Smut for Smut

[tavarish]

This has gotten out of hand.

I agree.

I did not ask for links.
I said I would not provide links, because I knew of none that encompassed my views on what we were discussing. I then made the statement 'what if I asked you to provide proof via web link, it would be impossible'. That is not asking for links, in fact I was distinctly not asking for links and trying to get the point across that I don't want to post any or have any posted for me. I am not laughing at Thor, I'm laughing at whywon'tgodhealamputees.com. Certainly I respect his opinion, but if that was supposed to be 'proof', then it is a good example of why I don't want your proof. The 'why does god let life suck' argument is even worse than the 'if god is the first cause, who made god' fallacy. Please understand I did not ask for links and then laugh at them...

That's actually EXACTLY what you did:

So I repeat, could you post links that would dissuade me from belief?

Hey again Tavarish. That is an incorrect and petty way to decry my statement that I don't watch one movie on the net and am made a believer. That is a jab, and I choose to just duck.

We'll get to this.

No one. Driftwood has many little places in the system, but not many moving and interdependent parts. It is a terrible analogy. A driftwood to rebut a flagelan motor... Ohhh Kay.

An ecosystem doesn't have interdependent parts? Really?

Did you even watch the video I provided for you about the flagellan motor? It seems like you didn't learn a damn thing.

uh oh! I would rather write stuff that is 'not backed up by anything' than stuff that is backed up by whywontgodhealamputees.com. I told everyone I know about that website, it is seriously terribly funny...

You would rather write gibberish than write things that have evidence to back up their claims. I didn't provide the link, I didn't make the link, nor do I support the link.

I would rather have you label me as 'unreasonable' that say my proof is on the caliber of whywon'tgodhealamputees.com. The only claim 9/11 truthers make in conjunction is that we are being lies too about 9/11. The fact that we are being lied to about 9/11 is undeniable.

Evidence for this claim please. It's a pretty bold claim. Lied to by whom? What lies are they telling? How do you know?

Be careful about what side of that specific argument you are on, because one side will be right in time, and one side will be idiots in time. Be careful that you are not stuck on the losing side of that debate. But you're gonna argue that Isreali Lizard People did not do it, and you once heard someone say that, and now I must be saying that, and how silly of me to say that...

Right in time? Does that make any sense to you? I'm on the side that has evidence and peer reviewed and well-respected scholarly journals. Why would it matter to me what side I'm on? Do you even know how science works? It's not about what you WANT to happen, it's about what really happened. Just because you don't like the government doesn't mean they're guilty of something, much less killing 3,000 people and orchestrating such a gigantic clusterfuck of mayhem without a single hitch, despite having literally thousands of loose ends and people that would have been "in on it".

I used to be a 9/11 truther. It's all garbage made by people who have their own agenda and want to promote their products. Loose Change? In Plane Sight?. Zeitgeist?

Do an hour's worth of research on their claims and you'll realize it's all easily disproven or flat out false.


Why would you assume I thought you blame Lizard people for this?

Please, if you gonna talk to me, you hafta listen to what I am saying. I very, very clearly stated that I DID NOT just know about 9/11 truth after watching loose change. In fact, that is the exact opposite of what I said.

Actually it isn't. I said you asserted that you knew the truth, exactly what you said.

It's not like after Loose Change I 'woke up' to the 9/11 truth, (b)ut that from day one I knew.

I said that I cannot, as a simple example, post a link to loose change as 'proof' of my truthism, because it was not that one film that made me know. Please let me repeat. Loose Change did not make me a truther, I did not make that claim, please don't say I made that claim. If you want to argue with yourself, stop wasting my time.

You need to learn how to form your sentences a bit better.

It's not like after Loose Change I 'woke up' to the 9/11 truth, (b)ut that from day one I knew.

This would mean that before Loose Change, you did not know.

But no. It's not enough that God made this world, that she made us in her image, that she loves us unconditionally.

Stop right there. You said earlier that you believed in a God that did not interfere. So she loves us, but not enough to actually do anything? Why is that?

It's not enough to live in a world with momentum and free will and chance, but that those things can only work in my favour and as soon as momentum hurts me, god has failed me. So you are the most complex and fascinating (may be miraculous) thing in existence. You are lucky enough, not just to be human, but to be human and alive. And god has something against you because you survived a car crash? God has failed you because you dared lose an arm and she won't make it grow back?

You're missing the point and making an argument where there was none. It's a direct refutation to those who make the claim that God provides miracles and intervened. You don't believe that, so stop wasting your time with drawn out replies, since it's completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Imagine that you lost your legs in a car accident. I can have your legs regenerate simply by snapping my fingers. It takes no effort on my part. You ask me to snap my fingers and restore your legs. I refuse. Would you think of me as a good guy?

Good try, allow me. Imagine you lost your legs in a car accident. I can regenerate them simply. It takes very little effort on my part. You ask. I refuse. I explain that causality and free will trump everything else in this reality. I cannot just give you legs back, or I would have to give everyone everything they wanted. Unless you want god to fix you legs, and fuck everyone else's prayers. But imagine if you would how we would be able to learn or grow if I held your hand every minute. If choices and chances did not have good or bad outcomes, what would be the point? If you still wanted me to break the rules of existence to fix your stupid legs instead of dealing with it like everyone else does, would you think of yourself as a good guy?

I'll play along.

You being God, have the ability to suspend the laws of causality and free will, as you have done so before via miracles. If you unconditionally love your creation, I don't really see an issue. It's not holding your hand every minute, it's making a leg grow back, something that has obvious positive merits for the rest of the person's life. What made God grant miracles in the first place? (considering you believe creation is a miracle)