Izzy

Nope. No. Apparently not, because I've said no to both? True! You've managed to get something about me right, lol. Even if I chopped your thought in half. Okay, I can accept that. Well, not a second chance. Knowledge gained, which I can either use or not use. Here's the totally honest thing that most people refuse to believe when I tell them. I don't particularly care whether I live or die. I don't want to die, just because I haven't done everything I want to do, and it would be massively inconvenient to those around me, but if I did, it wouldn't really bother me. And no, I don't have some stupid heaven to look forward to. Dying for me would be like before I was born. Which is oddly a soothing thought.. But yeah. I've had quite a few near death experiences. Several almost getting run over, almost drowned when I was like two, a pretty bad dirt bike wreck, and some I don't want to get into which apparently I haven't learned from, but whatever. Just.. live your life. Don't count on some dumb fairies protecting you. Have fun. No regrets. Don't let the government get in your way. Don't die without actually living. Definitely don't embrace death, but don't let it get to you. I'll stop now because I forgot what I'm talking about.

..Are fairies omniscient? 'Cos if they are, they would have known that I wouldn't learn a lesson anyway, so yeah... Eh, if anything that's some evidence for gawd not looking out for me.

Why is it every time someone narrowly escapes a catastrophe, it has nothing to do with actual conditions of the event, it's always God/fairies/angels/other random crap 'looking out' for them? You people can't accept that hey, maybe the world isn't out to get us, and Gawd/whatever doesn't need to protect us all the time. I didn't drown that one time when I was three. Of course it has nothing to do with the people that actually saved me, it was fairies looking out for me! Okay, I'll play your game. If fairies/god/et al. exist, why do they let us get into near death experiences, instead of avoiding them all together? A thought that comes up is this blading accident I got into a little over a year ago. My cousin, a few friends and I were scoping out an area to make video (biking, skating, and blading), and we found this pretty steep paved hill that we figured we could either race down or set up a ramp on. I don't normally roller blade (they were just convenient at the time), so my cousin and I decide to race down the hill. He (one a bike) used the road, and I (stupidly) used the sidewalk. The accelerating got scary, but I couldn't stop very well, because yeah, roller blade brakes *suck*. So, there was a house at the bottom of the hill, and the sidewalk did a 90° turn. There was no way in hell I could make that, so I tried to jump the bit of grass separating the sidewalk from the road. Bad move, I fell, rolled around, ended up on the road with a broken clavicle and severely bruised head (haha.. still won't wear a helmet..). Seconds after I fell, this dude on a truck comes speeding toward us, barely stopping before he hit the group of kids gathered around me. If he had left his house like two seconds earlier, I'd be dead. Now of course, Atlantis will claim it's just fairies looking after me. But why not just help me avoid the bail in the first place? Kinda mean of them. "Oh, we won't let you die, but we're gonna let you get hurt." That's like me punching a kid in the face but stopping before he dies. "It's cool dude, I only broke your nose."

Dude, are you actually serious? Really?

Regarding the whole Cognito Ergo Sum thing, I was going to say something, but I think Nietzsche says it better: When I analyze the process that is expressed in the sentence, "I think," I find a whole series of daring assertions, the argumentative proof of which would be difficult, perhaps impossible: for instance, that it is I who think, that there must necessarily be something that thinks, that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being who is thought of as a cause, that there is an "ego", and finally, that it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking - that I know what thinking is. For if I had not already decided within myself what it is, by what standard could I determine whether that which is just happening is not perhaps "willing" or "feeling"? In short, the assertion "I think" assume that I compare my state at the present moment with other states of myself which I know, in order to determine what it is; on account of this retrospective connexion with further "knowledge," it has at any rate no immedidiate certainty for me. Also.. coito ergo nom..

Adding to that: How big are they? Or what ranges in size. How fast can they fly, if they can? Do fairies give live birth or lay eggs? (Or other.) Do their voice pitches fall within those of humans? What do they eat? What do they wear?

Truth is she's hallucinating. Last 20-whatever pages got us to that conclusion.

Yay, someone else sees the fecking insanity in this. Oh well, I've given up. If Atlantis wants to continue to destroy herself psychologically, so be it. As long as taxes I pay are never used as funds to keep her in an asylum, I don't care. If she never realizes it, whatever. If she does, wait for it, I told you so. The entire thread is worth a read if you have the time. Crazy stuff.

So they might not be /making up/ things, but that still in no way means anyone should think what they're broadcasting is the truth.

Well, do we know why the dog poo was white in the first place? Removal of that = normal colored poo.

Of course they do. Exaggeration = more exciting = more viewers = more money. It's still all television.

Andromeda, the same Discovery Channel that airs A Haunting, and similar bogus ghost stories? TV is TV. Enough said. I'm not going to believe something until someone proves it. Like James said, if these psychics were sooo real, why have there been none that made the headline news in the last decade? (I say decade only because I cba to research if any ever have, and I've been watching the news roughly ten years.)

1. But how many times have these 'psychics' failed otherwise? 2. They could have easily either had something to do with the crime, or were tipped off. 3. Have we actually ever had this happen, where the psychic could have not known in any possibly way where the body was, other than by 'talking' to it? 4. If that is true, why aren't ghosts seeking these people out all the time? *edit* You know what would be interesting? A murder 'solved' by a 'psychic', murderer jailed and all, later to be proved impossible by DNA testing or something.

This is just another form of the god of the gaps bs. Because I can't find out what caused something, I should assume it was x? No, that's silly. I suppose you'll say vampires are real next.

Gah, this again? No we don't, if we do, we have forever, and by this point, someone should have been able to give some evidence for them by now. You seeing a ghost in your peripheral vision means nothing. Look straight, don't move your eyes, and attempt to make out what's at your sides. It's blurry, unclear, and could be essentially anything. (By the way, as I was typing this, I saw a few shadows moving about in the kitchen (which just happens to be outside my forward glaze. I actually got up to investigate what it was (as I'm home alone), and found it to be the wind blowing and hitting some curtains, hit by the sun, and projected onto the refrigerator. Figuring out what causes the shadows rules out ghosts too.

So if I told you you had many ghosts haunting you, would you believe me too?

Rule #7: Don't follow the rules.

Prove it? Perhaps with statements that aren't 'illogical'?

1. Your evidence for everyone believing in a higher power between the beginning of mankind and the publication of Darwin? 2. Only recently (relatively speaking) we found out that not everything revoles around us, but instead we orbit the sun. Doesn't that tell you something? Yeah, we start with ignorance and odd hypothesises, and science comes around and either debunks (as in the case with God) or confirms (like the helio-centric universe) them.

I think the universe has the potential to expand infinitely, but is definitely, at all times, completely finite. But just because it has this potential (much like I have to potential to count to <insert ridiculously high number here that would take centuries to count to>), it would never work in practice, so there's not point in calling the universe infinite. Or at least I don't think it would work? Can the universe actually be here forever? Doesn't sound right to me.

Yep, it's called the multi-verse, and was, at one point, my favorite interpretation of quantum mechanics. Unfortunately, I've had several physicists tell me it isn't possible, so *shrugs*. I can't remember their actual reasoning at the moment, nor do I have the time to look it up, but I'm sure you can research it yourself. Unless of course you just mean other universes and not parallel ones? Then yeah, that's likely. I high doubt they're going to be 'one atom' apart, because spontaneous change in one atom's whereabouts it's enough to create an entire new universe. New universes are likely to form through black holes, called 'daughter universes'. Inappropriate language edited: Martini

Hey guys, I think I'm gonna become a satanist. I mean, if it's his fault for everything, that demonstrates some serious power. Power > peace. Plus, if I go to Hell, he'll be cool with me anyway, and I can become one of his awesome demons or help him with stuff. Stuff being practically anything, I hear he's very good at certain things. All hail!

So is Satan capable of creating people too, then? Specifically politicians? ;P

Dude, aren't you the one who said there is no Hell?