(June 4, 2018 at 1:42 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Oh, yeah...that;s absolutely what;s happened here in this thread. You;re certainly not a credulous nutter with delusions of grandeur. Impossibru!
what delusions? the proof is on page!
Started with an op grounded in reality framed in the fantastic with proof backing the side of both.
then I let it simmer for 24 hours.
The brain trust of atheism (as anticipated) could not see past the fantastic implications. So like a pride of their simian ancestors would have, they flung the modern equivalent of their poo at what they did not understand and who they did not like.
Now ask yourself who defined the subject matters? who separate reality from fantasy? which one of your brothers did this? None of them had the ability while busy cooking up their verbal poo. all were too busy making poo cakes save one, and even that one did not understand the duality of the subject matter. That person thought or tried to accuse me of trolling a subject.
Again out of everyone who participated, which one of you saw/identified the simple truth? who seperated the science from fantasy? who proved that the brain was not only a transmitter but a receiver? who pointed out the only real argument was how far/If the brain could transmit or receive fro this different heaven/cloud/matrix dimension??? all the wile being verbally assaulted by the intellectual poo factory that seems to be at the core of atheism...
Delusions of grandeur what If I met you 1/2 way and say that most of you just don't know how to interpret an opposing view without first filling yourselves with emotion. You can't simply just be in opposition with someone you have to hate them. For those of you who have to Hate, you are slaves to your emotion, because you hate you want to tear down or destroy what you oppose.
I live at odds with how the world works and I don't hate or hate the people in it. I have contempt for people who are one generation out of the trees mean who can not control their thoughts but to serve their emotion. Tat said how many times to I simply take apart an argument one of you construct line by line and apply the appropriate source material that supports my argument? verse how many time do I start out attacking the individual?
How about never. i have never outright just attacked anyone. I always and completely dissect each and every post and rebuttal, while I may call you stupid for copy and pasting someone else's work I never attack the individual without something to do with their failed reasoning or lack of research.
Now look at your grandiose brethren look at the first 3 pages of out right name calling.
When have I EVER done this..
Who is delusional now sport? is the first three pages of this thread how the grandiose act in your world?
Who was the only one who was researched in this whole thread? who separates fact from fiction? who laid bare the possibilities and implications? ws it a believer in God or a 'student of science?' How about the believe who used science to not only purpose the question but quell an onslaught of personal attacks for even asking such a thing.
Despite me being at odds with all of your world views, I treat each and everyone of you with enough respect to seriously consider each question and throey every time you create a thread as if it were the first time we met. (meaning I cast off all and start over and give each of you the benifit of the doubt) and I put sometimes hours if not days into my responses to your questions. meaning you ask a legit question I give a well research legit answer no matter who you are and what was said between us in the past.
Then I ask one and I am met with so much hatred anger and negative emotion none of you could be bothered to even NOW that you have been made to see what I asked not one of you has the "grandeur" to even attempt a real answer.
If this shitty emotional/simeon primal behavior is grandeur to you then know I NEVER will strive to be like one of you. I will alway treat each person and each query with the same respect I started out with 20 years ago.
