Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52

Thread: msnbc

  1. #1
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,769

    Default msnbc

    its become way too much of a liberal circle jerk. i mean i can dig it being reasonably biased towards democrats but basically all the commentators are just talking about how awesome and super liberal cool each other are. chris matthews is still great though.

    also i just found out they fire pat buchanan which was some bullshit. morning joe was actually a great morning show when he was a regular guest because it was about 20% news and 80% them fucking around and cracking jokes and it was actually really funny. but he wrote some book that was deemed TOO OFFENSIVE FOR AN MSNBC COMMENTATOR.

    still the best news channel though

  2. #2
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    amazing atheist is the best liberal circles jerk by far

  3. #3
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,769

    Default

    aggressively proclaiming atheism stops being intellectual impressive after you're out of 8th grade

  4. #4
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    God he is like the Rush Limbaugh of liberals, I love it, he needs his own like radio station.

  5. #5
    Defenestration is imminent pichubro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kaleidoscope Of Mathematics
    Posts
    18,281

    Default

    I guess I'm boring because I like watching the BBC news... well, mainly as white noise, but it's not annoying white noise.

  6. #6
    Man Of All Things Merry buckweat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,689

    Default

    if you don't wach fox news than fuck you
    Quote Originally Posted by God View Post
    get out of my way kirby, i've got gulags to build.

  7. #7
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buckweat View Post
    if you don't wach fox news than fuck you
    a fitting post if ever there was one

  8. #8
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    I hope buckwheat was trying to be funny.

  9. #9
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    God is completely right.
    Anyone who is a true believer in atheism just isn't smart enough.
    There has to be a god(gods). Who/What it/them are is something our minds can not know. However that is not to say it is impossible to "know" (as in think they are one way and then be right) parts of him/her/it/them. Just to say you can not know what/who they are entirely or partially with any real certainty.

    Not to say some belief systems are not closer/ farther away from the probable truth(meaning some religions have more weight in "truth" than others) however learning from all the religions means that one is more likely to be closer to the correct "answer" than someone who stays within the confounds of one or two, if there is even an answer at all.

    Also, this means religions do have some probable reason, and that they are not solely all worthless.
    Some might say that since religions are all human made(which they are) that they are just control systems used by governments to make their people be peaceable and to gain a more steadfast control over them.

    However these two ideas are not exclusive to one another. We are all parts of the grand picture and to say that one person studying the picture and then sharing with everyone else a piece of it to manipulate them can have no possible good(or right) come from it is wrong. There can be truth even within the deepest and strongest of lies.

    "Every lie has a Cornell of truth" -Can't remember
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  10. #10
    what about .. eyebrows God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    among the people
    Posts
    49,769

    Default

    elijahwyatt is the oddest combination of dogar and kirby imaginable

  11. #11
    VVVV Look 4 balls Khaous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    God is completely right.
    Anyone who is a true believer in atheism just isn't smart enough.
    There has to be a god(gods). Who/What it/them are is something our minds can not know. However that is not to say it is impossible to "know" (as in think they are one way and then be right) parts of him/her/it/them. Just to say you can not know what/who they are entirely or partially with any real certainty.

    Not to say some belief systems are not closer/ farther away from the probable truth(meaning some religions have more weight in "truth" than others) however learning from all the religions means that one is more likely to be closer to the correct "answer" than someone who stays within the confounds of one or two, if there is even an answer at all.

    Also, this means religions do have some probable reason, and that they are not solely all worthless.
    Some might say that since religions are all human made(which they are) that they are just control systems used by governments to make their people be peaceable and to gain a more steadfast control over them.

    However these two ideas are not exclusive to one another. We are all parts of the grand picture and to say that one person studying the picture and then sharing with everyone else a piece of it to manipulate them can have no possible good(or right) come from it is wrong. There can be truth even within the deepest and strongest of lies.

