[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

When the scales fall from your eyes and you finally see the Truth® you're going to feel like such an idiot, you know.

Let Jesus enter you... it won't hurt unless you resist.

What's he doing here exactly? Did he hurt you while you were resisting?

I can see the truth fine. Nobody pushed their beliefs on me when I was young. I had the chance to learn how to think. Like I said, a little late for you to do this, even if it's still possible.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Do I think I'm far above people who support racism, inequality among humans, intolerance, violence, and other piffleed up BS? Yes.

All that sounds very noble of course, in a secular humanist sort of way - but how do you define all those things? What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

[Cranky Old Man]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

I can see the truth fine. Nobody pushed their beliefs on me when I was young. I had the chance to learn how to think.

Then why didn't you use that chance to learn how to actually think!? You neither listen nor use your brain. You are just repeating what you "learned" over the years like a retarded zombie without realizing there is so much more for you to learn.

I pity everyone who wastes time on talking to you. Even talking to a dead squirrel would be more effective.

Proverbs 18:2 "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion."

[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Then why didn't you use that chance to learn how to actually think!? You neither listen nor use your brain. You are just repeating what you "learned" over the years like a retarded zombie without realizing there is so much more for you to learn.

I pity everyone who wastes time on talking to you. Even talking to a dead squirrel would be more effective.

Proverbs 18:2 "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion."

So you pity yourself and 5 or 6 other 'True Christians'? Yes, you are pitiful.
You're probably way older than I am and have yet to grow a brain.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Working with goldfish can be very interesting. Did you know that recent studies suggest they may have attention spans extending into minutes? On the other hand, working with defective human beings is never interesting.

Originally Posted by You
Do I think I'm far above people who support racism, inequality among humans, intolerance, violence, and other piffleed up BS? Yes.

and here is my reply
All that sounds very noble of course, in a secular humanist sort of way - but how do you define all those things? What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

Keeping that in sight, if not in mind..

then Cranky Old Man suggested
..there is so much more for you to learn.

I pity everyone who wastes time on talking to you.

to which you responded
So you pity yourself and 5 or 6 other 'True Christians'? Yes, you are pitiful.
You're probably way older than I am and have yet to grow a brain.

discussion . . noun
..1: consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate
..2: a formal treatment of a topic in speech or writing

Although this is not a debating society, you seem to be attempting a discussion of some description, not very successfully so far. You don't have to agree with what we say but you are expected to respond. Minutes have passed. Here is the question again:

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Working with goldfish can be very interesting. Did you know that recent studies suggest they may have attention spans extending into minutes? On the other hand, working with defective human beings is never interesting.


Keeping that in sight, if not in mind..

discussion . . noun
..1: consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate
..2: a formal treatment of a topic in speech or writing

Although this is not a debating society, you seem to be attempting a discussion of some description, not very successfully so far. You don't have to agree with what we say but you are expected to respond. Minutes have passed. Here is the question again:

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

Luckily, I was raised with values and have a sense of morals. I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights.

Also don't need a Bible to set everything up for me. You probably have a brain, might want to start using it to think about things like this instead of listening to the Bible all the time.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Luckily, I was raised with values and have a sense of morals. I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights.

Also don't need a Bible to set everything up for me. You probably have a brain, might want to start using it to think about things like this instead of listening to the Bible all the time.

Luckily, no one here will pay you any mind. Your unsaved hatemongering is only going to grease the skids for your ride down to hell.

[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Luckily, no one here will pay you any mind. Your unsaved hatemongering is only going to grease the skids for your ride down to hell.

No real arguments whatsoever as usual?

And seriously, I want to sexually service you, pastor. Can I fly out to Iowa and do you?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

I was raised with values and have a sense of morals. I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights.

OK, you were raised with values. How do those values enable you to distinguish good from evil?

If you say that "limiting other people's freedoms" is the acid test — again, how do your values, or your morals or whatever you call them, tell you which actions or beliefs or laws do limit those rights &/or freedoms and which actions or beliefs or laws do not?

Mohammedans for example are raised with values and a sense of morals and yet their society is so debased that all 56 Islamic administrations are exempt from compliance with UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights provisions. Sure, they have been raised with values and have a sense of morals. They don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights. But what they determine those rights to be is not the same as your determination.

How they determine rights and freedoms however, is just the same as how you do it: by applying the values and the sense of morals they were raised with.

