Note that the jet fuel I talked about was burning jet fuel, but you didn't mention the burning part in your post, above. Basic chemistry doesn't take into account the many effects of burning fuel in buildings like the Twin Towers. Nor does it take into account the many effects of using liquid fuel to put out fires by depriving the fires of oxygen, especially in the Twin Towers. Nor does basic chemistry take into account the billows of black smoke in the Towers area, caused by partially burned fuel being boiled away by the relatively little that burned. There wasn't nearly enough heat from the fuel, in the Towers, to reduce their structural strength at all. The heat came from the explosives that caused the explosions, explosions that many people attested to. The explosions of the prepared explosives is what brought the towers down. However, I would caution everyone working in buildings that are part of the complex there, to consider having sample tests done on the materials making up the buildings. Why? Because you can see in many of the videos of the Towers coming down, great big chunks of masonry in free fall, virtually disintegrating in mid air, with nothing there to make them disintegrate like that. The point is, either there is explosive sulfur thermite built into all these buildings to make it easier to demolish them when the time comes, or there was some "disintegrating ray" sent from space satellites, like the Ronald Reagan Star Wars systems that he had placed around the earth back then. If you work in any of those buildings, you are in potential danger.  Your arguments presented here have already been refuted. Yes, with 8th grade chemistry. How do you want to proceed? Each of your rantings one by one? I guess that what I wonder is where on Earth do you come up with this stuff? If it is refuted by science, it's not true a week later. Yet that's what you are doing. Taking arguments that have been refuted, then presenting them as true yet once again. "explosive sulfur thermite built into all these buildings to make it easier to demolish them when the time comes" You have any idea how crazy that statement is? Perhaps if you would happen to expand your chemistry knowledge beyond the 8th grade, you might understand some of these things. |
|
|
|
First, nobody questions everything about God. Nobody can question more than a little about God, because nobody knows enough about Him to ask more than a fraction of the questions that could be asked about God. The important answer about God is that God is love.
First, your shouldn't speak for everyone... See? There you go again, setting yourself up as god.
I question god all the time... that's how I know your god does not exist... if you truly think about what your book claims god says/commands, you will realize that is not god
First you state that you are god by giving inappropriate orders to a fellow human being. Then you try to say that god doesn't exist. You funny guy. God is your God as well. You just might have to find out the hard way.
Perhaps you have to read it first?
What sort of moral lesson is the story about Lot handing his virgin daughters over to be raped by an angry mob? Did he at least try to talk them out of the raping? Or perhaps offer just one daughter instead of both?
If you had read it, you would have realized that Lot didn't hand his daughters over. He might have attempted it. He might have offered it. But he didn't do it. And what does that story have to do with anything that we are discussing here? Or do you simply like to confuse issues?
I'd think a better moral lesson would be to stand your ground and not let the angry mob rape anyone, including your daughters... just saying
If god was truly on Lot's side, he could have manhandled the angry mob, right?
Or, better... God could have given Lot the right words to say, to calm the angry mob... so they didn't rape anyone... wouldn't that have made a better story and moral lesson for children?
God DID handle the situation for Lot. The two angels reached out their hands and pulled Lot inside the house before he could hand his daughters over to the wicked men of the city. Then they caused the wicked men to be blind so that they couldn't find the door of the house and harm Lot and his family. Are you simply too dense to read the Bible? Or are you intentionally lying to the people. Your credibility is going way down. |
|
|
|
[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?
Hillary and Obama don't care. They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives. Or in a more perfect world, by prison guards for the rest of their lives. In adjoining cells next to every living POTUS and their minions, in a desert labor camp with no possibility of ever leaving it alive. This is the thing that nobody seems to understand. The United States is a corporation, just like any other corporation. Like every corporation, it has control over the people who are part of the corporation, BY THEIR AGREEMENT.Words are important, especially in a contract. There is no place that the people who set up the U.S. government way back when, ever gave themselves over to it. But if you have signed paperwork stating that you have done this, it is your own doing. According to standard contract law that has been around long before the U.S. government, you can get out of the agreement, because there was no meeting of the minds. But if they changed the terms without telling you, they broke the contract. However, if they didn't break the contract by changing the terms, you can still get out by rescinding your signature off whatever docs you agreed to. The government corporation people would like it if they could be dictators. But because of the structure of government, the only way they could come close is to dissolve the government. And there are too many of them that don't want to do this for it to happen. Here is key. Let them rule as they want until they become a real threat or actually harmful to you. Then, take the man or woman to court for repayment. Make the court your court, and hold court at, not in, the standard court building. You may want to take government to court as well. But litigate the human being who did the harm to you. |
|
|
|
image
Interesting game you are playing, Moloch. You claim you are an atheist, which means that you don't believe in the existence of God (or something like that). Then, by pictures and words like the above, you attempt to set yourself up in a position like God. Then you even act like you are God by admitting to believing that God exists, even if God is only you. And you do it in a religious way, proving that even if atheism happened to only be philosophy, you have strong, dedicated religion, personally. Then you call yourself an asshole. It would be interesting to know exactly what your goal is with all this. I think that is not the case. What is not what case? Atheism is religion. However, if all those people who are stating that it is religion are wrong (Google "atheism religion"), they are not wrong by much. Moloch, by being a bit of an atheist zealot, is also a religious zealot, the thing he seems to despise. I am not so sensitive to posts like this and i agree to this posts. But it's ironic that you call them assholes while posting an asshole posts. Just trying to be agreeable as much as I can while at the same time speaking his language. And i too am an atheist but it doesnt mean im gonna question everything about god. It's just i dont care.
First, nobody questions everything about God. Nobody can question more than a little about God, because nobody knows enough about Him to ask more than a fraction of the questions that could be asked about God. The important answer about God is that God is love. Second, you care at least a little, or you wouldn't have posted the way you have. Third, as I said to Moloch here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1424793.msg14773029#msg14773029: How many times do I have to tell you. I checked my pockets, the dresser drawers, the cupboards, behind the couch, even the shed, and I still can't find any god that I own. Since you care enough to reply, the Thing you are saying "your god" about, is the God of the universe, as proven to exist by science and nature. God is sorry you just don't care. He is sorry for you. He made this whole universe including yourself, and He holds everything in place. By your not caring, you are pushing Him out of your life, which is really you pushing yourself out of life. It's sad. I can tell by the language of your post that you are a caring, loving person. You should live. Your choice, however. |
|
|
|
Craig obviously is Satoshi. The famous retort on this forum is "sign a message and prove it," well he did just that - and still the circus continues.
It's obvious that Craig was a mere piece on the chess board.
It's akin to some talented developer from the Ukraine that responds to an ad on UpWork to become the lead developer for a $1Million+ project. Craig created something on the behalf of a powerful group of people, who employed him to bring their ideas to fruition.
It was never the intention of this group of individuals to reveal their identity, hence the Satoshi Nakamoto pseudonym - which is actually an anagram for "So a Man Took A Shit." (Pump and dump anyone?)
Craig being disruptive by nature comes out and reveals that he is the creator of bitcoin (oh no, what else will he reveal? why doesn't he want to take credit and receive praise?)....... then this character assassination plot is launched against him to diminish his credibility. I mean this guy actually created bitcoin... so if anyone could create a rival to this system it would be Craig White, with the support of a plethora of financial backers.
But, no credibility = no support, societal shunning etc - think middle easterners, michael jackson, muammar gaddafi. Assasinate the character first, and then get rid of them entirely
..... So now anytime Craig White is mentioned in the media, the agenda will be to tarnish his credibility and paint him as incompetent, and incapable. The first time the media introduced us to Craig he was being dragged out of his home in handcuffs - psychologically, 90% of those that saw those images now subliminally associate Craig White with criminalism, instead of innovation. We never saw Steve Jobs home being raided.
To me it doesn't matter who created bitcoin. I traded penny stocks for years without caring to know who the CEO of any of those companies were
But I will not engage in this agenda to tarnish another human being
Craig white may have alot of other interesting information to reveal, but the media has now started their tirade to paint this man as a liar. So whatever he reveals next will be laughed off, and dismissed. I wont be surprised if the guy turns up dead due to suicide via two gunshots to the head
We all should think
We call ourselves anarchists and libertarians etc etc, yet here everyone is.... Still being lead and controlled by the hidden hand
^^ This guy! What? Tinfoil hat broken? So, no proof == obvious proof? He used the protocol to verify his identity to a third party, so we should trust that evidence and ignore what we don't see on the chain? Are we once again resigned to relying upon third party validation even though we invented this wonderful system to eliminate that " PROBLEM?" I think this reasoning is exactly why Craig Wright doesn't fit the profile of the Satoshi Nakamoto we've come to understand. WE DON'T NEED, NOR SHOULD WE ACCEPT, THIRD PARTY VALIDATION OF MATTERS CONCERNING THE LEDGER....PERIOD! So, whether he's a middle aged white guy going thru some form of mid-life crisis, or a long haired, pot smoking, midget mind in a basement somewhere really doesn't matter. If he is trying to invalidate the value of the block chain ledger, then he is not our (Bitcoin's) guy; he is our (Bitcoin's) enemy! I agree. In addition, anybody who calls him "Craig White" when we all know his name is Craig Wright, really has some kind of a problem. Or was LCSociety actually dropping a hint that some joker named Craig White is the real Satoshi? |
|
|
|
Students Go Head to Head in Human-Powered Submarine Race The 12th annual International Submarine Races (ISR) took place the last week of June at the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Carderock Division. Students were given two years to build a one- or two-person human-powered submarine, which they would race along a 100 meter course in a model basin at the NSWC. Because the subs aren’t waterproof, the teams compete while wearing full scuba gear.
Contestants must follow a 44-page manual, and subs generally cannot be reused from prior years. Because the race takes place every two years teams have some time to plan their vessels.
It may sound like the plot of a Hanna-Barbera cartoon, but the submarine race is yet another way to get engineering students out of classrooms and into workshops—in this case, to create undersea vessels. The race was organized by the NSWC and the Foundation for Undersea Research and Education (FURE) and sponsors include the Oceanic Engineering Society of the IEEE, and the Marine Technology Society Read more at http://www.wired.com/2013/07/underwater-race/.
|
|
|
|
image
Interesting game you are playing, Moloch. You claim you are an atheist, which means that you don't believe in the existence of God You still can't seem to grasp this simple concept... I'll try to explain for the 8000th time... Being an atheist does not mean I don't believe in the existance of any gods... Wow! You are finally stating that atheism is a self-contradictory idea. Or are you simply redefining the word "atheism?" it means I don't believe you... I don't believe in YOUR god... YOUR god is a lie... it's fiction... How many times do I have to tell you. I checked my pockets, the dresser drawers, the cupboards, behind the couch, even the shed, and I still can't find any god that I own. How can my god be a lie when I don't own one?
This does not mean I do not believe any gods exist or could exist... just that your description of a god is all wrong... it's contradictory and provably inaccurate
Just because I don't attempt to prove the existence of God, doesn't mean that I don't show the things that anyone can research to see that God exists. I even show that the only things that science uses to attempt to disprove science facts, are science theories which are not know to be factual. So, now that you are re-defining "atheism" for yourself, how in the world is anyone not knowing your definition ever going to be able to determine whether or not it is the truth? Just by listening to you say it is? Be reasonable. We need more than your simple suggesting to that effect.
At the same time, I an open-minded enough that there could still be gods... just not the inconsistent god you believe in...
So, you admit that you aren't an atheist in the standard definition of the word.
I'd relate it to Buddhism, but I doubt you understand that either...
How is anyone supposed to understand "it" when you don't clearly express which "it" you are talking about?
I still don't know why you insist on replying to me with such nonsense... you only make yourself look stupid, over and over
I had thought that I was replying to someone who is a bit logical... one who makes sense. Now I see that you are re-defining "atheism," admitting to being an atheist at the same time you are admitting to not being one, jumping between the standard definition of "atheism" and your definition (which you haven't clearly defined for us, yet), and then dumping down into Buddhism (which probably has a different definition that the standard one for you, as well) without explaining why you are talking about Buddhism. You seem to be hinting that you believe in some form of mysticism. Is that it? Or have you been going off the deep end for a long time, now, and are finally almost there. BitNow suggests that you are a demon, and not a human. I, at least, think that you are a human who is possibly troubled by a demon. Come on, buddy. Pray to God for strength. He is ready and willing to help you through this time of trial, if only you will let Him... before it's too late. |
|
|
|
You keep bringing up the idea of basic chemistry. Nobody is going to refute basic chemistry regarding the 9/11 inside job. Why not? Because basic chemistry doesn't apply in the 9/11 inside job. Why not? Because chemistry and else way beyond basic chemistry was used. Wake up sometime. The only reason you said this is you don't know what chemistry is. "Does jet fuel melt steel" is a question of chemistry. Next? I don't really know of anyone who says that jet fuel melts steel. Perhaps some of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists in this forum have said it. I simply don't remember, and I am not going to go looking for them, and I don't even care. The fact is, jet fuel of the past was similar to kerosene. I don't know what JF is made up of today. But if you put some kerosene in a steel can, it doesn't melt the steel can... at least not in quantities that are noticeable. So, why do you even ask that? And your "Next" means what? Next question? You are asking the questions. Go ahead, ask another. I'll help. Is the sky blue? Or does it only look that way? Here's ONE OF MANY TIMES you discuss jet fuel. Your concern. Not mine. And it's chemistry. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1025761.160;imodeThere is lots of fuel in a plane of that size. But there is, also lots of building concrete and metal to be heated up with that fuel. In addition, there is convection time (the time it takes heat to penetrate steel and concrete from the outside). In addition, one need consider the air passages to the fuel. The fuel can't burn without air. When you look at the pictures of the people standing around the crash openings in the buildings (Twin Towers before they came down), it is highly unlikely that that there was enough heat to melt anything - that most of the fuel burned off inefficiently in the air - because the people would not have been able to stand around in the 2,000+ degrees F that it would take to crumble concrete and melt steel, especially when there isn't near enough time for convection to have occurred without roasting the people as well. Note that the jet fuel I talked about was burning jet fuel, but you didn't mention the burning part in your post, above. Basic chemistry doesn't take into account the many effects of burning fuel in buildings like the Twin Towers. Nor does it take into account the many effects of using liquid fuel to put out fires by depriving the fires of oxygen, especially in the Twin Towers. Nor does basic chemistry take into account the billows of black smoke in the Towers area, caused by partially burned fuel being boiled away by the relatively little that burned. There wasn't nearly enough heat from the fuel, in the Towers, to reduce their structural strength at all. The heat came from the explosives that caused the explosions, explosions that many people attested to. The explosions of the prepared explosives is what brought the towers down. However, I would caution everyone working in buildings that are part of the complex there, to consider having sample tests done on the materials making up the buildings. Why? Because you can see in many of the videos of the Towers coming down, great big chunks of masonry in free fall, virtually disintegrating in mid air, with nothing there to make them disintegrate like that. The point is, either there is explosive sulfur thermite built into all these buildings to make it easier to demolish them when the time comes, or there was some "disintegrating ray" sent from space satellites, like the Ronald Reagan Star Wars systems that he had placed around the earth back then. If you work in any of those buildings, you are in potential danger. |
|
|
|
"What am I?" is a wrong question. The right question is "What am I not?".
If we were defined by what we are not, the possibilities would be infinte. It is easier to define what we are. I didn't say "we were defined by what we are not", I just said that trying to define what we are leads nowhere. It's wiser to analyze and find out what we are not. And the possibilities are not infinite, they are just bodily and mental phenomena. Yes I know! That's how a discussion works. I quoted you and then I said something in reply to what you said. Clearly, you didn't say what I said; I said what I said. I didn't say what you said; you said what you said! I am me. I am not you. <-- see what I did there? "What am I?" is the right question. "What am I not?" would take much longer to attempt to answer and you would NEVER be understood. By the way, I am not mean-spirited.  I think a person can be self-centered without being mean-spirited. |
|
|
|
We are the children of stars.
The stars are the nannies of the universe.  |
|
|
|
I think that it's really good law about gun control, people should not using any weapon ever. I am for peace in the world, it's so default but i hate war and other stuff that linked with war.
Guns keep the peace because people recognize how dangerous guns can be, and don't usually attempt to harm people who have guns. The question is, How do you enforce gun control without using guns? Enforcing gun control with guns is simply the gun-group making slaves of the people they take the guns away from. Gun-control is a self-contradictory idea that is used by those who want to make slaves of others. |
|
|
|
The question wasn't about Muslims. It was about Islam. When a Muslim gets so involved with Islam that he actually becomes Islam, that's when he is prone to hating most. |
|
|
|
If this was the Boston Marathon bombing guy they were looking for ask yourself this. The 2 brothers were alive and involved in a shootout with police, killing the older brother. The younger brother got away after the police shootout THEN was missing for over 8 hours.
Ok how do you have 2000 cops, dogs and thermal imaging helicopters and lose a 17 year old boy you just got in a shootout with for 8 hours?
Finally a guy finds him in his backyard. The police did do much of anything excpet put on a show for the American people at 8pm on a Friday night.
I'm opposed to the big shows of force as you are but see (bolded above). Someone hides, and you go find him. You think you could do better? That whole Marathon Bombing thing was an inside job. The two brothers were patsies, and they were in "patsy training" long before the event. They simply didn't realized that they were being manipulated. EDIT: Most of law enforcement didn't know that it was an inside job. They were simply doing what they were told. |
|
|
|
You keep bringing up the idea of basic chemistry. Nobody is going to refute basic chemistry regarding the 9/11 inside job. Why not? Because basic chemistry doesn't apply in the 9/11 inside job. Why not? Because chemistry and else way beyond basic chemistry was used. Wake up sometime. The only reason you said this is you don't know what chemistry is. "Does jet fuel melt steel" is a question of chemistry. Next? I don't really know of anyone who says that jet fuel melts steel. Perhaps some of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists in this forum have said it. I simply don't remember, and I am not going to go looking for them, and I don't even care. The fact is, jet fuel of the past was similar to kerosene. I don't know what JF is made up of today. But if you put some kerosene in a steel can, it doesn't melt the steel can... at least not in quantities that are noticeable. So, why do you even ask that? And your "Next" means what? Next question? You are asking the questions. Go ahead, ask another. I'll help. Is the sky blue? Or does it only look that way? |
|
|
|
science proves God exists...
 QOTD: "When it comes to tithing... I throw a bunch of dollars into the air, and let God take what he needs... the rest I stick back in my pocket" Wow! There you go again, almost formally stating that you think that you are God. Are you really waking up to the fact that atheists are setting themselves up as gods when they state that God doesn't exist? |
|
|
|
Interesting game you are playing, Moloch. You claim you are an atheist, which means that you don't believe in the existence of God (or something like that). Then, by pictures and words like the above, you attempt to set yourself up in a position like God. Then you even act like you are God by admitting to believing that God exists, even if God is only you. And you do it in a religious way, proving that even if atheism happened to only be philosophy, you have strong, dedicated religion, personally. Then you call yourself an asshole. It would be interesting to know exactly what your goal is with all this. |
|
|
|
Science cannot even prove the facts of creation, How it will prove the facts of creator?
Facts of creation was already proven as far as i know. building blocks of life are from the outerspace and mixed up with the elements of nature here on earth long before man came. The evolution of species is how it all started, how we adopt to certain conditions. The Mathematical Impossibility of Evolution https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1454732.0. EDIT: And this is bending over backwards with being favorable to evolutionists. The reality of the matter is that while mutations might exist that are beneficial, nature has far greater odds of destroying a beneficial mutation before it can go anywhere, than the mutation has for continuing its further beneficial mutations. The whole idea of a hostile environment was not even considered in the calculations. |
|
|
|
I'm an atheist because every religion I have observed thinks that theirs is the one-and-only true portal to salvation which means that none of them are!
This is basically my version of Pascal's Wager If 1000 religions claim to be the one-and-only true religion... and they are all contradictory in such a way that only one of them could possibly be true... any given religion has at most a 0.1% chance of being correct and a minimum of 99.9% chance that it is wrong... (they could all be wrong, 100%... but at most, 0.1% of them could be correct) I could not possibly believe in all the 1000 contradictory religions, so the obvious bet is none... I bet none of them are correct... and I win at least 99.9% of the time Humans do not have enough time in their life to properly research all 1000 religions... so the choice is made while ignorant of most/all religions... only an idiot of a god would design such a scenario... so god either does not exist, or is a complete moron... your choice If I... some random internet dude... can outsmart your god... your god is bullshit This doesn't matter for you. Why not? Because atheism certainly isn't the correct religion, but you stay there anyway. So, how in the world can you ever expect to have time to find the correct religion when you stick with one that you know is wrong? Unlike you, I have done my due diligence in searching for the correct religion... I spent 20 years researching every religion on the planet... they are all wrong in too many ways to list Atheism is not a religion... in the same way that bald is not a hairstyle... and abstinence is not a sexual position... these are the lack thereof... very different, very simple, yet you cannot comprehend The reason you fail to understand these very simple concepts is because religion has blinded you to the truth of reality No wonder you are all mixed up - examining every religion on the planet for 20 years. Since you have to stop somewhere that gives you some solidity in life, you won't allow yourself to recognize the fact that atheism is a religion. You are going to have to look at the truth sometime. After all, science is out, because scientists are treating theory as truth in their groping at straws. And probability has proven that evolution couldn't have happened. And the 3 science basics prove that God exists. You are running out of room to force yourself to believe in your atheism fantasies. Don't despair as proof for God becomes greater and greater, and atheism becomes weaker and weaker. Rather, pour out your soul to God in prayer, asking Him to show you the right way. He'll do it for you if you really ask Him in humility. i dont think that science has found proof that explains existence of so called.. you said that atheism is getting weaker and weaker .. you are totally wrong .. because rates of atheists is inscreasing rapidly.. you should check the rates for sure. Science has found the proof of some so-calleds, and hasn't found the proof of many others. Since atheism is a self-contradictory religion because of the fact that God exists, there really aren't any atheists... only liars. |
|
|
|
Why people still duscussing about it? If you want to pray on smth you can do it, and nobody cares about it honestly. If you are an atheist you also don't care cause you don't belive in God.
Religious people want to give atheists the most opportunity for salvation possible. Atheists need to remover other religions so that theirs can flourish. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
