1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Homosexuality

« on: February 28, 2008, 06:45:57 AM »

If you heard god talking to you now, you'd be crazy. If you heard god talking to you 2000 years ago, you'd be a prophet.

Nah.  Mormonism. 

2

The Lounge / Re: Why the Two Ronnies are geniuses

« on: February 28, 2008, 06:44:27 AM »

Loved it.

3

The Lounge / Re: Smart/Dumbasses Wanted

« on: February 28, 2008, 06:39:55 AM »

Steal the big plastic Ronald McDonald.  Put him somewhere he can truly be appreciated, like tied to the train tracks.  It's been done, but it should bee done more often. 

4

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 26, 2008, 09:25:31 PM »

Psh nothing moves.  We just don't know where anything is.

I'm pretty thick; I don't get it.  :/

5

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 24, 2008, 06:23:22 PM »

Hmmm, I feel like I'm arguing with myself.  Does that mean I exist? 

The premise of the article is flawed:  He is asking for the physical entity of time to be shown in space, which is nonsense.  Of course time does not exist in space, it's a different dimension.  But Time is present in the movement of physical objects, which makes Time by definition "in existence." 

6

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 23, 2008, 01:22:03 PM »

I'm actually ontologistic. The whole premise was that time (other than ontologically), does not exist.

Are you now saying Time does exist "ontologically"?  I must have missed the distinction "other than" in the original post.  Care to point it out?  It sounds like you are again throwing out your strict adherence to accuracy in favor of making assumptions. 

The original premise was that time does not exist in a physical sense. 

But in all of this where is Time as a physical entity. [sic]

Which is similar to asking where light is when it's dark.  Or, "Why can't Time suck my wang?"  The question does not fit the case.  The premise is flawed. 

All measurements are conceptualized.  All measurements only exist in relation to other measurements.  Time exists in relation to space.  You have to also conclude that space does not exist if you conclude that time does not exist. 

Perhaps I am looking too hard into the extant of time, but the same seems to be true of those denying its existence.  By the logic used to say time does not exist one can also conclude that everything does not exist.  It is a self-defeating argument.

You lied. Fail.

Where did I lie? 

7

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: FE Experiments

« on: February 18, 2008, 09:03:01 PM »

This time, get a ruler, or another completely flat and straight object and then line it up with the the horizon line on the last URL I posted. You will see that the far right side curves off your ruler or straight object.

Sorry, but this is good evidence that the earth is indeed round.

That would happen on a Flat earth, too. 

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Single again, dammit.

« on: February 17, 2008, 11:31:53 PM »

The stoned and stunned response of bewilderment. 

Pass it on.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Single again, dammit.

« on: February 17, 2008, 11:21:27 PM »

The stoned and stunned response of bewilderment. 

Pass it on.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: if earth is flat are all the other planets flat?

« on: February 17, 2008, 11:10:52 PM »

It's the Earth. 

Welcome to the Flat Earth. 

11

The Lounge / Re: My car is gone

« on: February 17, 2008, 10:32:13 PM »

You should learn Karate. 

12

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 17, 2008, 09:16:04 AM »

Plus, it's not a debate since you seem to be genuinely asking a question of a view that quite a few people on this forum hold.

That sounds like a debate. 

A system of measurement can be developed for any definition if one so chooses. The sequential and succession of events was termed time, to which measurements were conceptualized and set in place. I think you may be look too hard into the "it does not exist" part.

All measurements are conceptualized.  All measurements only exist in relation to other measurements.  Time exists in relation to space.  You have to also conclude that space does not exist if you conclude that time does not exist. 

Perhaps I am looking too hard into the extant of time, but the same seems to be true of those denying its existence.  By the logic used to say time does not exist one can also conclude that everything does not exist.  It is a self-defeating argument. 

13

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 17, 2008, 07:03:23 AM »

Taking a philosophical view on everything and calling it accurate is bullshit.

Right, and there is no empirical aspects whatsoever.

Verisimilitude.  That should be your name.  You are a worthless debater.  I'm completely done even considering that anything you have to say is true. 

Would anyone else like to say anything about how something that does not exist can be measured?

14

The Lounge / Re: Sack Dancing

« on: February 17, 2008, 06:39:38 AM »

take off the question mark.

15

The Lounge / Re: Sack Dancing

« on: February 16, 2008, 11:17:45 PM »

Even after wathcing the video I still dont' get it. 

What is sack dancing?

16

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 16, 2008, 10:52:07 PM »

How can something that does not exist be measured? 

Are you kidding me?

Taking a philosophical view on everything and calling it accurate is bullshit.

Word. 

How can something that does not exist be measured? 

Are you kidding me?

Expound.

17

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 16, 2008, 03:45:37 PM »

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

And accurate.

Well shit, I'm glad this guy chimed in.  I don't know where we'd be without such a great moderator.  it's not accurate, it is wrong. 

Movement exists, thus time exists.  How can something that does not exist be measured? 

18

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 16, 2008, 03:31:44 PM »

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

Just as arguing FOR the existence of it. Thus, this thread has no purpose and we can all go fuck someone and have a nice day.
/thread

Oh come on.  You can't point fingers back since it was times existence that was denied in the first place. 

As for the latter, and in the words of Merl Haggard: let's get drunk and screw. 

19

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: The moon doesn't exist!

« on: February 16, 2008, 03:17:42 PM »

You're stupid.

In before teh lock.

While technically correct, it still FAILS in intended meaning.

"In before veclock" would have been funnier but wronger. 

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The bewilderment of a forum...

« on: February 16, 2008, 03:06:26 PM »

Why does he think he's the only one who'd know what it looks like?

Because of a giant thread where no one was getting it. 

I hope you're not talking about the "Acceleration Problem" thread.  Because you are so wrong. 

21

The Lounge / Re: Flat Earth: The Musical

« on: February 15, 2008, 11:15:27 PM »

Brilliance is bliss.   


wait...

22

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Circular Logic

« on: February 15, 2008, 11:07:07 PM »

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHA!   

I LOLERCOSTERED ABOUT FOR TIMEZ BEFORE AYE GOT IT.

23

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 15, 2008, 11:04:45 PM »

So is the consensus that nothing at all exists? 

24

The Lounge / Re: Happy Valentines Day

« on: February 15, 2008, 10:55:30 PM »

oh crap, I haven't been home since yesterday morning.  I had a good Valentines. 

I played Rock Band the whole time....with my girlfriend. 

25

The Lounge / Re: This site seems to have slowed down alot

« on: February 13, 2008, 10:13:46 PM »

...then I say welcome to the monkey house. 

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The bewilderment of a forum...

« on: February 13, 2008, 09:51:43 PM »

Belligerence is bliss.   

27

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Difficulty in debunking myths rooted in the way the mind works

« on: February 13, 2008, 07:23:01 AM »

Suggesting that the mind works "this" way after years of influence doesn't really work. There is no way to know how the mind works on genetics alone. Thus, I made my first statement.

This is all just speculation.  Please give something that can back up your argument. 

After a few minutes of drudging through the CDC website I found something interesting: 

28

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Time does not Exist

« on: February 12, 2008, 07:10:42 PM »

I agree that Time exists only as a concept because we humans created it. However, there has to be something out there that forbids events from happening all at once.

Something that forbids events from happening all at once... I think Kasroa is right in saying space-time is that something. 

So somehow is no events took place, would time still exist to contain these non-events? or would a non-event, in effect, be an event?

If no events took place there would be no way to measure time, which is about all we can do to get our grimy fingers around it.  So I suppose in that case there would be no time and also no events, no objects, no anything. 

This "time" thing seems to me to be just like another space dimension, except that we can only experience one point of its length: right now.  For some reason we are just slowly rolling through this 4th dimension at a constant rate.  We lack completely the ability to push ourselves around in this "time" dimension.  we can only look on as we, in our three visible dimensions, pass through the fourth just like the 3-D sphere passes through this 2-D plane: 


We know time because it exists.  Or it exists because we know time.  All things being relative, there is no difference between the two statements.  Reality is beyond words.  One must not confuse the world of things -- as we think about, talk about, and name -- with the world as it actually is.  The sound of rain needs no translation.  Time exists without us; it is we that are impermanent. 

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flat earth eh? Then I have a question...

« on: February 11, 2008, 09:54:12 PM »

detesto argumentium. 

30

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 09:49:21 PM »

Who wants to bet that someone is arguing with their alter-ego account in this thread?