    "Every lie has a Cornell of truth" -Can't remember
    lol "There has to be a god(gods)" no fuck you

  12. #12
    Defenestration is imminent pichubro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kaleidoscope Of Mathematics
    Posts
    18,281

    Default

    I don't understand why people thinking god's way of creating the universe is cool. I think exploding star dust that eventually formed all the elements needed to form sentient life on a floating rock is a much cooler sounding genesis.

    I understand wyatt's position of "we can't think of anything higher tierd than god", but anything unexplained is just a hole in scientific/mathematic theories for now.

    However I must point out that religion was NOT created to control people. We invented religion when we realized that we were gonna die someday. If dogs knew they were going to die with 100% assurance they would probably form a religion as well, however their brains are not really developed for such long-term concepts.

  13. #13
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    Yeah I use to do the cosmological argument, but I realized its bullshit from every angle. The odds that we are here don't matter because in the scientific sense, the odds don't matter after it's already happened. Also the "what made the big bang" shit is total shit, using God to fill in the holes of science is pretty much garbage and never acceptable, we will eventually find out, hold your panties.

    I only justify my faith these days by 1. pascal's wager, 2. the belief that Jesus must of done some cool shit for this religion for it to spread like it did, even if it was a facade, best facade ever, worship it, 3. if might seem weird, but religion is pretty much the only true heritage we have left as white people, 1,300 years ago our true pagan religions were stripped away, its the only tradition we have now 4. if you just say you have a religion, it makes you look good to like 80% of the population.

  14. #14
    Registered Users Regular Rayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,582

    Default

    pascals wager is even dumber than what you just proclaimed dumb

  15. #15
    Vanity of vanities, all is vanity Hicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,373

    Default

    i don't think pascal's wager is that dumb

  16. #16
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicky View Post
    i don't think pascal's wager is that dumb

  17. #17
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    You want fucking science? I'll give you fucking science.
    Life.
    A+B= A or B
    OR
    A+A=A
    Thats life. How did A and B come to existence if the only way to make A's And B's is with previece a's and b's?
    Are you telling me there is some mystical science route that happened to happen somehow that can create life from non life?
    Or you admit that there is a force out there that can create existence out of nothing.(god/gods)
    Choose one. Those are the only two logical options.
    If you choose option A I'll wait as you find evidence. Because there is absolutely none.

    Second argument
    WHAT THE FUCK CREATED THE BIG BANG?(sorry kirby, but HELLO WTF CREATED IT THEN? HOW DID IT COME TO BEING?)

    Third argument based on second, if you can answer this then what created that, and what created that and what created that? ECT. ECT.

    It's called infinite regression. Some of the Earliest philosophers knew of this, that when seeking answers to these questions it always creates another question if you answer the previous question with logic/science/anthing other than
    god/gods that have power to create things from nothing.
    Meaning the only real answer is that they exist/have existed.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  18. #18
    Defenestration is imminent pichubro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kaleidoscope Of Mathematics
    Posts
    18,281

    Default

    First off, you suck at math because adding two positive values only has one possible answer. Which will be C unless A and B both equal zero which is stupid.

    Life is not simply existing or non-existing, take viruses for example. They are not alive in the purest scene, yet they have enough elements to them to be considered biological. It did not go from simply carbon to multi-celled organisms, there are multiple factors at play such as temperature, the surrounding environment, how atoms interact with each other, and how the cells evolved. You cannot simplify life like it's an on and off switch. That's like saying evolution is fish -> monkeys -> humans.

    Figuring out what happened before the big bang (which btw, is not an explosion like the name lets on) is one of the pursuits of scientists today. One theory is that the big bang was a re-organization of the universe.

  19. #19
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    You want fucking science? I'll give you fucking science.
    Life.
    A+B= A or B
    OR
    A+A=A
    Thats life. How did A and B come to existence if the only way to make A's And B's is with previece a's and b's?
    I have no idea what your going on about, but A+B=A+B, it may be equal to A or B sometimes, but that is not proper mathematics.

