Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')
From: The©Wannabee# (faq_at_.@.@szmyggenpv.com)
Date: 11/15/04
- Next message: Ray M. Ransom: "Re: Is MASM32 an evil Microsoft plot?"
- Previous message: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- In reply to: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Reply: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:49:42 -0800
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:21:20 -0500, Percival <dragontamer5788@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> The©Wannabee# wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:11:11 -0500, Percival
>> <dragontamer5788@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Betov wrote:
>>>
>>>> About "Radiation pollutions of Fission". I have already
>>>> answered, that this is a democratic control problem and
>>>> not a technical problem. Anyway, this is a _temporary_
>>>> problem, and a temporary solution.
>>>
>>>
>>> Explain how billions of tons of radioactive material that has a
>>> half-life of thousands of years is a _temporary_ problem?
>>
>>
>> Send it into a known orbit, that takes that much time until it returns.
>> Then pick up that garbage, and store it in a mountain.
>
> $$$$ 'Nuff Said.
>
> If it was possible, All our garbage would be disposed of like that,
> except directly to the sun or moon instead.
What if we did it once every 10 years ? Or 5 ?
> We are eternal, but not of this world. Death brings us elsewhere, and
> you would fear it if you have sins on your soul.
No. I have sins on my soul because you tell me I do. From looking at my
life, I can explain most of the things I did. I bet this is true for most
people.
> lets end this discussion. Experiance says that discussion on this
> subject brings nothing but flame wars and misunderstandings. These are
> my principles, and my beliefs. No need to make you involved unless you
> are interested.
I will happily engage in a philosophical debate with you. I think its the
most intriguing of all discussions. Theres are something like 300
religions on this earth, without any scientific proof. This is one of the
most interesting aspects of human psycology. And its my beliefe that
nobody stays clear of this one. Even people who have been raised without
religion, are strongly affected by it, indirectly, through the laws, the
myths, the tales and the history and culture. Religions have without a
doubt strongly affected each and everyone of us, either we like to admit
it or not. I do not like to admit it. I would give my right hand to know
what it would feel like to grow up, totally uninfluenced by religion, just
to see what I would be like then. Its my absolutely firm beliefe, that I
would have been a better man without religion, and that my thoughts would
have been lighter, and that my science would have been better. And most
important of all, I think that my beliefe in fellow human beeings would
have been stronger. Now I must force what comes natural to people
unburdened by religious philosophies. This is what I belive.
> The way I see it, Catholics were spread out too thinnly and too quickly,
> spreading across the masses that would join Catholics for the historical
> benifits, including protection of the Pope (he was a very powerful
> figure in the 1000s-1500s).
I am not deeply familiar with the history of catholism. My interest field
is the human psyche, espesially my own, but also that of my fellow man. I
have never could comprehended my fellow beeings, and espesially not
christians, or even religious people at large. When it comes to religion
the "Faq Attack" on "The Sage" home page is what comes closest to my own
understandings.
> In addition, our Bible has been translated too many times to count, each
> time loosing the language of the message, and different "Bibles", each
> with contradictions.
Yes. Much likely.
> However, I hold the beliefs firm, call it instinct cause I have nothing
> else to prove it by. I see God in what I do, and what I say, and though
> others as well. Proof enough for me to stay by my religion.
I see in nature, an intelligence and complexity greater than I can
comprehend. When I walk in the mountains outside my house, I can feel awe.
I can picture something greater. When I see the pictures of jews graves,
from the holocoast, I can see something smaller, something dark. Neihter
of it makes any sense to me. If there really was a God. Who am I to define
it ? I dont even know how to properly define myself. Nobody, obviosly know
how to define a God. Because even if there was one, or many, we wouldnt
know how to propperly define them. So the way I see it "we", or humans
belive in something that we do not know what is, or isnt. This I have
nothing against. What I am against is lying and pretending that we know,
and then try to force the things we do not know into the heads of small
children that cannot protect themself, and who are naturally open to
grownups, because they need grownups in order to survive.
> Ahh crap, I blabbered again. Try to remind me not to respond. I don't
> feel like taking/sending any flames this week.
I dont feel like you are blabbering. In fact, I am much interessted to
know about the happenings that brought you to belive in a religion. If you
know, that is. I think it would be very interessting to talk with someone
who can argue sensible, about why their are belivers. Because I really
like to understand how they can support their belives, and sometimes even
fight to support it, when it (to me) seems it is founded in blind faith.
And contraindicatied in so many millions of ways. Even by pure logic.
However. I am also a contradictory man. Betov said it best.
>
> Percival
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
- Next message: Ray M. Ransom: "Re: Is MASM32 an evil Microsoft plot?"
- Previous message: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- In reply to: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Reply: Percival: "Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: 'Re: [OT] Why Bush?')"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|