him (John 8:59, 10:31-33). Why did it happen this way? Why a cross, not a bag of stones?
A man saw the reflection of the moon in a small pond. He began to throw rocks in the pond, and he smiled at how the image of the moon rippled and distorted and even winked out. A martial arts sensei from Monkeyland walked by and saw what the man was doing, and said, "Look up." Stone in hand, the man looked upwards. The grandeur of Earth's celestial sister washed over him, and his eyes opened. Shocked by the revelation of what he saw, he dropped the pebble and stared at the heavens. Many of us traverse through life, throwing stones at what we see. Maybe the pebble is nothing more than a harsh word or an untimely rebuke. Maybe it is just a lack of kindness and consideration in a word that was blurted a bit too fast. The result of our thoughtless speech may stir up emotions. Suddenly we have caused ripples of unhappiness, and our friendship with our fellow man is distorted. Perhaps friendship even winks out for a second. How do you take back the pebble? How do you undo the ripples that confound and obfuscate our perception of our fellow man? How do you make the waters return to the stillness that allows for an accurate reflection of life, and of our fellow man? And, how do you know how to look upward, as opposed to being entranced by only the reverse image of the moon? Reverse image? You didn't know? Read more at www.articlealley.com...
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I call Nibiru spinning Velikovsky into offshoot profits.
Spinning the comet into a planet
Some people can't do the research so they do the takeoffs.
Serious research is foiled as usual by Illuminati generated by lines of fantasy.
Isn't 'Nibiru' supposed to be this made up planet by a bunch of new-age-Annunaki-UFO believing kooks?