Thread: All aboard the Atheist bus

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Go, study grammar.

I used to teach it.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Blue, fish, are very talented swimmers.

Need, more examples?

However, some people, put commas in unusual places to, create pauses for easier conceptualization. I don't recommend it, but your hateful analysis of it was way too much of a generalization.

Originally Posted by O'nus

This is hard to say without sounding condescending in some way, but you must understand that it is hard for anyone else besides you to see the difference between what you are saying and random chance. The idea is that, if you have psychic abilities, you ought to be able to utilize them at any time. Otherwise, they are not so much abilities as they are random chance or a random "blessing". One is inclined to describe them as a fleeting vision of prognostication, but this is hardly different at all from a random fantasizing about something and having it come true - in fact, the latter might be more frequent. So, while I understand your frustration with others to demonstrate your abilities, you must acknowledge the lack of incentive to believe it.
~

I understand the lack of incentive to believe or understand, which is why I put a lot of value in personal empiricism. Though sometimes inaccurate, it is the most basic way to understand our world. I'd put my life on the ability to foretell the future to be real. It's easy to assume that its just random chance, but I have plenty of daydreams, etc.. that I know have nothing to do with the future.. I can tell the difference..

Nothing but some sort of knowing or pre-telling is the only explanation to explain the 100% of similarities between what happened and my vision. I understand chance, but I can't write something off as spectacular as this as a one in a billion chance. Its of course easier for those with no direct experience of this to disregard my personal experience, which I perfectly understand.

Exactly, but you cannot rely on that as a means to justify your beliefs or abilities. There are an infinite amount of things you can say that about or say that, "Well, once people didn't believe this to be true, but they had an idea.. and NOW we understand it to be true, so there is a likeliness that this is true to" this is really a desperate plea for justification. My end point is really just, only you can understand this ability, and, for that, it makes it no different (to anyone else) than random chance or imagination.

That was my exact point, to counter you bringing it up
Their are an infinite number of ridiculous or not ridiculous statements that could fit into that sentence. It's up to science to prove it to humanity. Comparing psychic visions to unicorns or Jesus when they are not the same concepts or ideas. The fact that it isn't yet understood doesn't make it as ridiculous as the giant pink unicorn or any other such idea.

Psychic powers have been a center of debate for a long long time, I wonder why.

Everyone knows of imaginary friends, but now if I say "ghost" what is the real difference? You can see the potential debate here, but can you also see the significant resemblance between ghosts and imaginary friends..? To best expose it, just listen to people describe their encounters with ghosts in the same way people describe their encounters with their imaginary friends. The only real difference is a sense of fear or comfort, no?

Sure, but people with imaginary friends are labeled as loonies, and those who believe in Ghosts are not.

An imaginary friend isn't usually understood to be a once living spirit as a ghost is supposed to be, no matter how similar these two ideas are they usually have quite the difference.

Imaginary friends are usually involved with children, not usually adults as far as I'm aware.

Ghosts are studied by many living adults to prove their existence, but no one is trying to prove the existence of timmy.

But I do see the resemblance in that they are invisible(make that ghosts can be seen..), unprovable(at this point).

My point is basically these concepts, psychics, ghosts, invisible friends are all so unique that you can't really lump them all together just because they are all unproven.

You see, this is where I'd like to say that people often become too enticed in the idea of fantastic abilities and supernatural fantasies whereas they fail to see the power of their imagination and the infinite possibilities of being powerless. This is not really an argument here, just sharing with you my perspective because I know that many who believe in psychic abilities think that those who do not believe in them (ie. me) have no inclining to the supernatural. But I do! And so much more! The supernatural imagination and the infinite wisdom of being weak is actually awing to me. This is existentialism at it's best.

Sadly an interest doesn't seem to be enough to make it clear to everyone. I'm not enticed by an idea of fantastic abilities, I had no interest in Psychic visions or powers until the event that changed my life. I don't have an urge to float things with my mind(albeit that sounds quite fun), I never believed in ghosts(took pictures at graveyard got orbs), I don't know how but I became Pagan in the last 3 years. Following the ebb and flow of the moon, and the cycles of life. And its done nothing but improve my life, my intelligence, and my understanding. My entire life up until that day I was an atheist who didn't believe in anything supernatural.. I was proved wrong.

I don't believe an inclining for the supernatural is necessary, I believe it is open to anyone.. Just need to kick your brain into the right gear.(So to speak)

No no, I wouldn't do the Cartesian shit, lol. Just saying that it is very common of us to have fantasies and even "get lost" in them. Is it not possible to have an incident of someone becoming so passionate and emotionally involved into a fantasy that it seems real?

Anything is possible. I am only speaking for myself at all times. I know when I'm fantasizing, I've never gotten lost in them.. I've also never not had cognitive control over myself or blacked out as some heavy drinkers do.

I can only speak for myself, sure it is possible.. But I know I am mentally stable enough to tell the difference between reality and fantasy.

And you see that is really my only point here - the only persons that will decide that it may be true are the ones that already have an inclining that it is true. It really offers absolutely no incentive to believe to those that do not. Which is sad, I know, but true. This does not make us "narrow-minded" it's simply that you do not believe everything you hear because, let's be honest, people in the world claim to be able to do many, many, things. If you were to read the journals of schizophrenics and believe everything they said, you would be under the impression that the world has ended, you died, there are 12 Jesus', everyones a zombie, and diapers are the best thing to make a bed out of. Not making fun of schizophrenics, just making the point that they are deluded and claim these things to be true and that you would believe them and think it true if you experienced what they experienced.

I think you see my point here.

Of course, but? I guess that is the only way to judge.

The problem with life in general is what you speak of, which is why we have science to save us. But how does science recognize something so offbeat, immeasurable that comes and gos?

And yes things can be claimed that are untrue, but things can also be claimed that are.

The only real incentive we ever have is re testable evidence, but everything in life especially your daily life does not have that convenience.

That's an interesting site... about taking drugs..? Where is your report on there? I am confused to see you cite this and can only imagine you cringe at my comment about drugs, so.. I'm curious for elaboration..?

