ethang5's avatar


A member since


Total topics: 61

Ever heard the song, Killing Me Softly by Roberta Flack?

Parts of the lyrics go...
Telling my whole life with his words

I felt all flushed with fever, embarrassed by the crowd
I felt he'd found my letters and read each one out loud
He sang as if he knew me, in all my dark dispair...

That was the exactly the impression I got reading the Bible. It was so true to my understanding of human nature, so true to what is within me, that I was "flushed and embarrassed". The Bible's authors were telling my whole life with their words.

Is this psychological? For the exact thing seems to have happened to millions of people all of different ethnicities, races, nationalities, genders, and ages.

And no other work of literature has had such a profound, lasting, or universally influential effect on humanity as the Bible has.

How could the human response to the Bible be only psychological?
13 6
The Mystery of Earth's Water Origin Solved

Ancient meteorites reveal that our planet had plenty of water, right from the start.
Oops! There goes the atheist counter that the Earth does not have enough water to have fed Noah's flood.

....Geologic evidence suggests that over Earths history, the fluxes of water between the interior and the surface - have been large.
The Bible notes that Noah's flood was augmented by water gushing from underground. How did the author know this fact so long before science did?

"This discovery can help scientists create new, more accurate models of what's going on inside the Earth,..."
", more accurate models..." means, closer to the narrative in the Bible.

"We"re not sure how it got there. Maybe it"s been stuck there since early in Earth"s history...."
Science now agrees again with the Bible, this time that there has always been water on the Earth, and lots of it.

Again, though the Bible AND science silences and shames atheists, they can only dismiss the Bible while claiming to uphold science which says the same thing!
81 14
I've asked Ragnar repeatedly but so far he has refused to answer.

I know mods have discretion and can go where the CoC doesn't. I have no problem with that, but surely this question deserves a clear answer?

Is it  CoC violation to post to a thread where the author of that thread has asked you to leave and not post in his thread?

Can one member forbid another member from a thread just by asking that they leave that thread and not post there? Is that currently a CoC violation if one ignores such a request?

Maybe Ragnar feels an answer would become defacto CoC and doesn't want to tie himself down that way, but I think I deserve to know what powers members have, and when a behavior is a CoC violation. Since Ragnar won't tell me, I concluded maybe it's because he doesn't like me, which is fine, but I would still like to know. So could someone please find out for me?

Must a member leave a thread and not post there if the thread's author asks him to? 

Thanks guys.
6 6
Does anyone know of any celebrity got news coverage when he contracted covid, went into hospital for covid, and then was reported as dying from covid? Any celebrity at all? 

Does it not seem strange that you can't name a single one? 
Current events
25 12
Chess Match Jarrett_Ludolph VS Ethang5

Jarrett_Ludolph -White
Ethang5 - Black
Max time per move - 24 hours

White to play.


31 7
On the 15th is was 9 threads on the first page of the religion board.
On the 19th is was 11 threads on the first page of the religion board.
Today, the 20th it is 13 threads on the first page of the religion board!

There are 25 threads per page. One is pinned.
Fully 52% of the threads on the religion board is by a single poster.

When and where have we seen this before?

35 7
The Bizarre Brainwashing Campaign to Convince Men They're Women
By Ben Bartee

As Aldous Huxley said it would be, the Brave New World is foisted upon us.

Enter "sissy hypno," a fascinating and eerie steampunk-style mass-scale psychosocial "movement" (for lack of a better word) that encourages men to renounce their masculine identity and become — as the term is used in the LGBTQ4GF150+ community — a "sissy."

The term "sissy" has a long colloquial use dating back to the 1890s.  In its original conception (and the way it was almost always used until the 21st century), it meant "a person (usually male) regarded as effeminate or cowardly."  Essentially, it was a flippant term of derision and nothing more.

The long form of "sissy hypno" is "sissification hypnosis," with the goal being to indoctrinate male viewers into new roles as sissies while leaving old gender identities and practices behind — hence the "hypnosis" portion of the term

Sissy porn's central conceit is that the women it depicts are in fact former men who have been feminized ('sissified') by being forced to wear makeup, wear lingerie, and perform acts of sexual submission.  Captions further instruct viewers to understand that the very act of looking at sissy porn itself constitutes an act of sexual degradation, with the implication that, whether they like it or not, viewers will inevitably be transformed into females themselves.

meme, on Twitter using hashtags like #sissyhypno and #sissytraining, on internet forums like the sissy hypno subreddit page, and hundreds (if not thousands) of websites.

Typical examples of "remixed" trans porn in video format feature female voiceovers that inform the viewer that you have "been a woman longer than you've ever known… You are a woman right now… Just by listening to me right now you have already become a woman."

The central idea is that you, the target of the meme — a (probably white) 20-something, frustrated, nominally heterosexual male — have always been a woman deep inside.  The issue is that, until sissy hypno came along, you had no idea of your true nature.

Since the foundational tenet of the "sissy" lifestyle is that you are and have always been a woman but lacked the capacity to express yourself accordingly, one of the major recurring themes in the sissy community is the "release" from the burden of having to pretend. Masculinity is treated as a burden; becoming a sissy, on the other hand, is liberating.

Rom 1:24 - Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,

Rom 1:27 - Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

Isa 5:20 - Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

(Or who put men for women, and women for men!)
12 5

Open Letter On Cancel culture

...censoriousness is also spreading more widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty. We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms.

The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away. We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other. We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences. If we won’t defend the very thing on which our work depends, we shouldn’t expect the public or the state to defend it for us.

A huge list of famous notable liberals in academia and literature signed this open letter. Look at it and see how many of them you recognize.

Obama on Call-Out Culture: ‘That’s Not Activism’

“I do get a sense sometimes now among certain young people, and this is accelerated by social media, there is this sense sometimes of: ‘The way of me making change is to be as judgmental as possible about other people,’” he said, “and that’s enough.”
“Like, if I tweet or hashtag about how you didn’t do something right or used the wrong verb,” he said, “then I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself, cause, ‘Man, you see how woke I was, I called you out.’
“That’s not activism. That’s not bringing about change,” he said. “If all you’re doing is casting stones, you’re probably not going to get that far. That’s easy to do.”
“This idea of purity and you’re never compromised and you’re always politically ‘woke’ and all that stuff,” Mr. Obama said. “You should get over that quickly.”

(Liberals didn't know what to do with this rebuke from their darling!)

It seems like liberals are getting fed up with liberalism. Antifa is burning down their buildings, demonstrators are surrounding their homes and businesses, they are losing jobs and contracts to cancel culture, and they can't get a cop when they need one. political correctness is out of control and is correcting even liberals. They don't like it.
Current events
37 11
I know this thread invites the anti-theists to take their petty pot-shots at God, but they are a constant, so we will ignore them.

*Christianity is twice the size if its nearest rival. Over a billion people More!
*Christianity seems to have the most effective message of all religions. It has been successful in virtually every culture on Earth. How many Swedish Hindus are there? How many Buddhist Ugandans? How many Paraguayan Muslims?  
*Christianity has been so successful, many countries have laws that attempt to restrict and impede it.
*Is it not reasonable to expect the most true religion to be the most universally acceptable? Why would a message from God be hindered by ethnicity or culture?
*Can adoption by a western king account for Christianity's worldwide success?
*Why has no other religion been able to duplicate Christianity's performance for 2,000 years?

Since the atheist does not believe Christianity is true, how does he account for its unmatched performance in the world? In terms of effective performance, no religion comes even close to matching Christianity's record. What, if not because it is true, in your opinion explains this?  
106 15
Both Trump and George Floyd are victims of rogue law enforcement officers breaking the law.

The bad apples at the FBI tried to do to Trump exactly what the bad apples at the MN police dept did to George Floyd.

See any liberals calling for reform at the FBI? Trump is white, so he can't possibly be a victim.
35 9
Both Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1 read, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” 

Some take these verses to mean that atheists are stupid, i.e., lacking intelligence. However, that is not the only meaning of the Hebrew word translated “fool.” In this text, the Hebrew word is nabal, which often refers to an impious person who has no perception of ethical or religious truth. 

The meaning of the text is not “unintelligent people do not believe in God.” Rather, the meaning of the text is “sinful people do not believe in God.” In other words, it is a wicked thing to deny God, and a denial of God is often accompanied by a wicked lifestyle. 

The verse goes on to list some other characteristics of the irreligious: “They are corrupt; their deeds are vile; / there is no one who does good.” Psalm 14 is a study on the universal depravity of mankind.

Many atheists are very intelligent. It is not intelligence, or a lack thereof, that leads a person to reject belief in God. It is a lack of righteousness that leads a person to reject belief in God.

Many people do not object to the idea of a Creator, as long as that Creator minds His own business and leaves them alone. What people reject is the idea of a Creator who demands morality from His creation. Rather than struggle against a guilty conscience, some people reject the idea of God altogether. Psalm 14:1 calls this type of person a “fool.”
127 16
Consider this....

A scientist creates in his lab, an artificial intelligence that has true sentience. It learns, laughs, and can feel suffering.

The scientist, amazed and enchanted,  creates many of these AI entities (as only digital persons) on his server.

One day he realizes that his AI entities have started to reproduce other entities in what could be analogous to birth in humans.

So he simply starts to observe them, enthralled at their growth, and interaction.

Soon, the AI develop societies and culture, they form a morality and a religion, and their numbers are increasing. One day, to his surprise, the digital AI's have formed governments.

These AI's have a life span of about 2 months, but their time perception is very fast. So they can cram into that 2 month lifespan, what we get in our 80 or so years.

Here are the questions fro you.

1. If the scientist should turn off the server, it would "kill" every AI sentient  "person" in it. Would it be immoral for him to do so?

2. If the scientist decided to experiment on a few of his AI entities in such a way that caused them to experience great suffering, would that be immoral?

3. If the scientist decided to give his AI some "moral" laws, one of which was, "Do not damage the Server." Would that "moral" law be any different from the "moral" laws the AI's have developed themselves?

4. If a few of the AI's develop weapons and begin to use those weapons to extinguish/kill other AI entities, is the scientist morally obligated to stop them?

5. If your answer to question #1 is "yes", please tell us as precisely as you can, whether it is the AI's sentience or it's ability to feel suffering that more morally obligates the scientist to keep them "alive".
20 8
Moral Truth – The Problems with Moral Relativism

Problem 1: Moral relativism suffers from what is known as the reformer’s dilemma. If moral relativism is true, then societies cannot have moral reformers. Why? Moral reformers are members of a society that stand outside that society’s moral code and pronounce a need for reform and change in that code. For example, Corrie ten Boom risked her life to save Jews during the Holocaust. William Wilberforce sought the abolition of slavery in the late 18th century. Martin Luther King, Jr. fought for civil rights in the U.S. If moral relativism is true, then these reformers were immoral. You see, if an act is right if and only if it is in keeping with a given society’s code, then the moral reformer himself is by definition an immoral person. Moral reformers must always be wrong because they go against the code of their society. But such a view is defective for we all know that real moral reform has taken place!

Problem 2: Moral relativists cannot improve their morality. Neither cultures nor individuals can improve their morality. The only thing they can do is change it. Think of what it means to improve something. Improvement means becoming better at something. But becoming better at something requires an external standard of comparison. To improve a society’s moral code means that the society changes its laws and values closer to an external ideal. If no such standard exists, then there is no way for the new standard to be better than the original; they can only be different. A society can abolish apartheid (racism) in favor of equality. A society can provide equal rights for women. It can guarantee freedom of speech and the press. But according to moral relativism, these are mere changes, not improvements. The Nazis used moral relativism as a defense for their crimes at the Nuremberg trials. The court condemned them because they said there is a law above culture.

Problem 3: Moral relativists cannot complain about the problem of evil. The problem of evil is one of the most commonly raised objections to the existence of God. Some of the great atheists— Bertrand Russell, David Hume, H.G. Wells— concluded on the basis of the evil and suffering in the world that the God of the Bible must not exist (genocide, child abuse, suicide bombings). The common argument is that if God was all-good and all-powerful he would deal with evil. But evil exists, so God must not. The force of this objection rests upon moral evil being real and some things being objectively wrong. But such a claim is peculiar if we understand the nature of evil. Evil is a perversion of good. There can be good without evil, but not evil without good. There can be right without wrong, but not wrong unless there is first right. If morality is ultimately a matter of personal tastes, like ice cream flavor, the argument against God’s existence based on evil vanishes. If evil is real, then so is absolute good, which means moral relativism is false.

51 10
Earlier in his presidency, the people of New York and California said Trump was not welcome in their states. Their governors instructed state officers not to cooperate with federal officials.

But now we find that they welcome federal money to fight the Covid 19 virus. Federal money is fine but federal officials aren't?

If I were President Trump, I would send no federal resources to those states, or to cities calling themselves sanctuary cities. If the chief executive of the federal government is not welcome in your state, why should federal officers be there?

Childish hypocrites, the lot of them. And none of them will notice that Trump has not thrown it back in their faces.
30 6
Did you know that concepts made popular in science fiction were first in the bible?

I won't post the passages unless asked, but here are a few of those concepts, found only in the Bible 2,000 years ago. Some have stopped being fiction, but I find it amazing that a book dismissed as the writings if illiterate goatherds could contain sophisticated concept that would take the world Years to discover.

1. Time travel - The bible has the concept within it that time is fluid and relative, and movement forwards or backwards in time is possible.

2. Teleportation - there are instances of instantaneous teleportation in the bible. Today, scientists are able to teleport elementary particles, but are working to get results with larger loads. But the concept was in the bible all along.

3. Water in the mantle of the Earth. A lot of it. So much that Scientists today are considering changing their theories about how the Earth got water. But 2,000 years ago, the concept was in the bible.

4. The concept of Genetics - The bible has stories of how genetics were used to get animals with desired characteristics more than 2,000 years ago.

5. Different Dimensions - Only the bible has this concept of "outside" the created universe, where not only is there no "time", but that instances there are not synchronous with time inside the universe.

