The Anti-Christian conspiracy

try this one... ''i have -8 BTS points''. fact or not fact?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
try this one... ''i have -8 BTS points''. fact or not fact?

Hehe, this is currently true.

so what happened to there being no facts? just 'perceptions' of the truth, hence what we perceive to be true. sure it might change and go to -7 when i make a post on BTS...but then that changes the situation, and then if i state i have -7 BTS points, that then becomes the fact, until again i made a post in the BTS forum. so i'm not quite sure why anyone would state that there are no 'facts', just perceptions of truth.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
endless sarcasm, never ceases with you. and that general smug appearance too. is that universal with christians, or just the way you are?

Sounds like it's not exclusive to Christians.

On the tooth thing, obviously there is some contention. Would your tooth be causing you pain if it wasn't there? Would your tooth cause you pain if it got a hole in it after it had already fallen out? If you didn't have a centralized nerve system, would your tooth be causing you pain? Is it the tooth that hurts, or the interpretation of the nerve signal by the brain that hurts?

Is your tooth hurting you fact, or theory?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so what happened to there being no facts?

Who said there were no facts? I agree with CrystalSword that beliefs can be facts and often times "facts" are actually beliefs. Did I misunderstand his assessment?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
just 'perceptions' of the truth, hence what we perceive to be true. sure it might change and go to -7 when i make a post on BTS...but then that changes the situation, and then if i state i have -7 BTS points, that then becomes the fact, until again i made a post in the BTS forum.

I qualified my statement with the word "currently", recognizing the possibility (and probability if you decided to post again there) that this would change.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so i'm not quite sure why anyone would state that there are no 'facts', just perceptions of truth.

Agreed.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
try this one... ''i have -8 BTS points''. fact or not fact?

It would appear to be true, but I can't see the php on the server to see if the actual point value is manipulated before it is displayed. I assume it's not, but I don't have concrete proof. If one of them admins were to post the code, that would lend more evidence, but there still would be a chance they put up false code, or that the actual php interpreter they use interprets php differently than is normal. Many variables, but most of them with such insignificant chances of likelihood that it is safe to make the assumption that, currently, you do have -8 points.

However, not a fact.

This is fun, throw out another

Originally posted by junglejake
It would appear to be true, but I can't see the php on the server to see if the actual point value is manipulated before it is displayed. I assume it's not, but I don't have concrete proof. If one of them admins were to post the code, that would lend more evidence, but there still would be a chance they put up false code, or that the actual php interpreter they use interprets php differently than is normal. Many variables, but most of them with such insignificant chances of likelihood that it is safe to make the assumption that, currently, you do have -8 points.

However, not a fact.

This is fun, throw out another

You think too much JJ , but we love you anyway

[edit on 27-1-2006 by saint4God]

My point in this actually goes back to LCKob's assumption that we should qualify everything that's not a fact.

Yes, there are facts out there. However, we, as individuals, cannot know every variable that goes into establishing those facts as true, so everything we have is just a belief. It is a belief based on overwhelming evidence, but belief nonetheless. So to say we have to qualify beliefs as exactly that means the word "might" will have to become the most used in the English language.

I, obviously, disagree

Originally posted by junglejake
On the tooth thing, obviously there is some contention. Would your tooth be causing you pain if it wasn't there?

probably not. it wouldn't be my 'tooth' causing me pain, if it wasn't there. it'd be the gum most likely.

Would your tooth cause you pain if it got a hole in it after it had already fallen out?

no my 'tooth' wouldn't be causing me pain if it's already out. it would be the gum that would still be hurting. maybe there's a gash where the gum is...hence the pain.

If you didn't have a centralized nerve system, would your tooth be causing you pain?

i probably wouldn't be alive if i didn't have a CNS.

Is it the tooth that hurts, or the interpretation of the nerve signal by the brain that hurts?

but even if it's an interpretation of the nerve signal, that is what is the painful thing. because my brain interprets this pain from my gum or tooth...i feel the pain.

Is your tooth hurting you fact, or theory?

it's fact. however, like i said either way, my statement is fact or your statement is fact. because if you say 'the interpretation of the nerve signal by the brain that hurts'...that must be fact, or my statement must be fact? right?

Originally posted by saint4God
Who said there were no facts? I agree with CrystalSword that beliefs can be facts and often times "facts" are actually beliefs. Did I misunderstand his assessment?

TheCrystalSword:

"Which is interesting, because there is no such thing as a "Fact"... only substantiated evidence.

yes you did misunderstand his assessment. he states ''because there is no such thing as a fact''

Originally posted by saint4God
I qualified my statement with the word "currently", recognizing the possibility (and probability if you decided to post again there) that this would change.

hence for now, therefore, it is fact.

Originally posted by junglejake
However, not a fact.

This is fun, throw out another

but then again, it's just your 'belief' that it isn't a fact. by you saying 'however, not a fact'... is that your belief or is that indeed a fact that you're stating there? because it sounds like you're stating a fact. ''however, not a fact''...although that is merely your belief, but you make it sound like a fact. hope you're not contradicting yourself by using facts, which are actually just beliefs.

Originally posted by junglejake
My point in this actually goes back to LCKob's assumption that we should qualify everything that's not a fact.

Yes, there are facts out there. However, we, as individuals, cannot know every variable that goes into establishing those facts as true, so everything we have is just a belief. It is a belief based on overwhelming evidence, but belief nonetheless. So to say we have to qualify beliefs as exactly that means the word "might" will have to become the most used in the English language.

