| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| chek wrote: | | sam wrote: | Just a sideline ....
What happens when the time-traveller pitches up in the past or future? The spot where they arrive had an instant beforehand been occupied by air (at least. Maybe a slab of concrete. Who knows? Maybe an ocean that exists in the future but not in the present) Does the traveller's body end up with a body's volume of air/concrete/water embedded in it? This would kill him/her instantly. Does the time-traveller arrive bit by bit and from the centre outwards, displacing the air and causing a) a loud explosion if they arrive really quickly b) a gentle breeze if they arrive slowly c) something in-between d) a horrendous cracking when the concrete has to give way to a physical anomaly.
What if, through some horrific coincidence, their Great-Grandad is standing exactly where their time-machine sets down. *Poof* to Great-Grandad, I reckon.
Such fun. |
Not to mention the allegedly fixed balance between matter and energy in the universe at any one time I've read about somewhere ... |
Good point. Matter+energy have been removed from one time and moved to another. Get a quadrillion time machines buzzing backwards in time to a given moment (like, the 2008 Time Machine Convention, Donington Park, special guest star Elton John) and the Universe could get a lot bigger suddenly. Then where would we be?
Anyway - how come the Tardis always manages to avoid landing in 2' of wet concrete? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
another matter well worth mentioning is the endless supply of new
energy each and everyone of us is replenished with during our hours of
welcoming and needed sleep.
We go to sleep tired, drained, exhausted, etc., and voila', we wake up
hours later (mostly) filled to the brim again with new energy and vitality.
This is repeated daily. And as everyone is 'fully aware' of the fact that
Homo Sapiens has roamed this earth for around 4 million years, this turns
out to be a hell of a large supply of free energy seemingly coming from
an inexhaustible source. (No, its not the sun)!
For obvious reasons this newly added supply of energy must come from
an external source, as the physical body (whether of a human, animal or
plant nature) would have no way of replenish the energy lost through
physical or spiritual activity during the waking hours. The body is asleep,
inactive and resting!
The CERN people will tell us that this energy came into existence around
a trillion of a second (give or take a bit here or a bit there) after the big
bang exploded with, one would expect, a big bang, that must have lasted
an incredible short period of time, or perhaps lasted in a period where
"time" not yet would have come into existence. I mean, where do you
start the countdown to where the trillions of a second begins to set in! In
the beginning of the bang, in the middle of it, or in the instant the noise
of the bang comes to an end?? Do "time" sets in in the instant moment,
or is the moment preceded with a little 'time-lag' of unknown origin??
Were there ever a time when 'time' and 'no-time' rubbed shoulder with
each other, and what would you call a moment like this??
I wonder if adherents to 'time-travel' can answer these and other related
questions that seems to lack any coherence whatsoever?
As, f. ex., how an explosion can give course and source to an endless
supply of renewable energy?
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I wonder if | Quote: | | adherents to 'time-travel' |
can answer these and other related
questions that seems to lack any coherence whatsoever?
|
no they car'nt answer, time travel is'nt possible. it car'nt be, theres just no way at all. because you said so therefore it's not possible.
it dos'nt matter one iota there are scientists who think it is possible and are currently investigating, who would listen to scientists anyway? i don't.
i only listen to strangers on internet forums.
| Quote: | And as everyone is 'fully aware' of the fact that
Homo Sapiens has roamed this earth for around 4 million years |
says who? scientists? why listen to them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: |
no they car'nt answer, time travel is'nt possible. it car'nt be, theres just no way at all. because you said so therefore it's not possible. |
I find it immensely fascinating to hear peoples explanations for why they
want to believe in the impossible. F. ex. you marky, want to believe that
nothing is impossible, which I think is very funny, and also very funny
because you yourself can't see any fun in it at all!
Or! Are you telling me that nobody has never told you about the
differentiation between "polarization" and "de-polarization"???
And the importance of this???
Then...... sh*t! or..... for f*cks sake! As good old Billy would put it!
| Quote: |
it dos'nt matter one iota there are scientists who think it is possible and are currently investigating, who would listen to scientists anyway? i don't.
i only listen to strangers on internet forums. |
Well, normal people listen to what makes sense, and that it is rather
immaterial from whence this sense comes from. There's even men of
scientific persuasions who listen to sense coming from women, but i'll
admit that only concerns a very small percentage of the male species in
this category!
| Quote: | And as everyone is 'fully aware' of the fact that
Homo Sapiens has roamed this earth for around 4 million years |
| Quote: |
says who? scientists? why listen to them? |
No, the Artist says so, and you should always listen to the artist as he or
she is much more attuned to what really goes on in the world - of course.
These people got a much much better understanding of what is right or
wrong, good or bad, Light or Darkness than any scientist would ever have.
They even know the true difference between the Arts and Science, which
the scientist wouldn't have a clue about.
You can't argue about that - surely!
_________________
What IS can never die
Last edited by Tamborine man on Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:16 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I find it immensely fascinating to hear peoples explanations for why they
want to believe in the impossible. F. ex. you marky, want to believe that
nothing is impossible, which I think is very funny, and also very funny
because you yourself can't see any fun in it at all!
|
no i don't want to believe anything actually, i want to know. to know you need fact. arguements for or against timetravel are only based on the way we THINK the universe works. we have not answered(as people) a lot of the mysteries in the universe. therefore untill those mysteries are solved and known to be correct as a fact rather than a theory, anything is possible!
who knows what is going to be discovered or what that knowledge will lead to? nobody does. therefore anything is possible.
thats the basis i work from when i say anything is possible, it has nothing to do with wanting to believe in timetravel.
however you believe, therefore it is, in your world.
your mindset.
"i believe it is impossible, therefore it is" "here is my 'theory'"
my mindset.
