RM5998
Sack of Meat
- Sep 3, 2018
- 2,202
Yes, out minds are meant to classify, objectify and contextualize, but that doesn't mean that you can assert that there is something that exists and cannot be perceived. When we decide to speak in scientific terms, we decide to use the scientific method. When we decide to speak in philosophical terms, we decide to make our assumptions clear and draw only from them. What you're stating... it's like Russel's teapot.
What does this have to do with anything. That further proves my point. Politicians are trying to reap the most out of us. How does spending billions on a fake program benefit them? They could just take that money and put it in their pockets. And if you say that's what they did, no. We know NASA had employees and such. So we know the money was going into NASA. And do you really think the government is that good at keeping secrets. Man and I thought I was delusional.
RM5998
Sack of Meat
- Sep 3, 2018
- 2,202
*cringe* hgdhsfffffgreeg *cringe*
Well, this thread seems to have devolved into a denial of the scientific method coupled with a debate on the authenticity of the moon landings. Also, it's not going to be possible to teach the scientific method here and encourage that mindset. Let's just agree to not discuss this again, and move back to the starting topic.
About the desire to die in the face of non-existence, I'd say my thought process relies on an alleviation of pain. I have no reason to believe that the non-existence after is any different from that which came before birth. And that part wasn't filled with pain. Now here comes the leap - to say that the non-existence is better than pain. There's nothing for or against this, as it is dependent on an arbitrary valuation of non-existence that we are all free to make in the context of our own lives, for our own lives.
You argue for science yet deny science. Logic. If you approach any scientific community with "the moon landings were real", be prepared to be looked at as a lunatic.
DeathBecomesMe
Student
- Sep 9, 2018
- 143
I'm not making things complicated, I'm merely interested in getting to the bottom of things, and I do like to share the truth.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic about the trails? Anyone who isn't at the least suspicious about them, needs to go and do their homework. If you are in the US or EU: Do you honestly believe those trails criss crossing the sky are CONTRAILS? If so, why have I never seen one contrail in my life here where I'm from. Also, why don't all plains leave contrails, only some? Geoengineering is FACT.
Oh politicians, did you know that Obama studied in Russia and not at Columbia, that he is a homosexual that has a penchant for crack and that his wife is trans, born Michael. I found the truth interesting, if you don't then don't respond and il stop. :)
Here is Larry Sinclair's testimony if you want to get a bit SHOOK. Btw he is gay. I have nothing against gay or trans, I'm for it, I'm also for the truth, especially when it's so damn fascinating. I hope you'll atleast look at it before you make up your mind. You've probably seen this video too?
In science you see things from all angles you debate to find an answer sometimes you'll find it others will be left unexplained but please don't deny a person to have there view
weedoge
Banned
- Jul 12, 2018
- 1,525
You might like Chris Langan's CTMU lol. We have theoretical physicists who can make calculations that will reliable calculate the probability of the state of particles even given the mysteriousness of the quantum world. We may not know about the underlying fabric of our universe or the origin of it but we can sure as hell interpret and understand it pretty accurately. Any alien species can only work with the information accessible to them. The only thing an alien species might have over us really is an understanding of dark energy and matter or simply better math than us.
Ninga sorry bro but do you still hallucinate when writing? Because I get kinda confused when I read your posts. I mean you basically started this thread in an idealistic way "you can't not exist, nonexistence is not a thing" which would imply the eternal nature of the mind and then you call me an idiot telling me that consciousness ceases to exist after death. When I didn't even state that, you did by denying nonexistence. Can you stop calling me an idiot for agreeing with you at the things you mean but don't say?
That was not aimed at you. I don't know what you're talking about. I didn't claim the mind is eternal. When you die it is a complete ego death. But my argument is that from a logical point of view, you are only sentient when you are sentient, which means that from your perspective, you are always sentient. I don't mean to call you an idiot, maybe I came off the wrong way, but that post u quoted was for that other guy.
RM5998
Sack of Meat
- Sep 3, 2018
- 2,202
I'm not denying science, I'm simply stating the boundary conditions for science.
RainAndSadness
Administrator
- Jun 12, 2018
- 2,135
Wait, what? What kind of bullshit theroy is that. And why the hell do we still have to serve as material for conspiracy theories and propaganda? There are pictures of Michelle of her entire childhood. She was always a woman. Even if she was trans, what point would it even make? What's the issue? Is being trans bad now? I guess, since you had to bring it up. if you people would shut up about trans people at least one second a day, I would really appreciate that.
DeathBecomesMe
Student
- Sep 9, 2018
- 143
You pick out an old post just to argue and pretend like you have the moral high ground. I call that VIRTUE SIGNALING. I'm the real deal, while you are here virtue signaling like a phoney. It's unbecoming of you.
You read up until that point and then flip your lid so fast you couldn't read further. I clearly state further down that I have no problem with anyone's choice of sexuality or gender, and that its about the TRUTH. Truth matters. When you are a public figure, the number one figure in the world, you are not allowed to have skeletons in your closet. If you do, you are compromised and will be a tool of someone powerful who may have a malicious agenda. Does this not make sense to you? I've publically supported gay people morally and financially, directing business their way as well as being friends with them. When I used to go out and drink, my gay buddy and his trans partner regularly joined.
Why do you want to deliberately get upset about an issue? Don't be nasty. You pick a fight with me when there isn't one. You only see what you want to see. Your tactics are divisive. It leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Keep fighting, I'm not here to fight and I won't respond after this.
I think the same. Which will imply you will only ever exist but wont remember past existance.
RainAndSadness
Administrator
- Jun 12, 2018
- 2,135
If truth matters then why do you spread nonsense conspiracy theories that have no hint of evidence. Shut up. Seriously. And you can claim to be supportive of lgbt-people all day, I don't buy it. You've lost me at the very second you decided to spead conspiracy theories that are used for propaganda against lgbt-people. I see the same claim coming from people that also say there is a secret elite agenda to destroy the nuclear family and how they are trying to turn us all gay.
Alex Jones is the best example of a transphobic person.
Last edited:
DeathBecomesMe
Student
- Sep 9, 2018
- 143
Who is Alex Jones? I don't follow him. Interesting video you reference. I haven't seen it and don't plan on it.
Please try explain this, as what you've said is counterintuitive and actually it's the opposite that is true:
Propaganda is something put out by a government on a mass scale. Like common core education for instance. These small time Youtubers don't get enough clicks for it to have any effect on any voting population.
You say it's propaganda against lgbt? How so? That makes no sense. If anything it helps the lgbt cause. If more public figures were lgbt or came out, wouldn't it have a positive effect on the lgbt community by normalizing it? By your logic if someone is lgbt it's automatically negative. What if the conspiring party said she was secretly a cat lover and helped cats. That would be a good thing, but now they say she's hiding the fact that she's trans and you find it negative? The truth is the objective, not the content. I don't know why you are finding fault with the content.
Do you think the world is just a dandy place where governments and corporations are doing their best to look out for the people? Why don't they give everyone a free house and free car and free healthcare and free healthy organic food, so the world can be a better place. Instead of enslaving everyone while TRILLIONS of dollars have vanished in thin air, unaccounted for out of treasury. This could have solved almost everyone's problems. The truth matters.
RainAndSadness
Administrator
- Jun 12, 2018
- 2,135
Propaganda doesn't mean it has to come from the goverment. Anyone can do propaganda. There is so much propaganda aganist jews that doesn't come from the goverment. I can give you many examples taken from neonazi websites.
If Michelle Obama actually was trans, that would be a different thing. But she isn't and there is no reason to hide it if she was. And if you go through youtube and watch any of these videos or read any articles on the internet that claim Michelle would be a "tranny" or "man", nice slurs by the way, you can see that the intention of that conspiracy theory is to shred hate towards transgender individuals. They use that idea to basically say: "Look, tranny, very bad. Obama is gay, because he is bad too." That's the whole point of that conspiracy theory. I already gave you one example where Michelle got called a tranny and male for being trans, by Alex Jones. If you disagree with that statement, then link a video please that has a positive message while talking about Michelle being trans.
If you keep saying you've found the truth I'll simply stop responding to you. You keep saying you know the truth like someone who suffers from delusion but you don't provide any conclusive evidence at all. Truth matters, yeah - not to you though.
TLDR; evidence for your claims please.
ok let me get this straight. You have a device in your hand/computer that has access to all of information in history, and the ability to communicate with anyone in the world almost instantly. Yet moon landing is hard to believe? Lmao, youre the kind of idiot that would burn people at the stake for witchcraft
DeathBecomesMe
Student
- Sep 9, 2018
- 143
What you said makes good sense, thank you. Nah it's a waste of my time to keep going here with you, this won't get us anywhere. You stick to your beliefs and il stick to mine. I like to think that I have an open mind, not delusional. I hope you don't have anything against delusional people. You win. :) Peace, enjoy your day/evening.
Lol I think I'm smart enough, just too strung out on meds to seriously think about it. Good one though, you got me.
The universe existing is just an assumption? Can you prove it exists?
Yes I can prove it exist. Let's define what the universe is first. The Universe is all that there is, it's not only the observable universe that we know, which means the universe is existence itself. We know that existence exists because we are existence, and we can't be an illusion (we = all that exist, not we = human beings) because there's nothing else to compare ourselves to. And the concept of "illusion" becomes irrelevant due to the fact that in my equation we're irreducible. There's no duality. An illusion can only exist in relation to something objectively real.
What was the point of your question and why do you ask me questions that are not related to my comments? Either I must suck at speaking English or you were very drunk when you wrote that. It's like whenever I write something here, you're the only guy who doesn't get what I'm saying, sorry if that offends you lol
I can't prove through the scientific method that "we" (my definition of we) exist because there are obvious philosophical limits to what can be done in regards to that. We don't need the scientific method to prove that 2+2=4, our ability to reason sometimes it's enough to at least grasp aspects of the truth.
(Oh by the way I'm not talking about or arguing for some kind of universal/hermetic consciousness or anything of that sort, just in case you want to assume that again because your brain matter apparently doesn't understand that we're in the same boat. I fucking hate strawman and ad hominem arguments)
Last edited:
Wtf are you on about? This reply was not meant for you, I don't even know who you are. Yes you do need science (maths) to prove 2+2=4. The way you reason and the reality of the universe are two different things. Philosophy gets debunked by science all the time. For example the continuity of space. If you use human reason to think about space, you will arrive at the result that space is discrete, as in there is a smallest distance in space, just how there are elementary particles. I'm talking about Zeno's paradox of the tortoise and achilles. However, using mathematics on this problem, it turns out space is continuous, and we arrive at the exact moment when Achilles reaches the tortoise. Please don't talk about things you know nothing about. There are people thousands of times smarter than you and me working on these things. If we only used our intuition we would still be in the stone age. Do you understand now why you shouldn't use arbitrary philosophy as a means to explain the world?
I'm NoLifeNoPain.
Science is a branch of philosophy. You can't do science without philosophy. I'm sure you meant something else though, but I can't understand you if you use vague words.
The rest of your comment has nothing to do with my previous assertions, so I'm not going to reply to that because I frankly don't care. Why are you using strawman arguments? All I was saying is that existence exists by definition and that a theory of everything is irrelevant (not useful) because we only need to conceptualize things as long as we're alive (and that was meant as a joke, read the "can I get the nobel prize" part dude)
If you want to know why I asked you what was the point of your question, I asked you that because it seems to me that asking someone to prove the existence of existence doesn't make sense (I used the word "universe" in that sense, to replace "existence/every possible thing that is or can be" maybe I should have specified I wasn't talking about the black void with galaxies you see in the sky at night, my fault,sorry)
Can I prove the existence of this particular universe that we measure and experience? No because it could be a simulation. If that's what you meant with your question, I agree with you. Assuming that this universe exists as the ultimate objective reality is just speculation.
Last edited:
