A4E

Maybe people are so used to being sweet talked, and abused behind the scenes by politicians, that when a real person with principles and real talk enters, the natural reaction is to whine and cry.

"How would you feel if Apple bricked your phone after reading a racist/sexist/islamophobic message you sent with it?" I would feel like talking about it to people. And then they would lose (future) customers. I think any sane company respects the power of people talking.

Villain- "Who will build the roads?" "How do you know roads will have to be built?" Villain- "Oh, come on, we will need roads, no doubt about it. Don't be a douche." "Ok, then people with tools and various materials will build the roads." Villain- "Yeah sure. Of course. But HOW and WHEN will they be built??" "When it is needed, planned, ordered and paid for." Villain- "Oh GOD... But what about peoples property? How can we build roads without governments being able to use any land when it needs to build a road?" "Negotiate with the land owners." Villain- "Are you telling me, that you are ok with an in high demand interstate highway being cancelled because some old lady don't want to sell her precious garden?" "Does not automatically mean its going to be cancelled, but yes." Villain- "You and your precious little principles. I'm done you slander slander." (You win)

DSAYERS IS SPOT ON

Wow, from 2007, and only 66k views. Masterpiece if you ask me.

You start by saying: "God made our world, but god is a servant, and is the creation of Entirah. Entirah is the supreme creator. All this time you have been worshiping a servant." Then you wait for any combination of: "Where is your evidence of...? / How do you know...? / What are you blabbering about? / Huh? / But this is not in the book, so how...? / What is this, are you ok? / Where are you getting this from? / How can this be true? / (Frowns and walks away) / (rolls eyes) / (inhales and exhales while looking upwards)" And then you bottom line with: "You just have to have faith." The target will finally get it, and you can see the shimmer of a light bulb above his head, and he will pass out for around 10 minutes. When he wakes up he will begin to demand evidence of everything.

Don't mean to step on the bodies, but a bit of obvious hindsight now is that they should definitely set up truck free zones.

Open / closed minded are much better terms imo. You did not just go to school. Maybe you talked to friends, kept thinking for yourself, played games, made new stuff, tried new things, etc... of which being open minded can even be mandatory. And everyone starts out open minded. I see that Wuzzums posted the apparent blueprint.

What is the line of reasoning that Saudis would help attack USA? I don't think I have read any information on this. Recent presidents have been friendly with the Saudis. I have also consumed information that says all recent presidents know how to speak and communicate in Arabic. (don't know if it is true) If there is a long history of this kind of relationship. Why would they help attack the USA? I have some presumptions of course, but I am asking because I have not seen any line of reasoning from anyone outside of my viewpoint.

(copy pasted) This weekend has seen three separate attacks on Danish students by young Arab immigrants. In Denmark there is a tradition that once students graduate from Gymasium, each class ride around in large open vehicles, visiting all of their parents to celebrate. First reports said it was just boys throwing eggs for fun, but the truth has started to trickle out. Here is a video of a group barricading the road, driving a car towards the students, and then dousing them in egg, flour and oil: Links are Danish articles. http://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/samfund/graedende-studenter-overfaldet-det-var-noeje-planlagt/6157611 Other reports and interviews from the police say another group of students had stones thrown at them - one girl hit in the head: http://nyheder.tv2.dk/2016-06-26-chokerede-studenter-blev-jagtet-ramt-i-hovedet-af-sten Two girls in another vehicle had acid sprayed in their eyes: http://nyheder.tv2.dk/krimi/2016-06-26-19-aarige-studenter-skudt-med-syre-under-vogntur Copenhagen's Police Henrik Stormer confirms the episode and says they sent a patrol car to the students, but did not apprehend any of the perpetrators. "We will not be starting an investigation. [...] It is a shame for the students, but we cannot put other peoples lives in danger by sending a patrol car on pursuit through Copenhagen." says Henrik Stormer to TV2.

I would go with this kind of guideline. If you start talking about problems with statism, and the 'friend' says "Oh? What do you mean?" or something nicer, then you may proceed. If you start talking about problems with statism, and the 'friend' says "Huh? What are you talking about?" or something more intimidating, then you are likely in for a long and tedious intellectual struggle that will probably go nowhere, besides perhaps finding out what kind of (non) relationship you actually have.

'Shooter' in Orlando non evidence event appears in a BP oil spill 'documentary' from 2012 at around the 36 minute mark.

"MY stance is that humans are incapable of knowing anything, incapable of gaining any knowledge." What is your opinion on humans prolonging their existence, by hunting, gathering, or growing various food, that they learned from other humans, or by trial and error? How does this happen?

From wikipedia org: Knowledge is a familiarity, awareness or understanding of someone or something, such as facts, information, descriptions, or skills, which is acquired through experience or education by perceiving, discovering, or learning. So knowledge is already defined without any requirement of absolute foolproof certainty.

Please do. You have caught my interest.

Software developers and companies undeniably have dynamic code like that, and have most likely been doing similar things like what you describe for more than 10 years, and even I have been coding stuff that can be categorized in this. So I don't see how this is "completely different". What am I missing? I would think that there would be an issue about copyright or licensing as well if someone wants to use a widget in his code, and the widget was made a year ago by a guy who quit working in the company. Just as an example. Maybe I just don't know enough about these things though.

When I was a child up to about 12, I had dreams of a kind of meat ball chasing me, and that is supposed to be a standard dream for many people. When my health decreased slowly but surely, because of malnutrition, I stopped caring so much about school as a result. When I was 17 I was not even able to read more than 1 sentence in 30 seconds. (had to reread it many times because I forgot about it right after reading it too many times). The being chased dreams vanished during this. So my theory is that dreams of being chased mirrors the social pressures, such as pressure to conform and always do as you are told. Get up early to go to school. Sit down and be quiet. Go back to your home. Do homework. Repeat... You are not allowed to ever relax and reflect on your own accord. So you have to continue running from the threats of consequences of nonconformity.

Awesome article! Easy to read and understand. Deserves a good youtube video based on it.

Hello, thank you for the forum thread. I am curious about this event you speak of: "I have seen an HIV patient die live and in color in my internship in a hospital a long time ago. It was not pretty." Was the patient on chemo therapy? Did the patient receive any other treatment?

I could probably count it on 1 hand. Not counting those who are close friends. Quite a few bullshit apologies though.

Stef says this after the 8 minute mark in the latest youtube video called "Where social justice warriors come from"

Outside of this forum I think it is very rare to see anyone publicly admit that they have changed opinion about something, so that is not something you will get any confirmation of. Not that it will ever happen with this trolling. If nothing else it is very effective in making people stop replying. Here is an example. I remember it well because it was perhaps the only time that a person has continued, and in the same path of "king of the hill" pride and slander no matter what I wrote. Which was interesting but a little bit scary. Him- We have been to the moon. Period. And you slander, or anyone else who thinks otherwise are slander slander. Me- But why are you so interested in that? Isn't it much more awesome that we have already been to Mars? Him- Huh? You slander slander, show me some evidence of that. Me- (me listing characters from Mission to Mars), are on video landing on mars. What rock did you crawl out from beneath?? Him- You slander slander, that is a movie. You have to be really slander slander. Me- What? are you one of those Mars landing deniers? You think they staged the Mars landing?? OMG. Him- You slander slander, I can show you that it is a movie, here is a link! What do you say now slander slander? Me- That is probably a link to one of your Mars landing denier sites. Do you really believe in garbage like that? Why can you not just accept that we have been to Mars? Countless people are on video going to Mars, so you will have to prove that we did not go there when there is so much footage of people being on Mars. And did you know Mars needs moms! ...etc The conversation did not go exactly like that, just in rough terms. His slander increased to 100% (started around 60%)

To relax. Play this video.

In public discussions there are people who will implicitly demand that you fight it out with them in the mud, and will hold you down there until they see an opportunity to declare victory for themselves, accompanied with heaps of slander towards you. You have various options that are much better than joining them in the mud. Ignoring is better, and gives you time to do other things. Also you can ignore the jabs to your pride, and conduct a respectable interview of the person's position. It will usually reveal the flaws of the position, unless the person just keeps on throwing slander at you, in which case you can refer to Socrates' "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.". If you feel like having fun, you can pretend to hold a blatantly false and more outrageous position than the person, and impose it on the person in the exact same manner that the person is imposing his position on you. I have no respect for people who resort to slander, which is why I allow myself to be a d sometimes to such people. I have found that the two last methods will make the person stop replying, or just become 100% slander focused. If you pretend to hold a more outrageous position, and the other person still keeps on fighting you as if you actually hold your pretend/trolling position, then you might also be dealing with a troll, or perhaps he is genuinely mentally disturbed. I avoid using trolling in this forum, because I know this place is way too respected to accept that.