"we don't know everything about the universe" "anything is possible"
if there are things yet to be discovered, then when and IF they are discovered, they could solve things that were thought to be impossible previous to it being discovered. on that basis i will not say time travel is impossible. especially if there are working theorys from scientists waiting to be tested/proved wrong.
it aint me you need to tell about time travel being impossible is it. im not the scientists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | No, the Artist says so, and you should always listen to the artist as he or
she is much more attuned to what really goes on in the world - of course.
These people got a much much better understanding of what is right or
wrong, good or bad, Light or Darkness than any scientist would ever have.
They even know the true difference between the Arts and Science, which
the scientist wouldn't have a clue about.
You can't argue about that - surely!
|
i can argue about it actually. your belief in good and bad is just that. and everybody has different values they would consider good or bad.
good and bad is about inconvience, if somebody does something to inconvience me then they are bad. if somebody does something to convience me then they are good.
so if a guy killed one man but later in life risked his own life to save two people, who would of died if it was'nt for him, is he good or bad?.
if a guy stole somebodys property and replaced with something that is twice the value, is he good or bad?
what about a guy who spent his whole life helping people and dedicating his whole life to saving people, he then kills somebody in an arguement and is convicted, which actions do you judge him on?
as for artists being more reliable than scientists, there is no evidence to support it what so ever, again this is just your belief. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pre-emption: No. Nothing is taken out of context. I promise!
| Quote: |
no i don't want to believe anything actually, i want to know. to know you need fact. |
No. "Knowing" will always come before "doing".
Its not much fun "doing" without "knowing"....... (what you're "doing")!!
| Quote: |
therefore anything is possible. |
This sounds like a definite statement of fact! Is this something you know
to be a fact?
Or is it something you believe in, although 'you don't want to believe in
anything actually'??
| Quote: |
thats the basis i work from when i say anything is possible,... |
I'm still trying to get my head around this one.
Are you saying that the 'basis' from which you work, is neither based on
facts nor beliefs! For the simple reasons that you do not yet got the facts,
and that you don't want to believe in 'beliefs'??
| Quote: |
however you believe, therefore it is, in your world. |
Perhaps, but not if you "know" that your 'beliefs' are only temporary.
Therefore THEY are not, in your world. Something else is!
(Here an example of a known "temporary belief":
I believe with everything I got that horse no.11 will wind the race!
b*! - the b****** came in a distant no.9. I don't believe in him
anymore..... that f*ckwit!).
| Quote: |
your mindset.
"i believe it is impossible, therefore it is" "here is my 'theory'" |
No. That's not my mindset. Sorry.
| Quote: |
my mindset.
"we don't know everything about the universe" "anything is possible"
|
You here state something as being an indisputable fact, while at the same
time admitting you're not in a position to proclaim your statement to be
this indisputable fact at all!
Isn't this what one could call a grave contradiction??
I'm happy to accept that you personally "believe" that 'anything is
possible'. There's nothing wrong with that. That's an opinion you're quite
welcome to.
The problem is that, that is not what you are saying.
You're saying you don't want to "believe" that 'anything is possible'.
Instead you make it a statement of fact, and then admit you haven't got
the facts to back up your statement of this "apparent" fact!!
It sounds silly!
What bothers me is that I find you somewhere totally lost in a
no-mans-land kind of place, where nothing real seems to exist, and where
logic and reason are unknown entities.
-That Socrates would have given you a miss had he been around, I'm
sure of.
-That the sophists would have embraced you with open arms, I'm equally
sure of.
Am also sure you wish my "bother" buried in the nearest pigsty!
But that doesn't make my "bother" less genuine, does it!
| Quote: |
if there are things yet to be discovered, then when and IF they are discovered, they could solve things that were thought to be impossible previous to it being discovered. |
Yes, history tells you this in abundance, but history mentions nothing
about "everything being possible"!
| Quote: |
it aint me you need to tell about time travel being impossible is it. im not the scientists. |
Actually, you sound like one! Are you sure about this??
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="marky 54"] | Quote: | No, the Artist says so, and you should always listen to the artist as he or
she is much more attuned to what really goes on in the world - of course.
These people got a much much better understanding of what is right or
wrong, good or bad, Light or Darkness than any scientist would ever have.
They even know the true difference between the Arts and Science, which
the scientist wouldn't have a clue about.
You can't argue about that - surely!
|
| Quote: |
i can argue about it actually. your belief in good and bad is just that. and everybody has different values they would consider good or bad. |
Yes, you can argue, but only if you use trickery and deceit.
I didn't mention the word 'belief', but used the word 'understanding'.
There's an infinite difference between the two!
(Take a quick look above, and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! This doesn't promise anything good - does it)!!
| Quote: |
good and bad is about inconvience, if somebody does something to inconvience me then they are bad. if somebody does something to convience me then they are good. |
That doesn't follow at all!
If f. ex. you're a nasty boofhead kind of person, then its more likely than
not that you consider good people around you to be an inconvenience
rather than a blessing, whereas the person who does something to give
you convenience is more likely to be just another bad-ass as yourself
f. ex., than anyone else!
| Quote: |
so if a guy killed one man but later in life risked his own life to save two people, who would of died if it was'nt for him, is he good or bad?. |
He was bad when he killed another man. He was good when he saved the
life of the two people.
| Quote: |
if a guy stole somebodys property and replaced with something that is twice the value, is he good or bad? |
The same as above applies here too.
| Quote: |
what about a guy who spent his whole life helping people and dedicating his whole life to saving people, he then kills somebody in an arguement and is convicted, which actions do you judge him on? |
You judge him on all actions of course. Some actions gives him respect.
Other actions gives him no respect. In the first instance he is free and
easy. In the second instance he lands in jail.
| Quote: |
as for artists being more reliable than scientists, there is no evidence to support it what so ever, again this is just your belief. |
And again you're misquoting! Will it never end???
I spoke about 'knowing the true difference', and not about 'being more
reliable'!
As for evidence!
Obviously you know nothing about Salvador Dali. He painted limp
watches, among many other things.
Scientists of the day adored him. They stood in queue to get an audience
with the man. They knew he knew more than they did, about "time".
Do I need say more!!
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | No. "Knowing" will always come before "doing".
Its not much fun "doing" without "knowing"....... (what you're "doing")!!
|
NO learning comes before doing. knowing is the end result.
| Quote: | | therefore anything is possible. |
| Quote: | This sounds like a definite statement of fact! Is this something you know
to be a fact?
Or is it something you believe in, although 'you don't want to believe in
anything actually'??
|
it is something i know is fact you are correct. we are still in the learning process where the universe is concerned. alot of things we think we know have not been proven and are still only theorys.
therefore where the universe is concerned there is little knowing. meaning i cannot know what is possible and what is not possible.
new discoverys lead to new technologies. i cannot even begin to say what is possible 100-1,000 years from now.
| Quote: | I'm still trying to get my head around this one.
Are you saying that the 'basis' from which you work, is neither based on
facts nor beliefs! For the simple reasons that you do not yet got the facts,
and that you don't want to believe in 'beliefs'??
|
no im saying it is not based on beliefs.
| Quote: | Perhaps, but not if you "know" that your 'beliefs' are only temporary.
Therefore THEY are not, in your world. Something else is!
(Here an example of a known "temporary belief":
I believe with everything I got that horse no.11 will wind the race!
b*! - the * came in a distant no.9. I don't believe in him
anymore..... that f*ckwit!).
|
thats a very poor example. your talking about outcomes of a action.
i was talking about knowing about the universe. the earth is round we know this, it dos'nt change. that is known.
if you imagine your horses to be different theorys about the universe, then you are close to how it is at the moment. you pick which one suits you, but you don't know if it is the right choice, as little is known about the outcome apart from their likelyhood, 2/1 30/1 etc.
the universe is yet to be explained, therefore we can only rate theorys on what is known so far, the odds will change depending on discoverys. therefore i cannot predict what happens or what is possible or impossible.
the same way you cannot predict which horse will win each race based on their odds.
| Quote: | You here state something as being an indisputable fact, while at the same
time admitting you're not in a position to proclaim your statement to be
this indisputable fact at all!
Isn't this what one could call a grave contradiction??
|
a contridiction how? is it not a contridiction to claim you know about the universe and what is possible, whilst people are still trying to learn about it?
during the history of people learning about the earth they was convinced it was flat. it did'nt make it true just because that what they thought though did it? new dicoverys changed that view.
| Quote: | Yes, history tells you this in abundance, but history mentions nothing
about "everything being possible"!
|
now your changing what i said, i did'nt says everything is possible. i said anything is possible. if everything was possible then it would be a fact time travel is possible. that aint what im saying, im saying we are yet to discover and yet to understand the univers, therefore anything is possible.
that dos'nt mean everything would beable to be done and nothing would be impossible.
it means i am unable to say what is and is'nt possible untill the unknown becomes a known. men are infants where learning about the universe is concerned, we are still learning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Yes, you can argue, but only if you use trickery and deceit.
I didn't mention the word 'belief', but used the word 'understanding'.
There's an infinite difference between the two!
(Take a quick look above, and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! This doesn't promise anything good - does it)!!
|
so i cannot argue because im tricky and deceitful. by using the word understanding, you showed a belief in good and evil. if you did'nt believe in good and evil then what is there to understand?
| Quote: | and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! |
does that make me evil? or is it only you who sees it as manipulative?
| Quote: | And again you're misquoting! Will it never end???
I spoke about 'knowing the true difference', and not about 'being more
reliable'!
|
ok where is the evidence that says artists know more than scientists. surely you don't base this on one painting of one man who was only one artist in the history of earth.
this is your belief, nothing more.
also what is the true difference in your opinon? and where did the artist get his understanding of time from? from what or whom did he learn the concept of time in the first place?
and how do you know he was right as opposed to believing he was right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="marky 54"] | Quote: | No. "Knowing" will always come before "doing".
Its not much fun "doing" without "knowing"....... (what you're "doing")!!
|
| Quote: |
NO learning comes before doing. knowing is the end result. |
Marky, you speak before thinking, and what comes out from that is of no
good use.
Everything completely new and beneficial that is introduced to mankind,
of whatever kind, cannot possibly be a result of learning, inasmuch as
there would be nobody around to teach something completely new to the
"originator"! Now, would there!!
I could give you a few examples, but it shouldn't really be too hard for
you to come up with a few examples yourself - If you think about it, that
is!
| Quote: | | therefore anything is possible. |
| Quote: | This sounds like a definite statement of fact! Is this something you know
to be a fact?
Or is it something you believe in, although 'you don't want to believe in
anything actually'??
|
| Quote: |
it is something i know is fact you are correct.
therefore where the universe is concerned there is little knowing. meaning i cannot know what is possible and what is not possible.
new discoverys lead to new technologies. i cannot even begin to say what is possible 100-1,000 years from now. |
Ergo: Previously, you said that you know for a fact that 'anything is
possible'. (That must include mankind being able to change natural laws,
amongst many other things, one would expect)!
But now, here you're saying: That you know for a fact you know nothing.
Now that sounds must more plausible to me, and I think that you're
getting much closer to the truth of the matter than you have done before!
I'm impressed.
| Quote: | I'm still trying to get my head around this one.
Are you saying that the 'basis' from which you work, is neither based on
facts nor beliefs! For the simple reasons that you do not yet got the facts,
and that you don't want to believe in 'beliefs'??
|
| Quote: |
no im saying it is not based on beliefs. |
Now I know what you're saying and what you mean! (See above).
| Quote: | You here state something as being an indisputable fact, while at the same
time admitting you're not in a position to proclaim your statement to be
this indisputable fact at all!