I, obviously, disagree

Once again, I promote the fundemental idea of using tools in the manner and fashion as intended. This being the case, I use words with their agreed upon and established meaning as a baseline for communication ... for the reason, that such usage tends to increase accountability and clarity to any message

... after all what is the point of communication?

I contend the following... as per MW: www.m-w.com...

communication

Main Entry: com·mu·ni·ca·tion

Pronunciation: k&-"myü-n&-'kA-sh&n

Function: noun

... a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behavior

- com·mu·ni·ca·tion·al /-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective



junglejake, just to clarify ... if one reads my posts or segments on posting in regards to "facts" and "beliefs" ... it is within the context of message clarity as a basis for navigating through the potential "minefield"of subjective interpretation of ideas, words and concepts ... anytime a person says "I believe" (without qualifiers, conditionals and or definitions to set the context) it is (as per established conventional sources i.e. MW dictionary as an example) a subjective view open to further subjectivity.


What is my point here? Merely this,

If one (anyone) makes a blanket subjective statement that implies or (is stated as) an objective truthful state ... this person sets the stage for a potentially an emotionally charged argument waiting to happen ... and there is ample evidence on this thread (and many others) to lend credence to my assessment.

This being the context, I once again bring forth the notion of the clarification of ones posts to minimize frictional differences over any two or more differing views of a subjective nature. ... where by definition, all opinions or beliefs are equal (by virtue of their subjectivity).

LCKob


[edit on 27-1-2006 by LCKob]

Offensive post removed.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: You Have An Urgent U2U- Click Here.



[edit on 27/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by eben1
Offensive post removed.

i wonder what they said

it's all part of the conspiracy! they're covering it all up!!

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i wonder what they said

it's all part of the conspiracy! they're covering it all up!!

Hehe...or the more important question, would anyone want to read it?

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i wonder what they said

it's all part of the conspiracy! they're covering it all up!!

Hehe...or the more important question, would anyone want to read it?

hahaha ... I admit that I am the curious sort and that the mere fact that it was removed ... piques my curiosity further ... that being said though ....

I understand and fully support the rationale and need for moderators with the discretionary power to minimize "civil unrest" by means of editorial "preemption".

LCKob

I think that is the first post I have ever seen with so many different links cited for its removal. Dang.

I, too, am rather curious what can inspire that kind of response.

Originally posted by junglejake
I, too, am rather curious what can inspire that kind of response.

We'll the title is "The Anti-Christian Conspiracy" and given that Christian information is not secret or obscene... I think it reinforces your ponit JJ by it's own right.

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by junglejake
I, too, am rather curious what can inspire that kind of response.

We'll the title is "The Anti-Christian Conspiracy" and given that Christian information is not secret or obscene... I think it reinforces your ponit JJ by it's own right.

or maybe its a person who just represents a bad minority among nonchristians, that minority is equivalent to the most embarassing member of your family.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
or maybe its a person who just represents a bad minority among nonchristians, that minority is equivalent to the most embarassing member of your family.

A very loud, vocal minority trying to represent the majority. Without further evidence, I'll give that to you, though, as my experience with the gay community has been very similar.

But then, if it's just a very loud minority working to vehemently discredit Christianity in the most profane of ways while insinuating they're representing the majority...Do we have a conspiracy?

Originally posted by junglejake

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
or maybe its a person who just represents a bad minority among nonchristians, that minority is equivalent to the most embarassing member of your family.

A very loud, vocal minority trying to represent the majority. Without further evidence, I'll give that to you, though, as my experience with the gay community has been very similar.

But then, if it's just a very loud minority working to vehemently discredit Christianity in the most profane of ways while insinuating they're representing the majority...Do we have a conspiracy?

it would be more a conspiracy against the more rational, nonprofane nonchristians, than a conspiracy against the christians, because who looks bad because of the embarassing ones?

Originally posted by shaunybaby

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword
Which is interesting, because there is no such thing as a "Fact"... only substantiated evidence. Facts are little to no difference from beliefs. Facts are assumed to be true, a priori. Beliefs are assumed to be true, a priori.

well if my tooth hurts, it's a fact if a say a statement such as 'my tooth hurts'. so yes there are 'facts'.

What I've found fascinating is not everyone with beliefs pushes their beliefs upon others, but more frequently people with "Facts" do.

when christianity first arose, people were sent far and wide to 'spread' the word of this new faith and jesus, hence 'push' their beliefs on other people. this is the only way this news could have spred so wide...by pushing it on people. sure facts are pushed on people, but so are beliefs.

1. Personal experience cannot be considered "Fact" as it is unreproducible in another. Your Tooth hurts? Prove it to ME. What you feel as pain I may very well consider to be you whining, as everyone's pain threshhold is different. Choose a better example.

2. Which is interesting because I never said anything about Christianity not pushing their beliefs on people, I said that more people with "Facts" push those "Facts" on others than people with belief. Do not also forget that there are people with belief that also feel that their belief is a "FACT". There are some rational people with belief that understand that their belief doesn't necessarily correlate to the same belief as others. Much like the idea that pain is not equal between you and me, same can be said for faith.

And to remind you, I never said beliefs aren't pushed. I merely think that Fact-pushers are more prevelent, whether they are pushing religion as "Fact" or their own ideas as "Fact".