I mean... I don't want to be rude or anything... but who cares ?
It doesn't matter. At all. It doesn't matter if there is life in one of those planets, even an advanced lifeforms or something good like that. We can't go, they can't come...
 Well. Believe whatever you want. But even if it was possible to travel at speed of light (and it is physically not possible ) it would still take hundreds of years to reach any of those planets. And the energy necessary would represent several actual stars.... Maybe in your dimensions  Of course if you deny every physical law we use everything is possible. I'm not saying your wrong, after all science always evolves, but it would mean were wrong for everything. And I don't see why trying to find such planets with our current science if the only way to get here would be... if our current science is completely false... The idea of our current science being false is not quite the correct way to think of it. Real science fact is fact. The thing that is wrong is the scientists who tell us what science fact is when they know that it is not fact, and the scientists who lead us to believe that some things are fact when these things are not fact. Unfortunately, many of the lies are at the core of our scientific thinking. The serve the interests of scientists and big business and politics. But they don't serve the interests of truth.  EDIT: Need an example? Big Pharma controls a lot of medicine and medical information. They come up with chemicals and vaccines and procedures that they say will help people with all kinds of medical problems. But the better way is with nature and nutrients. Yet Big Pharma tends to downplay the natural things that work, because there is no money in it. They get into government/the FDA and try to force their "stuff" on us, stuff which kills rather than heals. See http://naturalnews.com/ and their associated websites for all kinds of examples of this. What you say doesn't mean anything I just don't understand. Science is always a question of facts. What part of science is not factual for you? Notice the word question that you used. If there is question about something, it is not know to be fact. If it were fact, there would be no question about it. Science is irrespective of what you or I think. Science has facts, and science has questions. Often the questions are formulated as science theories. The theories might contain facts. But the questions that the theories present are not known to be factual. If they were factual, they would be called facts, not theories. Questions are a fundamental part of science. Yet, they are not known to factual until they are proven factual. Until they are proven factual, they are non-factual questions... sometimes in the form of theories. Ahahahahahah! What you say doesn't mean anything xD There is no pure fact in science. There are always a margin of error. Give me a single solid fact about anything with a 100% precision, that's not possible. You are such a tease.  So you think it is pure fact that there is no pure fact! Such a 100% precision piece.  |
|
|
|
I mean... I don't want to be rude or anything... but who cares ?
It doesn't matter. At all. It doesn't matter if there is life in one of those planets, even an advanced lifeforms or something good like that. We can't go, they can't come...
Well. Believe whatever you want. But even if it was possible to travel at speed of light (and it is physically not possible ) it would still take hundreds of years to reach any of those planets. And the energy necessary would represent several actual stars.... Maybe in your dimensions Of course if you deny every physical law we use everything is possible. I'm not saying your wrong, after all science always evolves, but it would mean were wrong for everything. And I don't see why trying to find such planets with our current science if the only way to get here would be... if our current science is completely false... The idea of our current science being false is not quite the correct way to think of it. Real science fact is fact. The thing that is wrong is the scientists who tell us what science fact is when they know that it is not fact, and the scientists who lead us to believe that some things are fact when these things are not fact. Unfortunately, many of the lies are at the core of our scientific thinking. The serve the interests of scientists and big business and politics. But they don't serve the interests of truth. EDIT: Need an example? Big Pharma controls a lot of medicine and medical information. They come up with chemicals and vaccines and procedures that they say will help people with all kinds of medical problems. But the better way is with nature and nutrients. Yet Big Pharma tends to downplay the natural things that work, because there is no money in it. They get into government/the FDA and try to force their "stuff" on us, stuff which kills rather than heals. See http://naturalnews.com/ and their associated websites for all kinds of examples of this. What you say doesn't mean anything I just don't understand. Science is always a question of facts. What part of science is not factual for you? Notice the word question that you used. If there is question about something, it is not know to be fact. If it were fact, there would be no question about it. Science is irrespective of what you or I think. Science has facts, and science has questions. Often the questions are formulated as science theories. The theories might contain facts. But the questions that the theories present are not known to be factual. If they were factual, they would be called facts, not theories. Questions are a fundamental part of science. Yet, they are not known to factual until they are proven factual. Until they are proven factual, they are non-factual questions... sometimes in the form of theories. |
|
|
|
I think it happened, it is not to be forgotten but the story is done.. period.
Not as long as Islamic disinformation campaigns continue to vomit propaganda such as the USA and or Israel were the real culprits behind 911 because, you know, "Islam is a religion of peace." The nature of propaganda is that it is propagated by naive gullible people, who likely are not related to the source of the propaganda. Propaganda --> propagated Now you are talking about anyone who believes the official 9/11 fiction. Actually the entire issue is dead as a doornail except for (1) Muslim apologists and protectors of the faith who want to use Takiyya, cast the US in a bad light regardless of how much lying they do (2) repeaters of the propaganda of (1) If you are calling the 9/11 tragedy an issue, then it is not dead. When the people who are angry about the crooks in government start using the Karl Lentz common law method for getting answers and holding people accountable, there will be results. Common law can be used to bring justice even after the perpetrators are dead, by descendants getting reimbursement out of descendants from the inheritance handed down by the perpetrators. It is English Common Law handed over to Americans to use when they realize that they can use it. |
|
|
|
I am an atheist but i don't hate religion, i'm just laughing on fanatics who fallowing to other people who said that God is our saver and bla bla bla.
From the quote itself its sure that you're a atheist but when you say you don't hate religion its clear that everyone knows that there is something a religion or power making each and every movement in the world. This is true. Atheists are people who want to do things that are prohibited by God. So, they go to school and listen to a bunch of lies from other people like themselves. If an atheist went out to the countryside for a week, and set aside his atheistic training, he would see that God exists in nature. His religious view would change. The reason atheists don't want to do this is that they don't like the things of God. They don't realize that the things God tells us are for our own benefit. Such is sin and corruption. It goes to the very heart and core and soul of people. |
|
|
|
I think it happened, it is not to be forgotten but the story is done.. period.
Not as long as Islamic disinformation campaigns continue to vomit propaganda such as the USA and or Israel were the real culprits behind 911 because, you know, "Islam is a religion of peace." The nature of propaganda is that it is propagated by naive gullible people, who likely are not related to the source of the propaganda. Propaganda --> propagated Now you are talking about anyone who believes the official 9/11 fiction. |
|
|
|
I mean... I don't want to be rude or anything... but who cares ?
It doesn't matter. At all. It doesn't matter if there is life in one of those planets, even an advanced lifeforms or something good like that. We can't go, they can't come...
Well. Believe whatever you want. But even if it was possible to travel at speed of light (and it is physically not possible ) it would still take hundreds of years to reach any of those planets. And the energy necessary would represent several actual stars.... Maybe in your dimensions Of course if you deny every physical law we use everything is possible. I'm not saying your wrong, after all science always evolves, but it would mean were wrong for everything. And I don't see why trying to find such planets with our current science if the only way to get here would be... if our current science is completely false... The idea of our current science being false is not quite the correct way to think of it. Real science fact is fact. The thing that is wrong is the scientists who tell us what science fact is when they know that it is not fact, and the scientists who lead us to believe that some things are fact when these things are not fact. Unfortunately, many of the lies are at the core of our scientific thinking. The serve the interests of scientists and big business and politics. But they don't serve the interests of truth. EDIT: Need an example? Big Pharma controls a lot of medicine and medical information. They come up with chemicals and vaccines and procedures that they say will help people with all kinds of medical problems. But the better way is with nature and nutrients. Yet Big Pharma tends to downplay the natural things that work, because there is no money in it. They get into government/the FDA and try to force their "stuff" on us, stuff which kills rather than heals. See http://naturalnews.com/ and their associated websites for all kinds of examples of this. |
|
|
|
TRUMP
LIBERTY
UNIVERSITY
SORORITY LIFE He's looking his age. And they know it...  At a $hundred each, plus a free T-shirt, that isn't much over $3600... a mere pittance for someone of Trump's financial stature. Which one is your favorite? And no, you cannot vote for me... Please let us know which one you are, so nobody votes for you by accident. I know, I know. You won't tell us, because then we would all vote for you on purpose. |
|
|
|
TRUMP
LIBERTY
UNIVERSITY
SORORITY LIFE He's looking his age. And they know it... At a $hundred each, plus a free T-shirt, that isn't much over $3600... a mere pittance for someone of Trump's financial stature. Which one is your favorite? And no, you cannot vote for me... Please let us know which one you are, so nobody votes for you by accident. |
|
|
|
Let's say hypothetically that there was a controlled demolition of the twin towers, plus building 7. In that case, then why the hell did planes crash into the towers in the first place, and why did they blow up building 7 too?
It makes absolutely no logical sense to me, why spend more resources on having planes fly into them? And why blow up a third tower when the huge twin towers were already going to fall, no added shock value was added by having building 7 fall too, it seems needless. Think I asked this question earlier in this thread but no-one had a good answer.