Isn't this what one could call a grave contradiction??
|
| Quote: |
a contridiction how? is it not a contridiction to claim you know about the universe and what is possible, whilst people are still trying to learn about it? |
You have now admitted that what you really mean is, that you know
nothing. You did not say this in the above citation!
And who has claimed he or she 'know about the universe and what is
possible'?? It certainly wasn't me! You're not trying to misquote again,
are you??
| Quote: | Yes, history tells you this in abundance, but history mentions nothing
about "everything being possible"!
|
| Quote: |
now your changing what i said, i did'nt says everything is possible. i said anything is possible. if everything was possible then it would be a fact time travel is possible. that aint what im saying, im saying we are yet to discover and yet to understand the univers, therefore anything is possible.
that dos'nt mean everything would beable to be done and nothing would be impossible. |
You're splitting hairs. What difference does 'anything' or 'everything'
make in the context of this discussion! Or 'anybody' or 'everybody' for
that matter!
| Quote: |
it means i am unable to say what is and is'nt possible untill the unknown becomes a known. |
Wish so much you had said this in the beginning!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="marky 54"] | Quote: | Yes, you can argue, but only if you use trickery and deceit.
I didn't mention the word 'belief', but used the word 'understanding'.
There's an infinite difference between the two!
(Take a quick look above, and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! This doesn't promise anything good - does it)!!
|
| Quote: |
so i cannot argue because im tricky and deceitful. by using the word understanding, you showed a belief in good and evil. if you did'nt believe in good and evil then what is there to understand? |
"Yes, you can argue, but only..... " (see above for the rest)!
'Understanding' and 'belief' has nothing to do with each other.
| Quote: | and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! |
| Quote: |
does that make me evil? or is it only you who sees it as manipulative?
|
No, that doesn't make you evil.
Others will see it as manipulative as well.
You'll go a long way further if you quote people correctly. That way you
harm nobody.
| Quote: | And again you're misquoting! Will it never end???
I spoke about 'knowing the true difference', and not about 'being more
reliable'!
|
| Quote: |
ok where is the evidence that says artists know more than scientists. surely you don't base this on one painting of one man who was only one artist in the history of earth.
|
Plato, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, da Vinci, Le Corbusier and Piet Hein, just to
mention a very few others - that might be known to you!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Marky, you speak before thinking, and what comes out from that is of no
good use.
Everything completely new and beneficial that is introduced to mankind,
of whatever kind, cannot possibly be a result of learning, inasmuch as
there would be nobody around to teach something completely new to the
"originator"! Now, would there!!
I could give you a few examples, but it shouldn't really be too hard for
you to come up with a few examples yourself - If you think about it, that
is!
|
actually i can only think of examples of learning doing then knowing. there is not one thing that is just known from scratch.
if there is give me one example. i bet you cannot. from birth what is known without first learning. which technology was'nt just an idea first? which then had to be put into pratice, to perfect into a known or fact, learning is needed, you never get it right the first time, but with pratice you learn, then you can do, then you know.
| Quote: | Ergo: Previously, you said that you know for a fact that 'anything is
possible'. (That must include mankind being able to change natural laws,
amongst many other things, one would expect)!
|
with technology, maybe. and which natural laws? the natural laws of earth? universe? are laws unbrakable? or are they just a guide to how it works under natural conditions? rather than manipulated ones or artifical ones. if you can use technology to manipulate natural laws then you can brake them.
| Quote: | | But now, here you're saying: That you know for a fact you know nothing. |
no i say i know for a fact i don't know everything, neither does mankind. therefore anything is possible. i cannot say time travel is impossible.
| Quote: | You have now admitted that what you really mean is, that you know
nothing. You did not say this in the above citation!
And who has claimed he or she 'know about the universe and what is
possible'?? It certainly wasn't me! You're not trying to misquote again,
are you??
|
but if you don't know everything about the universe how can you say time travel is impossible?
| Quote: | You're splitting hairs. What difference does 'anything' or 'everything'
make in the context of this discussion! Or 'anybody' or 'everybody' for
that matter!
|
anything and everything are worlds apart, if you do not know the difference i cannot help you.
everything includes all things. anything does not include all things but what it does include is unknown.
if i ask somebody if i can help with anything, it is because i am offering help of their choice but i don't yet know the outcome of what they will ask me to do.
i would'nt ask somebody if i could help with everything, or i'd be there the rest of my life and they would'nt beable to get rid of me.
if somebody offers me a sweet and asks which one i'd like, and i said anything, they would not give me everything in the sweet bowl.
anything is possible, does not mean everything is possible.
| Quote: | | it means i am unable to say what is and is'nt possible untill the unknown becomes a known. |
| Quote: | Wish so much you had said this in the beginning!
|
i did.
| Quote: | my personnal opinon is it is impossible to say what is impossible. so many times have people claimed things to be impossible which later became reality, so many times have people laid down the laws of the universe only for others to later discover something which brakes those laws.
|
little did i know i would have to explain a known. that mankind do not know everything about the universe. if i did maybe i would of been clearer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
you said: Yes, you can argue, but only if you use trickery and deceit.
I didn't mention the word 'belief', but used the word 'understanding'.
There's an infinite difference between the two!
(Take a quick look above, and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! This doesn't promise anything good - does it)!!
i said:
| Quote: | | so i cannot argue because im tricky and deceitful. by using the word understanding, you showed a belief in good and evil. if you did'nt believe in good and evil then what is there to understand? |
you said:
| Quote: | "Yes, you can argue, but only..... " (see above for the rest)!