The OIC is the largest head of state organization in the world after the United Nations (UN) itself and comprises 56 Muslim countries plus the Palestinians. It claims to be the "collective voice of the Muslim world," i.e., the ummah, and speaks on its behalf in effect as the seat of the next Islamic Caliphate. In 1990, the OIC membership adopted the "Cairo Declaration ," which officially exempted all Muslim countries from compliance with the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights and replaced it with Islamic law (shariah).

One of the fundamental laws of Islam deals with "slander ," which is defined in shariah as saying "anything concerning a person [a Muslim] that he would dislike." At the OIC's Third Extraordinary Session, held in Mecca, Saudi Arabia in December 2005, the organization adopted a "Ten-Year Programme of Action to Meet the Challenges Facing the Muslim Ummah in the 21st Century." A key agenda item of that meeting was "the need to counter Islamophobia" by seeking to have the UN "…adopt an international resolution to counter Islamophobia, and call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments." The word "Islamophobia" is a completely invented word, coined by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) front group. OIC adoption of the term reflects the close operational relationship between the OIC and the Ikhwan.

Six years later, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due to host OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Washington, DC in mid-December 2011 to discuss how the United States can implement the OIC agenda to criminalize criticism of Islam. Cloaked in the sanctimonious language of "Resolution 16/18," that was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council in April 2011, the WDC three-day experts meeting is billed as a working session to discuss legal mechanisms to combat religious discrimination (but the only religion the Human Rights Council has ever mentioned in any previous resolution is Islam). The UN Human Rights Council, which includes such bastions of human rights as China, Cuba, Libya, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, introduced Resolution 16/18 to the UN General Assembly (UNGA), where it was passed in March 2011.

The Resolution was presented to the UNGA by Pakistan (where women get the death penalty for being raped and "blasphemy" against Islam is punished by death). Ostensibly about "combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and…incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief," the only partnership mentioned in the text is the one with the OIC. The U.S., whose official envoy to the OIC, Rashad Hussain, helped write Obama's Cairo speech, actively collaborated in the drafting of Resolution 16/18.

SOURCE .. date 1/1/2013

So once again:

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?OK, you were raised with values. How do those values enable you to distinguish good from evil?

If you say that "limiting other people's freedoms" is the acid test — again, how do your values, or your morals or whatever you call them, tell you which actions or beliefs or laws do limit those rights &/or freedoms and which actions or beliefs or laws do not?

... Let me repeat. I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights. These human rights include but are not limited to the right to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. Freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom from torture/slavery, etc.

What do you expect me to say? My brain tells me each human deserves these rights and freedoms. Therefore, people or ideas that limit these rights and freedoms are wrong. Really can't get much more basic than that.

Mohammedans for example are raised with values and a sense of morals and yet their society is so debased that all 56 Islamic administrations are exempt from compliance with UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights provisions. Sure, they have been raised with values and have a sense of morals. They don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights. But what they determine those rights to be is not the same as your determination.

How they determine rights and freedoms however, is just the same as how you do it: by applying the values and the sense of morals they were raised with.

The comment about how I was raised was a stab at your own childhoods, which were probably not that great considering you had to run to God to console you.

So once again:

• What is your benchmark (for distinguishing the good and constructive from the the undesirable and ruinous)?

You really like repeating questions to which answers have already been given huh?


And pastorboy, why are you 'defiling' your own forums by changing my posts into homosexual comments?

[Ignorant Buttmunch]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

And pastorboy, why are you 'defiling' your own forums by changing my posts into homosexual comments?

Maybe he has needs to cover his own homosexual activities? He seems so obsessed with it.

Unfortunately for him, God sees through his malicious activities.

[Zechariah Smyth]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Maybe he has needs to cover his own homosexual activities? He seems so obsessed with it.

Unfortunately for him, God sees through his malicious activities.

An apology would go a long way.



YiC,

Zech

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

Maybe he has needs to cover his own homosexual activities? He seems so obsessed with it.

Unfortunately for him, God sees through his malicious activities.

What god would that be? The god of karma? The one you say doesn't exist?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

We had a politician here who said he would "lead our nation into sustainable technological and economic prosperity" which sounds great I suppose Then he was asked "how are you going to achieve that?" to which he replied "by stepping boldly into the future and leaving the past behind!"

You see he's not really saying anything at all because, even at the most superficial level, he has not defined what he means by

• sustainable
• technological (let alone which technology)
• economic (definitions range from Adam Smith to John Maynard Keynes to Karl Marx, Stalin and Adolph Hitler)
• prosperity (Nero introduced some very progressive economic ideas for example, but not everyone shared in Rome's prosperity)

nor has he explained how he's going to achieve his (extremely dubious) Golden Age.


So when you say : "I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights" you really do need to explain what you consider those "freedoms" are. I don't want to dwell on Stalin particularly, but he made very similar claims. You may be familiar with some of them. He said VERY CLEARLY what freedoms & rights were being limited AND BY WHOM and he proceeded to implement his programme to set his people free. If you wish to find out how he defined rights, freedoms, limitations, and so on read Das Kapital by Karl Marx or wade through the communist manifesto. At any rate, to protect what he regarded as the freedoms and rights of Russia, Stalin murdered some 20,000,000 citizens including such wretches (according to his definition) as poets, musicians, artists, assorted intellectuals, philosophers and many others. Do you share Stalin's definition of people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights? It is impossible to tell from your burblings so far.



"These human rights include but are not limited to the right to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. Freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom from torture/slavery, etc."
So off we go again. What do you mean by

• the right to life
• liberty
• property
• the pursuit of happiness
• freedom of speech
• freedom from torture
• slavery

Moving on from Russia, I was listening to a travelogue the other day celebrating the life, lliberty, prosperity, happiness and freedom enjoyed by the North Koreans. "We have nothing to envy in the world" announced the tour guide. Of course property ownership is illegal because that limits other people's freedoms and human rights. Property is theft. Is that what you think? You did not say. How do you determine whether property is theft? Growing up with a system of moral values in North Korea results in property "owners" being shot. From an early age they sang:

LONG LIVE KIM IL-SUNG.
KIM JONG-IL, SUN OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
LET’S LIVE OUR OWN WAY.
WE WILL DO AS THE PARTY TELLS US.
WE HAVE NOTHING TO ENVY IN THE WORLD. . . . . SOURCE

Now, rejoicing, they sing:

LONG LIVE KIM IL-SUNG.
KIM JONG-UN, SUN OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
LET’S LIVE OUR OWN WAY.
WE WILL DO AS THE PARTY TELLS US.
WE HAVE NOTHING TO ENVY IN THE WORLD.

Is that how you understand human rights including but not limited to the right to life, liberty, property (individual property ownership is illegal in this system of course) and the pursuit of happiness? You did not say.

What do you expect me to say? My brain tells me each human deserves these rights and freedoms. Therefore, people or ideas that limit these rights and freedoms are wrong. Really can't get much more basic than that.

There are several tribes in southern Africa. The Zulu and the Hottentot are well known. They have no particular squabble over territory, the Zulus live in Zululand, the Hottentot live somewhere else and yes, like you, their brains tell them each human deserves rights and freedoms. Therefore, people or ideas that limit these rights and freedoms are wrong. They respect one another's beliefs and territorial limits however in between the two tribes are a third group, the Bushmen. Neither the Hottentot nor the Zulu considers the bushman to be human. According to the moral and ethical code they grew up with that is quite correct. What do you think? How do you determine what is "human" and what is not? Is an elephant "human"? How do you decide? Is a Neanderthal "human" or a bee or an Orca? What about North Koreans and Russians? They may or may not agree with your definition of "human" rights. If they think you should be shot, would you impede their freedom to do so?

Christians have God's standard. He created everything. He knows all about it. He has told us how to live, how to avoid disease, who is human, what freedoms we have and what limitations we are subject to. There is no scenario you can outline where there is not an objective standard available to us which explains not only how to assess that situation but also why it is so. Your obvious inability to answer my question (because you don't understand what the question actually is) derives from a meagre and narcissistic world view.

Jesus is the answer to your spiritual void; Jesus is God.

Read about Him HERE. . Historical context HERE.
I hope that is helpful.

[Alkalai]

Re: 3 Experiments You Can Do At Home that PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

We had a politician here who said he would "lead our nation into sustainable technological and economic prosperity" which sounds great I suppose Then he was asked "how are you going to achieve that?" to which he replied "by stepping boldly into the future and leaving the past behind!"

You see he's not really saying anything at all because, even at the most superficial level, he has not defined what he means by

• sustainable
• technological (let alone which technology)
• economic (definitions range from Adam Smith to John Maynard Keynes to Karl Marx, Stalin and Adolph Hitler)
• prosperity (Nero introduced some very progressive economic ideas for example, but not everyone shared in Rome's prosperity)

nor has he explained how he's going to achieve his (extremely dubious) Golden Age.


So when you say : "I don't agree with people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights" you really do need to explain what you consider those "freedoms" are. I don't want to dwell on Stalin particularly, but he made very similar claims. You may be familiar with some of them. He said VERY CLEARLY what freedoms & rights were being limited AND BY WHOM and he proceeded to implement his programme to set his people free. If you wish to find out how he defined rights, freedoms, limitations, and so on read Das Kapital by Karl Marx or wade through the communist manifesto. At any rate, to protect what he regarded as the freedoms and rights of Russia, Stalin murdered some 20,000,000 citizens including such wretches (according to his definition) as poets, musicians, artists, assorted intellectuals, philosophers and many others. Do you share Stalin's definition of people or ideas which/who limit other people's freedoms/human rights? It is impossible to tell from your burblings so far.

Violated other's right to life. And freedom of speech too.

"These human rights include but are not limited to the right to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. Freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom from torture/slavery, etc."
So off we go again. What do you mean by

• the right to life
• liberty
• property
• the pursuit of happiness
• freedom of speech
• freedom from torture
• slavery

Don't need to explain them, my ideas on what they are are similar to the general public. Might want to look it up if you really don't know.
Get going: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Moving on from Russia, I was listening to a travelogue the other day celebrating the life, lliberty, prosperity, happiness and freedom enjoyed by the North Koreans. "We have nothing to envy in the world" announced the tour guide. Of course property ownership is illegal because that limits other people's freedoms and human rights. Property is theft. Is that what you think? You did not say. How do you determine whether property is theft? Growing up with a system of moral values in North Korea results in property "owners" being shot. From an early age they sang:

LONG LIVE KIM IL-SUNG.
KIM JONG-IL, SUN OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
LET’S LIVE OUR OWN WAY.
WE WILL DO AS THE PARTY TELLS US.
WE HAVE NOTHING TO ENVY IN THE WORLD. . . . . SOURCE

Now, rejoicing, they sing:

LONG LIVE KIM IL-SUNG.
KIM JONG-UN, SUN OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
LET’S LIVE OUR OWN WAY.
WE WILL DO AS THE PARTY TELLS US.
WE HAVE NOTHING TO ENVY IN THE WORLD.

Is that how you understand human rights including but not limited to the right to life, liberty, property (individual property ownership is illegal in this system of course) and the pursuit of happiness? You did not say.

No. North Korean citizens are also being limited in freedom of speech, the press, right to property, etc. Property owners being shot violates the right to life. No need to explain what these things are, read the link.

Also, no violating other people's rights, end of discussion.

There are several tribes in southern Africa. The Zulu and the Hottentot are well known. They have no particular squabble over territory, the Zulus live in Zululand, the Hottentot live somewhere else and yes, like you, their brains tell them each human deserves rights and freedoms. Therefore, people or ideas that limit these rights and freedoms are wrong. They respect one another's beliefs and territorial limits however in between the two tribes are a third group, the Bushmen. Neither the Hottentot nor the Zulu considers the bushman to be human. According to the moral and ethical code they grew up with that is quite correct. What do you think? How do you determine what is "human" and what is not? Is an elephant "human"? How do you decide? Is a Neanderthal "human" or a bee or an Orca? What about North Koreans and Russians? They may or may not agree with your definition of "human" rights. If they think you should be shot, would you impede their freedom to do so?

Christians have God's standard. He created everything. He knows all about it. He has told us how to live, how to avoid disease, who is human, what freedoms we have and what limitations we are subject to. There is no scenario you can outline where there is not an objective standard available to us which explains not only how to assess that situation but also why it is so. Your obvious inability to answer my question (because you don't understand what the question actually is) derives from a meagre and narcissistic world view.

That argument was meant to be connected to the rest, can't just split them. What's a human? Look it up. The reason we have and learned a language is so we wouldn't have to define everything by ourselves.

Why would you let someone else tell you how to live? And why God?
The Bible ignores evidence presented in the physical world, why still believe in it just because someone tells you to? Without even thinking about it?

Jesus is the answer to your spiritual void; Jesus is God.

Read about Him HERE. . Historical context HERE.
I hope that is helpful.

No, it isn't.