Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (23221)	3/20/2006 2:21:07 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<Therefore, one always knows the difference between facts and superstition.> ROFLAMO!!!!! You always know the difference between truth from falsehood then??? Amazing, better call the president right away, you will be in great demand!! <When you demonstrate that you do not understand quantum mechanics and are called on it, your response is the juvenile, "ROFLMAO!!!"> When YOU demonstrate that you don't have a clue WHAT I know about QM and demonstrate it by some broad general claim based on zero discussion or questions about it.... well, you get the idea. OTOH, since you know fact and fiction when you see it... well, no need to inquire I suppose! FYI, THAT lack of inquiry for the truth is what is known as immaturity... ie. juvenile. <Since thoughts or words are a subset of the universe, they can never fully describe the universe" Like fish are a subset of the ocean so they can never fully swim? You see, your premise is nonsensical. > Your refutation of my comment is all one needs to see to understand who has a greater understanding of the first paragraph (QM), so ignore first paragraph. Unless you want to discuss whether a thought is a subset of the universe or not, that might be worth discussing... but you've got to read a lot more about where they come from, ego, and right vs left brain (linear) processing. <Nobody can investigate the value in ideas if one of the parties is being intentionally obscure, or is simply confused and unable to communicate clearly past the confusion and the bewilderment he feels.> Of course you can investigate all sorts of stuff I've posted... I even gave you the search words!!! As you revealed before, that's not your intention... your intention is to dig heels in and grab onto something to refute. You said it yourself. Big difference between me saying something that you can investigate, and something you can refute. In fact that massive gulf between the two is called an opportunity. One that seems to keep eluding you! <I don't know whose rating of relevance you are referring to> My own of course... who's elses opinion could I state? We KNOW he's of utmost importance to you, all you do is deride religionists as ignorant troublemakes who create all the problems in the world. DAK