Login [Register]
Don't have an account? Register now to chat, post, use our tools, and much more.
Kllrnohj wrote:
comicIDIOT wrote:
Alright, yes, he acknowledged the word on Nov. 22nd, but I can't even find any hint to the homeless within his post on Nov. 23rd of which you quoted, Kllrnohj. So please, Kllrnohj, what did you read from elrune on Nov. 23rd that I failed to decrypt?


His post on the 23rd that I quoted was in response to my post quoting him on the 22nd, it is a continuation of the same context. Thus what you failed to decrypt was the all important context of the post chain.
I wasn't looking at the context, I see the relationship now.
Kllrnohj wrote:
it has no physical presence.

I would agree with that, but only because I believe we live in a universe that is not a purely physical universe. If we live in a purely physical universe then why should non-physical concepts have any meaning or relevance?

Quote:
So yes, random particle interactions *CAN* have importance and meaning because *PEOPLE* deem them as such.

People, who are also just random particle interactions are somehow capable of assigning meaning to other random particle interactions? When in reality they aren't doing that at all, but being forced to do it by the universe's RNG?

Quote:
My definition of an idiot is a creationist.

So there's the chip on your shoulder Wink By creationist are you referring here to anyone who believes that God took an active role in creating the universe, or just young earth creationists? If the first, I'd love to see you have a go at the head of human genome project.

Quote:

Bwahaha, elf isn't impartial or neutral, he is every bit as biased as I am, probably more so.

The key difference being that
a) I'm not intentionally offensive
b) I make my beliefs the subject of public discussion so that those capable of offering intellectual arguments against them can attempt to change my mind. As opposed to "I won't tell you what mine are, so you can't attack them. hah."
elfprince13 wrote:
I would agree with that, but only because I believe we live in a universe that is not a purely physical universe. If we live in a purely physical universe then why should non-physical concepts have any meaning or relevance?

People, who are also just random particle interactions are somehow capable of assigning meaning to other random particle interactions? When in reality they aren't doing that at all, but being forced to do it by the universe's RNG?


People are made up of *apparently* random particle interactions. Those interactions give way to consciousness (which, you'll note, is abstract - not physical. Abstract still totally exists without god Rolling Eyes). That consciousness gives importance to things. Whether or not our experience is random particle interactions, predictable particle interactions, or all particle interactions (many worlds) is irrelevant in what we experience.

Its no different that a house. A house is static and made up of smaller materials interacting, but it is a vital part of making our interactions not suck. You keep zooming back in on the building materials. What something is made of has no bearing on its resulting structure. Structure is importance. Structure gives meaning.

Quote:
So there's the chip on your shoulder Wink By creationist are you referring here to anyone who believes that God took an active role in creating the universe, or just young earth creationists? If the first, I'd love to see you have a go at the head of human genome project.


By creationists I mean all forms of creationists (including ID) except those that take modern science and theories and then just bolt on a "by god's design" (or something similar) without truly changing or modifying the theory in any way.

Quote:

The key difference being that
a) I'm not intentionally offensive
b) I make my beliefs the subject of public discussion so that those capable of offering intellectual arguments against them can attempt to change my mind. As opposed to "I won't tell you what mine are, so you can't attack them. hah."


a) True, but its also quite possible I'm having more fun than you because of it Razz

b) You are the one who tried to pin beliefs onto me rather than simply attacking the position I took. But, for what its worth, I would describe my true beliefs as apathetic agnostic atheist.
Kllrnohj wrote:
But, for what its worth, I would describe myself as being totally awesome.
Fix'd

Edit:
lol global mod powah
calc84maniac wrote:
Kllrnohj wrote:
But, for what its worth, I would describe myself as being totally awesome.
Fix'd


Why thank you Smile
Kllrnohj wrote:
But, for what its worth, I would describe my true beliefs as apathetic agnostic atheist.


Well aren't you just a bundle of joy Razz
Kllrnohj wrote:
Elfprince13 wrote:
I'm not intentionally offensive [unlike you]
True, but its also quite possible I'm having more fun than you because of it.

That doesn't make it right, pleasant or improve your argument. It simply shows that you are unable to separate your ego from your posts. If you want to have fun, i'm sure theres any number of other things you could be doing.
elrunethe2nd wrote:
It simply shows that you are unable to separate your ego from your posts.


No, it doesn't.

Quote:
If you want to have fun, i'm sure theres any number of other things you could be doing.


FYI, forums are typically either the source of A) information, or B) entertainment. I'm here for B, how about you?
Quote:
No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does.
You are offensive on purpose to make yourself feel good. Sounds egotistic to me.

Deriving entertainment from abusing others is not a neutral and polite thing to do. It is entertaining the ego and improving nothing but your immediate mood.
elrunethe2nd wrote:
Yes, it does.
You are offensive on purpose to make yourself feel good. Sounds egotistic to me.

Deriving entertainment from abusing others is not a neutral and polite thing to do. It is entertaining the ego and improving nothing but your immediate mood.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aego&btnG=Search

and

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aegotistic&btnG=Search

Again, no it doesn't. It may sound egotistic to you because you don't know the definition of the word, but that doesn't make it so.
Kllrnohj wrote:
elrunethe2nd wrote:
Yes, it does.
You are offensive on purpose to make yourself feel good. Sounds egotistic to me.

Deriving entertainment from abusing others is not a neutral and polite thing to do. It is entertaining the ego and improving nothing but your immediate mood.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aego&btnG=Search

and

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aegotistic&btnG=Search

Again, no it doesn't. It may sound egotistic to you because you don't know the definition of the word, but that doesn't make it so.

Quote:
characteristic of those having an inflated idea of their own importance

Quote:
having an exaggerated sense of self-importance

Quote:
an egotistical disregard of others

Bahahahaa.
I see no problems with my statement.
elrunethe2nd wrote:
Quote:
characteristic of those having an inflated idea of their own importance

Quote:
having an exaggerated sense of self-importance

Quote:
an egotistical disregard of others

Bahahahaa.
I see no problems with my statement.


Of course you wouldn't, we've already established you lack reading comprehension.

My self-importance isn't in this thread, nor have I exhibited an "exaggerated sense of self-importance".

Quote:
Also, I'd say that Elf and I are on rather equal ground.


Just because the ground we are on is higher than the ground you are on doesn't make it exaggerated.
Quote:
having an exaggerated sense of self-importance

Kllrnohj wrote:
Just because the ground we are on is higher than the ground you are on doesn't make it exaggerated.

I can't see the logic here.

Quote:
an egotistical disregard of others

Kllrnohj wrote:
we've already established you lack reading comprehension.

Nor here.

Quote:
FYI, forums are typically either the source of A) information, or B) entertainment. I'm here for B, how about you?

And, and allow Kerm to correct me here if I am wrong, I understand the Politics section is for people who can keep a level head through their arguments and argue politely as well as discuss their beliefs, not to abuse others and derive entertainment from that.

But hey, if that is what Cemetech supports, I could be wrong.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 6 of 6
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement