Dragon Stone,
I surely agree with you...
I surely agree with you...
Reality & You
- Thread starter kmguru
- Start date
Dragon Stone
Registered Senior Member
TruthSeeker, thank you.
Yes, I'd have to say you sound like an idiot there. That is a really lame attempt at trying to capture how we think. People who think like that are the believers who sit around and read the tabloids and hide whenever it says aliens are attacking! We're not like that. We think differently. I can't explain how we think--there are just too many ways to count--but we don't think like that.
Yes, and you usually can't disprove our theories either. We don't take the path of science because it will lead us to a dead end. If we use science then we'll never find the truth.
Those religions you knock so much have been around for centuries and they have more proof in them than any scientific laws that have ever been dreamed up.
We don't think we're right, but we don't think we're wrong either. We are just exploring the possibilites and giving our 100% trying to find the truth. That's what we're all about. Is that so hard to understand?
We all take that chance. Again, we're out there to find the truth. So if that means we are proven wrong, then so be it. We are not afraid of being proven wrong. Sometimes, we'd probably even welcome it.
Yeah, I've noticed that.
"Yes, I'd have to say you sound like an idiot there. That is a really lame attempt at trying to capture how we think. People who think like that are the believers who sit around and read the tabloids and hide whenever it says aliens are attacking! We're not like that. We think differently. I can't explain how we think--there are just too many ways to count--but we don't think like that."
There is no proof in what you believe. So it's the same thing.
"Yes, and you usually can't disprove our theories either. We don't take the path of science because it will lead us to a dead end. If we use science then we'll never find the truth."
Disprove my theory on Wayne Gretzky dumb-dumb. Can you? See how it's still the same thing?
What do you mean by the truth? Are you Nelson Part Deux? What do you mean it leads to a dead end? Because science can't answer every question? Eventually, most half-intelligent people realize that not knowing the answer to everything is fine.
"Those religions you knock so much have been around for centuries and they have more proof in them than any scientific laws that have ever been dreamed up."
Hahahahahah! You're a funny girl! First of all, the idea that something has been around for centuries does not even suggest it is true! For even longer than Christianity people believed the Earth was flat or that we were the centre of the Universe. Does it make it true dumb-dumb?
And what truth in religion?
"We don't think we're right, but we don't think we're wrong either. We are just exploring the possibilites and giving our 100% trying to find the truth. That's what we're all about. Is that so hard to understand?"
Yes it is. You're willing to do everything to find your truth except accept some facts. In my experience with conspiracy theorists and new agers, people believe what they want to believe. No matter the proof against them.
"We all take that chance. Again, we're out there to find the truth. So if that means we are proven wrong, then so be it. We are not afraid of being proven wrong. Sometimes, we'd probably even welcome it."
Then welcome to sciforums, I am glad to be introduced to the first one of you who will ever admitt they're wrong.
There is no proof in what you believe. So it's the same thing.
"Yes, and you usually can't disprove our theories either. We don't take the path of science because it will lead us to a dead end. If we use science then we'll never find the truth."
Disprove my theory on Wayne Gretzky dumb-dumb. Can you? See how it's still the same thing?
What do you mean by the truth? Are you Nelson Part Deux? What do you mean it leads to a dead end? Because science can't answer every question? Eventually, most half-intelligent people realize that not knowing the answer to everything is fine.
"Those religions you knock so much have been around for centuries and they have more proof in them than any scientific laws that have ever been dreamed up."
Hahahahahah! You're a funny girl! First of all, the idea that something has been around for centuries does not even suggest it is true! For even longer than Christianity people believed the Earth was flat or that we were the centre of the Universe. Does it make it true dumb-dumb?
And what truth in religion?
"We don't think we're right, but we don't think we're wrong either. We are just exploring the possibilites and giving our 100% trying to find the truth. That's what we're all about. Is that so hard to understand?"
Yes it is. You're willing to do everything to find your truth except accept some facts. In my experience with conspiracy theorists and new agers, people believe what they want to believe. No matter the proof against them.
"We all take that chance. Again, we're out there to find the truth. So if that means we are proven wrong, then so be it. We are not afraid of being proven wrong. Sometimes, we'd probably even welcome it."
Then welcome to sciforums, I am glad to be introduced to the first one of you who will ever admitt they're wrong.
No, DragonStone, you will never find what you want to find. You will find the truth, but not the truth that you want.
Your beautiful theories will be demolished by facts. This is the way of science. This is the way of reality.
I would like to know more of these proofs. What are they?
And how will you be relatively sure that you have found the truth?
Spoken like a true scientist.
Dragon Stone
Registered Senior Member
Well, maybe I am.
Two things can demolish that theory.
One, you don't believe in things like that. Your atheist.
Two, its obvious you made it up off the top of your head. You don't state it, but its obvious.
Its only in our century science and religion have been seperated. So those beliefs are both due in part to religion and science.
True, not all that was believed is true. But its simple enough to tell the difference between a person's superstious (sp?) story and a person's actual factual sight and belief.
In simpler terms, some of it is truth and some of it is lies. Doesn't take a rocket-scientist to tell which one is the fraud.
You're right. We do have a tendancy to do that. Sorry, deal with it. But you also believe what you want to believe and shut everything else out. So don't talk. And if we're not right, it doesn't work, and it comes to a quick stop.
Gut-feeling. Its really quite a weird thing. When you're finished, you feel accomplished. You just know. Not a lot to base it off. I know you're thinking "What the hell? Yeah right, bitch." But that's just how you know...
They will not be demolished by you're beliefs or what not. They will flourish with my own beliefs or fall by my own beliefs and no one elses. Sorry.
Dragon
PS Don't argue with me here. This is my, our, territory and you'll never win. Its fun just to sit back and laugh at you people though.
"Well, maybe I am."
Then you'll demand a substantially larger amount of respect from myself compared to most who believe pseudosciences. Honeslty.
"Two things can demolish that theory.
One, you don't believe in things like that. Your atheist.
Two, its obvious you made it up off the top of your head. You don't state it, but its obvious."
For starters, while it is COMPLETELY illogical, there are atheists who believe in pseudoscience faiths. You'll find if you discuss anything with myself or 99% of the atheists/agnostics here that we're mostly too logical to contradict our logic in atheism with blind faith in pseudo. Secondly, it is quite obvious I made it up of the top of my head. But that means nothing.
The two things you stated are suggestive evidence, and neither one in any way proves my theory false. If I found you someone who honestly believed it, would you then say it is probably true?
Also, a good amount of pseudo beliefs come from people making up things off the top of their heads.
"Its only in our century science and religion have been seperated. So those beliefs are both due in part to religion and science."
Not true. Have you read scientific or philosophical history? While it's true that religion has constantly attempted to hinder science, there has always been those who risk everything to examine science without a pesky god getting in the way.
"True, not all that was believed is true. But its simple enough to tell the difference between a person's superstious (sp?) story and a person's actual factual sight and belief.
In simpler terms, some of it is truth and some of it is lies. Doesn't take a rocket-scientist to tell which one is the fraud"
Whether someone truly believes something or not is completely useless. Jews will tell you hands down that it's a fact Jesus never existed. Christians wil tell you hands down that it's a fact Jesus existed and was the son of God. Christians will tell you hands down that it's a fact Mohammed was not a prophet of God. Moslems will tell you hands down that it's a fact Mohammed was a prophet of God. All these people believe with the same faith in there 'truth'. See how the 'inner feeling' theory doesn't work?
"You're right. We do have a tendancy to do that. Sorry, deal with it. But you also believe what you want to believe and shut everything else out. So don't talk. And if we're not right, it doesn't work, and it comes to a quick stop."
I believe in undeniable facts like gravity and such. When someone presents an unusual but not impossible idea I'm open to debate (though I admitt I most often begin the debate with a very skeptical mind). However, when someone like Nelson suggests that the number 0 is equal to infinity......well, I definetly am closed minded because he's just plain wrong.
"Gut-feeling. Its really quite a weird thing. When you're finished, you feel accomplished. You just know. Not a lot to base it off. I know you're thinking "What the hell? Yeah right, bitch." But that's just how you know..."
Like I said, some people have a gut feeling in Christ as the only savior, others in Mohammed, others in Buddhism........ If so many different people get the exact same gut feeling for different 'truths' how can you possibly think any of them are right based on the 'gut feeling'?
"PS Don't argue with me here. This is my, our, territory and you'll never win. Its fun just to sit back and laugh at you people though."
You start claiming things like 0 = infinite and you better fucking believe we'll get on your case and laugh our ass off at you.
Then you'll demand a substantially larger amount of respect from myself compared to most who believe pseudosciences. Honeslty.
"Two things can demolish that theory.
One, you don't believe in things like that. Your atheist.
Two, its obvious you made it up off the top of your head. You don't state it, but its obvious."
For starters, while it is COMPLETELY illogical, there are atheists who believe in pseudoscience faiths. You'll find if you discuss anything with myself or 99% of the atheists/agnostics here that we're mostly too logical to contradict our logic in atheism with blind faith in pseudo. Secondly, it is quite obvious I made it up of the top of my head. But that means nothing.
The two things you stated are suggestive evidence, and neither one in any way proves my theory false. If I found you someone who honestly believed it, would you then say it is probably true?
Also, a good amount of pseudo beliefs come from people making up things off the top of their heads.
"Its only in our century science and religion have been seperated. So those beliefs are both due in part to religion and science."
Not true. Have you read scientific or philosophical history? While it's true that religion has constantly attempted to hinder science, there has always been those who risk everything to examine science without a pesky god getting in the way.
"True, not all that was believed is true. But its simple enough to tell the difference between a person's superstious (sp?) story and a person's actual factual sight and belief.
In simpler terms, some of it is truth and some of it is lies. Doesn't take a rocket-scientist to tell which one is the fraud"
Whether someone truly believes something or not is completely useless. Jews will tell you hands down that it's a fact Jesus never existed. Christians wil tell you hands down that it's a fact Jesus existed and was the son of God. Christians will tell you hands down that it's a fact Mohammed was not a prophet of God. Moslems will tell you hands down that it's a fact Mohammed was a prophet of God. All these people believe with the same faith in there 'truth'. See how the 'inner feeling' theory doesn't work?
"You're right. We do have a tendancy to do that. Sorry, deal with it. But you also believe what you want to believe and shut everything else out. So don't talk. And if we're not right, it doesn't work, and it comes to a quick stop."
I believe in undeniable facts like gravity and such. When someone presents an unusual but not impossible idea I'm open to debate (though I admitt I most often begin the debate with a very skeptical mind). However, when someone like Nelson suggests that the number 0 is equal to infinity......well, I definetly am closed minded because he's just plain wrong.
"Gut-feeling. Its really quite a weird thing. When you're finished, you feel accomplished. You just know. Not a lot to base it off. I know you're thinking "What the hell? Yeah right, bitch." But that's just how you know..."
Like I said, some people have a gut feeling in Christ as the only savior, others in Mohammed, others in Buddhism........ If so many different people get the exact same gut feeling for different 'truths' how can you possibly think any of them are right based on the 'gut feeling'?
"PS Don't argue with me here. This is my, our, territory and you'll never win. Its fun just to sit back and laugh at you people though."
You start claiming things like 0 = infinite and you better fucking believe we'll get on your case and laugh our ass off at you.
Ropes, a measuring tape, and stakes. A compass might be helpful too. Also a flat board.
