No announcement yet.

I feel alone.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16

    Want to get into playing Quake again? Click here for the Multiplayer-Startup kit! laissez bon temps rouler!


    • #17
      just do not identify with the moment
      the invasion has begun! hide your children, grab the guns, and pack sandwiches.



      • #18
        I didn't expect my somewhat incoherent rant to get any attention, I just felt like venting because I couldn't at work. That's all.

        But, now I feel like I should clarify and address a few points that have been brought up. This time I won't use "real" so ambiguously. Ok, here is what I was trying to say.

        The World Trade Centers where not brought down by two commercial airliners. It's scientific fact, it cannot be proven otherwise as you cannot prove something which is, in itself, an impossibility.

        What are the implications of this fact? Its coincidence with many other facts concerning our financial, social and geopolitical systems should have the attention of most, if not all people. Unfortunately, this is not the case. This is why I feel alienated and frustrated.

        Originally posted by Planetnine
        I can appreciate the rant but I stopped taking you seriously at this:

        " God is real."

        So in a topic of what is real and reality, you toss that one in eh?

        Regardless of your religious beliefs or lack thereof. I think it is safe to say that not one system out there, religious, scientific, agnostic, has the proof or answers to be the "REAL" truth.

        So I would say to you sir, stop living a lie and search for what you believe is true and not what you were raised to believe because that is what people did in the past. OR what you turned to in a desparate time of need.
        I wanted to point out this comment because it's a great example of flawed reasoning that is very common. There are a couple main points I want to touch on:

        1. You said you stopped taking me seriously because I said God was real. In my rant I made several arguments, but you dismiss them because you disagree with one opinion I hold. Why not simply disagree with that point only? Why dismiss the rest? Where is the logic in that? What if the basis for your disagreement is itself flawed?

        2. You assume I believe in God because I was either raised that way or I turned to that idea in a time of need. This is a false assumption yet is the basis of your position.

        Modern biochemistry, cosmology, math, physics and many other disciplines reveal intent and design in the universe. This does not mean Jesus, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It simply means intelligent design.

        Darwinism as been perverted into something I'll refer to as 'Modern Darwinism'. Modern Darwinism cannot account for the origin of life, or even complex life. Natural Selection does not work on the cellular level or lower. You should do some reading on "Irreducible Complexity" as it nullifies Natural Selection on this scale. Sadly, "Co-option" is the leading counter-argument right now. I say sadlly because it is not intellectually satisfying, it's illogical and defies the very laws it tries to prove. Darwin himself wrote in "the Origin of Species" that if a theory such as what we now call "Irreducible Complexity" could be observed his theory simply breaks down. Remember, Origin of Species was written well before we knew anything about the cell. At that time is was just a blob of plasm.

        Modern Darwinism also cannot account for Protein Synthesis, much less account for the origin of life or even origin of species. It can, however, account for macro evolution within a species.

        Math and cosmology shed a lot of light on the question of probable inhabitability.

        The universe is freakin' intelligible for crying out loud, does that not raise anyone's eyebrows?

        This information is not hard to find, learn and understand. Nor SHOULD it be difficult to discuss in a civil and scientific manner. The world isn't reddit, it's ok to follow the path wherever it leads.

        Anyway, I just wanted to lend some clarity to my spontaneous rant.
        Last edited by KillPixel; 10-05-2012, 01:10 PM.


        • #19
          Originally posted by Planetnine
          Assumption causes many problems, but on an internet forum, what you state in a post is your time at the podium. That is all I had to go off before standing up and stating my opinion. You didnt really elaborate on that statement so I took what you said and ran with it. Now that you have elaborated on that section a bit, hind sight 20/20, I feel like my opinion is a bit short sighted now. However, I still stand behind my statement with the original evidence i had to go on. In a post of what is real and what isnt, i didnt think that any belief in any religous system had a place in it and that your original Rant lost some strength with that statement in it. Since that post your response has clarified a few things.
          I totally get that. I should have taken those things into consideration when I read your post.

          Originally posted by Planetnine
          When I first read your post I passed over your statement about the towers because I really didnt want to touch that. Since you stated it again I have to ask:

          What exactly are you saying there because you are kind of leaving it open ended. For example I can use what you stated and say your right, the airliners combined with older construction, burning jet fuel, etc caused the collapse and it wasnt JUST the airliners.

          It seems like you are trying to stir up the controversial conspiracy theories on the towers collapsing. Since you are quick to jump on other's assumptions, i am not going to assume something from your post again in this thread and therefor just ask, What are you really saying with that Quote? You have to admit it is open ended.
          Stirring up controversial conspiracy theories for its own sake is not my intent. My statement was somewhat open ended, insofar as I offer no speculation as to what did cause it. I find people close their minds to new ideas when fed speculation, so I didn't do that. I simply stated what is empirical, when the mind can accept that then it can move on to further questions, such as "why?"

          There are many sources of information that explain how commercial jets and burning jet fuel could not collapse those buildings, especially in the manner in which they collapsed.

          Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth is large organization of architects, structural engineers (including those who designed the WTC) and physicists. Their presentations are well ordered, succinct and offer no speculation. They have many publicans in text, video and audio.

          This is a good general presentation for ones first look into the topic:

          [ame=]AE911Truth Experts Speak Out - YouTube[/ame]


          • #20
            Yeah, but you have to be careful, as there are just as many 'truth experts' out there who say that nobody ever walked on the moon.

            Also, think on how many people would have to be kept quiet on this. No matter what the simulations show, it's more unlikely that the amount of people in on something like that would keep quiet for this amount of time.


            • #21
              Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation <- Read Please, thoroughly. You're going to LEARN quite a bit.
              Want to get into playing Quake again? Click here for the Multiplayer-Startup kit! laissez bon temps rouler!