Accept it!

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

It generally means that the topic has already been worn out...

If we continue thinking about it, can a topic ever really be worn out?

Originally posted by MeesterB
reply to post by PurpleChiten

 

I had to use an example that most everyone would understand. The two cases don't seem similar, but many perpetual motion threads are woefully ignorant of how gravity works, so they aren't so different.

Good answer, I can accept that

Yes you should accept what is the proven standards. The world is flat. The Earth is the center of the universe. Life must have sun light to survive. ( End sarcasm )

Can you imagine where we would be without people questioning the world we live in. I saw a show once that put history to a clock and we have been in existence for about two seconds if the life of the Earth was a 24 hour day. We have no true idea about the world around us. There are so many things that are beyond our comprehension at this time. We must strive to always futher our understanding of every thing around us.

Think of someone thats 100 years old. What have they seen. Horses to space shuttles. Telegraphs to cell phones. There is more computing power in your cell phone than went to the moon. Focused properly, Where could we be in another 100 years.

Good post. Didn't read all the comments so forgive me if I am restating.

Everything from Illuminati, the 13, Freemasonry, ETs, the world exploding with a spectacular amount of natural disasters, or just starting over with a celestial New Age of Enlightenment; it really doesn't matter how much we speculate and study these things. Answers are merely nothing more than undiscovered questions.

I agree whole-heartedly that we should question ourselves and everything around us, otherwise how can we be sure we know what we 'know'?

But, that being said, we only get one crack at this life thing (I think), and i've concluded that life is too short to not enjoy most things in it. I want answers, but I want to be happy. Deny Ignorance, but don't sacrifice happiness.

Eat barbecue and drink a little, vote to legalize mari-jane, relax and laugh with friends at these people that try so hard to control everything, because in the end, the outcome is undeniably inevitable. We all die (I think).

Originally posted by NightFlight
[...]
I guess what I am saying is: type your posts as if they are going to be read by fourth graders (they probably are) and be ready and willing to back up your hypothesis and explain your posts without getting uncomfortable about it.

I refuse to do that. If you are paying attention, eighth grade English should be sufficient. If someone genuinely can't read, interest will compel them to learn. Nothing can force someone to have interest. Without interest, or at least curiosity, your message (any message) will never become more than a footnote in the mind of the reader. So don't sweat to conform your writing to that lowest common denominator. They don't deserve the effort.

Then, do not get angry about secondary or tertiary explanations because the recipient may truly not understand what you have written even after he/she has called you a douche bag and questioned which canine was one of your parents.

The first half of that sentence I agree with. The second, I'm more inclined to ignore someone after they call me a douchebag. They have opted-out of my information stream.

reply to post by seamus


Huzzah. The way I write is the way I speak. I frequently use large words and pull out phrases that went out of use decades ago. Sue me. I won't reduce myself to low-grade English just to make it easier... Because then it would stop sounding like me.

Similarly huzzah on the douchebag comment. No one is forcing people to stick around and comment, and if someone calls me a douchebag, that can effectively end their audience. I'll pay attention to people who return that respect.

I must say... I'm liking this topic.

Originally posted by seamus
So don't sweat to conform your writing to that lowest common denominator. They don't deserve the effort.

Thats a little unfair!!!

Not all of us are word smiths, I for one struggle with the spoken/written langauge, but it does not mean I'm not worth the effort. I can design digital circuits, program in several languages, repair my own tv, rebuild car engines etc etc, can you?

Also, I dont see much difference between calling someone names and comments like your own.

The only things we know for sure are that there is only one God, the Christian God, and that the terrorists caught the USA off guard 09/11/01. Anyone who says otherwise is a terrorist.

Originally posted by gentledissident
The only things we know for sure are that there is only one God, the Christian God, and that the terrorists caught the USA off guard 09/11/01. Anyone who says otherwise is a terrorist.

The Christian God and the Islamic God and the Jewish God are one and the same. They only disagree on Jesus Christ, but they all worship the same God as far as the "Creator" goes.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by gentledissident
The only things we know for sure are that there is only one God, the Christian God, and that the terrorists caught the USA off guard 09/11/01. Anyone who says otherwise is a terrorist.

The Christian God and the Islamic God and the Jewish God are one and the same. They only disagree on Jesus Christ, but they all worship the same God as far as the "Creator" goes.

Ah, you must be a communist.

Seriously, I always expect the unexpected. However, religion isn't quantum physics. It's easy to see its origins and the reasons it's perpetuated. I'm open to the idea of an entity that seeded The Earth. For now, I'm going with abiogenesis being a property of the universes.

The problems I see with an entity creating our universe is that either something had to create that entity, and there are turtles all the way down, or that entity is eternal or sprung from abiogenesis or from nothing. Abiogenesis requires something, so there was already a "universe". Something from nothing is a stretch, but why would there 1st be life and not inanimate when life appears to evolve from the inanimate? Where did the entity get the inanimate? Is it more something from nothing? I'm going with multiple universes which have life spans, but have existed for eternity. I assume they are evolving as well.

If I am shown something different to my comfortable constructs, I will happily welcome the new knowledge. However, I can say with 100% certainty, that religion is a completely man made device.

Originally posted by gentledissident

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by gentledissident
The only things we know for sure are that there is only one God, the Christian God, and that the terrorists caught the USA off guard 09/11/01. Anyone who says otherwise is a terrorist.

The Christian God and the Islamic God and the Jewish God are one and the same. They only disagree on Jesus Christ, but they all worship the same God as far as the "Creator" goes.

Ah, you must be a communist.

nah, jest yer average purple chiten

physical law

Originally posted by terry456
physical law

Blue Popcorn
ok, your turn