fauxlaw

This is strictly a parental responsibility

modal logic says “no,” because the necessity cannot be shown to exist.

And you have been saying this for two days. Face it. You haven’t a clue what’s going on. Ask that this string by closed. To a mod. It’s worthlessness is all on you for starting it.

And Mike, himself, has said he will continue to pay for the site to stay up in the short-term [long enough to establish another domain] even though he is relinquishing ownership. So, your entire purpose in positing this string is of no consequence, which is why I don't think you should make sucks strings in the first place. When you own your own domain, go ahead.

There's distinction between sentience, and self-sentience, and I currently doubt they have either one. Sentience may come. I consider that at its current capability, AI can mimic sentience, but may never acquire sentience of self, and in some academic pursuits, that's a necessity to take all human jobs, and for most of them, taking human form is convenience, but not necessarily a requirement. Many articulated arms of industrial robotics, but I would not call that 'humanoid," and I certainly do not perceive it as such. And I would not trust it to apply stage makeup, for example, for my eyes. Fact is, I don't trust make-up artists to do it, either; I do it myself.

Relative to the internet as source of information, I am I.H. in the sense that 99.9...% of info accessible on the internet is is very high-percentile bullshyte simply because anyone knowledgeable of interaction in cyberspace can post bullshyte that must be carefully substantiated by multiple-source investigation, and most people simply lack the time sufficient to do so. Time is the enemy of satisfactorily navigating and negotiating the academia of the internet.

Why superhuman, lacking self-sentience?

Seuls les fidèles chiens de chasse d'Orion, Canis Major et Canis Minor, sont reconnus comme tels, traquant l'univers pour… le bon sens.

Or, it is, in the land of cartoon thumbless idiots, it's god.

Or, it is, in the land of cartoon thumbless idiots, it's god.

There's always premature efactulation...

These types are note eve self-aware. Why do you fear them?

You are not even close. You're an ordinary member, like me. I would have never launched this string. 

You will notice that the member who launched this string is neither the owner of the site, nor a mod, nor the president of the site. Don't you think such information should come from one of them? 

The launch of thiis thread is the exact reason why I think at least one Forum section ought not be available to ordinary members, leaving it for the use of the site owner, moderation team, and site president to launch notices because this string is counterproductive even if meant well. This belongs as a personal notice, and there is a section for such thoughts.

What insurrection? No one has ever been accused of insurrection, let alone convicted. Exaggeration does not help your baseless argument. 

Surgery on Tuesday 7/8 went very well - 3 hours under the knife. My surgeon may be the best in the joint replacement surgery in the region. I was up and walking about twelve feet about 5 hours after surgery with aid of a walker. Yesterday, had two walking sessions doubling then tripling that distance, plus ten separate exercises I’m repeating ten reps 4times daily.  My afternoon session today will do stair climbing exercises and the schedule is to return home Friday. Thanks for all your well wishes, they’re working.v

Your sources goes to a "page not found." 

So is the rest of your out-of-the-back-end-of-a-bull.

Nobody? In a truly capitalist healthcare system, since I have owned my own business on which I am the sole proprietor, and your sole proletariat, too, so I pay all the premium, and I still have a co-pay out of pocket. And, my private money still pays for my social security and medicare, so that is entirely self-funded, too for those benefits. I've been around the block. No, your FICA payments on your paycheck are not a Marxist system, boyo.  If I went through the rest of your list, I'd probably find issues there, as well, but I don't have the time.

Y'all know, don't you, that the flood in TX began in the early morning, about 01:00, and that Trump did not sign the big bill until about 15 hours later. and the bill did not take effect upon his signature. They almost never do. otherwise, what has a presided t to do with a flood starting on his watch? That's taking two entirely separate events and assigning identical cause to both. Yes, that can happen, but in this case, we area talking about one person who was not on site, our anywhere near it, so it sure wasn't his leaking pen.

"You guys," who?

You're so full of general-ities, y'll ought to go find an army somewhere to lead.

Thank you very much.  Will do.

Seems to me, all this generation of voting on site subjects ought to come from yourself [site-owner-in waiting], the  site president, or mods, but not the general membership. By what authority is this string even here?. I see this as simple attempt at membership usurpation. Am I wrong? In fact, I think the use of this particular Forum category ought to limited in use to just those identified above, and off limits to everyone else insofar as launching topics, It should be open to memebershhp for voting and commentary, but not to do this.

Yes, they did. Oba'a.

Dud I say I support Trump? I'm an Indie. I voted for Trump b because the other choice was a cat-5 joke who garnered not one single solitary primary vote. The Party choose her, regardless of the voters' preference, which was clearly Biden until he was shoved out. BY THE PARTY. And this is the third time in modern history that the Democrat Party has nominated against the will of primary votes of the people.

First, in 1952,  nominating Stevenson over the primary winner, Kefauver.

Then, in 1968, nominating Humphrey  over McCarthy, the primary winner [although had Kennedy survived his assassination, he would likely have taken the primary.

And, last year, Kammycakes.
When are you going to get it the Democrat Party plays by its own rules, re-writing as necessary, the people's vote be damned.

But, you go ahead with your assumptions...

Personal attack is the last of a lost argument, because you cannot conceive any better argument. I'll let that lay down. Am I ignoring we're  talking about the President. I am; he's the one who won both by Elec College and the pop vote. Have you another you'd like to mention out of a wish balloon factory? 

Who hates the poor? Well, by appearances of the last 40 years of jealousy for Wall Street, it sure appears that's descriptive of the Dem Party, since the official position is that the poor can be kept in line by giving away free stuff, rather than encouraging private, individual ambition, planning, and execution. That's how to make an enduring stash for one's self, so that charity can be privatized rather than expecting it of government. That privatization was always the true intent of charity, because the private sector is so much closer to the need.  The Dem Party attitude on charity: Oh, give the man a blanket, but God, no! Do not let him touch me. 

Does the rune [as given] have anything to do with the proposition that to express love, first go the one's own heart? Seems that is what it's doing. And then from any extremity, from both sides, it is a more personal complete expression outbound to another? That's what I see.

For greatest variations options, that's a counter-intuitive approach. Seems to me the greatest numbers of variations logic would favor one thinking in terms of personal approach over someone else's. It is presumed one knows themself better than any other person, so why not begin with self-perspective? "Moves which allow one to defeat an opponent, not even solely based on one's opponent's moves, but on one's personal strategy, and only then , opponent strategy & moves.

One assumes one has developed a personal strategy, yes? If not, the game is likely lost. 

"We" who? You and your windsock puppet?  You have Trump so deeply embedded in your head, you likely include yourself in your scorn even while he lives there, rent-free. Let it go, already. Is there nothing else to stir the pot than Trump all day and night? God in heaven, get a life

Your decision was a dood decision, and it will have benefits, but God hates no one. Hate is an imperfection, and God does not go there. Let's not confuse anger [although I would rather say disappointment - and I think that is closer to the mark] and hate; they are not synonymous.

I like your rune. It's a keeper.

So, if the dad's income is too high, why's she on Medicaid, married or not? legally, maybe not fraud, but in a social context, it's still freeloading. Why can't she work from home and handle both tasks. Plenty of ambitious people do that. But5, no, why work when freeload is so available? Why? Because contributors to society do that. Freeloaders don't, and when they have no excuse for it, well, laziness has its own failures and one of them is that point: lack of ambition.

Blame Trump. Yep, it’s a fact: Group-think simplifies an argument. No one in group-think has to actually think anything for themselves. They now have A.I. to do all that for them while they wait on their entitlements; deciding and doing nothing. People who think for themselves also decide for themselves, and act for themselves. And, of course, group-think also wants the other guys to pay all their fair share of taxes for them, right?

Re: your #126, I suppose that is possible, but he already leads voting almost 2-to-1 over the next most frequent voter, let alone the rest of us, but that's just evidence that he is a consistent, dedicated voter and that's not likely to change.

That's a good attitude to have.

No, I do not think he is that severe with mere talk. He knows mostly that what we perceive as blasphemy would amuse him, but we're better off keeping a more civil tongue. I think he is more disappointed than angry.

Yes, I get it. That, and the rest of stour #21 is a good post.  I believe there are aliens out there, and that they are probably cousins, at worst, and maybe closer relations that that. I don't believe this is the only planet inhabited by "us," I'll say generally. I also agree we have evil characters among us us wishing us harm and demise, but I also think bymaintaining a proper, healthy, and intuitive attitude about them, we defeat them easily. I have no fears but that I am protected, much as by my own attitude as by angels about I never see.  We are probably a multi-dimensional world - all populated..

And here's another fun fact; death is just a door to another room in Dad's mansion.

Yes, I now what you're talking about. To me, God is very personal, very caring,  and very supportive. But then , I've been dealing on a personal basis with him ever since, at 5, he directly answered me when I asked him, I thought then, a serious question, knowing I would have a response. And ever since, whenever I start a conversation, I always precede by saying, "thanks." Sometimes, that's all  I can say.

lot's of goodies. Make a habit of that. We all like to hear thanks

Ears to hear. I have conversation with him all the time. Even call him "dad," because he is. No, I don't hear words, I feel impreessions that do convert to words in my head. Some call that crazy, but arhat's on them. No one's put a straightjacket on me, yet.

Y'all know I'm not one of them. And to hell with those that do. No that's a hostile place. AS for the rest, eh, just not ready for us, yet. but, we have time to wait.

I have another suggestion for the new site relative to another incentive to attract voters to debates. What if we give points [such as in debate leaderboard ratting points] to voters who vote for the eventual winner of the debate. That way...

1. a voter has incentive to vote in the first5 place

2. a voter has incentive to scrutinize the debate in more detail to determine who the winner truly should be by practical dissection of the participants' arguments, sourcing, etc.

3. There is potential for multiple voters to be awarded.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Hillaryous Balloon Girl wore three different orange pantsuits. Just so you know. She even put Trump square in the middle of her campaign. Remember "Love Trumps Hate" Dumbest ad campaign ever. By the alleged smartest woman in the room. It was a lonely room.

Depends on if mom and dad area married, living together, and filing jointly, yes, both can take the child tax credit. If not, then only one [the child's caretaker] can take the tax credit

And who the hell do they think they are? God Almighty? I doubt it. But, you get what you wish for. Mayhem? Sure, It''ll be in the mail tomorrow. All I know is that, having read what I have of the bill, so far [it is online, you know, so you can, and I'm about half through it], I've not yet encountered anything like that, and, of course, these guys have no interest in railroading Trump by absolute lies, do they?

You're asking me? Ask Him. You blame him, why not direct the question to your accused cause? If I want to know why my wife is going to make pork and beans soup tonight [I hate it, and she knows] I should... what? Ask my neighbor? No, I ask her. Get it?

As for Camp Mystic, well, the area is well-known as a flood zone, often referred to as a "hundred-year flood" area. Did God choose to put a camp there? No, so why blame him? I am sick and tired of the choice to blame God for every little inconvenience [I'm not calling the TX flood an inconvenience, but, wow.] We blame him for everything. Why not thank him more oftenfore all the good he provides, and maybe he would step in to prevent stuff we think is harmful. If we only use him to gloss over own own poor choices of dominion, what do we expect?  He's not a patsy we can shove around at our will.

I didn't say he did. Like I said, he thought God was impersonal, and not a creator. That's pretty much a denial.

Did you miss my commentary: " But, let's not try to justify any religion on the basis of his belief as compared to, for example, Stephen Hawking, whose commentary on God was an impersonal god, at best, and not even a creator, and probably, because there were and are as many religious interpretations of who God is as there were and are scientific theories on the origin and structure of the universe, a subject of intense interest by both physicists."

Who started this, anyway?

What did God mean by “creation of heaven” as we read in the Genisis account? If it was to mean the entire universe, as some say because of how one may read the Genesis account, then what of the idea that God began mortal life like Adam; a man like him, and like us; and Eve, a woman, like women today? That, as a man, God the Father, too, had a God as a fatherly figure, and that this paradigm continues into infinity in both directions, like a mathematic line, as opposed to a ray? Then “heaven,” in biblical creation description, may include only our galaxy; the so-called “Milky Way,” and that other galaxies we observe from Earth may be the creation of older generational gods, with children, like us, and including once God, himself, as a mortal child like us. This, then, infers  there're mothers in heaven, too. This actually makes more sense than a limited beginning that reaches an end point, thus a segment, or a fixed beginning, and an endless future, thus a ray, and not an eternal line. I prefer the eternal line of past, present, future.

Therein, within our as yet imperfect galaxy, may exist a perfect place that is God’s perfect domicile, from which he observes the comings and goings of stars and planets… and residents, like us, in imperfect places, becoming, ever so gradually, potentially, perfect, like our mother and father in heaven.  

Then, “Who started this, anyway” has a longer answer, and the story would like to be fully told finally, someday. Here's a hint to achieve "someday:"

"The most important decision we can make is whether we believe in a friendly or hostile universe." - AlbertEinstein

Yes, Einstein did believe in God; many scientists do. But, let's not try to justify any religion on the basis of his belief as compared to, for example, Stephen Hawking, whose commentary on God was an impersonal god, at best, and not even a creator, and probably, because there were and are as many religious interpretations of who God is as there were and are scientific theories on the origin and structure of the universe, a subject of intense interest by both physicists.

However, regardless of how one acknowledges God, there is this dichotomy of universal consideration of being friendly, or hostile, and has much to do with whether we accept free will or universal determinism. When we are in the friendly universe camp, it is far easier to accept the free will camp along side it, but the opposing hostile universe camp will not easily observe such a condition, siding with determinism; that our lives are already defined, cataloged, and set in stone.

So, is the universe friendly, hostile, or something else?”

What political narrative? They're cheap and dirty. Credibility gap much?

On the other hand, no one here gets our alive, anyway, so, so what? I could die under the knife on Tuesday, and, if so, I've lived a great life. I seriously doubt that outcome.