    Are you telling me there is some mystical science route that happened to happen somehow that can create life from non life?
    Or you admit that there is a force out there that can create existence out of nothing.(god/gods)
    Choose one. Those are the only two logical options.
    If you choose option A I'll wait as you find evidence. Because there is absolutely none.
    Yeah you should of learned about it in biology. I am not going to bore you with the specifics, but the process is pretty solid that they have. There are some off parts here and there, but the main idea is there, scientists are working at it. Heck I just saw a ground breaking documentary on how some of the early RNA coding enzymes might of formed and the cell walls of early cells. If you don't know how a specific protein is formed then you just don't go "well it don just bin God, herp herp."
    Second argument
    WHAT THE FUCK CREATED THE BIG BANG?(sorry kirby, but HELLO WTF CREATED IT THEN? HOW DID IT COME TO BEING?)
    This fails on the current scientific layout of the big bang, currently it is believed by a majority of mainstream tradition scientists. That there was nothing before the big bang, because there was no time at all, the big bang was the start of time itself, so under this view, nothing created the universe, it just "is." Even if you do follow other dogmas like the universe in and endless cycle of renewal and rebirth, or energy introduced by collision with other dimensions (in string theory), then you have to accept that there never was a beginning, and again, it just "is." But remember these are all theories, but they do have some scientific back up, unlike God.

    Once again just because we don't know, doesn't mean anything. That's like saying 3 months ago that god changed the position of quarks and gave things mass, when we didn't know that the higgs boson existed or not. Science is working on these problems, the beginning on the universe is just a little out of our reach though sadly. If this was 100 years ago, one could of asked "what set the universe like this, must be God", before the background radiation from the big bang was found, and that question is just like "what made the big bang, must be God."
    Third argument based on second, if you can answer this then what created that, and what created that and what created that? ECT. ECT.

    It's called infinite regression. Some of the Earliest philosophers knew of this, that when seeking answers to these questions it always creates another question if you answer the previous question with logic/science/anthing other than
    god/gods that have power to create things from nothing.
    Meaning the only real answer is that they exist/have existed.
    This entire "logic" fails when I ask, "what created God" assuming he/she exists.

  20. #20
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Thats the whole point, god/gods are something that just exist beyond creation.
    ITS NOT MATH.
    A+B=A/B means A MALE + A FEMALE = A MALE / FEMALE WHERE DID THE FIRST TWO MALES/FEMALES COME FROM?
    Possible answer
    A+A=A However where did the first Asexual being come from then? Exsactly life doesn't just start. Prove to me it can and has then i'll say you know what, god could have may be not existed. Probably still not, but still. You'll have something.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  21. #21
    Registered Users Regular ElijahWyatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Athens, TN
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pichubro View Post
    Figuring out what happened before the big bang (which btw, is not an explosion like the name lets on) is one of the pursuits of scientists today. One theory is that the big bang was a re-organization of the universe.
    did not dismiss my infinite regression idea in any way. Infact proved that when you find out w/e was before it you will still have the question what happned before that. ECT. ECT.
    "As for me, all i know is that i know nothing"

  22. #22
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahWyatt View Post
    T
    A+A=A However where did the first Asexual being come from then? Exsactly life doesn't just start. Prove to me it can and has then i'll say you know what, god could have may be not existed. Probably still not, but still. You'll have something.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

    The fact that you said this again makes me think you didn't learn this in school, read up.

  23. #23
    Defenestration is imminent pichubro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kaleidoscope Of Mathematics
    Posts
    18,281

    Default

    Asexual lifeforms are a direct result of how cells multiply aka "reproduce"

    Give me a solid argument that god exists. An actual factual proof, not just speculation that "I don't understand this so it most be supernatural or divine."

  24. #24
    princeso Kirby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,047

    Default

    Oh ho ho, Pichubro pulls the burden of proof card .

    I think the best evidence of how sexual reproduction came about, is simple animals and plants that can reproduce both sexually and a-sexually, I don't know about you.

  25. #25
    Defenestration is imminent pichubro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kaleidoscope Of Mathematics
    Posts
    18,281

    Default

    The burden of proof always falls to those that have the faith. Thought this was obvious.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •