Please report back when they turn off the heater and air conditioner in that court room to do their part. ................ |
|
|
|
Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math. False association fallacy. That they were Muslim did not lend anything to mathematical or scientific advancement. Application of logic and the scientific method did that. Being Muslim is what they did when they weren't using logic or the scientific method. Theism isn't knowledge. Alan Turing was a math whiz who pretty much single handedly won World War II, by leading the team that broke the crypto codes of the Germans and the Japanese. He largely originated the "turing machine" concept, eg the programmable computer as we know it. Turing was homosexual, and didn't hide it. Maybe people of that era didn't like it - maybe they put up with it until he'd completed his work. Those things can be debated. What is not debatable is that in a Muslim society, he would not have been allowed to do his creative work and would likely have been killed. If Britain had been Muslim, the Germans would have won the war. This is not a "hate Islam" argument but a refutation of your assertion of Great Math and Great Science Advances in Islam. To have these great advances requires tolerance and appreciation for a great many odd types of people (which math wizards are often pretty odd). It requires the 50% of humans known as "women" to be allowed and encouraged to go into science and math. If a culture does not, then it will be retarded. If not for Turing (unless of course his ideas were discovered later by someone else) we would not be conversing on these "computers". There would be no "bitcointalk.org" because there would be no bitcoin because of a lack of crypto in electronic usages. So, Greg. You want to stand by your comments of your post of 6:38? I am curious. |
|
|
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy  If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. |
|
|
|
In 1898, delegates from across the globe gathered in New York City for the world’s first international urban planning conference. One topic totally dominated the discussion. Horse poop. In fact this was deemed such a huge and insurmountable problem with no practical solution in sight that this conference broke up in desperation after three days instead of the scheduled ten. Twenty years later the city’s last horse-drawn streetcar made its final run.
No shit? |
|
|
|
Well, in the late 1800s horse shit was a far more tangible crisis than nowadays when it mostly comes to mind regarding utterances of politicians and prelates and their minions.
In 1894, the Times of London estimated that by 1950 every street in the city would be buried nine feet deep in
horse manure. One New York prognosticator of the 1890s concluded that by 1930 the horse droppings would rise to Manhattan’s third-story windows. At the time the ballooning horse fleet dropped like 5000 tons of manure per day so those concerns seemed quite legitimate.
That's some pretty good shit. |
|
|
|
Fuck organized religion.
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. I would appreciate if you avoid using abusive language irrespective of any religion. Hmm....You might appreciate that, but it aint' gonna happen. Not on an unmoderated Internet forum. Also keep in mind that some people may have very, very good reasons to insult organized religion. Further, "religion" is much, much more than... an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. |
|
|
|
The media and a group of people really think that a flight attendant wanting to open a diet coke for a Muslim woman is already a hate crime
She is really making an issue about the flight attendant giving an unopened can to another passenger. Discrimination based on religion, according to the Muslim woman. No, i plainly disagree. SHE REFUSED her diet coke, claiming that she could use the pin to attack others. She was just an average lady travelling on board. .... Well, it does not matter if you disagree. This wasn't an "average lady".... |
|
|
|
You are making such a barrage of assumptions, I'm not sure where you'd want me to start... No, it's not secret, nor is it a high explosive; the thermite would've been used to cut the core columns, and would explain the orange liquid pouring out and the pools of molten steel and high temperatures days/weeks later. Nanothermite does not exclude the use of high explosives; it's just that the evidence of high explosives is limited to video clips of explosion-type sounds.
How about you "please try to explain this 911 ["official"] conspiracy thing in a way that simply makes sense"?
Perhaps more relevantly, though, the real question here would be: why would you believe anything these people (politicans and the media's "news reports" about their actions) say about any subject whatsoever? What is it that makes you believe that they are benevolent "leaders" guiding you/us to a reasonable future?
...
Please look at what I bolded. I didn't say anything like that. Ever. What I did is simply note that the magical mystery "nanothermite" does not even make sense in this context. It does NOT cement a good conspiracy theory. That was the reason for what I said. It's very, very simple. I am saying "This conspiracy theory makes NO SENSE! Please show me one that does, at least in part." Nothing complicated. There isn't anything complicated about explaining pools of molten metal days later. There isn't anything complicated about "orange liquid," either. You can't blow off valid criticism of half bunked theories by snapping to a decision that the skeptic of the theory is a gullible fool who bought into the government story - that's called not addressing the point raised. |
|
|
|
Obama Admin Warns 57,000 People Will Die Unless We Enact His Climate Change Rules…
A new report from the Obama administration warns of rising death counts and other disastrous consequences from inaction on climate change.
When compared with a “future with unchecked climate change,” taking action to curb manmade global warming would avoid nearly 13,000 deaths by 2050, and 57,000 deaths by 2100 from poor air quality.....
Let me know how many predictions from 1930 about 2015 were valid. |
|
|
|
Religion doesn't hate people. Religion doesn't kill people. Humans do. Humans hate, they kill. They want power and they have greed, they crave control and they enjoy supremacy. Its not their fault as it was always conditioned into their god damn mind. All the kings, their lifestyle, dictatorship, it all was glorified and everybody wishes they'd be king... Boofuckinghoo. And Islam doesn't hate people, the couple of faggots who kill on the name of religion do. Educate yourself.
