Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - MikDaTv

Pages: [1] 2
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« on: October 06, 2015, 08:20:49 AM »
Look at the crime rates between the individual states and you will find that places like Utah where guns are everywhere have less then 1/2 of the murders per 1,000 people the places like California where guns are controlled.  I could cite my source if you wish.  Murder rates in Utah are 1.8 and dropping while California's crime rate is well over 3.

There are also a lot of other vast differences between Utah and Cali.  Correlation does not mean causation.

Still, it's an interesting statistic. 

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« on: October 06, 2015, 07:29:32 AM »
Even if you magically removed all the guns from the United States and could somehow guarantee that other crimes that would have been committed with firearms would not be committed through another means, you would reduce the murder rate in the United States by a whopping 3% +\-.

Now I'm all for gun control.  The average citizen doesn't need access to a bazooka.  But that control should be put in place by people who actually know something about firearms.  There should be intelligent laws based around safety, not blind fear like the laughable assault weapons ban.
True, laws motivated on blind fear are not wise.
But isn't banning assault weapons for civilians wise?
If one wants to use military equipment, one should join the military.

Yes, the laws put in place should be reasonable. No question there.
But isn't it also perfectly reasonable to not have any guns?

The changes that need to be made shouldn't just come from the government.
There should be social change as well.
Guns are still seen as necessary, when they are not.

But, yes, there shouldn't really be a full restriction.
That would be over-involvement on the government's part.
But the gun laws in the US are still rather lax, and this needs to be changed.

Fun fact- Flamethrowers are not banned in most US states

There is in force an Assault Rifle ban in force that prevents folks from buying full auto assault rifles.  So a huge chunk of military hardware is banned to the average citizen.  That's been in place since the 70s I believe and I don't think any rational gun advocates are calling for a repeal.

The assault weapons ban that was proposed some time ago had extremely loose and vague definition of what describes an "assault weapon."  A vague definition that had nothing to do with the actual deadliness of the firearm itself.  I don't have the wording in front of me, but I believe it included a line like "if it looks sufficiently intimidating." Which opened up a can of mutant worms.  It made a M14 with a wood stock and no attachments perfectly legal, but a polycarb stock M14 with tactical rails and a flashlight totally illegal.  Same exact gun firing the same exact round but one was made illegal because it was black and had a flashlight on the barrel.

It also limited magazine size, but if a mass shooter really wants to kill some folk he'll just bring more magazines like the columbine kids did.

It's laws like that, proposed by politicians who are basing their knowledge on rhetoric and fear rather than facts and statistics which are the true gun control problem.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« on: October 06, 2015, 05:54:36 AM »
Even if you magically removed all the guns from the United States and could somehow guarantee that other crimes that would have been committed with firearms would not be committed through another means, you would reduce the murder rate in the United States by a whopping 3% +\-.

Now I'm all for gun control.  The average citizen doesn't need access to a bazooka.  But that control should be put in place by people who actually know something about firearms.  There should be intelligent laws based around safety, not blind fear like the laughable assault weapons ban.

4
Give it up Yaakov.  Even the other Christians think this guy is a nutball.  He can clearly quote the bible but I don't think he's ever actually read it.

When he gets to the pearly gates St. Peter is going to be like "Oh, your that guy!  Look, I'm gunna need you to sit through our basic indoctrination video.  Apparently you missed some stuff in your time on Earth." And then he'll call up Big G and they'll giggle about it.

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Learn about God's Earth
« on: October 01, 2015, 03:15:12 PM »
Why is this argument repeated so often when I have already dealt with it?
Probably because you haven't really dealt with it, which is probably because your really, really wrong.

Quote
Moon is likely a repurposed word. It means the light at night
you mean like the Moon?

Quote
the sum of starlight. This is clear by context
No.  No it isn't.  In no way is this clear by context.  You say the word used in the old testament meant something else at the time of its writing.  You've offered absolutely no proof or evidence of this.  You just say it is and we are supposed to take your word for it.  Not Gods word, your's.  The hebrews had a word for the moon, which is what was used in the original text and was then translated into english as The Moon.  We know the hebrew word meant moon due to its use in other texts to refer to... guess what... thats right, The Moon.

Furthermore, using the word moon to describe the vague light of the stars doesn't really work as the Hebrew language has a word for that.  אור כוכבים means Star Light.  It doesn't make sense for god to describe everything else in detail, using specific words to indicate what is being made, when, and how, but then suddenly decide to hijack the word used for Moon to describe something that the hebrew language already had a word for.  Unless you're suggesting God was being deliberately misleading.

Quote
We know that the moon came into being 2000 years ago
Actually we know for a fact that it's been around a lot longer then that.

