I don't take anything you say seriously.There's good reason not to take such judgments from nazi/confederate sympathizers seriously.
Care to elaborate more on your pet theory about how shaming makes the world better. Where is the evidence it works. You would have disappeared long ago if shame had any effect. You are a junky for embarrassing yourself and pretending somebody else should feel what you won't.Funny when someone who sympathizes with the worse elements of humanity just because it fits his little pet theories accuses anyone else of arrogance.
Are you kidding. My God is better than his god any day. Mine is the best only God there is. My god is actually also multiple times better than your god, that Mr. God of Pathetic Arrogance.
I don't take anything you say seriously.
Care to elaborate more on your pet theory about how shaming makes the world better. Where is the evidence it works. You would have disappeared long ago if shame had any effect. You are a junky for embarrassing yourself and pretending somebody else should feel what you won't.
What happened is that I found out a long time ago who you are by looking at me and now you see it for the same reason. I have never dropped anybody nor will I, because the person you see is not who you really are.@Moonbeam, I am this close to dropping you into the ignore dumpster. What the fuck happened to you?! You went crazy a couple of months ago and have disappeared all the way up your own ass.
And this from someone who claims to have had massive, consecutive moments of satori? No, either you never did or you forgot what it taught you. You're arguing some kind of postmodern anti-epistemology here that saws off all your other arguments at the knees.
It's a law and a truth but one that can only really be understood by those who have removed some critical level of their own conditioning
The truth is always there for those who have erased their egos.
What happened is that I found out a long time ago who you are by looking at me and now you see it for the same reason. I have never dropped anybody nor will I, because the person you see is not who you really are.
I do want to thank you for mentioning the Tao because it caused me to read up on it and I discovered something I found rather satisfying to read, and that is that there is a transformative psychological experience that people have that not only was described by very similar word to the ones I use but which indicated confers a sense of certainty. There just isn't any going back to the way the world once looked before you found out you know and don't have any need to know. I am not the droid to whom you think you speak.
See post 42 in this thread and compare it to:
https://www.icr.org/article/493/
Heck, he even starts changing his math later to use the 10^60 number from that website.
Previous threads he's used irreducible complexity and arguments of malaria drug resistance stolen from quacks like Michael Behe.
Your arguments are illogical and you keep flip/flopping positions. On the one hand, you agree there are universal truths. On the other hand, you argue that only those who have "deconditioned" can understand and recognize the truth. By definition, universal truths are universal irregardless of any qualifier whether it is conditioning or whatever term you want to place on it. And now you are stating that only the deconditioned can realize the truth, functionally, an argument for moral absolutism. Essentially you are arguing for the "religion of the deconditioned" as the only true and just way, based on unstated criteria at this point. This only raises more questions, how do the "deconditioned" know they have truth correct? If 2+2 =/= 4 for everyone, what should it be for the "deconditioned?"
Sorry............Great? now I have that milk shake song stuck in my head.
See what I mean? I explained it all and you didn't get a thing.Your arguments are illogical and you keep flip/flopping positions. On the one hand, you agree there are universal truths. On the other hand, you argue that only those who have "deconditioned" can understand and recognize the truth. By definition, universal truths are universal irregardless of any qualifier whether it is conditioning or whatever term you want to place on it. And now you are stating that only the deconditioned can realize the truth, functionally, an argument for moral absolutism. Essentially you are arguing for the "religion of the deconditioned" as the only true and just way, based on unstated criteria at this point. This only raises more questions, how do the "deconditioned" know they have truth correct? If 2+2 =/= 4 for everyone, what should it be for the "deconditioned?"
You need a payoff because for you the point of arguing is winning. Why do you suppose you keep circling like a vulture. What is this need to win? I'm a nobody. Defeating me will give you second to last prize. I guess in your condition it looks like something to strive for.I'm going to make the empirical prediction that arguing moonbeam like this is going to be about as effective as with buckshot, given it's the reason behind their partnership here.
You need a payoff because for you the point of arguing is winning. Why do you suppose you keep circling like a vulture. What is this need to win? I'm a nobody. Defeating me will give you second to last prize. I guess in your condition it looks like something to strive for.
Well, you know how it is. Science may only be a religion, but it's my religion and naturally, that imbues it with tremendous significance. And, my faith in it is unshakable naturally enough. I just miss the part where if you disagree with what I believe it makes you a worthless piece of shit instead of somebody who just doesn't know what they are talking about. You in particular should know that not knowing what you are talking about isn't the worse place in the world to be. You'll live.If Tao foretold much about reality they would teach it in science class. Of course it's in the self-interest of the religious like you & buckshot to categorize science as just another religion.
I know, making the world a better place means making everybody with a different idea of what is better miserable. Too bad that's most of the world. "agent will make you better you sick fuckl" You are funny.I do like to be right, because being right about the world is what led to the better state of things in modern times.
Why do you do what you do?
See what I mean? I explained it all and you didn't get a thing.
You arte thinking of truth as if it can be spoken or is some formal theory. It is a way of seeing, an experience of the oneness of everything, the ending of duality, being awareness, one's original self, the face you had before you learned to name things, it's you, your own being. You are the truth you are but you sleep and believe yourself to be your conditioning. You are ego and everywhere the ego looks it is the ego doing the looking so all the ego can see is itself. The truth is looking for you and will find you if you can give up all hope of finding it.
I'm going to make the empirical prediction that arguing moonbeam like this is going to be about as effective as with buckshot, given it's the reason behind their partnership here.
Well, you know how it is. Science may only be a religion, but it's my religion and naturally, that imbues it with tremendous significance. And, my faith in it is unshakable naturally enough. I just miss the part where if you disagree with what I believe it makes you a worthless piece of shit instead of somebody who just doesn't know what they are talking about. You in particular should know that not knowing what you are talking about isn't the worse place in the world to be. You'll live.
I know, making the world a better place means making everybody with a different idea of what is better miserable. Too bad that's most of the world. "agent will make you better you sick fuckl" You are funny.
Yeah, its the reason why I prefer to use data not found on creationist/Intelligent design websites. He can't formulate his own arguments because he has zero understanding of biology, hence the reason he never addresses the literature I post in response to him.Good points.
I probably irritated him using the eye as an example of evolution since that seems to be a favorite one for "irreducible complexity".
I know you're using this because I used it to deflate your position earlier.I don't need a source in order to reject your tautologies.
You are the one going in circles looking for what I'm saying among things you already know. You're like an ant trying to fly by crawling around its nest. Truth isn't the equation but the experience of elegance realizing it generates. Truth produces an altered state of consciousness. It is the experience of the alteration in whichever certainty occurs. When the truth is the self is not. If the self is the truth is not. The finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. These words are not the truth. There are no words when truth is. There is no truth when truth is thought. Cease and become if you want truth.Circular logic. Moonbeam knows the truth because the truth is defined by Moonbeam.
As predicted you carry water for buckshot just because he also likes to pretend science is just another religion like their own. Seems obvious that by using empirical observation about human self-interest I'm able to deduce useful explanations/predictions about the world, in contrast to little pet theories which have no use but pampering the ego of their owners.
It's just a matter of fact that human lives are better place today due to empirical understanding of the world. Such as why you & buckshot act the way they do and how to fix it by realigning self-interest a la education or denazification if need be. Again contrast with your medieval views of world which only resulted in medieval living back in the day before science.