My intent here is not to prove the bible true because it has these concepts, but to marvel that such advanced concepts are in the bible at all.

When science one day makes possible something we presently call a miracle, will we still doubt the miracle?

Even the concept of the attributes of God are unique to Christianity.

Omniscience - that God knows all that can be known is an advance concept, treated with much more nuance in the bible than skeptics usually admit.

Omnipotence - In the bible, omnipotence is not just that God is more powerful than anyone else, but that all power in the universe is His power, even the power used by His enemies. The bible treats energy as if it is all the same thing within the universe.
Omnipresence - This concept in the bible treats physical location within the universe as if it is spacetime, not just space. A concept it took man thousands of years to develop.

Immutability - This concept came to the fore when scientists discovered elementary particles. These particles are more energy than matter, and we now  know energy cannot be changed. Immutability may be built into the universe! But 2,000 years ago, the concept was in the bible.

Finally, the concept of eternity. That God is eternal is not simply that He lasts forever, but that He is not bound by time. This is a concept made understandable by Einstein. And this means that God is the only non-relative observer in the universe. A very high concept indeed!

Is it not amazing that these complex concepts are in a document dated at 6,000 to 2,000 years ago?
76 14
Ever wonder why Jesus had to come by a virgin birth? There is a concrete reason.

The virgin birth is unique in that it is the only miracle concerning Jesus' earthly ministry that was without witnesses.

In fact, neither Jesus or anyone else during His life time is recorded as mentioning or knowing He was virgin born.

Do be able to do what He was sent to do, Jesus HAD to be virgin born.

The bible says Adam sinned and became spiritually dead. Thus, according to the rule set up during creation, "Everything after its kind", Adam could only have spiritually dead offspring. (Forget original sin, it is unbiblical)

To save mankind, Jesus not only had to redeem us from our past and future sins, but from our spiritually dead state.

The bible calls Jesus the "new man" and contrasts Him with Adam whom it calls the old man. Our line of ancestry went back to Adam, who was spiritually dead.

Jesus had to break that line, and start a new line, spiritually alive, and then somehow hook us into that lineage. 

So Jesus became God's first born of the new line, and all who believe on Him, He will kill, (be crucified with Him), recreate, (be born again) and resurrect (on the last day)

Had Jesus had an earthly mother and father, he would Himself have been in Adam's line. For a new line, Jesus could not be a genetic descendant of Adam.

That is why Jesus birth had to be of the Holy Spirit. It was not just a miracle for the sake of a miracle.

It had to be in order for the salvation plan God designed to work. So for born again Christians today, our line of ancestry terminates in Jesus, not Adam.

That is why the bible says we already have eternal life, because anyone born in Jesus' line is like Jesus. Eternal. And the bible calls us Saints, because saints are what the line of Jesus produces.

It is a great, wonderful and selfless thing Jesus did for us. So we adore Him, and we thank Him, and we praise Him. Because while we were yet sinners, dead in sin, He loved us and died for us.

He made the first move, when we didn't deserve it, and came down into a world we had polluted into a hellhole, to save us
53 14
Every one of the below claims is untrue.

1. Everything in the Bible is a Divine command.

2. The Bible says the Earth is 6,000 years old.

3. The Bible doesn't say that Jesus is God.

4. Salvation, (and thus Heaven) is earned.

5. The Bible condones Slavery.

These are urban myths, perpetuated by atheists quoting a bible they have not read.
37 7
Europeans were sending out ships to go and round up migrants so that they didn't drown.
They were condemning America for not taking in the immigrants at its southern border.
They are even trying to jail Italy's former Interior minister because he didn't take in migrants there by "violating their human rights".

Yet, now that there are thousands of migrants at their border, (Greece) what do they do? Block it off.

What happened to all the love, tolerance, and multiculturalism Europe? Aren't immigrants great anymore?

And where are the progressive liberals here in America? Not one peep out of them about the poor souls being kept out of Europe.

I can smell the stench of their hypocrisy all the way over here.
44 7
A huge battle is going on for Twitter. The fake news media has kept it hush-hush so far.

Dems are terrified of Trump going into the 2020 election with his Twitter account intact. So, seeing the anti-Trump moves Twitter was making, Trump “summoned” the Twitter CEO to the white house.

Jack Dorsey Sent an Email to Twitter Staff About Meeting Trump.

The president and the Twitter CEO met for 30 minutes at the White House. Here's what they talked about.

Jack Dorsey sat down for a 30-minute conversation with President Donald Trump today. They discussed Twitter's role in the public conversation and Trump's contention that the site has removed some of his followers out of anti-conservative bias. Before the meeting, Dorsey sent an email to all Twitter employees, explaining his decision to meet with the commander in chief, knowing that decision would be unpopular with many of them.

Make no mistake--Dorsey and Trump are not likely to be pals anytime soon. Although the meeting was private, an insider with direct knowledge of it told the Washington Post that most of the 30 minutes was spent on Trump's complaint about Twitter removing some of his followers, and followers of other conservative figures as well.

Dorsey explained that follower counts on Twitter tend to fluctuate as the site is constantly removing fraudulent accounts. He himself has lost followers as a result of that process, the Twitter CEO said.

Seeing that the Twitter CEO was suffering from TDS, Trump has moved to get rid of him and stop Twitter's anti conservative stance.

A battle of the billionaires may be starting at Twitter.

Hedge funder Paul Singer has taken in a stake in the social media company—and now wants to replace Jack Dorsey as Twitter CEO and grab four board seats.
He heads both Twitter and $36 billion Square, the digital payments company.

This arrangement is part of the reason that Singer’s firm Elliott Management is pushing for change. Another is Dorsey’s stated desire to move to Africa, according to Bloomberg. For now, the size of Elliott Management’s stake in Twitter isn’t known, and a Elliott Management spokesman declined to comment. Twitter also declined to comment.

Billionaire Republican buys major Twitter stake, may oust CEO amid GOP concerns of bias, reports say

A billionaire Republican megadonor has purchased a "sizable" stake in Twitter and "plans to push" to oust CEO Jack Dorsey among other changes, according to new reports, raising the prospect of a shocking election-year shakeup of the social media platform that conservatives have long accused of overt left-wing political bias.

Paul Singer’s Elliott Management Corp. has already nominated four directors to Twitter's board, Bloomberg News reported, citing several sources familiar with the arrangement. The outlet noted that unlike other prominent tech CEOs, Dorsey didn't have voting control over Twitter because the company had just one class of stock; and he has long been a target for removal given Twitter's struggling user growth numbers and stock performance.

Singer, who opposed President Trump's campaign in 2016, has since changed his tune, raising the prospect that some of the changes to Twitter could make the platform a friendlier place for pro-Trump users. 

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Singer donated $24 million to Republican and right-leaning groups in the 2016 election.

Twitter has long rankled not only conservatives but also independent-minded commentators and left-of-center activists. In 2018, feminist Meghan Murphy slammed Twitter for the "dangerous" banning and silencing of users who didn't follow the platform's guidelines.

Murphy was banned after writing that "men aren't women," in defiance of Twitter's stated views on gender.
"I don't want to draw a line that ends up silencing people who have political ideas, or who are talking about ideologies, or who are challenging popular discourse that has been deemed offensive," Murphy told The Hill.

This story is still breaking. I'm hearing that some deep pocket liberals are moving to try and save the Twitter boss and block Trump. The plot thickens.
Current events
4 2
I have always loved languages.

One of the things I love about English that is absent in many other languages, is multiple words for things with only very slight differences in reality. The words are so precise, and thus require precision in their usage. A good example would be the words...

Slime, grime, mud, sludge, sleaze, dirt, and muck. All wonderful words, that can sometimes be used interchangeably, and other times mean almost opposite things.

How about grains, motes, bits, flakes, crumbs and dust?

At times you can spot the none native English speakers when they say something like, "crumbs of dust" instead of "grains of dust."

They say eskimoes have many, many words for snow. But English has many, many word for everything.

Take the derogatory terms for women,

Slut, skank, whore, and bitch.

A slut is a woman who will sleep with any man, and implies poor personal hygiene too. Though she may be of any socioeconomic class.

Whereas a skank is a woman of so low a class that she is not able to care for herself regardless her desire to do so.

And whore implies a woman whose body can be bought, usually for far less than it is worth. Implying low esteem.

Though the word "bitch" is losing it's sexual meaning, it originally meant something closer to "slut", as it's original meaning was a female dog in heat. Today it's used to say a woman is mean, and not empathetic.

There are even more derogatory words for men. Some are...

Chump, douche, jerk, doofus bozo, and loser.

Chump and doofus allude to low intellect, bozo to clownish demeanor, and jerk is the male equivalent of the female bitch. Loser has an implication of poor general economic performance.

Some of the words are so close in meaning and so nuanced, its a joy to watch a word artist use them correctly. Consider the words "nerd" and "geek"

Bill Gates is a geek, not a nerd, and Steve Jobs was a nerd, not a geek. Though both of them were jerks.

Knowing precise meanings, and then using the words correctly given those meanings, is an art.
36 8
As promised.

Christianity v Islam
Author: Salixes , 7 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
7 days ago

Is Temptation Real?
Author: Salixes , 7 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
7 days ago

Are Chickens Ignorant?
Author: Salixes , 7 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
7 days ago

Does God Smell?
Author: Salixes , 8 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
8 days ago

Religion Downunder
Author: Salixes , 8 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
8 days ago

The Reason For Life
Author: Salixes , 10 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
10 days ago

The Reality Of Atheism
Author: Salixes , 18 days ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
18 days ago

How We Interpret
Author: Salixes , 22 hours ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
22 hours ago

Breaking Good News For God Believers
Author: Salixes , 23 hours ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
23 hours ago

The Right To Worship
Author: Salixes , 23 hours ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
23 hours ago

Catholics Get Beaten
Author: Salixes , 23 hours ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
23 hours ago

Honor By Association
Author: Salixes , 1 day ago
Replies: 1 Salixes
1 day ago

If any of you want to help Ol' Sal escape being the zero reply king, just post anything in one of his clunkers.

He will quickly spam another half-dozen clunkers, but your kind pity will be noted.
7 2
Every time some atheist trots out the tired "prayer experiment", I can't help but doubt it as I know no real scientist could be that stupid.

To help you see the abject stupidity of prayer experiments, let's do one now. And let's use you as God, (we'll call you Godson) and your kids as the believers who are to pray to you.

Let's say you have 6 children, and this experiment is trying to find out if the prayers of your children work.

So each kid will ask you for something, and we will see if that request is answered. Clear so far?

Now before the kids start praying, answer a few questions.

1. Will Godson know an experiment is being conducted?
2. Will Godson be able to control the results of the experiment?
3. Will the results of the experiment be dependable if someone inside the experiment can control the results?
4. Will Godson be more interested in the safety and happiness of his children, or the results of the experiment?

OK now. Prayer time!

Kid one, 14 year old Tony: Can you please stay at work late tonight so I can shag my gf?
Kid two, 12 year old Anne: Can you get me a boob job? My breasts are too small.
Kid three, 10 year old Carl: I want to be a cowboy. Can you make me a cowboy?
Kid four, 9 year old Beth: Carl wants to be a cowboy and shoot bad guys, but shooting people is bad. Please don't let Carl become a cowboy.
Kid five, 7 year old Matt: Can I have a gun so that Tony won't bully me anymore?
Kid six, 5 year old Sasha: Chocolate! Lots and lots of chocolate!

Answers of Godwin.
To Tony: Are you nuts?
To Anne: Are you nuts?
To Carl: Are you nuts?
To Beth: Don't worry.
To Matt: Are you nuts?
To Sasha: No.

Experiment conclusion
Prayer doesn't work.

Would any real scientist consider this a real test of the efficacy of prayer?

*To be a valid experiment, the test subject (Godwin) cannot know he is being tested, or else he can control the results of the experiment rendering the test invalid.

*Godwin has standards that affect whether he answers prayer and how he answers. For example, Matt not getting a gun is not a sign that prayer doesn't work.

Anyone know of a way to do a blind test on God? The whole scientific "prayer experiment" is nothing but retarded stupidity.

But clueless atheists keep trotting it out. And more educated atheist pretend they don't see the thread.
122 12
The Boy Scouts of America has filed for bankruptcy. It cannot sustain the hundreds of claims of homosexual pedophilia against it.

Remember a few years ago the BSA decided it would allow homosexuals to be Troop leaders? Coincidence?

Did you know, the BSA has been tracking pedophiles within its ranks for about 100 years? They were aware of the problem, but still voted to let homosexuals become troop leaders.

Could a few pedophiles have infiltrated the governing body of the BSA and then, from the inside, forced the organization to accept gay troop leaders?

I just listened to the news report, and there was no mention of homosexuality. Because it isn't PC to call this what it is. It's pedophilia, they say, not homosexuality. Right.

What's next? Here is my prediction. In a few years, we will start hearing of male  kids adopted into gay marriage families, who were molested.

Adopt a little boy, and then abuse him and his pals who come over for stay overs. Idiot parents, wanting to appear politically correct, allowed their underaged male kids to sleep over at homosexual couple's house.

And even after it becomes apparent that there are hundreds of cases of abuse, the lemming PC parents will refuse to admit it was homosexuality, and will pretend it was just pedophilia.

Most conservatives would die before letting their underaged son sleep over at the house of a homosexual couple. They are bigoted! You scream. Perhaps, but think of how much money they will save on not having to pay for therapy for their untraumatized kids.
Current events
47 8
I wonder, do Muslim boards in Muslim countries have atheist trolls who spend their days attacking Islam?

Are Hindu boards in India infected with atheist idiots repeating what is basically the same post over and over for years?

I see Muslims and Hindus get attacked on religion boards in America. But a "religion" board in India would be hindu-centric no? Are there trolls there?

On an Arabic Muslim board, are there trolls spamming over and over? If it's just obsessive/compulsive disorder, one would expect the answer to be "yes, there are."

But if atheist trolls are rare on such boards, then the phenomena may be more than just obsessive/compulsive disorder.

On religion boards in the US, the Muslims, Jews, and Hindus get attacked mostly by racists and bigots, even by theist ones. But the atheists who park on religion boards with enough bile to last them for years tend to all be anti-Christian.

I wonder why that is?
40 9
Age allows perspective. I remember when overpopulation was all the rage, as climate change is right now.

Read the article below, and you will see how the climate change crowd simply used the exact argument from the over-pop era. Substitute "climate" for "population", or " population growth rate" for "carbon emmissions" and the article would not raise an eyebrow of the green faddists of today.

The Population Bomb was written at the suggestion of David Brower the executive director of the environmentalist Sierra Club, and Ian Ballantine of Ballantine Booksfollowing various public appearances Ehrlich had made regarding population issues and their relation to the environment.

Early editions of The Population Bomb began with the statement:
The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate...
Much of the book is spent describing the state of the environment and the food security situation, which is described as increasingly dire.

Ehrlich argues that as the existing population was not being fed adequately, and as it was growing rapidly, it was unreasonable to expect sufficient improvements in food production to feed everyone.

He further argued that the growing population placed escalating strains on all aspects of the natural world. "What needs to be done?" he wrote, "We must rapidly bring the world population under control, reducing the growth rate to zero or making it negative.

Conscious regulation of human numbers must be achieved. Simultaneously we must, at least temporarily, greatly increase our food production." Ehrlich described a number of "ideas on how these goals might be reached." He believed that the United States should take a leading role in population control, both because it was already consuming much more than the rest of the world, and therefore had a moral duty to reduce its impact, and because the US would have to lead international efforts due to its prominence in the world.

In order to avoid charges of hypocrisy or racism it would have to take the lead in population reduction efforts. Ehrlich floats the idea of adding "temporary sterilants" to the water supply or staple foods.

However, he rejects the idea as unpractical due to "criminal inadequacy of biomedical research in this area." He suggests a tax scheme in which additional children would add to a family's tax burden at increasing rates for more children, as well as luxury taxes on childcare goods. He suggests incentives for men who agree to permanent sterilization before they have two children, as well as a variety of other monetary incentives.

He proposes a powerful Department of Population and Environment which "should be set up with the power to take whatever steps are necessary to establish a reasonable population size in the United States and to put an end to the steady deterioration of our environment." The department should support research into population control, such as better contraceptives, mass sterilizing agents, and prenatal sex discernment (because families often continue to have children until a male is born.)

Ehrlich suggested that if they could choose a male child this would reduce the birthrate). Legislation should be enacted guaranteeing the right to an abortion, and sex education should be expanded.

After explaining the domestic policies the US should pursue, he discusses foreign policy. He advocates a system of "triage," such as that suggested by William and Paul Paddock in Famine 1975!. Under this system countries would be divided into categories based on their abilities to feed themselves going forward. Countries with sufficient programmes in place to limit population growth, and the ability to become self-sufficient in the future would continue to receive food aid.

Countries, for example India, which were "so far behind in the population-food game that there is no hope that our food aid will see them through to self-sufficiency" would have their food aid eliminated.

Ehrlich argued that this was the only realistic strategy in the long-term. Ehrlich applauds the Paddocks' "courage and foresight" in proposing such a solution.

Ehrlich further discusses the need to set up public education programs and agricultural development schemes in developing countries. He argues that the scheme would likely have to be implemented outside the framework of the United Nations due to the necessity selecting the targeted regions and countries, and suggests that within countries certain regions should be prioritized to the extent that cooperative separatist movements should be encouraged if they are an improvement over the existing authority.

He mentions his support for government mandated sterilization of Indian males with three or more children.

In the rest of the book Ehrlich discusses things which readers can do to help. This is focused primarily on changing public opinion to create pressure on politicians to enact the policies he suggests, which he believed were not politically possible in 1968. At the end of the book he discusses the possibility that his forecasts may be wrong, which he felt he must acknowledge as a scientist. However, he believes that regardless of coming catastrophes, his prescriptions would only benefit humanity, and would be the right course of action in any case.

The book sold over two million copies, raised the general awareness of population and environmental issues, and influenced 1960s and 1970s public policy. 

For the 14 years prior the book's appearance, the world population had been growing at accelerating rates, but immediately after the book's publication, the world population growth rate began a continuing downward trend, from its 1968 peak of 2.09% to 1.09% in 2018.

So today, according to the grean new deal, we have only 12 years, and it's already too late! Instead of mass starvation, its flooded coastal cities and killer storms!

We must do something NOW! The whole thing is laughable to those who have seen society convulse over these fads before.

But notice the similarities in what they think is causing the problems, and what  their solutions are.

The problem, as always is man. And the solution? Impede man, cut him off, stop him. The over-pop people wanted forced sterilizations, the green people want to take us back into the stone age. Confiscate cars, forbid oil, no meat, no flying. By force.

The fads are lasting longer now because technology is aiding each new wave. Radio helped the one in the 1930's and TV blew up the one in the 1950's.

Now the greens have social media to fuel their fad. Whatever comes next, two things will be certain, the problem will be man, and the solution will be his death.

These fads are from the king of this world, and death is his ultimate goal. Sooner or later we will have the perfect storm of technology and faddism, and the world will be carried off in it.

This current fad won't make it. There are still too many rational people among the sheeple for it to fully catch.

I predict the one in 2050 will do the trick. And I'm glad I'm going to miss it.
18 3
As President, Trump is in charge of Law enforcement for the country. He is the direct head of the Justice department.

So what is all the palava about Trump talking to Barr? Where is the problem?

These complainers are people who don't even know how their own country's government is structured. 

Now if we could only get rid of all these activist judges, we'd be making some progress!

26 5
I come to this topic as a mathematician, not as a philosopher or a theologian. From my perspective, mathematical "sets" — specifically infinite sets — can provide a small insight into the nature of God.
By Robbin O'Leary, Professor of Mathematics

I won't get into the details of the mathematics of Infinite Set Theory now. (Check out
if you want to know the math)

Stated simply, a set is a collection of objects. These objects might be words, numbers or anything we group into that set.

The things we group into sets are called "elements". We will notice right away that some sets are finite, and others are infinite. That is, the elements within some sets have no end, like the elements in the set of all rational numbers, for example.

Theoretical scientists can then treat sets as single objects and do higher form of math to learn things about our reality that couldn't be learned otherwise.

There are some startling findings about Infinite set theory that shed light on some of the concepts found in the bible.

Startling finding #1 - Subtracting elements from an infinite set does not make it smaller.

If you have the set of all numbers, and remove from it, the subset of all even numbers, BOTH the original set AND the subset remain infinite!

Infinity can be taken out of infinity with no reduction in infinity! The same goes for addition. Adding the infinite set of all even numbers to the set of all odd numbers give us a set that is EQUAL in size to the sets added!

Startling finding #2 - Adding infinite sets to infinite sets does not make them any bigger! Infinite sets cannot be reduced OR increased!

Startling finding #3 - Infinite set are all identical. Each element in one infinite set can be paired with elements in another infinite set such that all infinite sets have a 1 to 1 correlation. They are all the same size!

What do these 3 findings mean to Christianity?

Jesus claimed to be God. He said to Thomas, "How can you ask me to show you the Father if you have seen me?" Jesus claimed to have "come out from God". He was calling Himself a proper subset of God.

He shared a 1 to 1 correlation with God, which did not reduce God, or render Jesus Himself  less than God. This truth also shows how Jesus could not know some things, and still be God.

God is the absolute infinite set, with The Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit being proper subsets of the set "God".

All three sets are equal. The same size. Each one is equal to God, exactly in a 1 to 1 correlation with God. God does not diminish by removing one subset, or increase when one subset joins the Godhead.

Infinite subsets of infinite sets have a quality called "reflection", which means they have the same qualities of the original set. So as a subset of God, Jesus carries all the qualities of God, and indeed the bible calls Jesus the express image of God, He is the incarnation of God.

Set theory offers an explanation for the inner workings of the trinity.

Mathematicians Measure Infinities and Find They’re Equal
September 12, 2017

Two mathematicians have proved that two different infinities are equal in size, settling a long-standing question. Their proof rests on a surprising link between the sizes of infinities and the complexity of mathematical theories.

In a breakthrough that disproves decades of conventional wisdom, two mathematicians have shown that two different variants of infinity are actually the same size. The advance touches on one of the most famous and intractable problems in mathematics: whether there exist infinities between the infinite size of the natural numbers and the larger infinite size of the real numbers.

41 7
1. Can you write a 6 digit number where...

2. Digits cannot all be in ascending order ex. (134579)

3. Digits cannot all be in descending order ex. (964321)

4. No digit can be zero.

5. No digit can be a multiple of a digit beside it. ex. (374852) 4 and 8 are side by side, and 4 is a multiple of 8.

6. No digit can be used more than once. ex. (375594) 5 is used twice.

7. No digit can be 1 more or 1 less than the digit before or after it. ex. (253894) 9 is one more than 8.

8. No digits beside each other can share a multiple. ex. (386947) 8 and 6 are beside each other, and 2 is a multiple of both. 6 and 9 are beside each other, and 3 is a multiple of both.

9. The six digit number cannot have more than 3 consecutive odd numbers.
ex. (495372) 953 and 7 are all consecutive and all odd numbers.

10. Finally, neither the first or last 3 digits of your 6 digit number should have a sum of more than 15
(352947) 9+4+7=20
Can you do it?

89 6
Trump will be the only American president to ever speak at the March for life.

He has upheld religious liberty, has put common sense judges on the bench, is getting rid of the silly business killing  environmental extremism, and always transparently says exactly what's on his mind.

I saw a sign at last years march.
Choose Life: Your Mother Did.

I'm not ashamed of Trump at all.
Current events
62 8
Thanks to Trump putting sensible Judges on the bench, 78 nonsense verdicts from university lynch mobs have been rejected by the high courts.

If this continues, we can roll back and stop all the dumb liberal nonsense that has been afflicting our judicial system, million dollar verdicts for "too hot" coffee, lawsuits by transgenders because men want to be referred to as "she", and citizens being forced to pay for the murder of little babies.

But title 9 is dead right now. Progressive snowflakes know that the days of  guaranteed rape charge wins are over. How is that not better for our country?
Current events
3 2
Let us do a thought experiment.

Let us agree that immoral actions are bad.

Not just that immoral actions break a certain moral code, but immoral actions are "not good" in an empirical way.

Given this scenario, is it possible to say why  an immoral action is bad?

Sure, we could point to the "bad" an action caused, but that would only prove that the action caused bad in the world, the question remains, even if we all agree that the action caused bad, what makes "bad" immoral?

What makes "bad" of lesser value than good?

So murder is immoral. But exactly why is it immoral? Can there be any reason that is not based on someone's tastes?

Can your moral code give us an moral action that is empirically "bad"?

If it cannot, how is your morality different from your personal tastes?
113 9
This is my list of members whose posts are so often good that I have developed the habit of reading them whenever I see their name, regardless of the thread's topic. Their posts are usually intelligent and enjoyable to read.

In no particular order:

Speed race – he’s hella funny. And fair.

RationalMadman – he knows things. Almost always the first to know what’s going on.

EtrnlVw - Our most original thinker. Very polite and has intriguing ideas.

bmdrocks21 – intelligent posts.

Athias – probably our most intelligent poster. Concise, polite, and genius level easiness.

Dr.Franklin – great sense of humor, to the point openness. Never gets insulted.

Drafterman – intelligent posts. Very logical. Steady disposition.

Mhykiel – Clear headed intelligence.

SirAnonymous – probably the best sense of humor. Creative and original thinker.

Imabench – The best and most objective political instincts. Intelligent posts.

PGA2.0 – Best religious poster. Knowledgeable, friendly, and intelligent.

3RU7AL – interesting worldview, unflappable character.

Greyparrot – best political poster. Quick wit, and a wealth of political knowledge.

Outplayz - Very intelligent, but without arrogance. Easy to talk to.

GuitarSlinger – a principled poster. Intelligent and morally objective.

Janesix – Just a pleasant poster. Very honest about herself. Interesting ideas.

Christen – A poster without guile. Enhances the quality of any thread he enters.

Swagnarok – an all round intelligent poster. Enjoyable posts.

Honorable Mention:
PressF4Respect - Intelligent, very good counter-puncher, but inconsistent.

The Mods - As anything they say could be important to me, so I read them.

Who's on your list?

51 14
Where were all the libs claiming England had rejected common sense?
Current events
24 9
UBI = Universal Basic Income.
(Everyone gets an income regardless of whether they work or not.)

Is it me, or is watching people advocate for UBI like watching retarded half-wits advocating for a perpetual motion machine?

I watch westerns, and though the cowboy simply looped the reins of his horse once over a horizontal pole, the horse NEVER figured out how to free himself, even after looking directly at the single looped line.

The UBI idea is so stupid, I'm wondering if everyone is in on a joke I'm missing. How can people who went to school believe UBI is anything other than abject nonsense?
73 6
It seems to me, that if people pay to see movies, then the movie ought to deliver what the person is paying for.

I know different people want different things from movies, but surely we can come up with a somewhat common denominator?

Enjoyment? Too general.
Escapism? Too vague.

We want a movie to take us into its world, and make us believe and enjoy the experience. So then the movie must have an interesting world, be consistent and plausible within its world, and gave us experiences that are creative and enjoyable within that world.

Does that cover it?

A great soundtrack is not a great movie.
A beautiful lead actor is not a great movie.
Neither is titillation.

Going by these criteria, what is a great movie?
Show business
27 5
When elected, Trudie of Canada took it upon himself to teach Trump about tolerance and human dignity.

The the pictures of him in blackface showed up, and he was forced to apologize on air like the hypocrite he is.

The Canadian government just released the worse economic numbers for Canada in 10 months.

Then Germany's Merkel tried to school Trump on immigration and populism. Telling him how her policies of "inclusion" were better than Trumps policy of common sense.

Today she has lost control of her party, which is struggling at the polls, is about to lose her chancellorship, and is reversing the stupid policies she enacted that allowed primitive morons into Germany by the boatload. And the German public has turned against her.

The Chicago police chief who refused to attend a meeting by Trump and said Trump was not welcome in Chicago?

Has been sacked. Booted out weeks before he was to retire. And the Smollet debacle is still threatening to expose crimes under his tenure.

The Venezuelan president who castigated trump?

Overthrown and ousted.

The French President Macron, who touted his superior governing style of governance when Trump visited France?

Wrestling with massive public protests, and a precipitous slide in the polls. Facing an advancing right wing movement, and having soldiers die in Africa over his stupid policies.

Denmark and Sweden, sticking to their inane policy of importing islamists into their countries, claiming they would not fall to "Trump-like populism"...

Have now reversed the age old EU policy of free movement inside the EU, after crimes like rape and terrorism skyrocketed in their once peaceful countries, just as Trump predicted.

There are many other cases where Trump has been proven right, and his opponents have been bitch-slapped by karma.

From the Philippines, Cuba, Brazil, Poland, Israel, Chile, Euquador, Tunisia, etc. They keep biting the dust. But because liberal never learn, and thus never grow, they just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

The next to bite the dust? Democrats.
10 6
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Monday the U.S. is changing its position on Israeli settlements in the West Bank, dismissing the State Department's 1978 legal opinion that civilian settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are "inconsistent with international law." 

The announcement is the latest in the Trump administration's moves that weaken Palestinian claims to statehood.
106 13
Denmark Introduces Checks On Swedish Border To Combat Terrorism, Travel ...

Denmark to impose controls at Swedish border amid crime wave - The Telegraph

As Bombings Spread, Denmark Closes Border With Sweden - Breitbart

Denmark closes borders with Germany as migrants head to Sweden

TRUMP WAS RIGHT!… Denmark Closes Its Border with Sweden as Bombings Spread.

In February 2017 President Trump held a rally in Florida in front of thousands of supporters

During his speech President Trump referenced the increased violence in Sweden due to the tremendous influx of refugees.

They ran attacks all day Sunday claiming Trump said there was a terrorist attack in Sweden.

But Trump was right. Migrants are changing the face of Sweden.

The bombings and violence have continued to escalate in once peaceful Sweden.

On Monday Denmark closed its border with Sweden as bombings spread.

Read the main stream media links above, and you will find no mention of the criminals being immigrants or Arabic.

In 2010 it became the first Nordic country to be hit hit by an attack linked to Islamic terror. The two bombs which detonated in the capital killed only the bomber, Iraqi born Taimour Abdulwahab.

Since then one Isil inspired plot to make pressure bombs was disrupted by police and in 2016 a teaching assistant and a male student in a school in an immigrant area were killed in a racially motivated sword attack.

Integration has remained a problem in the country where the relatively high numbers of immigrants compared to a population of just under 10 million means it has one of the highest rates of immigration per capita in northern Europe.

The numbers have been rising steadily since the 1990s, and in 2015 Sweden accepted a record number of more than 160,000 refugees.

Sweden used to be nice and peaceful, with low, low crime. Today, rape and terror are rife. What did they think would happen if they brought in hundreds of thousands of Arab Muslims from backward cultures?

Of course, liberals will deny the truth right before their eyes and squeal racism, islamophobia, or some other such nonsense.

Hey Sweden. Now your country Look's more like Afghanistan. Are you happy now? Denmark, you're next.

You have to be brain dead not to know that 200,000 Arab Muslims plunked down into your country will change your country towards an Arab Muslims culture.

And what is Arab Muslim culture? Socially primitive, and violent.

Liberalism says all cultures are equally good. If so, why is Sweden now a dump? Why is Denmark closing its borders? Why are Swedes now dying from swords and bombs?
82 9
Besides yourself, name the 2 posters at Dart who you think consistently make the best posts.

(Please don't use this as an excuse to throw shade at anyone.)

Mine are PGA2.0 and dylancatlow

There are others, but the post limits it to only 2.

17 6
7 Ways Marijuana May Affect the Brain

Marijuana has a reputation as a relatively harmless drug, but researchers are learning more and more about the effects it may have on the brain.

An increased risk of psychosis, changes in the brain's reward system and the scrambled neuron signals that may underlie "the munchies" are just some of the many potential effects of marijuana use on the brain.

"The biggest risk related to the use of marijuana is the increased risk of psychosis," said Dr. Scott Krakower, assistant unit chief of psychiatry at Zucker Hillside Hospital in Glen Oaks, New York.

Another significant risk, for those who use marijuana during their teenage years, is an increased likelihood of an IQ drop. "It is safe enough to say that people who smoke marijuana," especially when they are young, are more likely have a reduction in their IQ later in life, Krakower told Live Science.

Here's a look at the recent research on marijuana's possible effects on the brain

Marijuana and psychosis
Multiple studies have linked marijuana use with a higher risk of psychosis, which is a medical term that applies to symptoms that involve losing touch with the real world, such as hallucinations or paranoia. For example, in an analysis published in 2016 in the journal Schizophrenia Bulletin, researchers looked at previous studies of about 67,000 people.

They found that people in the study who used the most marijuana were more likely to be diagnosed with a psychotic mental-health condition, such as schizophrenia, than people who had never used marijuana.

A review published in April 2016 in the journal Biological Psychiatry also found a link between cannabis use and an increased risk of psychosis. "Overall, evidence from epidemiologic studies provides strong enough evidence to warrant a public health message that cannabis use can increase the risk of psychotic disorders," the authors wrote in the review.

Pot and IQ
Teens who smoke pot may be more likely to experience an IQ drop when they are older, research has suggested. In a study of more than 1,000 people in New Zealand, researchers administered IQ tests to the participants twice: when they were 13, and then again when they were 38. The researchers also asked the participants about their drug use throughout the study period.

About 5 percent of the teens in the study had started using pot when they were teens. And it turned out that those who smoked pot at least four times a week and continued to use pot throughout their lives experienced an IQ drop of 8 points by the end of the study, on average.

It's not clear why pot may have negative effects on people's IQ, but it could be that teens are more vulnerable to pot's effects on brain chemistry, Susan Tapert, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, San Diego, who was not involved in the study, told Live Science in a 2012 interview.


I think the above may explain some of our more challenged posters. What seems like poor reading comprehension, or unending vitriol, might just be low IQ and psychosis from too much pot smoking.

Why do people smoke pot?
Science and Nature
78 16
Types of Bullies

It's a combination of several different factors at work (not necessarily all of them):

  • Learning things the hard way
  • Fixation/Obsession
  • Repeating scenarios to find catharsis
  • Obliviousness

Learning Things The Hard Way
Most people have to learn things for themselves, rather than following instruction. This especially is the case for emotionally involved situations (such as love), but can apply in any situation. For a neurocognitive basis for this, some people are predominantly No-Go learners, whereas others are Go learners; this predisposition is genetic, and affects dopamine expression in the reward centers of the brain.

No-Go learners respond best to negative consequences; Go learners respond best to positive outcomes. Someone who always learns the hard way might be a No-Go Learner.

Nothing will make you keep hitting your head against a brick wall like being fixated/obsessed by someone/something. It'll encourage tunnel vision, and make you lose sight of the big picture and get lost in the details.

Repeating Scenarios To Find Catharsis
People have a tendency to repeat traumatic events in their lives so that they can change the outcome of that experience - or at least process it. This may cause someone to keep acting out seemingly strange behaviors, which lead to a negative conclusion - until they can break the cycle (or find a safe way to discharge the emotional payload and process it). 

This is particularly common in people who have PTSD and may be tied to specific circumstances, or anniversaries of events - even if they're not consciously aware of the connection.

Maybe they're just not paying attention to what they need to be to help them? You should probably give them a nudge in the right direction.


35 8
Both Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1 read, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”

Some take these verses to mean that atheists are stupid, i.e., lacking intelligence. However, that is not the only meaning of the Hebrew word translated “fool.” In this text, the Hebrew word is nabal, which often refers to an impious person who has no perception of ethical or religious truth.

The meaning of the text is not “unintelligent people do not believe in God.” Rather, the meaning of the text is “sinful people do not believe in God.” In other words, it is a wicked thing to deny God, and a denial of God is often accompanied by a wicked lifestyle.

The verse goes on to list some other characteristics of the irreligious: “They are corrupt; their deeds are vile; / there is no one who does good.” Psalm 14 is a study on the universal depravity of mankind.

Many atheists are very intelligent. It is not intelligence, or a lack thereof, that leads a person to reject belief in God. It is a lack of righteousness that leads a person to reject belief in God.

Many people do not object to the idea of a Creator, as long as that Creator minds His own business and leaves them alone. What people reject is the idea of a Creator who demands morality from His creation. Rather than struggle against a guilty conscience, some people reject the idea of God altogether. Psalm 14:1 calls this type of person a “fool.”

29 9
This is probably the greatest post to ever grace DDO. It was so duckilishious. I felt it needed to be here on Dart.

Thett3, who is here now, has been laying low and has not rewarded us with anything this awesome so far. Read it in awe, and enjoy!

Finally, A Duck I Can Respect


10/3/2014 1:46:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago

I just witnessed the exploits of a duck that I have no doubt would hand my @ss to me in a fight.

I was celebrating Friday by feeding the ducks at a park. Anyone who's fed ducks a lot will know that sometimes they'll fight. Well, these two ducks were preparing to fight (ducks fight mostly by grabbing each others necks or heads with their bills)--doing the standard posturing, taking jabs at each other. It seemed a pretty evenly matched fight--you can file that under "most wrong predictions ever".

Something I've never seen before happened, just as the two were about to go at it and make feathers fly, from out of nowhere another duck came running to attack duck B, who will forever be known as badasss duck. Does Badasss duck care that it's now two on one? HELL NO. He's ready to kick some asss, so he does it.

Badasss duck ducks and the other duck TRIPS OVER HIS NECK. Then in one smooth motion, he grabs his original opponents neck with his bill and slams his head into the ground and starts shaking him. The other duck gets up in a daze of confusion only to, impossibly, see badasss ducks bill of justice coming after him and they have a three way pecking match before the other two ducks run away like cowards.

A high speed duck chase through to pond then develops as badasss duck chases the cowards across the pond for at least a minute, nipping at their tails until he finally catches one and holds his head underwater for at least 30 seconds before releasing him and coming back to shore a conquering hero.

I've never seen such a performance. I dumped out my entire bag of feed at badasss ducks feet.

I have no doubts that this duck is a reincarnated pirate, or perhaps a ninja. There's simply no other explanation.

Thett3, props man, the ball is in your court. o√L,
25 11
I notice you guys have been cleaning up the member list. Good work.

But I also notice that both of bully's accounts, disgusted and lunatic, are active. Does he have a special arrangement to have multi-accounts?

I also see that Harikrish's account is no longer closed. Could he log in now if he tried?

Otherwise, how are you holding up boss? Hope you are well.
12 6
Pick any position, and the liberal will side with the oppressor, the criminal, the killer, and death.

Sides with - the killer of defenseless babies
Against - Defenseless innocent babies

Death Penalty?
Sides with - The murdering criminal
Against - The innocent victim

Sides with - The law breaking criminal
Against - The law abiding citizen

Sides with - Disease and death
Against - Abstinence and life

Sides with - Death
Against - Life

Illegal Drugs?
Sides with - Overdoses and death
Against - Sobriety and life.

As I said, any position.
327 19
Conservatives have excellent credentials to speak about human rights. By our efforts, and with precious little help from self-styled liberals, we were largely responsible for securing liberty for a substantial share of the world's population and defending it for most of the rest.    
-Margaret Thatcher

139 16
Does true fashion require sentience?

Can things not part of an animals body, like the style of its nest or the dam of a beaver be considered fashion?

If not, then how come the home of a human can be considered fashion? What's the difference?
17 6
I had the pleasure of meeting the super beautiful First Lady of our great nation. She was funny, kind, and treated us like real people.

To my great honor, I was able to assist on some small errand for her. What a privilege! My daughters met her too. It was a thing to remember for all of us. What a classy lady.

64 14
#5. Father Dear
When Tyrion catches his father with his beloved. He kills her with a crossbow, and then finds his father in the john on the potty. They have a conversation, Tyrion holding the crossbow, and his father sitting on the potty. Tyrion shoots him, and he exclaims in wonder, “You shot me!” Tyrion shoots him again. Though in sadness and regret, his face is slack. Expressionless. Stellar TV.

#4. Imp Slap
When Tyrion multi slaps that moron Joffery, just as he is jerk-sailing on irritating impudence. This is the kind of great writing that makes you understand what TV could be. My God, that was emotionally satisfying TV!

#3. Speechless
When Little Finger tries to get smart with Cersei by saying smugly, that “Knowledge is power.”, Cersei corrects him powerfully, leaving him unable to breathe, and with that great line, “Power is power”. Spine tingling TV.

#2. Dragon Barbecue
When Drogon comes to Dany's rescue during the Harpy attack that looks like it's over for Dany. I was cheering, amazed that roasting people could be so much fun. With her mounting the dragon and flying into the sunset was an awesome topper to an awesome sequence.

#1. Flaying House Fray
After Arya eviscerates Lord Fray and all his male kin, avenging house Stark, in the quiet that can only come from unleashed death, Arya tells the lone survivor, almost whispering, “When they ask you what happened here, tell them,……. Winter came for house Fray.” My skin was tingling with goosebumps. It was simply epic.

The show has a hundred more great moments. TV without equal.
Show business
22 8
We all know that music alone can make us feel a certain way. That most of us associate certain key sequences as eerie or weird. The horror movie industry works on this truth.

In tests done all over the world to different cultures, "scary" music seems to be scary universally. There is something in the music, overriding culture, that prompts feelings of "wrongness" or "evilness".

So my question to you is, can music itself be evil? Are certain note structures wrong in and of themselves?

If your answer is no, then why do we see some music as weird or evil?
And why does this view seem to be consistent across cultures and ethnicities?
Show business
38 14