Yes it's specifically made for DXM(Dextromethorphan), found in cough syrup actually.. Just decided to cite where I posted the trip report, it was in the trip report section of the forum but this was back in April of 2005. Just a tidbit of information.

All we have is our words at all! But the thing is, I can describe to you what I have learned and prove it to you. I can cite many different things about your senses off the top of my head and prove them to you with demonstrations so that you can experience the conclusions which is exactly what science is! Science is the art of helping others experience what you experienced to bring you to that conclusion! That is the heart of it! Yet, it is all too easy to just say that science is "reducing" and "narrow-minded" and yet it is a world full of sharing experiences and conclusions to further the human understanding.

Yes but everything isn't.

A. Easily re-testable(Look at all the misdiagnosis of diseases)
B. Being tested scientifically when it happens

And then their is the fact that people are easily swayed to view things in ways to confirm to their pre-determined understanding of the event. Leaving it possible for a large group of scientists to overassume something,

Can you prove to me everything you've learned in history.
We are always taking assumptions that are pre-determined and treating them as fact, possibly because others agree but do we really check everything we see and hear to be the truth on a daily basis. How many people that believe in evolution actually understand it, for example.

I don't think science is narrow-minded, but people are narrow-minded and can miss the most obvious answers that are staring them in the face. And if one scientist agrees and they can "retest" it to show it as truth many others are bound to agree even if something in the formula is missing as long as the basics work out.

I think psychics will be proven by science, it's really only a question of how long for me.. When will society be ready to hear of this as a fact in life, it will throw people off so far..

The difficulty is that, you cannot demonstrate to anyone your abilities or control them. You cannot offer me a means to experience them myself. Thus, to anyone else, it is just as real to us as another fairy tale and just as believable that you have these abilities as a hollywood movie. I do not intend this as insulting, this is just what the perspectives are!

Sure but is it really ridiculous to think I don't have control?

Would you for instance tell someone who suddenly faints that you don't believe them because they can't control this?

Many functions of our body, mind or problems are not able to be conjured up to the surface on command. So I don't see why it's such a weird concept for so many.

No no, I mean how do you differentiate from your visions and, say, dreams or hallucinations - because they are claimed just as real and vivid. In fact, some people go insane from believing in them so much. These are paranoid schizophrenics.

And my answer would be, that is why they are paranoid schizophrenics.

My dreams are over when I wake, I've never had the thought that it was real upon waking(and a lot of time you realize while asleep..)

How do I differentiate from visions and hallucinations, well first my hallucinations are usually far past our plain of existence. Things that happen break the fundamental workings of our world.

I don't know maybe it's because I was such a psychonaut, trip taker that I've just had so much experience with reality and fantasy being mixed that I can easily tell the difference.

That is a bit self-defeating then. If you claim to always be aware of your senses, then you ought to be able to be impervious to many of the flaws of your senses. Hallucinations are called that because they "appear real" when only the one person can actually see them.

I'm not sure about that, I am aware of my senses along with the way reality works. Being aware of your senses and their ability and how they trick you are different than changing the way you sense. It is for instance impossible to convince your vision to make the sky look how it actually is, such as the way we view the sun dropping in and out of the horizon. But possible to understand how it actually works.

Nothing about my situation leaves room for hallucinations affecting this. I had a vision it was in the exact same ways the accident than just happened.. As long as I recorded the vision(in writing) and it really matches the accident scene that's all that matters to me. Of course to prove it to others incontrovertible proof is needed, but that was not my goal in my post. If I could I would. Just sharing my story with my reason for proof.

It is a grand claim you make to say that you can always differentiate hallucinations from reality and the only way anyone could call you on that is with actual tests. This is safe for you because no one can ever tell if you are even having a hallucination at all.

I guess, but ask yourself this. Do you from day to day question everything that happens, you read, do because it could be a hallucination..

Perhaps you aren't even having a discussion with me right now, and are in fact just hallucinating.

With this view of life everything could be a hallucination, all of science could be a global hallucination... And we are really all giant plants that eat plankton and STDs.

So.. how can anyone ever prove you wrong about this..? You have made an impossible-to-argue proposition? Does that mean it is just so powerful that it is unfalsifiable or that it is so confounded and introverted that no one can touch it but you..?

I am 100% certain. I wish I could prove it to you as much as I've proved it to myself. More of a statement, regardless of peoples opinions on this it really did happen. My only point.

Make sure to tread carefully on how you use science. Keeping in mind that science is the art of helping others experience what you experienced, what you are saying then is equivalent to, "I experienced it, I think it is true, but there is no way I can help you experience it." If I said this to you about claim X, would you believe me? It's kind of a rhetorical question, just to give insight to my perspective.

I understand your point, you don't have an incentive(re testable proof) to show you this to be how things are. I only have what happened to me to go on, I've analyzed this many times over and these are the conclusions I've come to.

But let me ask you this, if you really believed and knew it to be true would not being able to show everyone make it any less true.. It puts me into quite a predicament as you can see..

I just want to note that this is the same thing that is said in regards to paranoid schizophrenics, delusional, alzheimers, etc. "If you knew me, you'd believe me" or "if you experience what I experienced, you'd believe me" - this is not something I would ever personally bank on to justify an experience to myself.

I can almost bank on the fact that you actually do.. just probably not for such subjects that are topics of controversy.

Every day you live off of your experiences, you learned everything you know through experience, either your own or someone elses.

If you had a car driving fast at you, would you question the fact that you are hallucinating before you make the decision to jump out of the way?

After the event happens, how can you prove that this car was barreling at you?

The power of being powerless is sometimes all too awing that we must fantasize the supernatural.

A perfect excuse for the supernatural.

Personally I don't feel powerless, I've accepted the fact that I must die at some point.(What happens after that point..)

I live my life day to day, to improve myself and my living situation.. So I feel no powerlessness...I am personally empowered.

Nah, it actually ain't that rude. You are just freaking out over something mild because I contested your supposed vision.

Assuming something out of thin air doesn't make it true. That is what you are doing, assuming you know why I'm mad.

I'm not flipping out on Onus, so your theory seems quite shot.

As I said, and explained to you by the three specific parts I quoted of your words are the reason I'm pissed off.