First, you draw out how you want it to look the day before. You go out that night, drive a stake into the ground. Measure a length of rope to match the radius of the circle you want to make. Tie one end of the rope to the stake, the other around your waist. Walk out until the rope is taut. Turn 90 degrees. Walk forward on the flat board, keeping the rope taut at all times. You will very quickly come back to your starting point, having described a beautiful circle. Shorten the rope in progressive stages to fully trample a whole circle.
For straight lines, drive a stake in the ground, then use the measuring tape to ark off how long you want the line, and drive another stake at the end. Walk along the line, keeping it rubbing against your hip, crushing the crop in front of you with the board.
For arcs, use a combination of these two methods.
Doing this, you can make very complex designs very quickly. Very low tech. Everything you need could be obtained form a local hardware store.
How do we know this? Because the drunken yorkshiremen who started the whole thing demonstrated it step by step. With cameras rolling, they made a perfect crop circle with ropes and boards. Took them about 3 hours.
END OF STORY.
kmguru
Staff member
Northwind,
"Physical changes of plants and soil - not only does the physical appearance of seem to change (it looks dehydrated), but there is change at the molecular level. Research has been conducted over a ten year period with samples and thorough laboratory testing carried out by the biophysicist Dr. Levengood, Nancy Talbott, and John Burks -- the BLT Research Team, and a small army of volunteers worldwide. Their findings include enlarged cell walls, expulsion cavities in the nodes of the plant stalks, significantly extended node lengths, and changes to the soil composition (ie. vastly higher level of magnetite concentration) from samples taken within the crop formations in contrast to the control samples taken from outside the circles. "
What have I said...
"Emit sound at 5KHz frequency - Researchers have measured a distinct emission of energy at 5KHz eminating from fresh (few days after formed) crop circles. This corresponds to reports of eye-witnesses who often claim to hear a "trilling" sound coming from the direction of the formations. "
"Anomalous EM measurements - By doing a fluxgate magnetometer survey of several formations, Colin Andrews determined that the very center of these circles measured 40-50 nano Teslas. This is 10 times the radiation level of a normal field. "
What have I said...
...
"Physical changes of plants and soil - not only does the physical appearance of seem to change (it looks dehydrated), but there is change at the molecular level. Research has been conducted over a ten year period with samples and thorough laboratory testing carried out by the biophysicist Dr. Levengood, Nancy Talbott, and John Burks -- the BLT Research Team, and a small army of volunteers worldwide. Their findings include enlarged cell walls, expulsion cavities in the nodes of the plant stalks, significantly extended node lengths, and changes to the soil composition (ie. vastly higher level of magnetite concentration) from samples taken within the crop formations in contrast to the control samples taken from outside the circles. "
What have I said...
"Emit sound at 5KHz frequency - Researchers have measured a distinct emission of energy at 5KHz eminating from fresh (few days after formed) crop circles. This corresponds to reports of eye-witnesses who often claim to hear a "trilling" sound coming from the direction of the formations. "
"Anomalous EM measurements - By doing a fluxgate magnetometer survey of several formations, Colin Andrews determined that the very center of these circles measured 40-50 nano Teslas. This is 10 times the radiation level of a normal field. "
What have I said...
...
<i>Anomalous EM measurements - By doing a fluxgate magnetometer survey of several formations, Colin Andrews determined that the very center of these circles measured 40-50 nano Teslas. This is 10 times the radiation level of a normal field.</i>
'fraid not. The Earth's magnetic field is 50,000 nano-Tesla. That would completely swamp any field of 40-50 nano-Tesla, making it unmeasurable. This Colin Andrews guy is obviously an amateur.
'fraid not. The Earth's magnetic field is 50,000 nano-Tesla. That would completely swamp any field of 40-50 nano-Tesla, making it unmeasurable. This Colin Andrews guy is obviously an amateur.
???
Well... I don't understand that... so I can't discuss it...
Well... I don't understand that... so I can't discuss it...