Total posts: 2,193
-->
@Greyparrot
1) Don't have babies before you are married, and wait until you are 21 before you get married.2) Finish high school.3) Get a job.
Oh man... i agree with all three. I even took this route, and more, bc i have a family that taught me this is how you find success. It doesn't hurt that i have a decent iq too. But, for some people, even if they did all three... does the study show it is a sure way to success? Bc the way i look at our system, it's set up like a pyramid scheme. It most definitely isn't an upside down triangle where everyone doing those three things can get to a comfortable, excess, top. Now, i don't know that's just speculation. I know it is a top up pyramid where only so many people can get to the top... but i'm not too sure about the middle ground. I think these three values do have the potential to get you to that middle ground, but how stable is that middle ground?
But again, if the middle ground is corrupted, just like a pyramid scheme, only people at the top benefit.. well then i don't find that to be a good system. The middle ground should at least be stable while the top tier is still doing their thing and making a ton of money. I want both to be fair. Which is why ideas like socialism are disgusting to me. Bc it's not fair to the doctor that spent 20 years honing his craft through hard work and time. They deserve what they have... but so do people trying.
It all comes down to your POV of this... or how you answer these types of questions: "In our current times, in regards to the people that make it to the top of the pyramid, are they taking too much and giving back too little"? So, is that right to continue how it is? Keep giving more and more power to the top? Will that really benefit us in the long run if we continued to allow this to go unabated?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Redpill moment.What if I told you that rich people are not in fact greedy as people like to portray, rather they generally sacrifice a lot of short term pleasures so they can afford long term investments and savings.What if I told you that the greediest people are often made poor through their own greed by spending and consuming more than they make while never sacrificing short term desires to invest in themselves and in the future?
Sure that is great insight. And, your right. A lot of my family is rich and that is what they tell me they do. Invest, work, play, exercise, brainstorm ideas, etc. They are always on the move going forward in life. The problem is, not everyone is like them. Also, i don't mean they are greedy in the fullest sense. I mean, my cousins, uncles, etc. always take me out and never let me pay bc they're just rich. They are more giving too in that way. I understand what you mean, which is why i would never want a proposition that is a high detriment to the people that are successful.
I've also observed the middle class. They buy Mercedes, expensive jeans, nice watches, all the stuff that they want others to think they are rich. Pretending to be rich is only harmful to the person that should be first focuses on success, then splurge when you made it. But as you say above, a lot of them will still go to Costco to get a jacket or t-shirt... why spend more than you have? I'm fully on board with that's bad mentality.
With all that said, we still have 50% of the population making less than 30k a year. That's not good. Now, i don't know if that factors in jobs like working at fast food places... in those situations, everyone knows minimum is what you get in some places, so i think they should work to advance not stay stagnant. My problem is what portion of that percentage is also college graduates, or someone working their whole life... hard worker, getting jipped off just bc his boss wants an island. It's just a screw the people working for me, i'll give them minimum, but i need my ship and island... while the employee can't by milk bc he had an extra bill to pay.
Even though i will conceded you are right in how rich people handle their money and vice versa... there is still an element of greed bc we are humans. In part, humans only care for the ones they know and love, and like. Once you are out of that circle, you basically become nothingness to them. So i would say greed in that sense is still there. Why would i give more taxes to help out these idiot Commie Liberals. You don't know them, you already hate them, they just aren't in your circle and worse against your beliefs. Hell yeah you won't want to give more money. Sure, people you like can benefit... but i think the world is a bit more pessimistic when it comes to liking/helping other people you don't know.
It has to be addressed. The long term implications of this isn't going to hold bc it's almost like mass slavery with a smile that you're in control. No one is fully free unless they are at least financially stable. I don't think it would be that hard to at least make the ones trying financially stable. Safety nets for those that can't work, or have some kind of problem, sure. Maybe a little raise depending on where you live for the fast food type jobs, but for those that tried, got degrees, are pushing forward... at least we can make them stable. And notice, stable doesn't mean rich and it probably wouldn't even be that much extra money to get them there. It's just stable so the person feels free and doesn't have to be in misery in this country of happiness.
In this case, there will still be income inequality. There will still be CEO's making a crap ton more than the rest, creators will continue to be filthy rich, same as doctors, etc. It's just a little push, to keep people on their feet so they can breathe in the fresh air. That's how i see it could work. How we can get that? I'm not sure.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Saying you would "replace" a word is not actually interpreting the verse now is it. But it is impossible to alter the last words of Allah "due to its divine nature" . All muslims understand this perfectly and this unfortunately is their dilema.
The way i look at it is... it's ancient text. Who knows if the prophet didn't put debate, but then some power hungry warrior switched it to fight. Who knows. And keep in my, i also interpret by thinking what would a perfect god mean. Would it want more death? I don't know. Haven't read the Koran in a while. But from what i did, i am fully in agreement with you that it's dangerous.
Maybe, but the word " debate" for instance does not appear in that intolerant and divisive verse Quran 8:39, does it?
No it doesn't as i believe. I made that up by going with my kind side, bc the word fighting could mean a verbal fight too. Bc i am good, that's how i'll see it. But in the overall context of the book, i often many times have trouble trying to make a verse nice. Bc you're also right that in full context, it's more easily construed to mean a literal physical fight.
Europeans and the UK, as if it isn't already with over 20,000 returned jihadis on the islamic terrorist watch list.
Yeah, they should have been properly vetted. That's a scary number.
the difference is The Christ does not instruct his followers to go out into the world and rape and murder IN HIS NAME
That is true, and i wasn't trying to compare the two bc the latter is more violent. However, even Christianity can become dangerous. We never know how or who will be interpreting it in the future, or how it will change. One little change to Jesus like, "you know your flawed and will do flawed things, but repent and i'll be with you again." I don't know, just a small change. Now, these future humans would think, well maybe i'm born to sin and keep coming back to god... that's my test. So said person becomes an evil drug lord killing humans for his/her success, and repents every night. I don't know, that's just one hypothetical but it is pretty conspicuous it has the potential to violence just like any other man-made text.
Me too. And neither do Jews. they do not stone adulterers any more do they. the do not throw Homosexuals off roofs or burn them in cages anymore do they?
No they don't but they are killing a bunch of Palestine for a piece of land they say is of their god and their right bc of that. See what religion does? It's just natural land, stones, rocks, wood, etc... that you can have anywhere, but no god says this is our land so i will kill you if you try to take it. All it does is turn good people into monsters... i mean, they feel like they are fighting for the survival of their loved ones, bc it is a profound love they have for their religion. (Which is another thing that's dangerous... obsession over primitive texts).
They are. But be careful saying Allah's word "is flawed".
I am the least bit afraid of death... i actually can't wait to see if i'm spiritually right. And, if it's something like i turn to god, well as Marilyn Manson says it best "when i'm god everyone dies." I will even go as far as saying i'm more powerful than Allah. I'd love to have a stand up match with him. But the funny thing is, i'm pretty sure it will end in handshakes. Only narcissistic gods will not find enjoyment in opposition that beats it... i will never worship an easily offended god, bc that isn't god by definition.
Well they say that now don't they. Even you have suggest this yourself when bring up "interpretation".
Yes, that is happening now... but in a couple years or decades, i think this can bring Christianity back into another age of darkness. I mean, it's all subjective to the person reading it... furthermore, if one person is smart enough to change it and get a huge following, it can reemerge as another violent religion... it's not out of the realm of possibilities.
would call you religiophobic for that statement
The outcomes and events that can come out of religion in a negative way scares me. I'm not scared of religion itself. I'm scared that it has the tools needed for a perfectly primed good and moral human being... to become a monster of a human being bc they don't see you as human anymore. It's just all these little nuances people look over bc it happens in the minority range. But i really do like how you said it, these minorities can pack a punch if they get pushed enough.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Hey btw way, did you like my choices? I was keeping you in mind to find some of my more OG listening like Bone Thugs in Harmony. I thought you'd find that OG mastery of the fast style intricate lyrics to be good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
There won't be a nuclear war over Africa since Africa doesn't have nukes. If the UN gets on my(and thett3's) side for this(which I think is actually achievable) then I don't think there will be WWIII.
But do you think there is a potential for there to be? Other powerhouses really don't like when we throw a government over just bc we want to make them more like us. What message does that send to the rest of them? They'll be thinking, "what?, one day you are going to want to attack us bc we aren't like you? Naw, lets not let this happen without showing our force." Which is sorta what is happening in the middle east. A bunch of nefarious reasons i'm sure; but, i do think on reason is that someone like Russia wants to assert their power too. That they aren't weak.
If they are willing to use violence to get in the way of the invasion, then they should get treated like enemy troops and killed.
Sure, that is my whole point... they will be enemy troops and we will have to kill them. From your last posts, i've realized you are okay with some loss of life in order to obtain a better future. I can't fully disagree with you bc i want them to be better too... it's just all of the implications in getting us there i'm wary about.
More lives get saved in the long term under US rule, and I think you dropped this point, so it would be a net positive for the continent on the basis of life.
I don't think i've dropped this point, bc i'm pretty sure i've said i agree. If anything i did now. The long run isn't what i'm personally focusing on however. Bc i feel the implications of taking over a country and their states is very dangerous. You don't know who you are pissing off; you don't know if the extremists will just go underground, strengthen, then come back full force again; you don't know what effect it will have on our soldiers mental health that they had to kill children, especially if it fixed nothing; we will lose lives in the millions as you've said, we will have to have a long war and a long time our troops staying back to rebuild the country (taking them away from a life they can have in the country they love); you'll be going against ruthless warlords in a gorilla warfare setting, which will be really hard for our troops bc missile strike have to be careful not to kill civilians; Missile strikes will actually probably kill innocent lives if we have to bomb somewhere our troops need help; bc missile strikes will be hard in an urban warfare scenario, we need troops on the ground... but how many? How long should they stay? ... etc., i can go on. I just see too many detriments in starting this war for the "hope" (bc it ain't guaranteed) that we will fix their culture... which is another important point, we are switching culture.
Since our military technology is superior to the Africans, I think almost no Americans wills suffer death or injury.
Have you ever read the Art of War? It doesn't matter who is superior or not, it's all strategy. The American troops were far superior in the middle east. But, they kept getting blown up with bombs vested, or IED's on the ground they missed. That is how a less technologically advanced country fights. They fight dirty, and it doesn't matter how much technology you have when you miss a bomb that takes out your whole crew. There are many other ways, and examples, that an underdeveloped nation can be very effective in harming the more powerful nation. I mean, we have in America a blueprint of what the most effective way to defeat an alien invasion that would be way more advanced... and, we've figured out ways understanding the Art of War (not the book this time, i mean in general).
Side note:
I don't understand why you are not thinking of alternative ways we can help them. Get volunteer doctors, get volunteer educators, crap, get a campain going that we will give all the people being abused and iPhone or Android with full access to the internet. If you look at the IQ of most of Africa, you can see a trend. I think this correlation is proper, less iq... the more you are prone to violent behavior. We need to teach them, we need to wake them up... then trust me, they'll fight back themselves. Maybe at that point we can all give them a hand. This is bc nothing is created through force. That creates more chaos (although i concede you can change cultures by adding chaos and letting it rework itself back to baseline - different story, if you're curious ask and i'll explain how). The way you change a culture is by empowering and enlightening its people from the ground up. Any good marketing person knows building ideas, a movement, etc... will always tell you it happens from the ground up. It rarely happens by the end product being pushed, especially through violence since that can only lead to more violence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Nice lyrical flow. I personally don't like the beat. But you know, that's just subjective to the fan. I'll look around his music bc i'm sure he'll have a beat that i can enjoy. He's good in general.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you really believe the rich steal from the poor? Like at gunpoint? Or are they just exploiting the greed of the poor?Did you know Massachusetts (my state) took in nearly 1 billion dollars of revenue this year through the lottery which is mainly supported with the greed of the poor? (most lottery tickets are purchased by the poor who have no clue about the risk/reward calculations)What do you think of that?
You are right that in cases people that are poor just are bc of their choices... and as you say, bad DNA. Pointing to the lottery can be a positive in what revenue comes back or taxed, but that is just one isolated situation. I'm not saying everyone is bad and doesn't give back. I'm just saying there is more than there should be that aren't of the moral / ethical background. If you leave them unchecked, they will get worse and worse.
My argument isn't bw the poor and rich, primarily. It depends, but i think a better correlation would be bw the rich and the middle class... those working and making the rich more wealthy. In that stage, yeah... i think they are stealing from the people that are helping them bc successful just bc they can. Not at gunpoint, but a gun is an assertion of force. Your power of those less powerful over you is also an assertion of force. One you can literally die if shot, one you can literally have your life destroy bc your employer threw you under the bus. So, yeah... i think if top level people in a company are only caring how much they can give themselves, and what is the "minimum" they can give their workers, is stealing from those workers. This wouldn't apply if you know, the top tier aren't making enough and the minimum is logical... to which the person should find another job if they are not feeling it at their place of work. But on the flip side, if a CEO is taking 400% of everything and leaving his/her workers to just scrap by... i think they are stealing from the workers. An extreme example would be an African nation or China. Sure they are getting rich if they own the company, but they are also paying the workers minimum. Is that okay for the sake of there being rich people? Would it really be a detriment to them if a billionaire made a million less?
There is a balance that can be found to benefit both the rich and other tiers.
Created:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Well... it's about to get stricter.From my limited understanding of New Zealand, they have some of the strictest gun control policies in the world. In fact, I'm pretty sure he chose New Zealand to make that point.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
In my opinion, there is a certain level of income inequality you can have. I think we aren't leveled out better. I don't believe in free lunches or making the middle class rich so everyone can be. No, i still think we need to have what you are saying is good for the country. But we can make sure one side isn't robbing the other side blind just bc they have the power to do so. So sure income inequality can exist, we just shouldn't let it go unabated. There are levels to it and we can't just say "at least you have a job."If you don't have income inequality, people won't be free to choose to be more productive and more competitive than others. They also won't be free to use their superior DNA to better society for all of us either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Take away the physical object factor and we still have common sense, logic, evidence (testimonial), experience, backing sources, cross referencing, intuition, instinct, application and observation ect ect...
I really wanted to answer that, but i thought i'd sit back and let you have a go at it first. I agree, those are the ways we have to test transcendent matters. But, i think Merlin is going to come back with there are no methods to falsifying a claim. But i think he is thinking of it as a scientific method... which he's sorta right. We don't have anything to "prove" spirituality. Spirituality falls under pseudoscience... but that doesn't make all the methods you explained incorrect in getting closer to the truth or even to the truth. We just can't prove it with physical instruments. Science is mainly for the physical (this reality), pseudoscience is for the transcendent.
I'm glad you found that interesting. I heard a scientist talk about it in an evolutionary sense to debunk spirituality... and right away i thought, wait, there is a perfect spiritual explanation to it too.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Income inequality is an essential component to a society that promotes equal opportunity, as some people have more genetic talent, or simply choose to be hyper productive in society, which is the backbone of the progress of any society. These people need to have the freedom to earn more than others.
So, we are going off survival of the fittest? Is that how we should still be? Bc it's pretty primitive. This world is favoring the alpha, the obsessed, and honestly, scary people fall under that too like narcissistic people, psychopaths, etc. That is who the world is favoring. The rest be damned. You were born an introvert so you get what you get... being alone and broke. A good way for you to understand my politic beliefs, always ask what would a hero do? I'm a hero at heart, or try to be. I don't agree with anything that leaves people out bc they are who they are. We all came to America bc it's suppose to be the home of the free. We need to work to get it back to that.
Making a welfare safety net for the handicapped people who cannot be as productive due to bad DNA is important, but not if it destroys the income inequality that guarantees equal opportunity. The welfare net should also not be exploited by lazy people.
This is kinda to your top point too, but i am not against people getting rich. Actually, i want doctors to be rich, i want people that give me entertainment to be rich, music, entrepreneurs, etc. If you are giving to this world in a significant way... crap, buy an island with our money for all i care. But, supporting other people that can't be those things is also a must. We can't let those that we are willingly allowing to be rich and powerful (bc they wouldn't be if it wasn't for us) go unabated. They are human too and prone to all of our darkness. The way i look at it right now is that they are stealing from us. They are being too greedy, they are too power hungry, etc., bc they're human in the end of the day. That shouldn't be left unchecked.
Now defining who "they" are is important, and figuring out a way that doesn't harm their success as you said is also important. Is higher taxes on them a way? Maybe, but who controls where that money goes? Plus, since i see them stealing from us currently, i don't see taxes as stealing from them. Taxes steal from all of us to put back into our nation... they should just suck it up, they'll still be rich. In this way, currently... i can't think of anything else. I'm going to be gone for the rest of the day... but if you have another idea how we can check this, i'd be interested in learning about it. Bc i currently agree with liberals on this point. Taxes would be the "fastest" way to get this started.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Wow, that sounds really interesting i should read it. And yeah, i think in recent times with technology and easy access to each other, the government is getting scared. People will continue to have more and more distrust and eventually anger towards them. So, i think they are secretly up to something to gain their power back. Bc once you've tasted power... you're not going to give it up. Humans are crappy that way. So, they have to be up to something. The scary part is that something usually involves the people begging the government for help... and in any scenario we are forced to beg the government for help... whatever that scenario is can't be good.1984 shows what a dystopian world would be like if the constitution was shredded and people in power were allowed to program the minds of the public. The left's war against the 1st amendment with "hate speech" laws is just the critical 1st step toward this dystopia.
Off the top of my head, the only thing i agree with on the left 'fully' is the case of income inequality. For the reasons above. If one human can get more and more power... they don't care how they gain it. As long as you're on your feet, even if that is a struggle... you're still good. I don't believe that. I think the powerful need to be checked one way or another. The thing America stands for is freedom. What gives you freedom? Money. I'm not saying everyone should be rich, but everyone should feel free if they are trying. "Trying" is also important, bc i don't believe in free hand outs. But something needs to be done. And the rights, work hard and you'll make it isn't the right answer, nor is the lefts give everyone money... so i don't know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
I think i'm being a little bias and thinking of the most recent skeptic i listened to that said he is against anything afterlife. I think you're right. Bc i have that "what if" type afterlife belief, and many do concede maybe... some are hardcore as you said.For instance, I am 99.99% sure that claims about the nature of the afterlife made by major religions are not true. That is not the same as being 99.99% sure no afterlife exists at all.
But i fully agree with you. I'm 99% sure the afterlife isn't a version of any of the Abrahamic faiths. I'm also 99% sure no one religion alone holds the truth for everyone. Although, i understand some eastern religions a little less. What i've been hearing from some mystic and gurus is actually pretty interesting... but still, i don't think they have the full truth. But, some of them i think are onto the platform at least. It's all my speculation anyways... but i am confident of the above percentages.
I'll keep my eye out for more moderate skeptics, i'd like to listen to them against a spiritual person. I guess the one's i see on Youtube are the louder minority, but the latter should be there too.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I was born in 1984... but i still haven't read that book. Considering how so many people are saying it's coming true... i really think i should read it now. And yeah... the far left is really scaring me right now. So is extreme right people, but not as much as the extreme left. They are saying/doing some crazy stuff.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Really? So would you be so kind as to interpret what is meant by the verse Quran 51 above and this verse:Quran 8:39
And fight them until there is no fitnah and until the religion, all of it, is for Allah. And if they cease - then indeed,Allah is Seeing of what they do.
I would simply replace the word fight with debate. It's really fruitless bc the most violent parts of it i can interpret kindly bc i am a kind and non-violent person. But i fully understand there are people that are not kind and are violent. They would not read it how i do. And, given the context if you are reading it all the way through... peace basically came through war. So, it is actually logical to say i'm wrong... i would be the one forcing it to be innocuous.
I'm in absolute agreement with you it's one of the most dangerous religions out there. Then again, i think religion is dangerous in general. Even if Christianity has gone through an enlightenment, there are many people that aren't very enlightened and can even misconstrue that text to do violence.
I'm agnostic and think there is a chance there is a spiritual reality... but i'm sure it's not the Abrahamic version. They are all flawed and clearly written by humans which is why they have the potential to make other humans violent. How can fallible humans write a perfect text of beliefs? They can't... bc they are greedy, power hungry, etc.
My uncle is also agnostic but with less confidence of spirituality than i have... but we both always say it's only religion that can take a good man and turn that man evil towards the world. That is actually really scary. Other faiths think they have it good right now. They went through an enlightenment and they are good. I call BS on that. How do they know a few generations down, those humans don't say "you're enlightenment is against god, you are interpreting incorrectly." Then they start to kill each other. Religion is just dangerous in general man. It scares me in more than just one way.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, yeah... just be a gentlemen and call a person an "it" if that's how "they" feel... and you won't get banned.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
In the upcoming decades (according to UN estimates), there will be 6 times as many Blacks as Whites.
According to a scientist i am forgetting his name, probably can google search this if you are more curious. But, the steps came from early humans. The world was too scary, they had too high of anxiety, too much fear... so, the brain (or however it works through time) created spirituality to lessen this fear. Once humans started to think there is something beyond this reality, the world became a little less scary and a little less intense.
I don't fully agree with this point of view, but that is from the evolutionary perspective. I personally think humans have always had it, but than again, his hypothesis isn't too bad either... it makes sense.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
I don't know your age, but you must not use too many social platforms. Do you also have a presence on Youtube, Twitter, Instagram, Parascope, Facebook, etc.? If you don't, you have no clue what you are talking about... bc censorship of content is a big issue right now. My knowledge of this incident has nothing to do with that fact.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Other people matter and treated with respect bc... they are useful to me lol. I was tempted to pick that one. But a better world one is cool too.
65% ... i would personally say more so 50% ... some of the questions were lacking in options. For a little test though, fun, thanks.
Edit: Lol... 55% if i checked "they are useful to me"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Since i hate math and stumbled myself into this thread.. as Marilyn Manson so succinctly says... "When i am god everyone dies" ... So give them treatment 3. At least we know 200 survive and we'll have 400 less humans...
Created:
-->
@mustardness
There was something i watched or read a long time ago where women were in control. It was hilarious bc it ended up as men being in chains and slaves to them. It was interesting i remember, in how it got there. But for the life of me i can't remember where i saw / read it.
But, you might be right... maybe if god was a girl we would be better off too. The problem however with women in power is that they hate other women. Plus, have you ever worked for a 'bitchy' women before... i guarantee you it would be the worst job you've had. A list of the worst jobs i had were with bad women bosses or gay bosses. But then again, some of my best jobs are with cool women... bc they wanted to hook up was an added bonus :)
So who knows what would happen. Not all women are nurture, as not all men are what you say. The people that tend to get into power are generally wolves. I personally think having intellectuals that are experts in specific politics run our politics is the best move we can make... man or women, just know everything about what you doing... bc as it is... all we have are greedy lawyers, just in general greedy narcissists are running our world... of course it's going to turn out to be shit.
Created:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
It's a damn shame he couldn't apply his genius in a way that didn't slaughter people who are innocent and just wanted to live their lives, at least for the most part.
What other avenue would he have had if he was being censored? I didn't read the manifesto so i have no clue, actually pretty ignorant to this whole ordeal bc i simply don't care anymore. But you and Resurgent do have a point in pushing people underground is not a good idea.
I would argue... since i don't know him i'm going to speculate. If he wasn't someone, if he didn't have that narcissistic drive, etc... that's people that get into power mostly. The way he did it was the most brilliant way to get his message across. It's sad really... the world knows how to trigger our media and get attention. They are very predictable. And look, now they want to ban 'military style weapons.' Like that will save them or anyone for that matter... push a dog into the corner, it will bite... i've been saying that ever since the censoring began.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Given that, I wonder what gods would be the most prominent without those two books?ie Which gods would you worship in their place?
This is a hard question to answer. But, there would be some kind of spiritual belief. The hard part to answer is that you need to be more specific. Or maybe give a scenario. Which god would it be today? Or, which god would it be today if humans couldn't keep records? Which god would it be today... i actually think something like the Abrahamic god bc that text is the best for indoctrinating people that can't think for themselves. The concepts of have no god other than me, don't do this or that, blah. It creates followers that don't question due to being afraid of hell. It's genius in that regard.
Now, the second scenario might be different... if we couldn't keep text. In that situation it could really be anything. Again, the same rules apply... what religion can i create where people will follow it and not question it? You can create anything really at that point.
But if we add in you can't keep text and you can't have another person to tell you... well, that would be interesting. I think people would worship themselves as god. Or, since people are creative, they'll think of something that will be unique to them. There would be essentially multiple faiths. Different person to person based off personality.
Edit* i should add, or no faith for some. But there will always be spirituality bc it's encoded in us through evolution... or maybe even, spiritually encoded.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
And do you think the rest of the world would be okay with that? Or, maybe would that cause a world war?Around 3 Million African and American soldiers would die
"They eat hearts bc they don't have food"
No my man, they eat hearts to assert power, put fear, and take the persons soul within themselves. The one's eating hearts are actually the one's fine with food. The warlords control the slums, they are kings. They get everything they need by force: food, drugs, sex, etc. They sound like scary people huh?
You didn't answer one of the more important ones... do we kill the child warriors?
What effect will that have on Americans fighting this war?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
I don't know if i am listening to the wrong ones, but most of them posit that they are 99.99% sure there is nothing having to do with an afterlife. I just don't understand that confidence if one looked at things from a higher perspective without preconceptions. I understand that science is doing great at figuring out this world... but that is mainly what it is designed for... figuring out this reality. Not very good for multiple dimensions and higher intelligence's, etc.Most skeptics would agree that there are lots of wild ideas that could be true. They just think that one ought to assume most of them are not true without solid evidence.
In regards to evidence, i would say there is evidence to at least suspect "spirituality." I'm using that term loosely. There are millions of people that have experienced it, and certain people that have a high intelligence in understanding it (i label spiritual intelligence). I've personally had experiences that break what we know to be possible. And i'm just one person. I've heard a lot of different people tell me about their experiences, and read a lot of experience. Bc i've had experiences i'm sorta obsessed with asking others bc i just want to know i'm not the only one. I've learned i'm not, but it still hard to accept. Bc i've heard things that should not be possible. Are they all lying, mistaken, delusional? I'm not. So, i really don't know, but i would say we shouldn't overlook it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
By comparison yes, but mentality no... they are lions. They will fight until their last breathe... and live stream eating American hearts.Africa is the deer by comparison.
Now, you are right we can change it. I mean, crap... we should liberate the whole world. They would all be better if they were more like us.. right? But guess what... that doesn't change the fact that a lot of people will die. That is the only thing you are either overlooking or don't see seriously enough... people, Americans, will die. We are a powerhouse and less of us will likely die... but death is death. And further, for this exchange in death, or you sure things will change? Do you really think force will change a culture? Are you okay with having Americans be full time police to make sure they don't go back to eating hearts? Do we kill all of those that eat hearts? How many are there? How many children will we have to kill to get to them? Will we kill the child fighters? See what is repeated throughout this... killing. If you are okay with that, i agree if they were more like America more people would be happy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
Outplaying there Outplayed here. And yes, my views spiritually have changed or i should say evolved, since DDO. I have also learned how to say i really don't know... which makes me a hybrid spiritual agnostic. But i am more confident in a spiritual outcome than the latter... i just accept it's also a possible outcome that you just die. And honestly, it feels a lot better knowing and not being sure. I personally always need to find humility in what i believe to feel my conclusions may also be right. I've also engaged in more of the topics than i did on DDO... politics, philosophy, and others when i see an interesting topic. But just like DDO, i disappear and reappear. If only people knew i disappear just to read what they have to say without my opinions being asserted into the conversation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Oh, okay. Great. I respect that view that there are things that don't need a conscious mind, but really who know right. I'm a weird hybrid of agnostic and spiritual. The reason is that everything our science is speculating on i can also connect it to spiritual conclusions. Bc there is one, or i should say a couple since it falls under monistic type beliefs, that has implications that can answer what, in my opinion, science can from a "supernatural" perspective. I don't like calling it that bc it's natural if it's real but for lack of a better word.
Now, i've examined a lot of these and i think it can be concluded to something like an infinite consciousness. This is unlike the religious god view that it creates outside of creation. In an infinite mind type hypothesis (i just call source) everything just is happening. It's like making your mind incorporeal and infinite. Everything you know is just real. But it's not good to anthropomorphize it like that bc we can't imagine what it can as finite beings. If this source has always been, and is infinite... well, the implications of what it is would be wild. I've really gone done this rabbit whole so i understand to a certain level, but some parts are still hard to realize bc they can be one or another thing. But as a platform, its implications allow for something like this reality.
I call it source bc i don't think, unlike the gods of religions, this source is a who... it's just a source consciousness. The who within this source would be us... we are the individuals within this platform. But it's not necessary to go down that rabbit hole. Point is, this platform i have found can answer a lot of questions, even some paradoxes facing us in science. That's why i am always interested in hearing what skeptics have to say against a "consciousness behind this world/realty" bc i haven't heard anything convincing enough to change my suspicion that it really could be true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Yeah, that's one other benefit of it being legal, plus ending the drug war, plus decreasing crime associated with addicts and drugs in general. It's the most logical conclusion. But, just as every issue... there are a lot of people making policies while ignorant. How many politicians have been addicted? How many have even touched a drug? That's the problem with our world... ignorant people making policy about things they know nothing about.I agree as of right now, with a tax to bring in revenue for the federal government.
I think the world should change. Politicians should be of every expertise. We need intellectuals to run our nation... not greedy lawyers.
I'll pose one of the arguments they always make against making them all legal... it will increase usage. However, they don't understand the difference bw a normy and an addict. A normy can do any drug they want and not become addicted (if they know it's addictive which is another key). A perfect example is in the Kratom legality right now. Normies are using it and not becoming addicted. On the opposite spectrum, addicts are having a hard time with it. In what's legal right now, an addict will become an addict as soon is he/she takes their first sip of alcohol, take kratom, take a pain pill, take adderal ect. There are already countless ways for an addict to be triggered into addiction. So the argument they will increase is just ignorant.. that's going to happen anyways... but even say it's a small increase.. that's a better issue to tackle than gang wars, drug wars, strung out criminals, etc. It purely ignorance of drugs that we have it this way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I don't think it's too far off if you look at it as a simple non-literal correlation. The reason you are not is bc you don't take spiritual people seriously. How do you know spiritual people aren't on to something? I'm not including religion in this bc i think religious people aren't truly the most spiritually intelligent bc they don't think for themselves. I'm talking about spiritual people that escaped indoctrination, became their own, and are truly obsessed, just as a scientist would be, in figuring out what is most logical if there is spiritual implications.
If you take these two people, what she is saying is correct. One is fully obsessed in figuring out this world (scientists) and one is fully obsessed in figuring out beyond this world (enlightened spiritual person). It just doesn't make sense to me why you would ask a scientists that has no care about spirituality to be an expert on spirituality and vice versa. Sure, both of them can learn each others position in order to debate, etc... but the key is one is obsessed in figuring out one thing and the other in figuring the opposite. That's what makes people professionals at what they do. Which we can label that as a priest bc a priest is suppose to be the expert... but i personally think that's a bad comparison since a priest is obsessed with someone else's work and doesn't evolve. But as a general non-literal correlation... it works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Out of all the drugs that can be legal, it should be cannabis. I would add hallucinogenics to this too. I would really like to make alcohol illegal, tobacco, kratom, and other such addictive drugs. But, due to history... i know that's not a good idea. But mainly, weed and shrooms (i'll categorize them by those names) have no addiction... or at least, physical addiction which is most damaging. Now, they can have addiction if someone is using it to mask something. But, that something is what comes back... it's not addiction.
I'm a recovering addict and have done almost every drug you can think of, and have become addicted to them as well... the ones you can be addicted too. I've smoked weed for years and was able to stop them and get no physical withdrawals. It's physical withdrawals that are the most dangerous thing to look out for in drugs.
Alcohol will kill you cold turkey, or make you feel so shitty that you will do anything for another sip. Now, this is less harmful bc it's legal. Which kinda puts me in a make them all legal mood. Bc meth and opiate addiction is just as horrible in regards to withdrawals (although if your healthy it can't kill you like alcohol). But since it is illegal, there are only so many places you can go to get them. And, there may be long times you'll have to be in withdrawal bc say a dealer isn't available. In those cases, i think withdrawal can lead to violent behavior or crime.
This is bc when you are addicted to these drugs... you are shutting down your frontal cortex. You are mainly operating off of you reptilian brain. Add in the fact that you literally feel like you're in hell when in withdrawals... some people can do crazy things.
So, i'll be the argument on the opposite end of the spectrum. I think we should make all drugs legal and regulated. I didn't even bring up that it would possibly even end the drug war... but as you can see, it has detrimental implications on the individual as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Well, the way i look at it is a bell curve. Just like iq has its curve. There are the, um... mentally challenged, to the average level, to the genius level. I look at spiritual intelligence the same. It's a bell curve were the atheists are in the mentally challenged range, to the average religious, to the genius level of deeper understanding. Now that's not an insult to atheists... although maybe i shouldn't say it how i did, but it's an example... okay. They are most definitely not mentally challenged, but they sort of are in the spiritual sense. This has to be this way. Actually, i would say, unlike iq, this bell curve is flipped. I bet people on the opposite end, atheists, do better in this life bc they are focused solely on this life. That's the only way we are going to get scientists that will break through. Richard Dawkins wouldn't be who he is if he wasn't how he is on this curve. So unlike iq were the other side of the curve determines more success, i would say the opposite is true for spiritual intelligence.
Now this isn't saying people on the other side of the bell curve can't be successful. This is very unlike the iq, just similar bell curve. However, lets call them the genius level spiritual people will impact this world different than the opposite end. The average, religious, portion of it will also do fine. Now agnostics are the most interesting to me bc they can be anywhere on the bell curve.
I bring this bell curve up bc some scientists think that's just how humans are due to evolution. That it is purely of this world. I would disagree bc the entire bell curve can be construed under spiritual speculation as well. Bc if you manifest here to be Dawkins, you will manifest here on the left side of the bell curve. If you want to come here remember just enough to have a belief, you manifest here on the average side of the curve. If you manifest here wanting to know as much as you can in such a reality, you come here on the tail end. All of this can be correlated to a spiritual manifestation of who you want to be, or who you are to this world.
Anyways, thought you'd find that interesting and maybe i can trigger some atheists to join.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
"infinite mind"? Can anyone explain what that is? I dont think there exists any rational, logical common sense explanation.
Hey man, i've always liked you. I think you have a creative mind. But i'm not going to tell you my reasons if you don't critically analysis them with me. As soon as this turns to "you're wrong bc you have no rational, common sense, etc." thing, i'm done, okay. But i'm more than happy to explain some of my reasons.
Reason one would be it seems that everything in this universe is one. Not only that, everything is a wave. It's almost like we aren't even here really. Now, i know when i say the point, "everything is made of the same thing, atoms," i'm leaving out a bit of other stuff. Everything observable is one. But we do have to account for dark matter and dark energy. I think energy happens within this matter, so i am assuming dark energy happens within dark matter. Without knowing what dark matter is, i'm speculating. But, i wouldn't be surprised if it follow that we are all still one.
Edit: I realized i made a mistake, energy isn't within matter but it's own thing. But still i don't want to speculate about dark energy since we have no clue. But still, energy is part of a mind so it doesn't detract from my oneness hypothesis.
My second reason is the wave function property of matter that we see. Like i said, it's almost like we aren't here. The scientists proposing an answer to some of this, including quantum entanglement, is the many worlds hypothesis. Well, that hypothesis is a watered down, very materialistic, version of what i'm saying. Bc not only do i think there are infinite of this reality happening, i think there are infinite realities happening of all kinds.
Third reason is it answers some paradoxes. For instance the infinite regress paradox. If you have and are a manifestation of an infinite mind, you can travel instantaneously and manifest in any of these realities you imagine. It's faster than any travel we can do. Light speed takes how long to be on the moon, how long does your imagination take to get on the moon? Now, make your imagination an incorporeal mind a part of an infinite mind that has the ability to manifest itself as a corporeal being wherever it imagines itself to be. Infinite regress is a paradox bc it is using linear time or light speed to get from one end to the other. An infinite mind breaks linear travel in such a paradox.
I really do hope you have a discussion with me and this wasn't all in vain.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyseGui
Can you explain this evidence please.I just think it the most logical answer given what evidence we have.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
No Nazis were in the minority, but it didn't stop this minority causing the deaths of 60 MILLION!
I agree with you there. A minority of people can do a lot of damage if left unabated.
Which is?
Firstly, you can't say there is "no" good parts in the Koran. It's a book of morals that even shares some with the other Abrahamic faiths. When it comes to the bad stuff, it all comes down to who is interpreting it. If it says "stone your wife bc she cheated on you" or something... i would take that as a metaphor not literal. I would tell my wife it feels like i want to stone you bc you cheated on me... key being that's how it makes me feel vs. literally doing it. With that said, there is also very dangerous text in the Koran. Especially those relating to leaving the faith. They will forever kill each other if one group to the next thinks the other group is a traitor and infidel. There are of course a lot of other parts of the Koran i don't enjoy reading. Only a person really really trying to make it peaceful and can think outside the box can. But just reading it as a normal person that can't see grey areas... it's very dangerous text.
Our world leaders insist Islam is a religion of peace when it clearly is not.
Well for the majority it technically is... but i do agree with you they shouldn't obfuscate the matter by calling it that bc there is a minority that prove it's not a religion of peace. And any person reading the Koran by themselves, at face value, wouldn't conclude it's a peaceful religion. The first time my aunt read it, she said, "Holy F* hell, this is the religion they been trying to get me to believe." It was hilarious.
And no one did a thing about it.
I really want to get all conspiracy theory on this point, but who knows... maybe they just missed it. Or, maybe they wanted to ban rifles and let it happen. This world is pretty F* up man.
Dare I say it but that is a large assumption on your part.
Yes and no. I've asked many people if they know what Sunni and Shia are in conversations about this topic and most had no clue. Now, that's not a true study, but it's something. So dare i say, how many people do you think know the difference? Or even know there is two sects? Out of ten i would say maybe 1.
No they operate with deceit and denial and bias when it comes to Islam/muslims.
I agree the liberal type way is too nice, but i would also say the conservative way is a little to forceful.
Yes this is called addressing the secondary problem
I'll watch the video. But yeah, this last point is the most important. They are bias. They will cover some attacks but not all. Mostly those that also address American law too. Like the CharlieH. massacre. That was horrible bc it was an attack on free speech. They knew that would rile up the American population. It's just so clear they are trying to push an agenda, and at the same time push what makes them the most money. I'm sure you see it too... they show things that trigger Americans which is good for their pocket and agenda. Rarely do they show something random. I think they've noticed that when they do, they don't make that much money on it... bc if they did, they would be showing it all the time.
Of course not all muslims will act upon these words but hundreds of thousands of the 1.5 billion muslim adherents will and do and have.
Yeah it's sad... like you said, a minority can cause a lot of pain. Anyone reading that text without someone that is an apologist to interpret can't escape how violent it is...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@crossed
Trust me, if you are in severe pain, you will be begging for that intravenous shot of dilaudid / morphine.
If you are going to look at it spiritually... i will add i don't believe in your religion, you can look at becoming addicted to these drugs as when you are sinning. Bc when you are addicted to these drugs you are not in control anymore... and to be honest, it is almost exactly like letting a demon take control. And getting off it, is almost exactly the description of hell. But here is the good part, you can overcome that and be even stronger after this experience. Experiencing being controlled by a 'demon,' defeating that 'demon in hell,' makes you quite strong as long as you know that being addicted means being dead and not in control. Some people just like not being in control and will give the 'demon' their life... to each their own. I don't think they go to hell... i just think if they move on from this life, they take their pain with them. You can have pain at home, or fly to Spain... you won't escape that pain by running away. This addiction scenario can have a spiritual connotation to it, so i'll give you that much... but, doing it to stop pain, fix a mental disorder, keep you safe... those are all 'god' given relief to those suffering.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyseGui
A simulation of what kind should be your question. I also believe there is a possibility this universe is a simulation... but, i would add a mix of lucid dreaming to that simulation. I would say it is a combination of the two. The hard part is understanding where it comes from. A simulation of a dream like state, can come in a couple ways. It can be a computer, it can be Solipsism, it can be a god/creator - but this gets complicated. Does this god dream us up? Which would be solipsism; Does this god make a marble and we are in that marble. Then the marble analogy is just as interesting bc that is correlative to a computer. Did it program us into marble? If it didn't, what does that look like? Is it imagining us into the marble, which is again correlative to solipsism. Or, are we all god? Is everything happening inside a cosmic consciousness? I might be missing some, but i prefer the cosmic and/or infinite consciousness version. Why, bc then a simulation of a lucid dream type is just happening within this consciousness. If this consciousness is infinite, than every possible world / reality is already happening and known. The question really then comes to is there layers? Do you have a true self, and do you get to control staying as yourself... i don't know, but i think it would be a logical outcome of an infinite mind to have individualized to avoid being fully solipsistic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Can you provide some links?
This is one that i remember watching and can find (it was easy bc who can forgot 'cannibal warlords').
I am pretty sure they don't live living off of $2 a day for their lives.
You're not getting it. Of course some or i'll even say most people don't like it. Who likes to be tied up and turned into a slave? You'll notice that in the documentary too... but don't turn your logical mind off... bc what you'll see is it's the older guys that have matured that aren't eating each other anymore. But that same guy preaching in the end of the video use to eat people's hearts.
You have a country of warlords, young, easily malleable, drugged up, and blood hungry. Do they overall love it? Maybe not, like you see... when some get older they regret it, but do they all? No. They are kings of the slums. They are powerful man over the weak. You think they'll just hand you that? Good luck taking power from a lion when it looks at you as the deer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Just remember suicide means you are rage quitting. If you haven't heard of the term rage quit, it comes from gamer's that just turn off or get out of the lobby bc they are being beat... sometimes very beat sometimes just beat. Rage quitting in life is similar to a team based game... which are the worst games to rage quit in bc you are leaving your team to be beat even worse. You are leaving likely one team member that is really trying to get you up... you just don't know the conclusion bc you left them behind. And, ultimately, what happens to rage quitters is that no players want to play with them anymore, they get kicked off the team... they are avoided bc they are more hurt by a rage quitter than the rage quitter is getting hurt. Something to think about even if you're not serious and are joking... this is the implication. Now... if you have no one, nothing, and are tormented... honestly, i would have no issue with rage quitting this life. It only hurts you in that you don't get to see it through...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Time is of no concern in terms of souls progressing.
Hmm, in that way it makes a lot of sense. Maybe that's why we also have this progression, although quicker, in our reality. What i mean is, if a source is going to manifest into a reality... each of its progression need their time. This always gets me to an evolving source, but i guess it is somehow conceivable a source that has always been just saw progression in this way somehow... who am i to understand an infinite mind. But our own progression or call it evolution can be bc each character has needed to play its part for the future, more advance characters. It's almost like dinosaurs were the sources childhood phase and now we are its adolescence. The interesting part is, if we follow this logic, when it is mature, all the way to a wise old source... at that wise old man stage, we will probably have created a similar source here. Or everything could just end tomorrow and i'm wrong, lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
There's probably a handful of that type of being on this planet and one thing is for sure that they are here to uplift the consciousness of mankind and they have come purposefully not randomly.
Yeah this is interesting and follows the spiral dynamics model. It's interesting bc these people that get to the top level, teal, the majority of them want to uplift mankind's consciousness. That's why i know i'm split if i am even that high, i'm split bw the two bc sometimes i want to, sometimes i really don't care about anyone but myself. But it's interesting those top tiers are usually people that have practiced all their lives to connect inside themselves and then to the world, and that's what they become... and oh so rare they are. That almost seems like by design bc they can't be many or else what they said would be like a religion... empty. They are like the whispers through the wind... you really have to listen or want to listen to hear it.
I just wonder why more of them aren't studied. I would think someone that can control their astral projections would be interesting to study. I've done it before so i know it can be done, but controlling it is a whole different issue. Actually, i told my uncle about it when i did it and he was a bit confused how i did it. He is a neurologist and i remember this stumped him for a bit of what would be happening to allow for me to step outside my body. He just surrendered that it wasn't what i thought and it was a dream (could have been in my scenario)... but, i don't know if that is sufficient enough an answer overall. Bc i know people say they can do it under control. Never met one, but heard. Actually, if they are teal tier, i would understand they wouldn't care to be studied. Their main focus wouldn't at that point be proof but how to help humanity. So not only are these people rare, they don't care to prove it... it would be interesting if one did.
At one state, the highest state is non-dual and everything is One Source so there is no such thing as good or evil because right and wrong only come into play through relations, through separation, duality, contrast and opposing views.
Oh, i see what your saying. I'm following and can see your point of view, it makes sense. I just really look at it in an anthropomorphic kind of way with our art being the main example. It's like is Stan Lee evil for creating Thanos? Is Thanos evil, well in the duality of the movie yeah, but he was necessary to the story right? Without Thanos or any evil characters for that matter ... how can you have a hero? Of course it can be argued hero's would be the ones that just save people from car accidents, natural disasters, etc... but aren't even those events evil? They still kill; what's the difference bw wind killing you or Thanos snapping his fingers? I don't see a difference other than the human has choice to. But do they? You can look at Thanos as a natural disaster that requires the hero's to save people from. So that's how i really look at it bc i think our art is a projection of who we really are. Not only is that true in this reality, i think the more imaginative arts (like fantasy) is another projection of lives we've forgotten. It's just really interesting humans have this ability to create realities, characters, entire universes really of things we've never seen. Plus, i can't wait for Avengers: Endgame... lol. Hence, the Thanos analogies... Damn trailers, bc i just watched the newer one. Hyped.
The funny part is that many things people think is absurd or stupid exists in the higher worlds...other universes and planets, even fantasy movies are unknowingly expressing what already exists.
You know, this gives me goosebumps, simply bc it is so rare to see someone say this. I've been online since early 20's and i've never seen anyone say this in forums or Yahoo Answers (where i started :p). I always thought there is no way this could be true (interestingly though, except when i was a kid.. i was sure it's true). But then i started examining this infinite consciousness concept... if that is true, then what in the world is it not capable of? Imagine everything we have imagined to this point times infinity. That is truly incomprehensible. But such a platform would allow for such implications. It's funny though, bc the people that understand this infinite source platform, don't seem to understand how many realities are possible. Most guru's, mystics, and the like i at least listened to basically only think this reality is it. Reincarnation is only into this reality. Which of course i think they're wrong, but it confuses me how they can know so much but so little.
I think your advantage over them is that you don't only listen to their perspective. Again, interestingly, in this world of indoctrination, the only way you can find this conclusion/platform is to examine all beliefs and philosophies and most importantly do it by and for yourself, with your own mind. Of course there are small exceptions like kinda people like me (i say that humbly) since i saw this as soon as i could imagine. But i did forgot it due to indoctrination. It took giving a middle finger to all of them to come back to what i already knew. The path to this platform is interesting in itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
@ludofl3x
I'll let you two decide:
But if you'd really like to know what's going on in my mind... this whole song is one piece of my mind:
Created:
-->
@Stephen
No it isn't nothing like Christianity. Nowhere will you read in the Christian New Testament the Christ instructing his followers to go out into the world and rape, butcher, maim and murder people IN HIS NAME for not being Christian as does the Muslim quran.
You should work for the media :p You are pretty good at taking me out of context. Everything i said about Christianity was an example/analogy to what is happening in Islam... not that Christians are like that, although they sorta were at times, but def. not today. I wasn't saying any of that, so i'll skip your next comment reply about Christianity. I was giving an example using Christianity not saying that's what it is.
Then you do not understand the makeup of this vile ideology. Muslims will and do live and die to achieve the ultimate goal of Islam. These are facts.
Again where did i say that isn't one of their goals. Also, it's one goal not shared by all Muslims. But it is enough to be concerned about sure. You have to understand how these two religions have splintered among themselves (illustrated by the Christian analogy). One group by themselves isn't violent, they are actually following the good part of the Koran. Bc it's a community and everyone agrees with what they have. It's when these communities meet other communities that say, "well no... i have the correct translation and you don't" is where the violence can begin. But this history of it all is all irrelevant and kind of just a courtesy by me to show you a little more into what i understand about the area.
The main point your making is why doesn't the media cover these things. 1) A lot people don't understand what going on over there; 2) that's just not how the media works; 3) The media can't cover everything... there is only so much time they have to show things and so many people they have to cover / write it; 4) i truly think most Americans could care less unfortunately therefore ratings would drop and they'd lose money... losing money is a key one too; and of course 5) they want us selectively outraged towards their agenda's. Like "a guy uses an AR 15 to kill churchgoers in NZ" then headline a few days later "NZ prime minister (or whatever he's called) says he will ban 'military style weapons' after shooting." Sounds pretty selective and perfectly fit in the agenda now doesn't it...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Okay, i think i understand now. The significant part i was missing, or it didn't sink in last time, was that post hoc observations are more subject to bias bc of human pattern seeking behavior. I did really enjoy reading your examples and the work you put into demonstrating them, so thanks for doing that.So with that said hopefully I answered your question sufficiently. If you want me to go more into detail about any particular point or you have any other questions please do so. If you feel I did not answer your question sufficiently, misunderstood your question, or did not understand the answer please let me know that too.
But we must get back on track a little i think. Bc this statistics things started out with you mentioning i may have some misunderstanding when it comes to statistics. I have conceded you are right about that, but i also have two degrees which both (one more than other) involved many stats classes, so i'm not completely ignorant of it. That's not to boast or anything, i just don't want to pretend i'm playing dumb or something bc i'm not. I truly understand what you mean after you remind me a little, and at the same time, i truly don't remember some of it.
So the main question comes up still in regards to getting back on track (i know i said i'll do that in the last paragraph but got off track again... excuse my messy mind), you said there is some kind of misunderstanding of stats i'm not considering or something on those lines. I don't think i am misunderstanding it in the bigger picture. Like my concern i mainly addressed in my last reply, most of my experiences aren't post hoc. I know they are suppose to happen again, and they've been continuing to happen. I guess it can be argued it's kinda both post hoc and not. But this ultimately doesn't matter too much bc of the experiences i'd rather discuss.
So again, if i mix in the experiences that have multiple coincidence, i don't think it is unfair of me to say they are rare and/or extremely rare occurrences. Maybe i might over estimate by saying like winning the lottery, but i would think close. Especially since some of them foreshadow events that haven't happen't yet, some happening on the spot... but the key is, there were feelings, observations, sequence, events that needed to take place, then the experience itself. I find that to be mind blowing rare, and i think it's fair for me to think at the very least, that shouldn't have been possible (on its face).
So really, you did not address those concerns i had in my reply post (114) which i was more detailed in. I don't see, although appreciated, how your statistic analogies and examples fully apply (bc they definitely play a part i'm sure) to my specific experiences. They do apply more so to my weaker experiences, but even then... those weaker experiences are still experiences for a reason. Although there is only one coincidence, most of my experiences that should 'continue' to happen in the future, and have been, are the weaker experiences which is why i still categorize them as such. I just feel this is a lot different than a one time guess that turned out to be right, or two, or three, that turned out to be right. I shared just four, i've lost count at this point of my experiences... all i can say is more than a dozen maybe two at this point in my life (i keep it at a dozen and not more purposefully cutting experiences out just in case i'm mistaken but it is for sure more if i'm just counting). That changes the tables in the stats i believe to where i can at least say... this is statistically improbable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
I've enjoyed reading through this whole thread and don't take anyone's side really... i'm too ignorant of the science to know exactly who's right or wrong. I am of the opinion evolution is true and it is more how Ram says it... and/or the gradual version of it. I'm a fan of that and can see it working with minimal knowledge overall, but i really don't care... we're here so we're here. But i noticed this:
My point was that there are plenty of examples of information that do not require a conscious mind to create.
And why i am replying to you specifically. If we are examining in this entire thread a physical world or anywhere in this universe we can examine... we are examining this reality. Which seems to follow laws and have reasons to its existence. So when you say this phrase above, sure there are things that don't need a conscious mind to form... but i must ask, how are you so sure there isn't a conscious mind behind the entire universe? This isn't an argument for creationist or any religion, just in general... i know this is off topic, but i'd like to know where you get this knowledge or confidence? Or is it just simply your opinion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
When the soul leaves the body the very next layer is the astral body and this astral body correlates with the astral world which is what most NDE's observe.
I'll only copy lines but this is in regards to your first post. When i read your beliefs, it's interesting to me bc i primarily 1) look for spiritual platforms that make sense of my experiences and 2) that would give me what i would consider paradise. It sounds to me that your levels hypothesis / observations, especially in regards to NDE's, would explain my experiences, and of course the rest allows for what i would consider paradise. I really wonder sometimes if my mind is somehow connected to other levels. Bc not only have i always known, as a very young kid, this reality isn't where i'm from or at least there are other realities, i also have had experiences that shouldn't be possible. Maybe that is a tapping into the higher realms. I guess if there can be certain brains that can connect to this world like an Einstein type mind, i'm not calling myself a genius, there could be minds that are more connected / remember more / blocked out less of the other worlds. So i'm always impressed when i hear you explain this platform bc not many see it. Plus, i see you have some eastern philosophy in there as well in regards to the reincarnating until you fix your karma which i've always found fascinating. Plus, i should add, western monks / gurus / mystics, it has been said that through so many years of mediating, they have actually left there bodies and just died in mediation. I find that also interesting and wish it could somehow be tested. But it's hard to know 1) when it will happen and 2) if they are just dying naturally. But i suspect there is a little more to it. I think the best thing we can test is past live memories at this point. But understanding this platform and the implications of what your past lives could be... i think it's also hard to find someone that had a past live on earth. But theoretically, that would be the easiest thing to test at this point anyways. Good luck having the west do that study though... if it doesn't make money, it ain't getting grants. Stupid western philosophy of greed, i swear.
One last thing is, i'm not sure if darkness or evil really exists. I think it only exists in this reality bc we are afraid to die. But if we become infinite, was there ever really evil? I don't know. So this kinda goes into my next point which i'll make below... i'm not sure some people can transcend... i think they are who they are infinitely. Especially the people, if you've met any you'd know, that just have no minds... their like robots doing what they do and very malleable.. they just seem like necessary characters to make this reality whole.
Yes, the soul can play mindlessly for as long as it wants though too and that is part of the reason for these experiences.
I hear what you're saying, it's again very close to eastern philosophy... i just have a sneaking suspicion, as i indicate above, that some people can't snap out of who they are. From what you wrote, i am assuming you are of the belief everyone can snap out of their level if they learn to and cultivate it... i just think even then, it will always be incomprehensible for some people... like they were created to be what they are infinitely. I don't know really... i understand how your observation can be likely, maybe even more likely, than what i think. I'm just not sure and have no way of knowing.
nah I really do have people I love here there's a lot of beauty but because of the swing of duality it can be brutal as well. The heaviness and restrictions of the physical body become mundane at time.
Firstly, that's a really cool belief. I'm happy you find this world beautiful and have a loving family. But there is a reason i usually ask this question, and it's bc i've noticed you're paradise will mostly be what you love. Who knows until then really, but i would have been able to guess some of it. Creating worlds for others, that's awesome and something i don't think i can ever do. Actually, we have a lot different in what we would consider paradise. If you looked at my life, and don't want to tell too much here, you would start to understand why i find what i do as paradise... which basically, put your finger on a fantasy movie you've seen and i'm probably there. For instance you've heard my obsession with vampires, but there's more than just that like a lot of worlds i've learned from Anime i've watched, Harry Potter type realities, LOTR type realities, Marvel, DC, etc. Lol. But there is a theme that is similar in all of these that i personally see manifested in my world. A theme all these types of people would have to go through. I don't like talking about what this theme is... but i see it in my life. It's weird to me how what i would consider paradise matches who i am, and what others think it is, matches who they are. Who knows... things may change... but i also don't want to be in this reality for long. I don't see myself getting very old. Am i right in predicting that? I don't know... but i do agree i would live this life 100 times over for the things i love. Actually, i believe we are all (or a lot of us at least) are here for the things we love about this reality. I just don't love it as much as you do... how can i? When i can imagine myself in any of those other realities i mentioned. Like i think i already told you, that why i feel old already and out of place... i don't think this is a reality i would manifest in often. And i also think, interestingly, that's why i would manifest here sorta remembering... bc if i manifested here as an atheist (or really any other belief) i'd probably be dead by now. Well, not agnostic bc i find not being sure is actually very uplifting bc i can imagine it, i suspect it, i'm just not sure... kinda makes you excited to die and find out making death more of a blessing than a curse.
Created:
-->
@KingArthur
Or handguns (except for my stupid state "Cali" is trying with there stupid rules of micro chipping) handguns, that account for so much more death by firearm, like 80% or higher, i can't remember at this point. But you're right, shotguns would be just as effective. Actually, rifles that are bolt action (308 and the like) but allow you 10 rounds with a detachable magazine, legal even in my state, with a handgun for backup... you would tear through people. They would beg to make the AR, pinky .223, legal again.No one ever wants to regulate shotguns, which I would argue, could cause the same if not more damage in an enclosed space as a rifle during a mass shooting.... since that is what they use as the basis for their anti-gun rhetoric.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
To be honest, i was about to tell you... everything is working fine now after i simply refreshed the pages under comments and notifications. I got your notification just fine and now they are off. So, i think a simple refresh works too.
I don't want to clear my cache bc i don't know what else it would affect if i did. I was going to research it online, but if you can tell me that would be awesome. I'm just concerned it will mess with other sites i use. Don't really know what clearing your cache does... like i said, pretty ignorant when it comes to these things i don't usually do on the computer.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well... i also sorta have a theory. I think the Dems want to ban rifles so the gangs realize they are the only ones with the superior weapon now. Bc of course the only people giving up their rifles will be the law abiding... maybe not all (thankfully and i hope i live around one... wink wink you'd be living around one if you lived by me) but i think a bit of people will if it's a felony or something. But in this scenario, now the gangs know they have the superior weapon with range while others only have pistols. And what are gangs mainly comprised of, black and Latino Americans. Can you say... maybe that could be the catalyst to a race war? Idk, just a theory (hypothesis if we're being technical).The media elites are about to go to war with the radical left now to suppress their tribalistic culture. It's going to be glorious. Thank you Trump for speeding the process up.
But i also do concede that Dems just want to ban Rifles bc they look scary... i would bet 95% of them never even touched a gun.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
That will be in the Islamic sphere of things. Muslims can even get outraged and violent over cartoons and novels, you know.
Yeah i know, that's what i mean... we would have to be outrage everyday over their crap. I'm kinda glad the news only covers selective outrage.
Unless, if they were going to show it all the time, i think then in that case i would be sick of the killing and hope for America to just go over and kill everyone. I mean, what else can we think. If we see their killing everyday in the news... it will be overwhelming. It is overwhelming which is why they really do need to figure their crap out. I'm saying this as a Persian / Azari (Turk). I said, well my parents thankfully said, F* off we are going to America. Why? Bc they be crazy over there.
That is an opinion and a poor one at that.
It is a poor one as you copied it, and i probably didn't expand. I mean the majority of the US population has no idea what's going on there. Most will ignorantly be outraged over maybe the right thing and likely the wrong thing. I personally, being from that part of the world... understand it a little more clearly. It is bw Sunni's and Shia's... but you have to understand that's not it. There are multiple splinters within both those beliefs as well. Everyone thinks they have the correct translation and others don't. It's similar to Christianity. Imagine the Christians going to war. The Mormons going to war with the Catholics, the Catholics with other Christians, on and on. That's a bigger picture of what's going on but there is even more political, social, etc. But i do think there religious text is primarily the catalyst for their more violent acts.
One of Yassines complaints is he blames western interference.
Again i was a bit vague. He is right, and he is wrong. Western interference has done some good, but it also has done some bad. Do you think the uptick in heroin use in America when we invaded Afghanistan was a coincidence? Sure, we went int to save some people, but guess what... they produce i think 90% of the world's opium. It's a win / win. So, i don't think America's interference is all good. I think there is some good, and there is some bad bc people are greedy A*holes. Overall, i don't think American interference will ultimately fix their issue... they need a reform or an enlightenment period. The problem needs to be fixed ground up... not forced. But us being there does do some good as you explain in lives saved... just don't forget there is bad too.
Created: