InternetTherapist

And by people you mean the same groups who now say the big bang isn't real? How does that example make any sense? It makes sense until you got to the end, in which you twisted around the answer. No, it hasn't been accepted as fact by people who don't understand it, and no, you can't record it on camera as it happened in the past. But just like air you can prove by extension, you can prove it through the need for it to exist and the evidence left behind. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/bigbangredux.html You can believe whatever you want to believe, but what you believe isn't going to sway scientists, and I'll side with them. You completely missed the point I was trying to make. All I am saying is science doesn't have all the answers, and there is much about the universe that they don't understand. The big bang theory is exactly that, a theory, nothing more. But the idea that the world was flat at one time was also a theory, but people considered it a fact, even though it sounds ridiculous today. We don't even understand how much of the universe works, so how can we assume how it was created? I would like to point out that gravity is still a theory too. I'm not sure you quite understand what the word theory means and implies, it does not imply something is not yet proven, it only means that it's an answer, and by extension all answers can be wrong, whether they're right or not is based on the evidence. Yes, I saw that point, and it is a good one in that it's good to always question a theory, that's how they get better, that's how we figure out what's real and what's not. But there is a point in which a theory gets close enough to fact that it's pretty much proven. It should always be questioned but surely it shouldn't be disbelieved forever and ever until pictures are shown, look at the links I've given, those findings aren't enough to have unwavering belief in it, nor to never question it, but they are enough to accept it as fact for now. Personally I can't think of a single theory which I don't believe should be questioned vigorously when new evidence relating to it comes up, but look at politicians, they're hardly on trial 24/7 for cheating on their wife, for breaking the law or any other wrong doings, so until something comes up, yes, I will believe that Obama isn't a murdering wife beating secret male prostitute. Your point is valid but I felt it seemed a little bit off, sort of like calling Israel the new Nazi Germany, whether or not someone believes they're comparable doesn't change the fact that the comparison feels off. So I pointed that out. I'm sorry if it seemed like I missed your point, maybe it might seem like this one missed it as well, let me wrap it up then. I understand your post didn't really SAY anything other than that it is possible for it to be proven to be ridiculous in the future, but that's kind of unfair, if there is little or no real scientific evidence to believe that it isn't real as it is then why not say we could find out that up is down and down is up? That the world IS in fact still flat after all? I don't object to you saying it's possible, I object to the implication that we should have any more doubt in something because unknown evidence can come to light, I find that to be a ridiculous stance which severely limits our ability to understand the world, but I don't think you really took that stance, only implied it. tl;dr Read THIS and know a theory can never become a law, even if proven 100% true, because a law is inherently different from an explanation.

Yours was more about mathematics whereas mine was about time and relative change, but both focus on the fact that there are truths in the state, and not really based on an outlook on life.

If the glass is empty and you change that through putting half of a full glass into it it becomes half full. If the glass is full and you change that through taking out half of a full glass from it it becomes half empty. Your action changes its state and thus the wording you use should reflect the change. If I'm happy and become more sad then I am feeling worse. If I am sad and become happier then I am feeling better. Edit: Ohh I see Maxwell the Fool made this point before me.

Who said that all scientists believed the Big Bang? Nobody did, but a majority of them do believe in the big bang. Polls show it's in the 95%+ range. Alright, then what are those reasons? I already did, I posted a link above.

thats very head driven. none of that actually matters when imploding into is. What do you mean imploding into is? Imploding, into, is. He said "Which is in the form of free will", so imploding into free will? What does imploding mean in this context?

Explain free will to me, please.

And by people you mean the same groups who now say the big bang isn't real? How does that example make any sense? It makes sense until you got to the end, in which you twisted around the answer. No, it hasn't been accepted as fact by people who don't understand it, and no, you can't record it on camera as it happened in the past. But just like air you can prove by extension, you can prove it through the need for it to exist and the evidence left behind. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/bigbangredux.html You can believe whatever you want to believe, but what you believe isn't going to sway scientists, and I'll side with them.

The problem with trying to find meaning in life is that we are actively trying to prove there is meaning; we have a vested interest in one side of the argument, and to an extent most people will believe what they want to believe over what we don't want to. Those who believe in meaning should note that they are the ones unable to believe there is no meaning, whereas those who don't believe in meaning would love to believe there is, but won't, because they know there isn't. People who don't believe in meaning or a purpose in life aren't unlike those who do, they almost always try to find it, even when they don't believe in it, but that seeking does not prove there is meaning, it only proves that we have a common tendency towards wanting to believe what we find nicer or more meaningful than the cold, sad realities of the world. "I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it." - Mark Twain I am the product of my parents, they are the product of their parents, and they are the product of their parents, people seem to forget that they are the product of their parents having sex and were not in fact created by God, now, I didn't just say that God didn't make MANKIND, but surely he did not give birth to you, you could say he had planned it beforehand, but then we get into the talk of how he planned all bad things which happen and planned for some people to go to hell, and I won't get into that type of debate. We are not the first people to question life, men have been doing this since the beginning of our species, we do not somehow have a better grasp on abstract concepts such as meaning then people in the dark ages, they thought about what we think about now on an internet forum as they died of the black death in their beaten down depressing houses full of the dead bodies of their children and loved ones. The only real difference between the dead and living is that they're dead and we're not dead yet. I choose not to believe in that which I want to believe, I'd rather know that my hair is on fire then believe I am a super saiyan.

Went through every page of this thread and ctrl + f'd dofus and wakfu, nobody has talked about it, weird. http://www.wakfu.com/en http://www.dofus.com/en Turn based MMORPGs, they're making an Xbox 360 game based on it and I think they made a DS one. There is a cartoon based of it in France. It has some pretty amazing features like a working plant ecosystem and animal ecosystem. Wakfu is in beta, Dofus isn't but it's old and I've never really played it, been waiting for Wakfu to go out of beta. Think it's closed beta ATM.

Because there is no one to blame, Neo-Mania only serves to help the advancement of technology; if Americans didn't buy the latest and greatest gadget available to us from our fellow countrymen then they would most likely not export it to the rest of the world, then there would be no next latest and greatest, and the US is the number one pioneer of a lot of tech related products, such as operating systems along with hardware. nVidia, AMD, Intel, Apple, Microsoft, all US companies. ATI is Canadian but owned by AMD now.

I don't see why I can't talk about why people don't get along in a thread about why people don't get along. Hoshi has made it very obvious that it's logic or something, he edits all of his posts extensively after he makes them so I'm not sure what they say now. I say the problem is words, hoshi uses words but he cannot really know simply through words, just as I cannot really know simply through logic and debate and questions, as he says. I like the bold yellow text you've got going there, but is there really a rule about talking in haikus? Seems Hoshi has made around 500 posts which are completely incoherent, what's so wrong with me debating him incoherently as he replies to me incoherently and says I'm wrong with riddles? Who is to judge the importance or relevance of them if they're too cryptic? I could go over my haikus for you if you would like.

but you cant prove things with words you think you can prove everything with words but you cant you can only prove nothing with words and you do that all the time i think you need to stop looking at the world as some equation and love you need to feel the love of the world, the love of the universe your life is black and cold you try to prove all these things with words but you cant you must be very sad i hope i can show you the way you have to accept that the world is and was of the main reason for it still is and it cant not be you have to see that but you are blinded by your mind your mind controls you you need to become free of that ur like a robot i bet you will reply to this message too with your words words are not the answer they only blind you to the truth just go outside and look around no words only the world do not reply to this thread again with your words only see the truth words are a lie

but if i die to the unknown then the world in and of itself is not for the truth of my soul, if you deny this then you are just too strapped down by logic and fake understanding that the world gives you. you just keep proving im right over and over i dont no how u dont see that its like ur saying ur right ur right and im like yeah i know i know and you just keep saying it you are so blind just read my posts over and over til u get it if the world is in and of itself for it is in me then how can you say that it isn't? Is it really that hard for you to see that the world is in and of itself for it is to be and has to be forever and since the beginning of time? you think you are so smart you can understand and think the world is not and of itself becaue it is and could not be? how can you come to understand the world with logic? if people only used logic and understanding then antibiotics would never have been created because they were too busy being in and of themself because they were to be.

hoshi you just prove my point that if you ant of logic u cant be for logic in and of urself if you cant then it just doesnt work and u dont see the truth dog chases tail but it doesnt find it cuz it not in of itself the world works in of itself but u cant see that and its for the ways it can that it doesnt u say to be or not to be but the questn is why and why is in the sky apple pie nicky and i for it is of the fly black cherry pie alone i buy the world of sky by fly guy die bill nye. if you dont get this den dont reply to my post cuz ur not inlightned and ur dum lol jk not relly but i am right and u cant prove me wrong bcuz u cant undrstand me

I do believe there is some truth we can find in the world, there is moral relativism between groups of people, but I still believe people are just in questioning the actions and morals of others based on a few general universal human rules and morals, those being: The valuing and protection of our own lives and by empathy those of others. The valuing of our own kind over other kinds and species. The betterment of our own lives and through empathy that of people like us, and to an extent that of mankind. These rules create a system, a game system of sorts, in which we live and can gain success often through the betterment of other peoples lives and mostly those of people like us. A team like system in which countries try to help their own people, and through competition mankind is bettered through knowledge. But there is selfishness, although I do believe in freedom and equality to an extent, but not equality of original conditions, we could share the pie between a million people, but then that wouldn't be much of a pie, now would it. In other words I'm not a communist or socialist, although I am not vigorously opposed to them, the world does need to be bettered, which is why Mexico deports illegal immigrants from South America, they tend to bring more crime and poverty to Mexico than anything else, yet they are only trying to better their own lives, the illegals from South America into Mexico, I mean. That's why Mexico allows their citizens to perform citizens arrests on any suspected illegal, and for illegal immigrants to get up to 2 years prison sentences for crossing into their country illegally. Although the US is racist for doing much less than what Mexico does, and Arizona is a Nazi-State for enforcing the law, or so Mexico says. Point being that people look out for their own kind, but can still be empathetic to other tribes, but only up to a point. I'm not into the whole global peace talky tree huggy thing, these people don't want us all to share the pie, they just want more of our pie and that's evident by how they treat those who need THEIR help. The point there is NOT that if they can do it we can to, point is that we both follow a general rule of helping our own kind, and we'd be foolish to change the way we play as they still play by the old rules, the rules which make some countries great and productive and others miserable failures. And while I'm on the subject of Mexico and differing social opinions, Jesus, Mexicans/South Americans naming their kids Jesus. Saints have been crucified UPSIDE DOWN to try an not be like Jesus, yet they outright NAME THEIR KIDS JESUS! But that's beside the point and don't reply to it.