'Understanding' and 'belief' has nothing to do with each other |
but i did argue about your point, therefore your saying im trickey and deceitful, although i doubt you mean it. it seems more like a way of ensuring any reply i make is considered tricky and deceitful. incase i argued a point.
you mentioned understanding good and evil. but good and evil is just a belief and everyone views it differently. i have been good to people and evil to people throughout my whole life, most of time without realising it.
only the people who were on the recieving end of my actions precieved it as one or the other even if it was not my intention to be good or evil.
we are all the same no matter what our actions are, people commit acts some would consider worse than others, we have laws for them to make society work and to protect people, but there is no good and evil. if there were, then everyone is good and evil at the same time. which would kind of make the good and evil void because we would all fit into both catorgorys. even if you think you have not commited a bad act, that dos'nt mean others did'nt see it as such. your feelings are your guide, thats all 'good and evil' is. if you listen to your 'good' feelings then i suppose you'd be considered 'good' by most but not all.
if there is a god, then i believe god gave everything feelings to test them or balance was intended but shaping your reality is dependant on which feelings, you listen to more, they are also a survival tool in certain situations.
even my way of looking at good and evil is just a belief, the same as yours and everyone elses. so how do we understand good and evil? how do we catgorize people and events, items, or whatever into each group? everyone would do it differently and most things could fit into both groups.
| Quote: | No, that doesn't make you evil.
Others will see it as manipulative as well.
You'll go a long way further if you quote people correctly. That way you
harm nobody.
|
others will see it as not manipulative, as i did'nt misqoute you. everbody has a belief in what good and evil is. my belief is there is no good and evil. just actions with feelings to aid you, our reality will reflect which feelings each person listens to more. an act of god? i don't know, if there is a god, i like to think thats how it works and thats what feelings are for.
if i asked you to understand something, how can i not have a belief in it? you cannot ask me to understand something without having an opinon on it or a belief in it. many will disagree with my belief on this subject, but that dos'nt mean any of us are right, we just believe we are. maybe its comforting, but i am aware what i believe is NOT a known.
| Quote: | Plato, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, da Vinci, Le Corbusier and Piet Hein, just to
mention a very few others - that might be known to you!
|
and what have these people achieved that is any different or more significant than any other proffession?
and you ignored these questions.
also what is the true difference in your opinon? and where did these artist get their understanding of time etc from? from what or whom did they learn the concept of time etc in the first place?
and how do you know they all are right as opposed to believing they are all right?
there must be some basis as to why i should think artists are the true scientists who know the true meaning, im still waiting for an explaination on this, which you claim to be fact. as i see different people throughout history of different occupations all playing different and important roles.
there is no reason to believe artists are more significant or knowing than any of the other great minds that came before or after. mankinds knowledge came from each and everyone of them, lots of minds have gone into what we know today, and theorys that exsist today but are yet to be proven as fact.
(changed the questions slightly to fit the added names). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="marky 54"] | Quote: | Marky, you speak before thinking, and what comes out from that is of no
good use.
Everything completely new and beneficial that is introduced to mankind,
of whatever kind, cannot possibly be a result of learning, inasmuch as
there would be nobody around to teach something completely new to the
"originator"! Now, would there!!
I could give you a few examples, but it shouldn't really be too hard for
you to come up with a few examples yourself - If you think about it, that
is!
|
| Quote: |
actually i can only think of examples of learning doing then knowing. there is not one thing that is just known from scratch. |
New things are. See above.
| Quote: |
if there is give me one example. i bet you cannot. from birth what is known without first learning. |
How to walk!!
| Quote: | Ergo: Previously, you said that you know for a fact that 'anything is
possible'. (That must include mankind being able to change natural laws,
amongst many other things, one would expect)!
|
| Quote: |
with technology, maybe. and which natural laws? the natural laws of earth? universe? are laws unbrakable? or are they just a guide to how it works under natural conditions? rather than manipulated ones or artifical ones. if you can use technology to manipulate natural laws then you can brake them. |
So you think there will be human beings who in the future will be able to
break the natural laws? Do you mean all of them, or do you have a
single one in mind? Anyway, I say good for you, no matter!
| Quote: | | But now, here you're saying: That you know for a fact you know nothing. |
| Quote: |
no i say i know for a fact i don't know everything, neither does mankind. therefore anything is possible. i cannot say time travel is impossible.
|
No. You're saying that you know for a fact you don't know everything, and
that you know for a fact that you know anything is possible.
You're talking gibberish!
| Quote: | You have now admitted that what you really mean is, that you know
nothing. You did not say this in the above citation!
And who has claimed he or she 'know about the universe and what is
possible'?? It certainly wasn't me! You're not trying to misquote again,
are you??
|
| Quote: |
but if you don't know everything about the universe how can you say time travel is impossible? |
Because "time" do not exist in reality.
Have you already forgotten what has been talked about in earlier posts!
| Quote: | You're splitting hairs. What difference does 'anything' or 'everything'
make in the context of this discussion! Or 'anybody' or 'everybody' for
that matter!
|
| Quote: |
anything and everything are worlds apart, if you do not know the difference i cannot help you. |
Yes you can. Just be a little bit kind.
| Quote: |
everything includes all things. anything does not include all things but what it does include is unknown.
if i ask somebody if i can help with anything, it is because i am offering help of their choice but i don't yet know the outcome of what they will ask me to do.
i would'nt ask somebody if i could help with everything, or i'd be there the rest of my life and they would'nt beable to get rid of me.
if somebody offers me a sweet and asks which one i'd like, and i said anything, they would not give me everything in the sweet bowl.
anything is possible, does not mean everything is possible. |
Truly!! Where do you get that one from??
We are talking about the unknown future. Not about the present.
Tell me in your own words why one should make a distinction about
'anything' and 'everything' when the talk is about an unknown future?
What's the point?
What's the difference between 'all and sundry'? Isn't that all inclusive?
Isn't 'anything' all inclusive? Or does 'anything' have limitations as far as
you're concerned? Isn't 'everything' all inclusive? Or does 'everything'
have limitations as well?
Please be a little more specific.
| Quote: | | it means i am unable to say what is and is'nt possible untill the unknown becomes a known. |
| Quote: | Wish so much you had said this in the beginning!
|
No you didn't. You said that 'anything is possible'. Full stop.
| Quote: | my personnal opinon is it is impossible to say what is impossible. so many times have people claimed things to be impossible which later became reality, so many times have people laid down the laws of the universe only for others to later discover something which brakes those laws.
little did i know i would have to explain a known. that mankind do not know everything about the universe. if i did maybe i would of been clearer. |
You have more often than not proclaiming the "bloody obvious", and more
often than not, trying to teach people "how to suck eggs"!
PS!
'Personal opinions' and 'beliefs' are the same. You have stated that you
do not want to "believe", so why do you now desire to tell us about your
'personal opinions', when that is what you don't really want to bother us
with?
You're very hard to understand, marky!
cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="marky 54"]you said: Yes, you can argue, but only if you use trickery and deceit.
I didn't mention the word 'belief', but used the word 'understanding'.
There's an infinite difference between the two!
(Take a quick look above, and see for yourself how manipulative you are
here! This doesn't promise anything good - does it)!!
i said:
| Quote: | | so i cannot argue because im tricky and deceitful. by using the word understanding, you showed a belief in good and evil. if you did'nt believe in good and evil then what is there to understand? |
you said:
| Quote: | "Yes, you can argue, but only..... " (see above for the rest)!
'Understanding' and 'belief' has nothing to do with each other |
| Quote: |
but i did argue about your point, therefore your saying im trickey and deceitful, although i doubt you mean it. |
No. You didn't argue about my point. You misquoted me and that made
you full of trickery and deceit. Don't misquote people ever, and your
life will hopefully be strewn with roses and beautiful scents wherever you
go!
| Quote: |
you mentioned understanding good and evil. but good and evil is just a belief and everyone views it differently. i have been good to people and evil to people throughout my whole life, most of time without realising it.
|
Never ever display your ignorance on a public forum. And never ever
tell people that you are a person completely without a 'conscience'.
Please bear in mind that not all people are like you!
And please bear in mind that you again contradict yourself in the above!
| Quote: |
we are all the same no matter what our actions are, people commit acts some would consider worse than others, we have laws for them to make society work and to protect people, but there is no good and evil. |
How do you know you've been 'good' to people and 'evil' to people,
'throughout your whole life, most of time without realizing it'. ......!
If you do not know what is good or bad?? Wherefrom comes your
'realizasion' then, if you do not think 'good' or 'bad' exist other than as
mere "beliefs"??
Again you're making no sense, marky!
| Quote: | No, that doesn't make you evil.
Others will see it as manipulative as well.
You'll go a long way further if you quote people correctly. That way you
harm nobody.
|
| Quote: |
others will see it as not manipulative, as i did'nt misqoute you. |
Yes, you did misquote me. And those who can see this very clearly are
the good ones. The ones who you think couldn't see anything wrong, are
the ones you should stay clear of - if you want to go forward here in life!
| Quote: |
if i asked you to understand something, how can i not have a belief in it?
|
Why would you ask me to understand something, which you yourself
would have no understanding of at all, but just a mere belief!
Unless, of course, you want me to teach you about a subject you yourself
cannot quite yet understand!!
| Quote: | Plato, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, da Vinci, Le Corbusier and Piet Hein, just to
mention a very few others - that might be known to you!
|
| Quote: |
and what have these people achieved that is any different or more significant than any other proffession? |
Well, you could look them up, and thereby get a little insight yourself??
| Quote: |
also what is the true difference in your opinon? and where did these artist get their understanding of time etc from? from what or whom did they learn the concept of time etc in the first place? |
Nobody taught them. There was nobody there to teach them. They just
"knew" where to look!
| Quote: |
and how do you know they all are right as opposed to believing they are all right? |
Sometimes 'history' can be merciless. It tends to ignore the useless and
the unimportant, and rather focus on, and remember, the beneficial and
the useful. What has staying-power seems to be the right thing to
consider being not too bad!
| Quote: |
there must be some basis as to why i should think artists are the true scientists who know the true meaning, im still waiting for an explaination on this, which you claim to be fact. |
Its quite amazing how often you get things wrong! Nobody have told you
that 'artists are the true scientists'!
True artists will forever remain artists, and true scientists will forever
remain scientists. Its that simple!
(God, how I wish you would quote people correctly and verbatim, but
you are obviously on a private crusade here where your main aim is to
annoy the sh*t out of everybody; for surely I could not possibly be the
only victim, could I)?
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | if there is give me one example. i bet you cannot. from birth what is known without first learning. |
so you did'nt learn how to walk first? it did'nt take a few attempts to perfect?
| Quote: | So you think there will be human beings who in the future will be able to
break the natural laws? Do you mean all of them, or do you have a
single one in mind? Anyway, I say good for you, no matter!
|
not human beings no. their technology maybe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgYUOUfPm8c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BR8Ac7hxbg
| Quote: | No. You're saying that you know for a fact you don't know everything, and
that you know for a fact that you know anything is possible.
You're talking gibberish!
|
not at all. im saying i do not know everything about the universe and neither does mankind. therefore anything is possible. discoverys lead to technology, if there are still things to discover, i do not know yet what they are. so i cannot predict what technology would be possible in the future.
it would be gibberish if it was'nt true.
| Quote: | Because "time" do not exist in reality.
Have you already forgotten what has been talked about in earlier posts!
|
since when were any of the theorys about time anyway? they seem more focused on how the universe works. which is still unknown at this point.
| Quote: | Yes you can. Just be a little bit kind.
|
i have been kind, whilst putting up with your accusations and uptightness.
| Quote: | Truly!! Where do you get that one from??
We are talking about the unknown future. Not about the present.
Tell me in your own words why one should make a distinction about
'anything' and 'everything' when the talk is about an unknown future?
What's the point?
What's the difference between 'all and sundry'? Isn't that all inclusive?
Isn't 'anything' all inclusive? Or does 'anything' have limitations as far as
you're concerned? Isn't 'everything' all inclusive? Or does 'everything'
have limitations as well?
