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 - Soze

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support donald trump
« on: July 11, 2016, 02:13:41 AM »
Hillary explicitly asked her aides to cover up the sending of classified documents.

Can you elaborate or post a link to what you are referring to? It's very possible I missed something, and I don't want to misunderstand you.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support donald trump
« on: July 10, 2016, 04:09:26 AM »
How is this even a close call to anyone? Trump is deplorable by every conceivable standard. He is a narcissistic, ignorant, hateful, morally-bankrupt, special interest incarnate. As I understood it, Hilary was technologically incompetent and instructed her staff to cut corners so that she only had to check one email. Not that she would admit to being incompetent, but there wasn't malice in her blunder. I doubt anyone here thinks Hilary's intention was to deliberately create a security breach.

In contrast, Trump is explicitly malicious.

“Lethal injection is too comfortable a way to go.”

“When somebody hurts you, just go after them as viciously and as violently as you can.”

[Women?] “You have to treat ’em like shit.”

Explicitly Sleazy
"You can never be too greedy."

“I’ll do nearly anything within legal bounds to win.”

“It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”

Explicitly Racist
“I have black guys counting my money.… I hate it. The only guys I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes all day.”

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. [...] They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Explicitly suffering delusions of grandeur
"My Twitter has become so powerful that I can actually make my enemies tell the truth.”

...HOW is this a wash?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flat earth counter argument
« on: January 15, 2010, 06:33:32 PM »
You cannot see the entirety of Earth from any mountain simply because of the atmosphere.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Artwork
« on: November 23, 2009, 04:59:23 PM »
Do you still have the original?
Good thinking. When I go home for Thanksgiving, I'll find it and take more pictures.

I liked most of the art here but...

 I don't get it. Is it the picture or is it the fact you were able to draw the picture. is it like driving a car at 200 miles an hour just to prove you could rather then the joy of going 200?
I don't get art sorry.  :( there is a reason I am a math major.
It was actually an art assignment, so the content really doesn't mean a lot.
The stuff I do, without being told what to do, is much more fun.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gay Marriage = Religious Freedom
« on: November 22, 2009, 11:11:04 AM »
So... that's forceful. Read the thread.

There's also the issues of proof of consent and duress.
Assisted suicides of the terminally ill and pained is hard enough to get passed.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Photography
« on: November 22, 2009, 11:02:55 AM »
You should take an extended shot of the star at night to see their paths.  ;)

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Artwork
« on: November 22, 2009, 10:48:51 AM »
The image used to be hosted on my school website before I graduated. I only recently rediscovered it. It seems she scours the internet looking for Pepsi pics. Very odd really. Notice the Cool Pepsi pics versus the My Pepsi pics link. She knows not to take credit for them.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Artwork
« on: November 19, 2009, 07:52:00 PM »
I don't know why I made this thread for only computer art. Any kind of art is fine with me.
If there are complaints, I'll just say it's still computer art because you are seeing art on a computer.

Colored pencils.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Google
« on: November 19, 2009, 07:45:07 PM »
I just removed it from my Google results. Too bad noobs won't know to do that.

The Lounge / Re: Best mod
« on: November 19, 2009, 07:39:56 PM »
Congrats on your Modship Gayer.  :)

Logically life doesn't make any sense to have a god watching over the universe because how can a god let something like the War on terror even happen?

Hell was created for control, just like the bible and other scriptures of religion.

Humans cannot accept change if it challenges individual beliefs

It's called free will.
A) Prove we have free will.
B) Prove freewill is dependent on the potential for evil.
C) ...Who's will is it for miscarriages? Spontaneously contracting fatal illnesses? Volcanoes exploding and smothering people in burning ash? Deadly tsunamis? These apply to God's lack of involvement as well.

Sell her story to the media, become a public figure, accept donations.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How is an infinite plane possible?
« on: November 07, 2009, 02:08:45 PM »
It isn't an alternative explanation for gravitation, it accepts gravitation (attraction between matter)
Which is an alternative of apparent gravitation due to acceleration.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How is an infinite plane possible?
« on: November 07, 2009, 10:25:52 AM »
I asked a similar question. I didn't really ever get a full explanation.

Mine is more geared towards the big bang theory which I think is actually a rather large part of the infinite plane. Because if the earth were infinite, it would kind of screw up a lot of astronomical theories.
Astronomical theories are based on the RE model, so they would need revision in light of FE. I think that goes without saying.
Which question went unanswered in your thread?

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The future of James Bond
« on: November 06, 2009, 05:53:45 PM »
The mere thought of that makes me shudder.
I feel accomplished.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How is an infinite plane possible?
« on: November 06, 2009, 05:41:47 PM »
Re: How is an infinante plain possible
I just reread the title and realized that you think it's impossible. I'm curious to hear why.

Flat Earth General / Re: How many FEB are there?
« on: November 06, 2009, 05:40:33 PM »
You have a good example of self selection, and liars.
Please refrain from making baseless claims. I highly doubt that you are capable of knowing the mind of the FEB's, nor would you be capable of demonstrating anything.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Shadow Object?
« on: November 06, 2009, 05:36:35 PM »
1. I think its hilarious that "moon" is  a word (cause it exists), and "antimoon" isn't a word (cause its fictional)
The dictionary is not an authority on anything beyond terms and usage. Antimoon is simply not common enough to be put in the dictionary. We have many times the words in our language that we used to have, does that make all the new words fictional? No.

2.  I think what you're referring to is the submoon (also not a word...) which pulls down while the moon (exists) pulls up.

All of this.. still leaves me with no explanation of the antimoon.. (still not a word)
In order to ask the question you must have heard it used somewhere in some context. The last time I checked, the antimoon was underneath, but the popular name might have changed. It's always possible that the terminology shifted. If you are asking for the definition of something, it is appropriate to provide the context so that I can distinguish if it is being used as another word shadow object or not.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution didn't happen
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:59:52 PM »
I'm trying to understand why everyone is not jumping all over my offer.
I have no idea what you admit to or what you don't.
I'm trying to understand why you won't cite your previously posted evidence.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: FE Believers
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:52:37 PM »
The problem is that sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between genuine true believers and skillful devil's advocates that don't drop character.
So why not just make them all FE'ers?
It beats having 2 groups of people that are hard to distinguish from each other.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Shadow Object?
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:50:24 PM »
The shadow object is theorized to create the shadow effect seen on the moon.
Also, unknown doesn't translate to magic.
I thought the object you're referring to is referred to as the "AntiMoon"?
How is that a question?
...Some models use the antimoon to stabilize the water displacement in ocean tides. It is under the Earth.

BTW, Firefox Spellcheck identifies antimoon as not a word.
Why would it?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How is an infinite plane possible?
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:46:48 PM »
Why do FErs beleive in an infinante plain
It is an alternative explanation for gravitation; the IFE doesn't require a UA.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Shadow Object?
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:39:33 PM »
The shadow object is theorized to create the shadow effect seen on the moon.
Also, unknown doesn't translate to magic.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The future of James Bond
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:35:09 PM »
I thought Quantum SUCKED.
I saw a preview for it right after I rented and watched it, and I honestly enjoyed the preview much more.

What next, is the Bond girl from a previous movie going to reappear in the next one? ::)
Aside from M?

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution didn't happen
« on: November 06, 2009, 04:16:41 PM »

Actually, evidence has to be true. Otherwise, it isn't evidence.

Tell that to the jurors of the OJ Simpson murder trial.  They forgot it.
Perhaps you'd like to link us back somewhere, or provide a quote of some evidence that you provided that didn't get obliterated?

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: FE Believers
« on: November 06, 2009, 03:49:08 PM »
Hello there :]
Good morning.

FEW is a group that was working on the Flat Earth Wiki (FEW).  As far as I know, FEW members are not necessarily true believers.  They just volunteered to work on the wiki.
I know, but I thought it was relevant to mention that it existed.

Daniel also only makes you a believer if he thinks you actually believe it. For example, I asked if I could be one, because I am one, but he said I'm not one, so he didn't make me one.
That's my point. It seems like if you argue on behalf on FE you should be recognized. I am an FE'er, but not I do not personally favor FE. I abstaining from personal judgment, but it seems like replacing the title with "FE proponent" could combine both advocates like myself and believers so that RE'ers know who to talk to. It's a FE discussion forum after all. Short of altering my sig or personal text, nobody would ever know that I'm an FE'er, without digging through my post history.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: FE Believers
« on: November 06, 2009, 01:52:58 PM »
At the bottom of the home page it has a little display:
I copied the text just now.

37 Guests, 10 Users (2 Hidden)
Users active in past 15 minutes:
Soze, Colonel Gaydafi, Blanko, Wendy, Proleg, Z0mgZ0rs, Daniel, Robert Palmer
[Administrator] [Planar Moderator] [Regular]

It was my understanding there was also the ranking of FE Believer and FEW in their own colors, though nobody from those two groups is online now.

EDIT: Aha, gin's online.

[Flat Earth Believer]
It's in orange, and The FEW is in purple.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution didn't happen
« on: November 06, 2009, 01:47:30 PM »
The fossil record shows a sudden, inexplicable appearance of a wide variety of both simple and complex life-forms. However, if evolution were true, there would only be a very gradual increase in both the numbers and complexity of such organisms.
Despite the name, the Cambrian explosion was hardly sudden.

 You have yet to show any positive evidence whatsoever in support of creationism.  

Neither have you.

Please read:

Suggestions & Concerns / FE Believers
« on: November 06, 2009, 11:04:04 AM »
I'm inclined to think that of few of them aren't but to recognize their positions, maybe we could rename it FE Proponents to extend the title to include all theorists?
Also, I wasn't planning on staying a regular forever, and I wouldn't mind becoming an official proponent. Anyways, for the purposes of this site, it seem like it makes more sense to state what your defending instead of why.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29