Onus, am I freaking out over you contesting my vision?
Maybe it's the way you present yourself, KROMOH.

Grammar is the most important part of language - it shows logical reasoning, argumentation handling, concept handling, level of abstraction, amount of practice, ease at understanding semantic correlations and whatnot. Placing of commas in a wrong place is worse than a typo because it is intentional, don't you realise that? Most people do.

Actually the most important part of a language is understanding and use of the words. While grammar has its parts, even terrible grammar is easier to understand than using completely unrelated words in the wrong parts of sentences. For instance...

My crackpipe is full.

(Except I meant to use the word glass and empty) Completely changes the meaning of the sentence.

I didn't even care about your typo, I was just making a joke. Obviously you don't understand what those are. I even showed you I knew what you meant. If my pointing out of your typo hurt you so badly, my apologies.

You lack understanding of very simple concepts of language. There's a tremendous difference between a typo and a conceptual and intentional mistake. There is a very important theoretical reason to why a verb cannot be separated from the noun of a sentence, but since you claim to be so superior to me, you should know it better than I do.

Once again not understanding what I'm saying. I understand language and how it works. And I also understand the placement of commas is not essential to understanding what people are saying. Notice in spoken language, it has absolutely no bearing..

xD Once again, I said, English not being my first language changes nothing in any argument, but at least you should save that in mind before you judge my intelligence, or even, bash my language skills. And if you say I don't have a full grasp of the English language, then you are just acting blind. I speak far better than a majority of native English speakers, and even have passed Cambridge's three top level English exams.

I love how your arguing with me about something I can't prove. Yet claim you are better than the majority of native English speakers without any proof or reasoning.

I've read plenty of your posts and see your incorrect use of the English language plenty, I just don't choose to point everything out.

I'm sure I use it incorrectly as we all do... Especially when typing out report size posts in the matter of minutes.

I'm from Brazil, for the record. Don't be so ignorant next time.

I said Portuguese not Portugal so their wasn't a need for that. Not sure how I'm being ignorant. The majority of people in Brazil are descended from the Portuguese.. As I said I live in a town full of them, some from Brazil some from Portugal..

And as I said, old portuguese woman, are loud as hell.. At least all my friends grandmothers were.

How can you be so cynical as to try to judge my knowledge of psychology, when you said something so bad as the conscious mind having precedence over things (which doesn't even make sense in first place). I'm assuredly not as knowledgeable in psychology as O'nus (obvious reasons), but I can also assuredly say I'm better at it than you.

Your the one who tried to argue with me, you never said my understanding was wrong. You took my original words and put it into psychological realms when that was never the point of my original comment. I was saying my conscious mind has precedence over my conscious functions.

Again separating the noun from the verb with a comma. I didn't want to say this earlier, but when a person makes this mistake, it shows they have a problem with grasping meaning from long sentences. Just go ask any pedagogue.

Ignore the point of my post and instead criticize my comma placement, look I just did it again.

The least important part of communicating with others in their language is their placement of such mundane details. If you don't understand this, that is too bad.

P.S. I don't care about my comma placement. Nor do I proofread my posts to assure their 100% adherence to the rules of English. But at least I can communicate without coming off as an asshole. (Unless of course that was my goal)

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

However, some people, put commas in unusual places to, create pauses for easier conceptualization. I don't recommend it, but your hateful analysis of it was way too much of a generalization.

As, I said, commas, in unusual, places, shows that the, person, lacks ability when, dealing with grammar, and does, so, because of having, trouble with, understanding: long sentences.

So easy to criticise me, isn't it? I wasn't the one accusing others of having terrible language skills, and being so cynical as to make stupid conceptual mistakes - it was DeathCell. It's a cynic action. That is the point I was trying to make. I'm not a grammar nazi as you tried to convey.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Assuming something out of thin air doesn't make it true. That is what you are doing, assuming you know why I'm mad.

Not out of thin air. I have a very cohesive backing for it. Once again, unlike you, I don't say things I don't mean.

I'm not flipping out on Onus, so your theory seems quite shot.

As I said, and explained to you by the three specific parts I quoted of your words are the reason I'm pissed off.

Onus, am I freaking out over you contesting my vision?
Maybe it's the way you present yourself, KROMOH.

So easy to put the blame on others xD

Actually the most important part of a language is understanding and use of the words. While grammar has its parts, even terrible grammar is easier to understand than using completely unrelated words in the wrong parts of sentences. For instance...

My crackpipe is full.

(Except I meant to use the word glass and empty) Completely changes the meaning of the sentence.

Nah. Grammar is the tool that constructs relations of meaning. Words without grammar would be like "bananas, table, place, top, last night" Words with grammar would be like "Bananas were placed on top of the table last night."

I didn't even care about your typo, I was just making a joke. Obviously you don't understand what those are. I even showed you I knew what you meant. If my pointing out of your typo hurt you so badly, my apologies.

It wasn't just a joke. You were criticising me for a freaking typo. Then you started to bash my language skills. No problem with pointing out typos; judging people based on their unintentional language mistakes (especially a language that is not their first) is just plainly arrogant and hypocritical.

Once again not understanding what I'm saying. I understand language and how it works. And I also understand the placement of commas is not essential to understanding what people are saying. Notice in spoken language, it has absolutely no bearing..

Absolutely no bearing in spoken language? You don't even know what a comma is. A comma is a graphic representation of a break in speech continuity, without finishing the topic of a sentence. Commas weren't invented before breaks - it was exactly the opposite.

I love how your arguing with me about something I can't prove. Yet claim you are better than the majority of native English speakers without any proof or reasoning.

Don't try to make responses when you have none. I was referring to my language skills, and even said it is completely unrelated to any arguments I have. What you did here was practically read an answer and still ask the question.

I've read plenty of your posts and see your incorrect use of the English language plenty, I just don't choose to point everything out.

As I said, English is not my first language. I know a vast majority of native English speakers who make more mistakes than me.

I'm sure I use it incorrectly as we all do... Especially when typing out report size posts in the matter of minutes.

Your point being? So you actually admitted that language over the Internet doesn't really prove one's language skills - but what had you been doing up to that point? Yep, you were just going mad at saying how I strike an absolute zero at the English language. Oh, the paradox.

I said Portuguese not Portugal so their wasn't a need for that. Not sure how I'm being ignorant. The majority of people in Brazil are descended from the Portuguese.. As I said I live in a town full of them, some from Brazil some from Portugal..

Put it simple for the ignorants out there:

Born in Portugal = Portuguese
Born in Brazil = Brazilian

You are just extremely ignorant about Brazil, so don't argue about Brazil with a Brazilian. 90% of our origins aren't european. Saying a Brazilian is Portuguese is like saying an American is British.

Don't argue about Brazil with a Brazilian, man, that is just ridiculous, and shows how ignorant you really are.

And as I said, old portuguese woman, are loud as hell.. At least all my friends grandmothers were.

Read above.

Your the one who tried to argue with me, you never said my understanding was wrong. You took my original words and put it into psychological realms when that was never the point of my original comment. I was saying my conscious mind has precedence over my conscious functions.

Soooo. I was simply stating a truth - false memories are known to exist, as these are created subconsciously by the mind.
And well, look at that: you are right now admitting you failed at expressing well - just after saying I can simply not communicate at all.
Finally, saying the conscious mind has "precedence" (if there is such a thing) over your conscious functions is even acknowledgeable... But tell me, what has "precedence" over your conscious mind? Psychopaths think that what they do is just plainly logical and right, you know.

Ignore the point of my post and instead criticize my comma placement, look I just did it again.

That specific comma wasn't wrong you know. Of course, another comma after "look" would be desirable, but is not essential.

The least important part of communicating with others in their language is their placement of such mundane details. If you don't understand this, that is too bad.

Grow up. Stop trying to "win" the argument. You clearly have not the slightest understanding over the basics of language, you just mechanically speak what you were taught.

P.S. I don't care about my comma placement. Nor do I proofread my posts to assure their 100% adherence to the rules of English. But at least I can communicate without coming off as an asshole. (Unless of course that was my goal)

So, weren't you the one saying I can completely *not* express myself well enough for survival in English? Go figure. My point is done, you've admitted that judging language over the Internet is senseless, and also that slight mistakes don't damage understanding of meaning. I didn't prove you wrong for bashing my language - you did.

Ok...

I think it's time for a reality check both of you!



(thanks dreamqueen for introducing me to this picture!)

And also:

Originally Posted by Kromoh

As, I said, commas, in unusual, places, shows that the, person, lacks ability when, dealing with grammar, and does, so, because of having, trouble with, understanding: long sentences.

My point was that it can be for the benefit of the person reading it.

Originally Posted by spaceexplorer

I confess my guilt on that one!

So, I now ask myself, what this thread's topic was... xD

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Not out of thin air. I have a very cohesive backing for it. Once again, unlike you, I don't say things I don't mean.

See the difference between me and you is I sourced the exact words you used already that PISSED me off, while you just banter and don't source it.

I don't say things I don't mean. Give me an example of me saying something I didn't mean... Oh wait, you are talking out of your ass.

So easy to put the blame on others xD

You would know.

Nah. Grammar is the tool that constructs relations of meaning. Words without grammar would be like "bananas, table, place, top, last night" Words with grammar would be like "Bananas were placed on top of the table last night."

First, if you have no understanding of the words used in a language than the arrangement and placement would be pretty inconsequential when you don't know what the words mean.

Even a sentence put together with poor grammar is easier to understand than use of words you've never read/heard.. (Notice in your own example you can still figure out what your saying in the top quote, now imagine not knowing what any of those words mean!)

P.S. You attacked my use of commas, one of the most unimportant concepts in grammar. Congratulations.

It wasn't just a joke. You were criticising me for a freaking typo. Then you started to bash my language skills. No problem with pointing out typos; judging people based on their unintentional language mistakes (especially a language that is not their first) is just plainly arrogant and hypocritical.

Do you not realize that on this website all our previous posts are still in this topic?

"And its grasp not gasp, and I probably have a greater grasp than yourself."

That is what I said about your typo.. Please explain to me how I bashed your language skills.

Than you replied with..

"Don't be so low as to judge people over their language - which is, to say, a typically american thing to do."

You were judging me as an American and then go on to complain that I would categorize you as most likely descended from Portugal. YOU ARE A DAMN HYPOCRITE. JUST BECAUSE THE POST WAS MADE A FEW DAYS AGO DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS FORGOTTEN! (YOU JUDGED MY CULTURE FIRST!)

Absolutely no bearing in spoken language? You don't even know what a comma is. A comma is a graphic representation of a break in speech continuity, without finishing the topic of a sentence. Commas weren't invented before breaks - it was exactly the opposite.

As I've noticed in a lot of your posts your opinion on something is always fact. I don't know what a comma is? That is utter bullshit. Why are you telling me the obvious. My point is commas have no place in spoken language, and it's absouletly true... When I'm speaking from day to day I don't think about my comma placement. I'll start speaking like this....

Hello Tim my name is Alex comma what is yours?
(Ignoring my original comment and posting something vaguely related doesn't make you clever.)

Don't try to make responses when you have none. I was referring to my language skills, and even said it is completely unrelated to any arguments I have. What you did here was practically read an answer and still ask the question.

No I pointed out the fact that you claiming to be better than the majority of native English speakers doesn't make it TRUE.

I should be telling you not to make pointless responses, read my post thoroughly before responding.

As I said, English is not my first language. I know a vast majority of native English speakers who make more mistakes than me.

Once again as my point was the whole time. This is the internet, you are on an English based forum. English not being your first language is not an excuse for being an ass, condescending, or any number of other things you can come up with. I'm sure you know tons of native English speakers in Brazil.. And I'm also sure you stalk them around to decide if you are better at their language than themselves.

Your point being? So you actually admitted that language over the Internet doesn't really prove one's language skills - but what had you been doing up to that point? Yep, you were just going mad at saying how I strike an absolute zero at the English language. Oh, the paradox.

