Skyler998 Posts

As for the "breaks", don't bluntly stop : keep running at a slower pace until you reach again your breath -- you can slow down to a walking pace, even drinking and eating, but do not stop.

Or else, blood goes down :

• You're hot, so skin's veins are dilated, it lower the blood pressure so blood go back slower to the heart.

• You're tired, so your veins struggle to send back the blood to the heart (that's why we have dark rings under the eyes).

• Plain muscles are a part of the blood circulation engine, too (that's why when people are confined to bed for long time they're given anticoagulants).

Even though you're defeated, why not turn the hero(in) as a villain in the same time ?

I say it's impossible because I don't want to give into speculations about future. That's all.




Ho ? I think the suffering exist to distinguish whether something is bad for a living being or not. No more but, above all, no less. Without that precious knowledge you may be in danger by ignoring something is harming you.

It may be seen not as a "curse", rather as a "bliss" -- a way to say it was really an amazing and efficient invention, so much that it is very widespread amongst living being in a looooot of forms.

So I can comprehend some biologists being christian even though you would argue/oppose the existence of suffering as some "evidence" their god would be "false" or not "omnipotent" and such.




Where you see people forced to "believe" I see people a least forced to look as if, or even brain-washed but it is not true only for religions :-/

But I doubt someone willing to change his/her mind or whatever could be "stopped", even though his/her education. There's always a tiny, even the tinyest, part of choice whether you would follow or not your parents' path. Not that's always easy, in one way but also the other.

As for example :





Speculation :-)







So would it be better to let some of us trample on other belief / way to think (like believing in god) instead of them being respectful ? Nonsense.

Of course if you're willing to do so, be prepared to meet some opposition. At least when some individuals call upon reasoning and such, they should back up their "opinion" if they're willing "to be right" in spite of everyone/everything.

You just quote near 90% of my post. So why forget the rest ? Was it disturbing ?

You can also use the spoiler balises, if you think it's becoming some long wall.




That rejection is not backed up for all I have learnt. So it is just a conviction, a belief.

The word disturb you but yeah : there is no proof whether our universe is originated from a "god" or whatever you could call it, or "nothing".

You may have your own conviction, it does not prove anything.




First, you have forgotten the agnostic ones.

Second, even if you don't "eat the cacke", it does not mean you don't eat your own sweets on the same purpose. You just do the same with a little nuance.




You don't understand, so you answer with spite and insult ? My, what a poor pride :-/




So you've just said you don't understand about what it is, then you think you can built any "opinion" or whatever ? Do you really get if you're wrong or right about what you want a miracle to be ? All to say you just show your ignorance.




It is not because you don't understand that I would have no argumentation. Rather the contrary since for few posts, you try by spite and insult to run away each time I hit a nail.




Your quote go along what I've said X-)

Is it for joking you cling on your "he's not" ? Thanks to that Bill Maher :-)







Then you can't believe your entourage when they give you your name nor any form of testimony, even the knowledge from science you could reach on any media. Or else, you would contradict yourself.

I don't say you should take every speech for true. I myself use my discernment in order to select what I can confidently take for sure and what take as nonsense.




That's called a conviction, not a "knowledge" in any possible form.




If you are religious, you know your answer. If your aren't, the same -- should not be difficult to answer simply none, is it ?



Simple. It's because you answer I "believe" there is no greater power. This is just atheism, don't get offensed for so little.

I won't comment that clumsy comparison with a hobby. I can do the same as a comparison with people being bald and those who don't. What is the point ? Saying you don't like to be put on a label ? Don't worry : you just have to quit living in society to escape that phenomenom.




You put it like there was only the choice in believing or not in some god(s). BUT there is also the status quo.

Which means it's different. Three choices :

• Believing there would be no great power.

• Believing there would be a great power.

• Staying without clear-sided opinion.

Me I'm agnostic. Because when you put analysis to its very extremity -- meaning every hypothesises have been reviewed and run out -- you reach two point :

• Why is there something instead of nothing ?

• The origine of the universe.

Beyond those two points, it's impossible to know whether or not there would be some "power" also called by many people (with or without religious attachement) "god" or even "gods".

You may reject the possibility of something like a god but you have no proof to sustain your belief, because as long as it remains a conviction, it is not the reality but rather your own belief or even "opinion" -- if something so few backed up can be called an opinion.

Besides religions, which you're not forced to follow against your will/heart, you can't brush away a hypothesis solely on the basis you reject it without solid back up. It is not to say whether religions would be right, wrong, or whatever. Just the fact :

WE. DO. NOT. KNOW.


That's why as for myself I'm agnostic and I won't despise people believing in any form of (a) god(s), as long as it does not contradict the facts from objective reality.

Welcome here.

Welcome here.

You should quote the entire post more correctly too, since you were asking :



I have answered as for example :



Then, up to your last post :



Believing there is no god, as known as being atheist, is still a belief. It's different from agnosticism.




You even went as far as insulting Leibniz "just because" -- a way to say you're rude because of knowledge/understanding 's lacuna or because of dishonesty ? Both ?


You randomly comment my post without some consistent agrument. Maybe it was too hard to swallow ?

As for what is a miracle, ask doctors they know some of. It is not a matter of what science can handle or not, but also of expectation and occurences. There's no need to argue.

Plus concerning mutly-universe and such, you just try to drown the fish in some logorrhea only built with spite and zero argumentum.

Paranormal ≈ supernatural and each/both = patascience(*)

(*) Read about pataphysic for example.

As for parthenogenesis, it is just normal science and no sientist would rigourously say a parthenogenesis within human-kind would be "impossible", but rather there are lot of mechanisms preventing against such event. In that given case, just a matter of statistic and possibilities.


As for miracle, huh ! Don't think everything is already "written" somewhere along the "natural law". Casualty is a matter of statistic, which is different than determinism. That is why exist theories about parallel universes, each of these universes parting from each possibility than can occure for each event even the less significant. Some of those theories assume the way events happen in our "current" universe/dimension, may be influenced by what is happening in the "nearest" dimensions/universes. That is not as foolish as some of us here would like to make it look.

Moreover, there is a extremely unpredictable phenomenom called emergence : whatever you can know about a level of natural law or a situation, when complexity reach a certain moment or amount or both, it becomes unpredictable, also qualified as chaotic. Why ? Simply because order is only a facet from chaos.

So miracles aren't the preserve of religions and such.

And if you believe in determinism, you should learn a bit about thermodynamic laws as for example the failure of the Laplace's demon versus the Carnot's principle and the irreversibility of events.

So : no, not everything can be "explained" or rather foreseen by Science even if you were to know every-everything about our universe. But afterward (after the events), you may try to "trail backward" those events.


As for Leibniz, to summarize he was saying that if every/each event, even the less significant, happening within our universe is decided by God, then each event would be a miracle -- since it's from God's hand.


Concerning what the universe is originated from, we really lack of facts and thus "proofs". We have no way to reach anything beyond the birth point of the universe.

Better to do it in no-salty water, or else vaginal libricant wears off. Even so, water still makes it more or less wear off.

Make sur your partner is wetting buckets like crazy.

Welcome here.

As if...

When there is recession there is depression and where there is depression there are disorders, sometimes deaths, most of time some cost for society.

Not sure taxes would solve anything, since it has never prevent people to begin to smoke tobacco nor to drink alcohol. Not even to buy by import.

You wouldn't gain more money, just the same but from fewer people, or people would turn toward illegal providers with no taxes.

Nietzsche ^^ A good guy :-D

In a way if there is no god, then this world is really a miracle -- that is to say, not the same way as Leibniz's view but still a miracle, regarding one of the ultimate ontologic matters : "why is there something instead of nothing ?"

In that vein there are people considering "as a god" what made possible the existence of the universe. Not the same god as in bible, torah, koran... But some "power" we're originated from.

In this absolute extreme, ahteism also become a form of belief -- since it's indecidable for lack of fact/proof.

The truth is you deal with depression by yourself.

What you can do with other people is relax, sometime learn a bit, etc. In short : forget for little time your current depression, focus on other things, act as if everything was alright.

Because those moment "as everything was alright" are very important to regain some energy and confidence in yourself, or simply be normal even for a shorter or longer moment.

But that's not your friends or whatever who decide it, only the depressed one, if he/she is willing to.

That is why, when the depressed one is in too bad condition to be right-minded in those moments, there may be need of medical drugs and most of all a psychsatrist to (re-)learn some mind-tools and how, when, why use those.

Welcome here.

1st) Try to be honest. She may be pleased to pop your cherries.

2nd) If you can't be honest, go to a prostitute. No need to say it's a part of her job, so it will go smoothly and you'll get out of this with a better confidence in yourself.

3rd) If you can't even do the 1st) or the 2nd), withdraw your rendez-vous to gain some delay or whatever and shed your tears on your cowardice.


The choice is yours.

Welcome here.

Welcome here.

When you say animals displaying "moral" behavior, I just see anthropocentrism.

Or would you say for example parasites and such are displaying "immoral" behaviour ? What about the ichneumon which, says the anecdote, had made the great Darwin to cease believing in god existence when he discovered how it takes care of its offspring ?

Hence it's better guarding oneself from hasty judgement, particularly about possible anthropic bias.


Satus quo still keeps great value, even whithin human societies.

We just are.

The "good/bad" balance is more a matter of society and culture. And as a matter of fact/sample, south-east Asia balance is less settled on saint/evil or even "good/bad" than order/chaos.

Welcome here.