2 edits
Originally posted by black beetleok people you win, I admit it, we are a type of creation, although inherently unique. Consciousness is the prime thing as far as i can see. Consciousness and spirituality.
Nope; current facts are current facts alright, although these current facts of today they could be interprated tomorrow according to a different scientific approach (the falsification is related to the scientific approach itself and not to the given facts, and the probability of the falsification itself forces us to dismiss the products of the current f ccording to the current scientific facts and evidence ...oh ye Rabbie ye know the drill;
😵
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobperhaps you are correct Noobster old son, in that i have unfairly attributed to you characteristics which were ill conceived and erroneous. i apologise and retract my statement within those parameters.
Robbie, could you point to me where i've stated that everything in the world is black or white, or that everything in the universe can be reduced to a yes or no answer? You may have a long time looking beacuse i've never stated anything of the sort. You're making up an argument that i've never said.
You have this strange debating technique whereby if YTHING has a simple answer. It's quite frankly bonkers of you to assume that's the case.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieConsciousness is unique to humans?
ok people you win, I admit it, we are a type of creation, although inherently unique. Consciousness is the prime thing as far as i can see. Consciousness and spirituality.
Like I said.
Spirituality is unique to humans?
I'd like to see you prove that one.
Like I said.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"Win" is nothing🙂
ok people you win, I admit it, we are a type of creation, although inherently unique. Consciousness is the prime thing as far as i can see. Consciousness and spirituality.
We could say that every sentient and non sentient being is unique. Furthermore we could say that the manifestation of Life as a whole, it takes place through procedures that they are constantly monitored by the scientists and by the philosophers, and we could say also that these procedures are constantly monitored by the theologians too.
It seems to me that the scientists and the philosophers are proceeding hand by hand during their analysis and evaluation of the current scientific facts and evidence (they make their way from the given Known to the given Unknown by means of facts and evidence that they are not related to the so called "absolute truth"😉, whilst the theologians make their way from their personal Known (they call it "absolute truth"😉 to the Unknown. This means that, in my opinion, the scientists and the philosophers are trying constantly to bring up the falsification and thus the evolution of their accumulated knowledge and theories herenow in order to advance, whilst the theologians are trying constantly to prove that their miscellaneous religious theses are standing alone eternally as “absolute truth” (because they read them in their so called “holy scriptures&rdquo😉.
This miserable atheist thinks that the scientists and the philosophers have more to teach him than the theologians -however he still knows that he has to hear everybody’s story😵
Originally posted by Jigtieactually its perhaps the accent and the dialect that is throwing you. we are from a branch of whales that about fifty squillion zillion years ago, while we were evolving on land, i recall it was something to do with the menu, i think it was shrimps, we did not fancy the idea of returning to the sea and wanted to eat grass like our closest relative, the aquatic dear. but alas we were forced by the general consensus of all others whales that it would be better to put our personal preferences aside for the good of whale kind and return to the sea from whence we came, so being good natured fellows , we acquiesced, and returned.
Hey! 😠 Don't lie now. I know whale, and that's not iiiiiiiiiit.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI thnk you'll find that a whales closest relative is the hippopotamus, not the mouse-deer. Let's be accurate now.
actually its perhaps the accent and the dialect that is throwing you. we are from a branch of whales that about fifty squillion zillion years ago, while we were evolving on land, i recall it was something to do with the menu, i think it was shrimps, we did not fancy the idea of returning to the sea and wanted to eat grass like our closest relative, ...[text shortened]... urn to the sea from whence we came, so being good natured fellows , we acquiesced, and returned.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieTell me - what have the norweigans to do with this thread? You're avoiding the main topic of this thread. Because you know yourself that you are wrong?
your just sore cause the Norwegians left you and now their rolling in dosh from their own oil! if you cannot discern what I was saying regardless of the humour then you must be a very colourless fellow.
Why do you act like a clown? Grow up and be serious of once.