No minor mistakes are not important was my point, but saying bla bla bla, calling someone stupid and ignorant is not acceptable and hiding behind the fact that English is not your first language was my point the entire time. Just because you can't understand what I've been trying to tell you, doesn't mean its whatever you want it to be. And I never said language over the internet doesn't prove one's language skills, I said minor mistakes are really not that consequential. Their is a difference, things are not black and white their is plenty of gray.

P.S. All I did was point out your typo and correct it for you, since it was a main point you were making... it needed to be cleared up that you were intending to use that word.

Put it simple for the ignorants out there:

Born in Portugal = Portuguese
Born in Brazil = Brazilian

No shit, did I ever argue against this? You don't read or should I say comprehend what I'm saying.

Here is a copy of what I said. "I said Portuguese not Portugal so their wasn't a need for that. Not sure how I'm being ignorant. The majority of people in Brazil are descended from the Portuguese.. As I said I live in a town full of them, some from Brazil some from Portugal."

Where exactly did I argue against what you were saying.

Do you know what the word descended means? Here is a definition.

Descend - a. To come from an ancestor or ancestry:

Now are you going to try and argue what my point of that post was? Are the majority of Brazilians not somehow descended from Portugal?

Maybe instead of me being IGNORANT, you just read whatever you want from my words.

It is widely accepted that the first European to discover Brazil was Portuguese Pedro Álvares Cabral on April 22, 1500. From the 16th to the 19th centuries, Brazil was a colony of Portugal. On September 7, 1822, the country declared its independence from Portugal and became a constitutional monarchy, the Empire of Brazil. A military coup in 1889 established a republican government. The country has been nominally a federal republic ever since, except for three periods of overt dictatorship (1930–1934; 1937–1945 and 1964–1985).

I live in a town full of Brazilians and Portuguese. I date a Portuguese girl.
I am well aware of the difference between Brazilians and those from Portugal.. those from Brazil always make that quite clear.. obviously some leftover hatred from being a colony of Portugal... BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION has some connection to Portugal in their family..

You are just extremely ignorant about Brazil, so don't argue about Brazil with a Brazilian. 90% of our origins aren't european. Saying a Brazilian is Portuguese is like saying an American is British.

I'm sure their are plenty of non-Portuguese descended in Brazil, but that is still the major population force in that country.. Are you telling me the majority is not Brazilians descended from Portugal? Because having talked to many people who've lived in that country that live in my town... They tell me the opposite.

I'm not extremely ignorant, you are extremely unable to read my words and instead just assume whatever you want.

Don't argue about Brazil with a Brazilian, man, that is just ridiculous, and shows how ignorant you really are.

You realize how pointless this point is? Don't argue with a native english speaker about English, this is just ridiculous and shows how ignorant you really are.

P.S. Calling me ignorant multiple times makes it no less true, nor does it relieve the fact that you what you are calling me.

Soooo. I was simply stating a truth - false memories are known to exist, as these are created subconsciously by the mind.
And well, look at that: you are right now admitting you failed at expressing well - just after saying I can simply not communicate at all.
Finally, saying the conscious mind has "precedence" (if there is such a thing) over your conscious functions is even acknowledgeable... But tell me, what has "precedence" over your conscious mind? Psychopaths think that what they do is just plainly logical and right, you know.

I was never trodding down the road of psychology, as when my first post about seeing the future that you said I needed scientific proof. You assume I need to incorporate science and psychology in our discussion, when they were NEVER THE POINT.

I won't add things into discussion that had nothing to do with the subject and were not available for it.

I control my conscious mind, that is my point.

False memories are known to exist, but I am not diagnosed with this disease.
Am I going to call you out? How do I know its not a false memory that English isn't your first language, and how do I know its not a false memory that you live in Brazil?

That specific comma wasn't wrong you know. Of course, another comma after "look" would be desirable, but is not essential.

A run on sentence with no commas is still able to be understood. (My point that commas are not necessary to communicate, but proper use of words is.)

Grow up. Stop trying to "win" the argument. You clearly have not the slightest understanding over the basics of language, you just mechanically speak what you were taught.

I'm not trying to win anything, but I'm not gonna let you mis-understand me and assume things you have no reason for.

You clearly don't have the slightest understanding on what the most important concepts in language really is. And it's not Commas, just to let you know.

(Just because you took a class in English recently, doesn't make you an expert.)

So, weren't you the one saying I can completely *not* express myself well enough for survival in English? Go figure. My point is done, you've admitted that judging language over the Internet is senseless, and also that slight mistakes don't damage understanding of meaning. I didn't prove you wrong for bashing my language - you did.

No my comment still stands. You can't express yourself well enough for survival in English. If you communicated with someone in the streets of a big city in the same way you communicated with me, you would probably be shot. Rudely, arrogantly, disrespectfully and than use the fact that English isn't your first language as an excuse. It's not, as I said and continue to say..

IF YOU CAN'T COMMUNICATE WITH US WITHOUT COMING OFF AS AN ASS, THAN DON'T.

(I DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR COMMA PLACEMENT, AND ONLY MENTIONED THAT YOU MADE A TYPO AS YOU CAN READ FARTHER UP MY POST, I QUOTED IT)

Originally Posted by DeathCell

See the difference between me and you is I sourced the exact words you used already that PISSED me off, while you just banter and don't source it.

I don't say things I don't mean. Give me an example of me saying something I didn't mean... Oh wait, you are talking out of your ass.

I mean that you make up the lamest arguments when you lack a good one. Know what you're talking about before you do. The objective of an argument is not to prove others wrong, but to prove yourself right. Even if you managed to prove others wrong, it doesn't mean your arguments are right, and saying so is a logical fallacy named argumentum ad ignorantiam.

First, if you have no understanding of the words used in a language than the arrangement and placement would be pretty inconsequential when you don't know what the words mean.

Language is about abstraction. You obviously don't mean I understand bananas of your saying apples; but I agree that in an argument with high levels of abstraction, many ambiguities may occur. You yourself failed to express correctly several times, but I didn't do like you and moved on to say how completely incapable of speaking English you are.

Even a sentence put together with poor grammar is easier to understand than use of words you've never read/heard.. (Notice in your own example you can still figure out what your saying in the top quote, now imagine not knowing what any of those words mean!)

LOL, so you're either saying I don't know what the words I use mean, which means I'm extremely lucky to just pick words randomly from the dictionary and they miraculously make some sense; or you're saying that you don't know the words I used.

P.S. You attacked my use of commas, one of the most unimportant concepts in grammar. Congratulations.

Nah. You attacked my language skills, I only refuted. And I used your comma placement as example because it shows lack of ability in critical reasoning. Dyslexics place commas like you do.

Do you not realize that on this website all our previous posts are still in this topic?

"And its grasp not gasp, and I probably have a greater grasp than yourself."

That is what I said about your typo.. Please explain to me how I bashed your language skills.

You could have been kind, admitting I may not be as fluent as you are (especially since I'm Brazilian), and corrected me only so that I could improve.

But that's not what happened - you just pointed my mistake out (which was an unintentional one, a freaking typo), and tried to use it to show I'm inferior to you. For someone who talks so much about understanding and comprehension, you sure are being hypocritical about your own actions. That sentence of yours you quoted only shows the moron you are.

Than you replied with..

"Don't be so low as to judge people over their language - which is, to say, a typically american thing to do."

You were judging me as an American and then go on to complain that I would categorize you as most likely descended from Portugal. YOU ARE A DAMN HYPOCRITE. JUST BECAUSE THE POST WAS MADE A FEW DAYS AGO DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS FORGOTTEN! (YOU JUDGED MY CULTURE FIRST!)

As I said previously, 100% of peopel who tried to bash me for my language skills were American. I didn't act based on prejudice - a 100% sample is no thing to forget.

Further on, I've already said how completely ignorant you are about Brazil, as I'm definitely not most likely to be of Portuguese descent. If 90% or 80% of Brazilians were of Portuguese descent, I completely wouldn't mind you judging me as of Portuguese descent, even if it were not true. But yoru assumption is not true - you could have quickly gone to wikipedia and read: "A predominantly Roman Catholic, Portuguese-speaking, and multiethnic society"
That shows two things about you: you are extremely ignorant, and you talk about things anyway without knowing shit about them.

As I've noticed in a lot of your posts your opinion on something is always fact. I don't know what a comma is? That is utter bullshit. Why are you telling me the obvious. My point is commas have no place in spoken language, and it's absouletly true... When I'm speaking from day to day I don't think about my comma placement. I'll start speaking like this....

Commas have no place in spoken language, and that is absolutely true? Oh boy, you definitely don't know what a comma is. In ancient languages, people had trouble to synchronise spoken text with written text, because of the usual breaks in spoken speech, which made understanding easier. the solution they found was to introduce a code which would represent such break in written language, and, when reading, should be interpreted as a break.

Using your own example, you definitely wouldn't say it like this:

Hello Tim my name is Alex comma what is yours?

But you would say it like this:

Hello Tim [pause] my name is Alex [pause] what is yours?

As I said, you don't know what commas are: written representations of breaks in speech. People who do not understand what commas are put them inappropriately in written language. And this isn't exclusive to English - All languages that use the Latin alphabet use commas.

In suma, you don't know what commas are.

No I pointed out the fact that you claiming to be better than the majority of native English speakers doesn't make it TRUE.

Tu quoque.

I should be telling you not to make pointless responses, read my post thoroughly before responding.

So you read my accusation that your argument was empty (which means, you completely forgot to back it up), and instead of backing it up, you attempt to change the topic? Bad boy.

Once again as my point was the whole time. This is the internet, you are on an English based forum. English not being your first language is not an excuse for being an ass, condescending, or any number of other things you can come up with. I'm sure you know tons of native English speakers in Brazil.. And I'm also sure you stalk them around to decide if you are better at their language than themselves.

I've travelled, I've talked to, I've compared written text, I've had native English teachers. Don't assume what you don't know.

No minor mistakes are not important was my point, but saying bla bla bla, calling someone stupid and ignorant is not acceptable and hiding behind the fact that English is not your first language was my point the entire time. Just because you can't understand what I've been trying to tell you, doesn't mean its whatever you want it to be. And I never said language over the internet doesn't prove one's language skills, I said minor mistakes are really not that consequential. Their is a difference, things are not black and white their is plenty of gray.

I wasn't hiding behind the fact that English is not my first language. You bashed me for a freaking typo. I said what you did was moronic and also excused my mistakes because English is not my first language. Then you realised how bitchy you had been and moved on to criticise my supposed behaviour and inability to express. You completely lack any ability of abstraction to realise what you're doing, or you know what you're doing, and are just being a bitch.

So you assumed you made a mistake at bashing me for a typo. Congrats, You took longer than everyone else. I should give you a medal or so... hardest-headed human being.

P.S. All I did was point out your typo and correct it for you, since it was a main point you were making... it needed to be cleared up that you were intending to use that word.

Don't bend what you said. I might not be a native speaker but I'm not downright stupid. You bashed me for my (unintentional) mistake. I'm becoming repetitive, so just read above.

Are the majority of Brazilians not somehow descended from Portugal?

No. (and you would be ignorant in thinking so)

I live in a town full of Brazilians and Portuguese. I date a Portuguese girl.
I am well aware of the difference between Brazilians and those from Portugal.. those from Brazil always make that quite clear.. obviously some leftover hatred from being a colony of Portugal... BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION has some connection to Portugal in their family..

What freaking sample do you have? Oh my, you are just so hard headed, you could be used to polish diamond. Of course that Brazilians who go to the US descend from the richest social class, namedly, the Europeans.

But tell me, how many times have you been to Brazil? Or even, how many places have you been to in Brazil (huge social contrasts between regions here)? Or even, how many books have you read about demographics and ethnicity in Brazil? How many years did you spend studying Brazilian history? Do you learn Brazilian history at school?

I already know your answers to my question. Based on those, I categorise you as completely ignorant about Brazil.

I'm sure their are plenty of non-Portuguese descended in Brazil, but that is still the major population force in that country.. Are you telling me the majority is not Brazilians descended from Portugal? Because having talked to many people who've lived in that country that live in my town... They tell me the opposite.