Quote
the Bible is very clear on this topic.
No it isn't.  It's made painfully clear by the bible that the Star of Bethlehem was a star, what with them using the word for star and everything.  Plus, there was already a word for Moon already in existence, as previously discussed, and the bible very clear does not refer to it as the Moon of Bethlehem.

Also, no other text from the era makes any mention of a Moon suddenly springing into existence out of nowhere.  The Romans, who controlled most of the known world at the time, were very good at keeping records and had a decent education system for it's time in place.  There were a great many learned and literate people who would have witnessed this moon suddenly pop into the night sky and would have recorded it.

We have plenty of Roman writings from before and after Jesus's birth.  Strangely, writings from before his birth clearly indicate there being a moon and describing it's motion through the stars and it's phases as some Romans were big fans of Astrology which they got from the Greeks who also had a word with a solid definition for the moon.

Quote
No other object matches the description.

A star does.  A star matches the description nicely.  The star appears and Magi from the west travel east as they feel the star signifies something great.  The star does not give the location of Bethlehem to the Wise men.  King Herod does that.  The Wise men simply say they have seen a star that heralds the birth of the King of the Jews.  Seeing as they were astrologers and that stars were their business, they would know a star was.  If it was the moon that had suddenly appeared, they would have said, "King herod, we're looking for the King of the Jews because of that giant honking new light in the sky that dominates all of the stars."

Quote
The Bible is our record of this. Few records exist of that long ago: we have the barest fragments. It is not suspicious at all that some things are lost, especially with demons seeking to hide the truth.

Um, no.  We have tons of records from that time.  Poems, books, music.  Hell, professors are digging their way through Roman accounting books.  Now has a ton of stuff been lost?  Sure.  But we don't have only the "barest fragments" thats for sure.  The Romans loved to write stuff down and before them we have writings from the Greeks.

Quote
God is clear. To deny it is willful ignorance.
God is clear.  Hopefully one day he relieves you of your ignorance.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Learn about God's Earth
« on: October 01, 2015, 11:18:15 AM »
I still don't get how you can say the moon didn't exist before Jesus.  Multiple accounts of the moon from before his birth, describing it exactly how it is now.  All of that is the work of demons... For some reason.  Until Jesus is born and all of those previous texts coincidently describing it in perfect detail.

Yet Jesus is born and there isn't a single scrap of writing about the giant light in the sky the gigantic light in the sky suddenly, with no warning, and seemingly out of thin air.  Not just astronomers would write about it.  Anyone who knew how to write would mention it.  Poems and songs would be written about the new light in the sky.  Kings would claim they were born the night the moon suddenly appeared.  Pictures would be painted.  Wild theories would be made.  Masses of animals would be sacrificed to the new sky God.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Learn about God's Earth
« on: September 30, 2015, 07:57:10 PM »
If the meanings of words change (Seemingly only for the benefit of your arguments) then how do you know none of the other words have changed since the beginning of creation.  If the Moon referenced in genesis doesn't really mean moon, then how do you know God really means God?  Maybe at the beginning of time God meant Stanley.

Stan was a gardner who made some killer compost.  That was the Earth.  Earth didn't mean earth, it meant compost.  Anyway, Stan found a naked couple in his garden one day and let them live there in peace, asking only that they not eat anything from his apple tree as he was going to try and make a pie later.  One of Eve's ex's sent her a text (because snake back then meant cellphone, not that it was an actual snake) though saying Stan's apples were too good to pass up so she jacked one and got Adam to eat one too.

Stan found out about it and kicked them out of his garden.  And moon didn't mean moon, it actually referred to the UV lights Stan used to light his garden at night.

The similarities been the story of genesis and the story i just made up are far to great to ignore, therefore it must be absolutely true.

maybe back then Enoch didn't mean dedicated, trained of famous.  Maybe it meant lier and Jude was saying this lier made this prophesy.  Then later the meaning of Enoch changed to a dudes name, because, you know, words in the old testament might not mean what they mean today.

8
Flat Earth General / Re: A challenge to round Earthers
« on: September 30, 2015, 02:17:17 PM »
I don't disregard anything in the bible.  I just realize that it was written by men, translated by men and rewritten by men over the course of many centuries and in the case of the old testament, thousands of years.  It's purpose is not to provide an accurate world history but Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.

God gifted human beings with rationality.  It would stand to reason that he wanted us to use that rationality.  He gave us math, which is the closest thing in the world we've come to the language of god.  Both rationality and math say the world is spherical, and the bible never says anywhere explicitly that it is flat.  I will not deny the gift god gave me for the sake of a text written by man that doesn't even explicitly deny what the sciences tell us.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Learn about God's Earth
« on: September 30, 2015, 12:52:57 PM »
The moon referenced in genesis refers to the actual moon.  I know this because it is the word of God, written in the king James bible that was specifically made to be the first publicly available bible to spread gods word.  It was written after the star of bethlahem and would therefore be referred to as the star of Bethlehem, unless Gods word is lying and it's actually the moon.

Furthermore, while you say external sources can be demonically influenced I doubt all of them that refer to a moon are.  Also, there is absolutely no texts, (including the bible, but whatever) that make mention of the moon suddenly springing up out of nowhere.  A gigantic new celestial body appears and not a single astronomer anywhere in the world writes so much as a footnote about it.

And while you say the moon fits the description of the star of Bethlehem (it doesn't, but whatever) that does not automatically assume the two are the same.  Likewise "the planets are angels because there just so happens to be 7 of them" doesn't really hold water either. Especially since God found the book of Enoch to not be worthy enough for his king James bible.  You know, the one he specifically designed to be the best public version of his words.

I feel as if you have become so obsessed with the litteral letters of the bible that you've lost sight of what it is for my friend.

10
Flat Earth General / Re: A challenge to round Earthers
« on: September 30, 2015, 12:34:31 PM »
The Bible doesn't say anything about science for the same reason why my biology textbook doesn't contain interpretations of famous poetry, it's not what the book is about.  The Bible also doesn't contain anything about chemistry, does that mean you think that chemistry is a lie even though you can prove it yourself?  The Bible is not an unabridged user manual for the universe, it's all about becoming a better person.

Hey look!  Someone who gets it.  People trying to shoe horn the bible into the roll of a text book or scientific journal make me tired.

Test is right about one thing.  God does not lie.  But on the other hand he is not always completely 100% literal.  Test seems to think God is like Drax the destroyer.  No concept of metaphor.

11
Flat Earth General / Re: A challenge to round Earthers
« on: September 30, 2015, 09:52:32 AM »
With all the translations and changes the bible has gone through, how do you know it is 100% accurate?

God is not a fool. He was in charge of the original writing, and He inspired a crucial translation into English: the King James Version, the first meant to be truly available to the public. This version is accurate, the other translations are intended to muddy the water.

Where does it say that in the bible.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Free Will
« on: September 30, 2015, 09:23:44 AM »
We have free will. That does not preclude foreknowledge: I know what I did yesterday, but I still had the freedom to choose at the time. The souls of humans are what make us unique in this regard.

Or to shorten...

"There is a difference between knowing the path, and walking the path."
~Morpheus

For once we agree Test.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Learn about God's Earth
« on: September 30, 2015, 09:14:30 AM »
I was wondering where you got the names for your archangels because of the 7, only 3 are named in the bible.  And if they get planets to represent them in the sky, what about all the seraphim and cherabim who are far and away more powerful and much higher in rank than the puny archangels?

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but you can't see Neptune, Uranus or Pluto with the naked eye.  What qualifies them as bright shiners?

And the bible never ever states the moon is the star of Bethlehem.  It actually makes very specific references to it as the moon, it's own and separate entity in the sky.

I'm the first to say I believe in God.  Me and the almighty chit chat on a regular basis.  Mostly one sided talks I admit, but he's a great listener.  But I believe the greatest gift he's ever given humanity is free will, and through our free will, rationality.  He's given us the option to think our own thoughts and make our own decisions based on what we see.  I believe abandoning that rationality to constantly follow, without question, the words written by men who are imperfect is a great sin.  The bible is the inspired word of God, not a history text book.  It was written to help people understand themselves, their soul, and what comes after.  It was not written to be an accurate account of history.

14
I see your gospel of the twelve and raise you one Xur, agent of the Nine.

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Critical Thinking and Religion on a Flat Earth
« on: September 15, 2015, 08:44:05 PM »
You can come at me with all your lies & all your greed .You can come at me with knifes guns & misery.
And you can tell me that I'm am not a living Man ,but you will never take my pride my soul or my land.
For I will never back down never back  down, l will never back down.

Good for you.  You're still wrong.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproof of gravity
« on: September 04, 2015, 09:20:25 AM »
I was watching the video with Brian Cox, the one whey dropped a bowling ball and a feather in a very large vacuum chamber and both the ball and the feathers hit the ground at the same time. My question is: If everything has a gravitational force then, one large object, suspended from the ceiling, should be attracted to the side of a vacuum chamber. Has anyone seen an experiment like that? They certainly have the means to try it.

It is attracted to one side.  The bottom side.

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Light is Sound Debunked
« on: August 15, 2015, 04:34:08 PM »
How about this? Light is sharpened by lenses.
How about giving me a bit of detail and explaining what you're getting at.

I thought you were the smart one and he's the one copy/pasting thoughtless protocol.  Shouldn't you know what he's getting at?

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Neutrino Update
« on: August 11, 2015, 06:31:43 AM »
Lol so if you think the earth is flat your labeled a tin hat crazzy,

Thats because if you think the world is flat then you are a tin hat crazy.

19
Are you guys still taking him seriously or is this just for the shits and giggles?

Truth Seeker is more shits than giggles, but yeah, more or less.

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What Is The Worst Flat Earth Fallacy ?
« on: August 07, 2015, 06:00:51 PM »
the truth is payment enof...

Aww.  I'm sorry to hear about your extreme poverty then.

What i find interesting is your use of ad hominem.  You can barely write something that could be considered english but you haven't misspelled the latin once yet as far as i've seen.

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What Is The Worst Flat Earth Fallacy ?
« on: August 07, 2015, 02:14:08 PM »
I sent Truth Seeker a PM asking him to improve his grammar and spelling; he responded with this:
I USE BETTER GRAMMER THEN YOU AHOLE
offering definitive proof that he is a troll.

Yeah, as if it wasn't obvious enough already! First we have sceptimatic. Now him. Wow. It's actually quite entertaining.

I miss Tom and his 60X spotting scope.

how much is they paying you for lieing live on tv??

How much are they paying you?

22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What Is The Worst Flat Earth Fallacy ?
« on: August 07, 2015, 06:56:44 AM »
I sent Truth Seeker a PM asking him to improve his grammar and spelling; he responded with this:
I USE BETTER GRAMMER THEN YOU AHOLE
offering definitive proof that he is a troll.

Yeah, as if it wasn't obvious enough already! First we have sceptimatic. Now him. Wow. It's actually quite entertaining.

I miss Tom and his 60X spotting scope.

23

Mainframes: you will provide NO 'calculations' for ANYTHING, disinfo-merchant.

You will instead provide a SIMPLE explanation for how a cube, heated to 1200C, made of a material that dissipates heat very quickly WILL NOT transfer that heat to any object it contacts.

And that is ALL you will do, criminal liar.

ANY other response will be DISMISSED.

lol.  you think calculations aren't simple.

24
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disprove the flat earth theory to me...
« on: August 03, 2015, 04:31:32 PM »
The earth casts a round shadow on the moon.

25
Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth From a Christian Perspective
« on: August 03, 2015, 01:34:08 PM »
I think your confusing "accident" with "happened by chance."  Even if there is no God, telling your child he/she is an accident would not be appropriate because he obviously came about through the conscious actions of two adults.

And I belive that one should not be so focused on the meaning of the words in the bible that they miss its message.  god created a masterpiece, but it's entirely possible he used gravity and evolution as his brush.

27
The Lounge / Re: A way for our time traveler to prove himself
« on: July 17, 2015, 10:06:32 AM »
Would yall stop trying to ruin a good story.  Real or fake it's entertaining, and isn't that what we all come here for?  Entertainment?

28
Tell me...when you are in a plane...can you look up at the sky?

As I said before, the difference would be miniscule. They would simply approach the edge, and just continue along a curved course to Russia. The difference would be negligible. The journey, would appear seamless.

Consider a flat map. You could easily plot the route on a flat map, meanwhile making the star patterns seem consistent.

If you are on the North Pole and you look up you will see Polaris directly above you.  If you can't look up then you can look at the positions of the other stars and use one of literally thousands of applications which can help you determine your location.  Many of them are open source so anyone can look and confirm that they are not purposely made t be in acurite at the poles.  You don't even need such apps if you know the night sky well enough.

This would also mean that all pilots would have to be in on the conspiracy.  Believing that is just insanity.
Thought light was relative. Now all of a sudden it isn't.

Relativity of light has absolutely nothing to do with this.
Fact of the matter is curvature of earth in the sky can be accounted for by atmospheric distortion or magnetic resonance or cascade matrix ovulation or something along those lines. Other Flat Earthers can explain it better than I can.

The cascade matrix ovulates?  Does it have a period too?  Is it the cascade matrixs time of the month?

29
The Lounge / Re: A way for our time traveler to prove himself
« on: July 15, 2015, 07:32:02 AM »
Don't do it JT.  If you fail the test your proven a fake and the magic is gone.  If succeed then your proven a time traveler and all the mystery is gone.

30
Flat Earth General / Re: Pluto, I'll call it now.
« on: July 15, 2015, 07:25:29 AM »
Didn't it get reclassified as a "protoplanet" or some such a few months ago?

Pages: [1] 2