As far as I'm concerned, even without delving into the mechanics on whether this could or couldn't have occured, the logic of the controlled demoliton theory is massively flawed.
You mean cutting a horse's head off, then shooting it, then driving over it with a truck isn't necessary? It is if someone pays you enough to do it - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1385160.msg14860214#msg14860214... like the American people paying the government people in taxes for who knows what, and this is the result. |
|
|
|
TRUMP
LIBERTY
UNIVERSITY
SORORITY LIFE He's looking his age. And they know it... At a $hundred each, plus a free T-shirt, that isn't much over $3600... a mere pittance for someone of Trump's financial stature. |
|
|
|
I am an Urantia Book reader, and I am convinced that it is the best religion option for these present days because it provides a new approach to the old religions under a Christian perspective and an universal spirituality.
Any book that doesn't teach the salvation of Jesus in the factual ways the Bible presents them, isn't worth it. After all, this all passes when one dies. Any book that teaches Jesus salvation in the factual ways that the Bible presents them is unnecessary as a religious book. After all, we already have the Bible. |
|
|
|
TRUMP
LIBERTY
UNIVERSITY
SORORITY LIFE He's looking his age. |
|
|
|
I am an atheist cause i can't see any proofs of God, i beleive on science and if they will proof that god exist, i will change my mind instantly, everybody will.
A microbe scientifically examining a water molecule probably won't find much in the line of proof for either God or mankind. |
|
|
|
However... ... in Holy Communion believers partake of the body of Jesus. They will rise to the new Heaven and the New earth forever, starting at the time of the judgment... ... while the unbelievers will be baked in Hell forever. Moloch, if you are black, you have a head start. Wow, that was way out of line. Even for you. I don't know about that. Do you think Moloch is so set in his ways that he can't change? Perhaps he is set in dishonoring God by showing this kind of cartoon joke. Will my continuation of his joke in a way that honors God cause Moloch to be more set in his ways? Or will it have a chance to actually help to save Moloch by waking him up in some way that he will have missed otherwise? |
|
|
|
...
Why animals are killing each other ? THEY ARE NOT RELIGIOUS!!
... Animals kill each other because they are atheists. |
|
|
|
Let's say hypothetically that there was a controlled demolition of the twin towers, plus building 7. In that case, then why the hell did planes crash into the towers in the first place, and why did they blow up building 7 too?
It makes absolutely no logical sense to me, why spend more resources on having planes fly into them? And why blow up a third tower when the huge twin towers were already going to fall, no added shock value was added by having building 7 fall too, it seems needless. Think I asked this question earlier in this thread but no-one had a good answer.
As far as I'm concerned, even without delving into the mechanics on whether this could or couldn't have occured, the logic of the controlled demoliton theory is massively flawed.
I mean, false flags are a diversionary tactic used in this world. If foul play is involved, magicians' tricks of "look here while I do this there" could be expected. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversionary_foreign_policyConsider a Machiavellian group with political power embroiled in a military-industrial complex, who needs a reason to go to war for the control of oil somewhere that is not a part of the Empire. Is it not plausible that such a group would figure some sort of means to an end to control such a resource that allows for more power?
9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA |
|
|
|
In my country, to own a gun, you need:
1 a membership from a shooting range
2 you need to be active in the shooting range (at least a dozen times a year)
3 you need to take an exam every 5 years
4 you need to pay extra tax every 5 years
5 your doctor needs to sign a weaver that you are capable of owning a gun
6 you need a special cage to store your gun
7 you need a signature of every person over 18 years old, living in your house
8 certain calibers are just illegal, no normal civillian can own them... Period (it's pretty hard to own a firearm other than caliber 6 and 9 mm)
9 the amount of ammunition you can own is limited (i think you can have 10.000 cartridges as a private citizen)
So it's basically almost impossible to own a gun legally (many people own guns illegally tough). However, gun related deaths are pretty low.
EDIT: even after all these thing, the government can change gun controll laws whenever they want. If you stop complying to the new laws, you have to turn in your firearm with the police for free, even when you bought it legally... (this actually happened on two occasions the last couple of years)
What is "legal?" All legal is, is some people telling some other people what to do. If you want to be a person who adheres to legal, all that means is that you want the right to tell others what to do and to be told what to do by others. It is lawful for everyone to own guns, even though it might not be legal. What gives anyone the right to tell anyone else what to do with their lives or property? Nothing. Every legal action is unlawful in some ways, even though it might be lawful in other ways. Legal has to do with taking the rights away from some people while enhancing the rights of others. Owning guns might be illegal in some areas or ways, but it is lawful. |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