Please be a little more specific.
|
o' please, lets get a dictionary.
eve·ry·thing /ˈɛvriˌθɪŋ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-ree-thing] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–pronoun 1. every thing or particular of an aggregate or total; all.
2. something extremely important: This news means everything to us.
–noun 3. something that is extremely or most important: Money is his everything.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/everything
1. any thing whatever; something, no matter what: Do you have anything for a toothache?
–noun 2. a thing of any kind.
–adverb 3. in any degree; to any extent; in any way; at all: Does it taste anything like chocolate?
—Idioms4. anything but, in no degree or respect; not in the least: The plans were anything but definite.
5. anything goes, any type of conduct, dress, speech, etc., is considered acceptable or valid or is likely to be encountered and tolerated: That resort is a place where anything goes!
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anything
everything equals all, anything equals something unknown.
| Quote: | No you didn't. You said that 'anything is possible'. Full stop.
|
no i said this a long time ago
| Quote: | | my personnal opinon is it is impossible to say what is impossible. so many times have people claimed things to be impossible which later became reality, so many times have people laid down the laws of the universe only for others to later discover something which brakes those laws. |
which you agreed with here
| Quote: | | You have more often than not proclaiming the "bloody obvious", |
| Quote: | PS!
'Personal opinions' and 'beliefs' are the same. You have stated that you
do not want to "believe", so why do you now desire to tell us about your
'personal opinions', when that is what you don't really want to bother us
with?
You're very hard to understand, marky!
cheers |
you are correct which is why im puzzled about you basing your arguements on beliefs. the difference is i am not using beliefs to justify my points, and where i do mention beliefs i state them as beliefs not as facts like you do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | No. You didn't argue about my point. You misquoted me and that made
you full of trickery and deceit. Don't misquote people ever, and your
life will hopefully be strewn with roses and beautiful scents wherever you
go!
|
you said these artist have a better understanding of good and evil.
i said that you had a belief in good and evil.
you cry i misquoted you.
you will not answer how you know they have a better understanding in something you don't believe in.(and if you do belief in it, then i did'nt misqoute you did i, i simply qouted your words as they were written, then said you believed in it based on what you had wrote previous)
i just assumed you believed it as you were the one claiming they had a better understanding of good and evil, how would you know if you don't believe it or believe in it?.
| Quote: | Never ever display your ignorance on a public forum. And never ever
tell people that you are a person completely without a 'conscience'.
Please bear in mind that not all people are like you!
And please bear in mind that you again contradict yourself in the above!
|
wrong again. you chop up what i said into smaller portions to make it seem that way. some would call it misqouting.
| Quote: | How do you know you've been 'good' to people and 'evil' to people,
'throughout your whole life, most of time without realizing it'. ......!
If you do not know what is good or bad?? Wherefrom comes your
'realizasion' then, if you do not think 'good' or 'bad' exist other than as
mere "beliefs"??
Again you're making no sense, marky!
|
have you never been misjudged? your doing it now. your already doing it in our exchange, you view me based on your belief of what good and evil is and you make up your mind as to what type of person i am based on it.
need i say more. people do not judge me based on my belief of good and evil so there is no contridiction at all. and i never said i don't have a belief on good and evil, i said i don't believe in it. the fact i do not believe in it, is a belief in its self simply.
| Quote: | Yes, you did misquote me. And those who can see this very clearly are
the good ones. The ones who you think couldn't see anything wrong, are
the ones you should stay clear of - if you want to go forward here in life! |
see the first point above.
| Quote: | Well, you could look them up, and thereby get a little insight yourself??
|
how do you know i have not. i see nothing that is fact, i see theories on canvas. expressions on canvas, and feelings on canvas. nothing proven.
| Quote: | Nobody taught them. There was nobody there to teach them. They just
"knew" where to look!
|
thats magic. they had no parents, no school, no guidence, no advise, no experience. they just knew.
they learnt where to look because they obviously had those things or most of them during their life, which played a part as it does with everyone. then they looked. they found a place most fail to learn about, in order to know it. thats why the likes of such people are far and few between. you learn the way to knowing. knowing is never the first process ever.
that is assuming they were right and they knew in the first place.
| Quote: | Sometimes 'history' can be merciless. It tends to ignore the useless and
the unimportant, and rather focus on, and remember, the beneficial and
the useful. What has staying-power seems to be the right thing to
consider being not too bad!
|
in your own words. You have more often than not proclaiming the "bloody obvious", and more
often than not, trying to teach people "how to suck eggs"!
its relevant here.
| Quote: | Why would you ask me to understand something, which you yourself
would have no understanding of at all, but just a mere belief!
Unless, of course, you want me to teach you about a subject you yourself
cannot quite yet understand!! |
i missed this point so adding it now, there is nothing to understand, good and evil is like time, it dos'nt exsist in reality, only in your mind.
| Quote: | Its quite amazing how often you get things wrong! Nobody have told you
that 'artists are the true scientists'!
True artists will forever remain artists, and true scientists will forever
remain scientists. Its that simple!
|
you said artists understand more than scientists and that scientist are basically useless. your doing it again, making out im misquoting you when what i said is relevant.
so no you did'nt say the exact words but the basis of what you said is that artists know the true meaning! therefore that would make them the TRUE scientists! i never said that you said it, did i?
YOUR the one misqouting. please find the part where i said that you said artist are true scientists? i did'nt yet you say, Its quite amazing how often you get things wrong! Nobody have told you
that 'artists are the true scientists'!
i never said anybody told me that. that is what it would be a case of if artists know the true meaning though is'nt it.
i said it, i don't need to be told to work out what it would mean, thank you very much.
| Quote: | (God, how I wish you would quote people correctly and verbatim, but
you are obviously on a private crusade here where your main aim is to
annoy the sh*t out of everybody; for surely I could not possibly be the
only victim, could I)?
|
its amazing you think your not annoying, especially when you argue about specific wordings whilst ignoring the point.
if you do not like debates or other peoples points, why post on an internet forum? and your correct i proberbly do annoy people, however some can take it, some obviously cannot, and most are at least polite about it.
yep that makes you sound reasonable, i should start adding cheers at the end of my posts after accusing, insulting and getting all uptight about nothing.
you obviously like art and have beliefs based on it, my whole point with this debate is explaining how you use YOUR personnal beliefs and promote them as fact. which you have done right from the word go.
the only thing you have been right about is that time dos'nt exsist in reality, but you failed to understand that time travel is not based on earth time.
it is based on how the universe works. timetravel is just a word so people can relate and undertsand what is being proposed.
end of debate for me, this is one of the worse pointless debates ive had in a while. it is pretty obvious to me you are not willing to seperate your beliefs from what is actually known. so theres no point.
anyway im off to get my paintbrush to solve the mysterys of the universe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
end of debate for me, this is one of the worse pointless debates ive had in a while. it is pretty obvious to me you are not willing to seperate your beliefs from what is actually known. so theres no point. |
Bliss -
Thank you -
cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tamborine man wrote: |
What IS can never die |
What about that scorpion?
One moment it IS, then I crush it under my heel, then it becomes WAS and is most definitely dead.
This is the problem with mystics - any old b#llocks will do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="sam"] | Tamborine man wrote: |
What IS can never die |
| Quote: |
What about that scorpion?
One moment it IS, then I crush it under my heel, then it becomes WAS and is most definitely dead.
This is the problem with mystics - any old b#llocks will do. |
'To be or not to be - that's the question'!
Obviously your hapless scorpion was not to be!
You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
That choice of yours will one day cease to exist.
The choice you chose not to make, will live on forever.
"Death" will die. It will cease to exist. It's in its nature to do so.
But you sam, will have an enormous amount of 'grow-ups' to do,
before this event will ever take place.
And that aint no 'bullocks'!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
(In short):
the question!
be
live
exist
forever
so
do
take place.
no bullocks!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
| Quote: | Obviously your hapless scorpion was not to be!
You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
That choice of yours will one day cease to exist.
The choice you chose not to make, will live on forever.
"Death" will die. It will cease to exist. It's in its nature to do so.
|
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tamborine man wrote: | | Quote: |
You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
That choice of yours will one day cease to exist.
The choice you chose not to make, will live on forever.
"Death" will die. It will cease to exist. It's in its nature to do so.
|
|
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | Tamborine man wrote: | | Quote: |
You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
That choice of yours will one day cease to exist.
The choice you chose not to make, will live on forever.
"Death" will die. It will cease to exist. It's in its nature to do so.
|
|
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
|
Thats true.
"Life" can never die.
Only "death" can.
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Before,
"Quite harmless idiot"
Or now,
"Relentless limpet shill"
Shall I consider this a promotion? or worse than the foregoing?
or pretty much more of the same?
(sometimes its not easy to figure out what goes on in the minds of the
moderators)!
Please be gentle....... please!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
| Quote: | | "Death will die" . |
| Quote: | You chose to kill him rather than let him live!
|
| Quote: | "Life" can never die. Only "death" can.
|
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
| Quote: | be
live
exist
forever
|
| Quote: | | You chose to kill him rather than let him live! |
| Quote: | | What IS can never die |
am i the only one who has'nt got a clue what your going on about?
what is can never die, yet you say death can die contridicting your first point. you say..... be, live, exist, forever then contridict it by saying "rather than let him live", if somebody experiences death, then that IS. so what is can die and ceased to be.
try telling the dodo differently.
if your trying to say there is life after death then at least make it clear and say so in a way that dos'nt contridict. in this reality things cease to be. if they do not cease to be then who will know untill they cease to be?
again its all belief based stuff, which is fine, but your promoting it as facts in life.
death needs life to exsist. while ever there is life there will be death. death will never cease to be. death cannot die.
GLOBALLY/UNIVERSALLY, death will not die after life has ceased to be. death will be the last action and all that will be left is death. death will exsist after life.
if there was no life then life and death would'nt exsist. but there is life, and if life ceased to be all thats left is death. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
death will never cease to be. death cannot die.
death will exsist after life.
if there was no life then life and death would'nt exsist. but there is life, and if life ceased to be all thats left is death. |
So, according to your statements above, I take it that you firmly believe
that:
"Life" will die. (Naturally, I hope)!
"Death" will live forever. (Bleeding b*stard, swine, f*ck)!
Well, that's pretty much opposite to what I understand the true
situation to be, so I shall endeavour, to the best of my ability, to try in the
next few days to see it from your perspective, and hopefully after much
strenuous deliberation come over to your side!
Cheers
_________________
What IS can never die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | "Life" will die. (Naturally, I hope)!
|
yes, hopefully. although with current world events theres no way of gaurenteing anything.
| Quote: | "Death" will live forever. (Bleeding b*stard, swine, f*ck)!
Well, that's pretty much opposite to what I understand the true
situation to be |
in this reality or experience, when something dies it ceases to be in this reality. to us everyone who ever died has gone, they are no longer present, they have died and been dead for longer than they were alive in a lot of cases, apart for more recent deaths, their deaths still happened and still exsist.
if you have a idea of true reality then please explain it, because in this reality(the one we experience now) everything i said is true.
if there is other realities possible to experience afterlife, then we live on, but we still cease to be in this reality.
death cannot die in this reality untill there is no life anywhere in this reality and there is nothing left to die for death to exsist. life exsists everday, so does death. they go hand in hand you cannot have one without the other in this reality.
so everything you have said is dependant on things we have no real proof about.
everything i have said is true to this experience in this reality.
knowing what your refering to helps. why not explain the true meaning, or true situation you keep mentioning instead of little cryptic lines, im intrested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