You educate yourself. Any group of teachings can affect emotion and thought, that is their purpose. People read stories and for a time, feel happy or sad or whatever. Similarly, written work certainly influences behavior and hate. Trying to play word games like "religion doesn't hate people" will get nowhere. You also error in your logic in saying "Not A but B." Both A and B exist independently, jointly and may feed on each other, or on unrelated issues. There is no way to say that "religion" does not foment hate, as a general premise. Some religions certainly do. Some do less, some more. |
|
|
|
if mars is real and human could live in mars, and if its better than living in this earth i bet that the only human could live there must reach,have power (goverment,military,etc) and famous so what about poor people? If people were to successfully populate Mars, probably it will be a Mars Vs Earth could lead to a planetary war. Because life on Mars would be a life of extreme, unimaginable poverty. Think in terms of trucking a couple thousand cubic meters of rock and dirt and sand 200 miles inland at the South Pole, giving a couple people about 2000 lb of supplies and a small habitat, and telling them that's where they will live out their lives. Anything they have to have, they must make from that raw material. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I bet a panel of geophysicists wouldn't want to hear from someone claiming the earth's core is made of cheese, either.
You know, people being dismissive of your opinions and denying you the right to speak at conferences, isn't necessarily evidence of a goddamn conspiracy. You have to consider the idea that maybe you're just plain wrong and they already know it and they don't want to waste any more of their valuable time on you.
Actually, if you know enough about the scientific findings and have thought them over, you do in fact know that all the current schemes for carbon reduction are FAILS. You know that many of them are close to being outright frauds, and others are well into the scam category. The discussion of such things should never be suppressed. The ugly head of a socialist power grab, rising once again. Climate change is the new socialism. I don't know if climate change is the new socialism. It is something new. Proof is now the Vatican is in. It is about control as none of what is being pushed to "save the planet" is about planet saving. It's a socialism that goes beyond nationalism, the new trendy. Just like Islam disregards national boundaries for it's own motives. But it can affect action and decision within a nation by bringing large forces to bear. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I bet a panel of geophysicists wouldn't want to hear from someone claiming the earth's core is made of cheese, either.
You know, people being dismissive of your opinions and denying you the right to speak at conferences, isn't necessarily evidence of a goddamn conspiracy. You have to consider the idea that maybe you're just plain wrong and they already know it and they don't want to waste any more of their valuable time on you.
Actually, if you know enough about the scientific findings and have thought them over, you do in fact know that all the current schemes for carbon reduction are FAILS. You know that many of them are close to being outright frauds, and others are well into the scam category. The discussion of such things should never be suppressed. |
|
|
|
Yup, I think someone already in the forum shown that this project was indeed a scam but i don't remember who it was but just googling it the Mars One project there are so many valid scam accusations about it. Yes, it is a scam. We do not have the technology to create a self supporting biosphere system on Mars. Neither to jump start any industrial or maintenance of Earth built equipment. Think in terms of how to make a fabric, a brick, a metal rod, basic stuff...i agree completely if we cannot even get the basic necessities how is the settlement suppose to be successful its not surprising though that a scam like these gets attention because who wouldn't want to go live on mars It wouldn't surprise me one bit if someone or some group took this challenge on, and flat out announced their goal was to put people on the Red Planet. They could then announce progress on the various necessary tasks and ISRU (in situ resource utilization). If people funded that, it is not impossible that one, two or three decades later the answer to the questions of necessities is "Yes, yes and yes." At such a point in time, then they'd say - "Now all we need is rockets." That's NOT the difficult part of the equation. |
|
|
|
Yup, I think someone already in the forum shown that this project was indeed a scam but i don't remember who it was but just googling it the Mars One project there are so many valid scam accusations about it. Yes, it is a scam. We do not have the technology to create a self supporting biosphere system on Mars. Neither to jump start any industrial or maintenance of Earth built equipment. Think in terms of how to make a fabric, a brick, a metal rod, basic stuff... |
|
|
|
Another false flag. We don't know about the true identity of the attacker. And from the slogans which he shouted before the attack, I believe that he is also from an Islamic background. And from the article, it is clear that the perpetrator suffered from acute schizophrenia. So it seems that the attack resulted from mental illness, rather than Islamophobia. I'm sorry but what you are stating here is wrong, As a French and since this case was big, it was impossible to miss any information about it, it was clearly an islamophobic attack. Also According to officiel and several organisation (in France), Islamophobia cases has skyrocketed after the Terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo I can list some if you want (there was an increase in antisemite act last year as well but that's another story). The other which I mentioned before is what you are exactly stating above ie Every attack done on a muslim is related to mental issues, but when it's a muslim doing them it's automatically terrorism which stupid. you don't believe that every cases done against any muslim is related to mental issue and excusable and statically it's impossible. I can fix this problem for you. Belief in Islam is a mental illness. (LOL...) if only the solution was as simple as that .... Joking aside, though.... It should be of importance to look at cause and effect. Let's parse it like this. Muslims commit atrocities --> various people kill Muslims