Nutes and Nugs
Well-Known Member
An that is calling the kettle black!please shut your stupid mouth if you have nothing to contribute.
thank you.
You almost made me piss my panties.
Thanks for the lol's.
An that is calling the kettle black!please shut your stupid mouth if you have nothing to contribute.
thank you.
I believe in a "creator" or an "engineer" if that's what you're getting at. I also believe in evolution pretty hard to deny that flounder I gigged a coupla months ago.are you saying DNA was intentional?
Yeah I found one where he admits to being john galt....I find the irony amusing.Ah No.
Buck just get caught in a loop of his own lies.
He's getting older and forgets what he posts.
What makes you think ancient alien theory is valid?I don't presume to know all the details I do like ancient aliens though....seems as valid a theory as any.
What are you defining as 'nature'? Of course you don't think other things in nature have intentionality, like hurricanes and volcanoes. I agree with you that our basic instincts are pointing towards reproduction, but I wouldn't necessarily call that intentionality, I don't see any active aspect in the process. Similarly, I wouldn't call blinking or breathing 'active'I think so.To survive and reproduce in order to insure the survival of the next generation.
like if you leave the washing OUT on the line - nature "rains"explain to me how nature could have an "intention".
intentionality implies consciousness. without understanding consciousness fully it would be hard to assert either way that nature is possessed of consciousness, and, by the transitive property, intentionality.i have heard several right wing folks tell me that nature has intentions lately.
you guys want to have at it for my amusement?
but Fibonacci developed the sequence; it was recognized from nature and structured by human pattern-making consciousness and exists separate from phenomenal reality (math is pure abstraction). Fractals are compelling too, but they aren't indications that there lies an intentionality in nature; i'd say they indicate the capacity for pattern recognition/construction of the human mind.Something about the Fibonacci sequence just screams intent to me.
no, i'm talking about nature.I believe in a "creator" or an "engineer" if that's what you're getting at.
no, you said that YOU felt it was compelling. i would not, because the theory is flying spaghetti monster ridiculous.
as i said, if you would like to be mocked for feeling compelled, go start that thread elsewhere.
i'm not concerned about your lack of qualifications, i understand and accept that you have incredible shortcomings in that department.
4 real tho brah, i defined exactly what i was talking about at the start of the thread, and tried to keep it simple for the walmart greeters and subway sandwich makers of the world. check there 4 wat u nd, k?
Oh how I laughed at this one....belief in something bigger than yourself is weak minded? What then is the collective?no, i'm talking about nature.
like i told bigotednbushy, if you want to start a thread about your weak mind that must rely on some odd notion of a creator, start that thread somewhere else.
The universe is not infinite, that is a fact.How would you presume to know? Can you say, as fact, the universe is NOT infinite? And natural?