Not true. Read above.

I'm not extremely ignorant, you are extremely unable to read my words and instead just assume whatever you want.

Not true. Read above.

You realize how pointless this point is? Don't argue with a native english speaker about English, this is just ridiculous and shows how ignorant you really are.

Have you studied theory of language?

P.S. Calling me ignorant multiple times makes it no less true, nor does it relieve the fact that you what you are calling me.

Read previously above. I don't say what I don't mean. You are ignorant - it's not an accusation, it's a statement of fact.

I was never trodding down the road of psychology, as when my first post about seeing the future that you said I needed scientific proof. You assume I need to incorporate science and psychology in our discussion, when they were NEVER THE POINT.

LOL never the point? I said that your supposed experience could have been false memory. I was trying to bring some science into your experience. Of course, the science that studies memory is psychology. Don't say psychology is unrelated to your experience, for it is not.

I won't add things into discussion that had nothing to do with the subject and were not available for it.

Nothing to do? I am beginning to think you didn't understand what I originally said about false memory. In any case, read above.

I control my conscious mind, that is my point.

Most stupid sentence ever. First off, in terms of psychology, you need to define what "you" and "your mind" and "consciousness" are. If you think "you" are your conscious mind, then of course you control your conscious mind - "you" are your conscious mind in that case. But if you actually mean that "you" are your mind or identity, then "you" are definitely not your conscious mind, and your subconscious process have precedence over practically everything - you just don't realise it, because, of course, they are subconscious. Study some psychology before you try to talk anything about the conscious mind.
And there you went, again talking about things you are completely ignorant about.

False memories are known to exist, but I am not diagnosed with this disease.
Am I going to call you out? How do I know its not a false memory that English isn't your first language, and how do I know its not a false memory that you live in Brazil?

Disease? False memories are not a disease. You think you actually "forget" your dreams?

Seriously, stop going into ground you can't stand. It only shows your ignorance and hard-headedness.

Answering your lasts questions: you don't. That's why insane people cannot be criticised or judged.

A run on sentence with no commas is still able to be understood. (My point that commas are not necessary to communicate, but proper use of words is.)

Maybe not in written language. for you can re-read and organise - reading is not a timeline process. But try speaking without pauses.

My point in criticising your comma use is that, for someone who bashes about minimal unintentional mistakes, you sure make some intentional ones.

You clearly don't have the slightest understanding on what the most important concepts in language really is. And it's not Commas, just to let you know.

Again, don't talk what you don't know. Speech break and continuity is a very important piece. But of course, you haven't studied languages, you only mechanically speak what you were taught, as I said.

(Just because you took a class in English recently, doesn't make you an expert.)

Don't assume what you don't know. people aren't as stupid and pathetic as you are. I've studied English for 10 years, and two other languages for more time than that. I've also taken a course on philology. Finally, I've learned many computer-programming languages. Contrary to you, some people actually know what they are talking about.

You can't express yourself well enough for survival in English.

Oh seriously? Then I might just as well replace my words with "uga uga", since nobody would understand me either way, right?

IF YOU CAN'T COMMUNICATE WITH US WITHOUT COMING OFF AS AN ASS, THAN DON'T.

Uga uga uga uga. Understood that?

(I DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR COMMA PLACEMENT, AND ONLY MENTIONED THAT YOU MADE A TYPO AS YOU CAN READ FARTHER UP MY POST, I QUOTED IT)

Nah, you actually bashed an unintentional mistake, on the internet, and moved on to say I lack any ability to be understood in English. If the typo didn't damage understanding of the sentence, why even bring it up? For someone who says I am rude and cannot socialise, you sure are worse at it.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

You could have been kind, admitting I may not be as fluent as you are (especially since I'm Brazilian), and corrected me only so that I could improve.

That is a grammar train wreck.

How so? There is an elliptical form in "and (could have) corrected me". You just assumed I made a mistake because I wouldn't have ellipsed that form if I was less fluent, am I right? Stop blaming your misunderstandings on my language ability.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

How so? There is an elliptical form in "and (could have) corrected me". You just assumed I made a mistake because I wouldn't have ellipsed that form if I was less fluent, am I right? Stop blaming your misunderstandings on my language ability.

The subject of the sentence is "you". However, between the two commas, you put in a point about yourself without ever using the word "I" or an equivalent. Your usage suggests that you are still talking about Death Cell even though you are suddenly talking about yourself. It is absurd communication. You needed to either start or end the sentence with a clause (which includes a verb, not merely a participial) where you throw in the fact about yourself or else write it in parentheses where you in reality wrote it within commas. Another sentence of the type you wrote is, "Robert came to work, liking Robert as a worker, and helped with the project." Such a thing would be a grammatical clusterfuck in any language.

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

I think it's an cool initiative. Plus, Ariane Sherine is awesome: cute and Atheist, it's win-win.

I only wish it didn't happen just in the UK.

GUYS

THIS BUS

IT'S AWESOME

CAPS

Stay on topic? Maybe just a little?

Originally Posted by no-name

GUYS

THIS BUS

IT'S AWESOME

CAPS

Stay on topic? Maybe just a little?

Jesus, what a subject change. What planet did you just come from? Get with the program and make sure you are in the right thread.

Sorry, forgot this' place was un-moderated...

Reminds me of an old Carou thread,

http://dreamviews.com/community/showthread.php?t=66998

Many atheists seem just as preachy as many evangelists. And self righteous. And they both think they know the answer. Science knows what was proved to be "true" but is open to the possibilities of it being wrong. Many atheists seem to overlook that fact.

Originally Posted by LoverbeanS

Many atheists seem just as preachy as many evangelists. And self righteous. And they both think they know the answer. Science knows what was proved to be "true" but is open to the possibilities of it being wrong. Many atheists seem to overlook that fact.

Remember that there is a huge difference between passionately arguing atheism in a religion forum and doing it with unsuspecting people out in the regular world. Evangelist types are just preachy in general. This, however, is a forum that is specifically for religious discussion. You can't measure how preachy people generally are by how preachy they are in here.

I have done a great deal of religious debating in here, but I try to avoid it in places where people did not sign up to hear what I have to say. By clicking this forum, people sign up to read what I have to say. I don't try to play with people who don't get on the field.

I'm a firm believer in those ads. It has hit me right here at home. Right where I work as a matter of fact. Initially the ads were not to be allowed but thankfully a few people on council who don't buy that hokum (or just really believe in the right to free speech) prevailed. Kudos to them.



You know, I just finished reading The Story Of B by Daniel Quinn (have you read Ishmael yet?) and the very last paragraph of the last page of the book about summed it up quite nicely:

(on being asked if B was the "antichrist")
"The Evangelist John wrote, 'You must not love the World or the things of the World, for those who love the World are strangers to the love of The Father.' Then just two sentences later, he wrote: 'Children, the final hour is at hand! You've heard that the Antichrist is coming. He's not one but many, and when the many of him are among us, you'll know the final hour has come.' John knew what he was talking about. He was right to warn his followers against those who love the World. We are the ones he was talking about, and this is the final hour - but it's their final hour, not ours. They've had their day, and this is indeed the final hour of that day. Now our day begins."

Finally, a little bit of hope.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Remember that there is a huge difference between passionately arguing atheism in a religion forum and doing it with unsuspecting people out in the regular world. Evangelist types are just preachy in general. This, however, is a forum that is specifically for religious discussion. You can't measure how preachy people generally are by how preachy they are in here.

I have done a great deal of religious debating in here, but I try to avoid it in places where people did not sign up to hear what I have to say. By clicking this forum, people sign up to read what I have to say. I don't try to play with people who don't get on the field.

You are different, but I read and hear plenty of atheists preaching atheism and shoving it down people's throats everywhere, even in religious forums. They post their own preachy shit to religious people in a Chistian forum, or just randomly post it anywhere else, or even go to religious conventions and tell people why they are wrong in not being atheist.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The subject of the sentence is "you". However, between the two commas, you put in a point about yourself without ever using the word "I" or an equivalent. Your usage suggests that you are still talking about Death Cell even though you are suddenly talking about yourself. It is absurd communication. You needed to either start or end the sentence with a clause (which includes a verb, not merely a participial) where you throw in the fact about yourself or else write it in parentheses where you in reality wrote it within commas. Another sentence of the type you wrote is, "Robert came to work, liking Robert as a worker, and helped with the project." Such a thing would be a grammatical clusterfuck in any language.

Nah. The part between the commas actually refers to DeathCell.

Don't blame your misunderstandings on me, and, as I said, don't ever try to bash me for my language skills, as that is just as moronic.

Also, how many languages do you know to say it would be wrong in any language? You only know your god'damn English. Actually, you would need to know every language that ever existed, to be able to tell if their formations and grammatical protocols would make the sentence you assumed, wrong. You know, some languages (like Vietnamese) don't even have grammatical persons. So next time, shut the fuck up before you say something stupid.

Originally Posted by LoverbeanS

You are different, but I read and hear plenty of atheists preaching atheism and shoving it down people's throats everywhere, even in religious forums. They post their own preachy shit to religious people in a Chistian forum, or just randomly post it anywhere else, or even go to religious conventions and tell people why they are wrong in not being atheist.

Statement of fact: atheism may not be right (not arguing over that), but christianity is surely wrong. I could write tenths of pages about this, but I'll make it short: reading the bible makes you disbelieve christianity. 70% of christian beliefs aren't present in the bible, 10% are about wrong interpretations (as in, taking human opinions as teachings from god), and 10% are about wrong or tendentious translations from the original greek version. There is just a tiring list of things that show christianity wrong, but this one is by far the most important one.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Nah. The part between the commas actually refers to DeathCell.

DeathCell needed to admit that you are not as fluent as he is, especially because you are Brazilian? That makes sense. He was in so much denial about it when he was pissing you off by saying it.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Don't blame your misunderstandings on me, and, as I said, don't ever try to bash me for my language skills, as that is just as moronic.

You were bashing people for language skills, so you asked for what you are getting. You need to be aware of your own hypocrisy.

You might be the snootiest person I have ever met in my life, and you are in no position to be like that. People who act like you are assholes even if they are great at whatever. It is just such a low life way to act.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Also, how many languages do you know to say it would be wrong in any language? You only know your god'damn English. Actually, you would need to know every language that ever existed, to be able to tell if their formations and grammatical protocols would make the sentence you assumed, wrong. You know, some languages (like Vietnamese) don't even have grammatical persons. So next time, shut the fuck up before you say something stupid.

It is illogical speech, period. Maybe there is a retarded language on Earth in which your retarded communication style is accepted, but it is a retarded language. Is Portugese like that? Tell me about it. Bitch.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

DeathCell needed to admit that you are not as fluent as he is, especially because you are Brazilian? That makes sense. He was in so much denial about it when he was pissing you off by saying it.

Admit: to grant as true or valid, as for the sake of argument; concede.

....Admit to himself, you bastard.

You were bashing people for language skills, so you asked for what you are getting. You need to be aware of your own hypocrisy.

I wasn't. You don't even know what happened. DeathCell started bashing my language skills. I only refuted, to show his hypocrisy (he also made many intentional mistakes). Universal Mind.... ever proving himself more ignorant and hard-headed.

You might be the snootiest person I have ever met in my life, and you are in no position to be like that. People who act like you are assholes even if they are great at whatever. It is just such a low life way to act.

Your point being?

It is illogical speech, period. Maybe there is a retarded language on Earth in which your retarded communication style is accepted, but it is a retarded language. Is Portugese like that? Tell me about it. Bitch.

Saying a sentence doesn't make it true. Especially not with the word "period" at the end. You only call it illogical because you were unable to understand it. I haven't seen anyone more retarded in my life than you. So accusing, so hard-headed, so hypocritical. I keep arguing with you, to see if you actually ever come up with something that characterises as "argument", but you only write personal attacks, empty statements, and misleading or accusing blabber. Seriously, I haven't found one argument of yours in our discussions. Stop trying to win an argument, and start trying to prove yourself right, and back up your assertions with examples, evidence, science, and logical reasoning. You should start listening to advice already.