No, wait. We can do better than that. Someone/group draws cartoons of Mohammed --> Muslim group commits atrocities --> various people kill Muslims --> in reaction to the absurdity of those killings, a lady decides to have a draw Mohammed cartoon contest --> Muslim wanna be commandos try to kill her Looks like one Muslim terrorist goal is to do things bad enough that they will engender a response, so that the cycles of violence will definitely continue. Well, the history of use of those tactics pretty much defined Arafat's entire career. Create media events about "the evil Jews" but always leave out the historical chain of events and the atrocities that engendered the response. So there's nothing new in this, and it's not limited to lone wolf terrorists. Now, back to the subject of "Islamophobia." As post #1 used the phrase, it was a hijacked term used as an intimidating word, one to shut people up who said anything against Islam. You wouldn't thing there actually might be some things to be said against islam, would you? Of course there are some "Muslim" terrorist that want to use the situation to their advantage like you've mentioned, but that's only one side of the story, the other way around is true, there are people that initiate this kind of situation to their own advantages from politics to the weapon lobbies are just some random sect... As for the Islamophobia term, no this is wrong, You can say whatever you want about Islam I think no muslim will mind you saying you disagree, just keep it civil because people will get offended if you insult and mock them especially when it comes to their strongest believes or things they like being it muslims or not. I've provided example of Islamophic acts (recognised officially as such) being it on scale or just individual act. Of course this doesn't mean that there aren't people that uses as you mentioned to shut other people down but this in case of Islam is marginal especially when you consider the number of Muslim around the world ie Third of world population ( There are other groups that have better tools and organization that fall more in the definition you are portraying) In America, you have young men graduating from high school. Some of these young guys join the military. They do it because they feel that they are supporting America by going out and fighting Middle East insurgents. You also have lots of young graduates who believe that our interference in the Middle East is wrong. They think that it is our involvement over there that is causing much of the strife. They would almost never join the U.S. Military to go and fight in the Middle East. Both of these groups are Americans. They recognize each other as Americans. They might call each other nasty names at times, because of their differences. They might even get into political fist fights once in a while. But they all recognize each other as Americans. ---------- In the Middle east and around the world you have Muslims. Some of the Muslims are militants for their beliefs, just like the young American soldiers. Others are totally against fighting. Some of them get into fights over their beliefs. Yet they are all Muslims, because they say so, just like Americans are Americans. ---------- Now, here is the distinction between the two groups. Warrior Americans and peace loving Americans recognize each other as Americans. Warrior Muslims recognize all Muslims as Muslims, but peace loving Muslims try to say that warrior Muslims are not really Muslims, but that they are simply terrorists using the Muslim name. ---------- I think that there are no peace loving Muslims. I think that they are all warrior Muslims. I think that the ones that talk peace to the extent that they would not recognize warrior Muslims as Muslim... I think those peaceful Muslims are really an advanced infiltration group of Muslims, slipping behind enemy lines, like spies, sent to soften unsuspecting nations up, so that at just the right time, they can call in the warrior Muslims to destroy the unsuspecting nations. There aren't any peaceful Muslims. There are only warrior, conqueror Muslims. And the ones that say that they are peaceful are the biggest warriors of them all, because they are preparing the nations that they infiltrate for conquest through the peace lies that they spread. This is not a bad analysis, but you are completely wrong. Let us say that for discussion we accept your premise (bolded above). Propaganda efforts by their nature require large numbers of "propagators." These are willing, naive and gullible individuals, but they truly believe what they propagate. This is very different than willful deceit and dishonesty. Next we could consider NOT accepting your premise, and it's consequences for the take on the overall situation.... Then we could consider Kuroman's premises, which are <<short story>> that there are so many things going on continually in large and small amounts that no useful conclusions can be drawn whatsoever. And then there's my point of view. Exploding bombs aren't peaceful, even though if don't know anything about how they are being used. Then you contradict yourself, because they who do such do not say they are peaceful. |
|
|
|
any religion can´t do any harm, thus it is not evil by itself. its those humans that do bad things and claim for gods
On the contrary, the only time a religion can do no harm is when by virtue of bad teachings, inflexible rules, or other systemic problems, it has managed to kill off or run off the very last member of said religion. |
|
|
|
Only 2% of the science community deny climate change. This 2% are the fools of the community and/or are sufficiently appease by big oil to continue their flakiness.
The present media, such as it is, give a bigger % of pages to the deniers than the 97% (or the can't-make-up-their-minds) 1%.
Do you really believe big oil could only afford 2% of scientists if that was their goal? Your argument doesn't even make sense based on your own premise. Hehe yep more like they got the money to buy the 98% ^^ Given that there has been decades of false and misleading attacks on "the fossil fuel industries" personally I think it's only right they defend their position. Otherwise you've got massive amounts of lies and propaganda, coupled with some small or unknown percentage of truth, against silence by that industry. |
|
|
|
I thought that the pastors would be happy that people think of god at least some time.  But seriously, does anybody pay attention to what such fringe elements say? Yes, actually they do. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
