The universe just turned 6010 years old
-
That just proves the universe is a simulation. The Bible was generated by computer.
I've uncovered its secrets! I realised that you are only partially correct, and via literally seconds of research, I figured out that the Bible was not only generated by a computer, but that computer was emitting code - the Bible is the output of a code generator! I subsequently wrote a compiler and input the Bible as my first program. The results were astounding! After much harddisk whirring, the program finished compiling and on my screen, blinking white against black was... "Hello, World!"
Me: Can you see the "up" arrow? User:Errr...ummm....no. Me: Can you see an arrow that points upwards? User: Oh yes, I see it now! -Excerpt from a support call taken by me, 08/31/2007
-
The bible was probably generated by people with access to illegal substances.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Allowing the argument that only people enhanced by illegal substances[1] are able of conceiving such gematria. [1] I didn't mention DXM, did I?
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
How in the world do one come up with such crap, and call it science?
All that is required is a willingness to lie.
I just can't understand why one would want to lie about something, that can be discredited so easily, if you only took 30 seconds of your life to apply some critical thinking.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
Demon Possessed wrote:
That is just unbelievable. How in the world do one come up with such crap, and call it science? The mind boggles.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
It's not altogether crap. the concept is sound, just the attempts to use it, and what they attempt to prove, are crap. Ancient scholars used to use such devices to guard against forgery etc. You could call it a form of steganography.
-
It's not altogether crap. the concept is sound, just the attempts to use it, and what they attempt to prove, are crap. Ancient scholars used to use such devices to guard against forgery etc. You could call it a form of steganography.
I beg your pardon? :~
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
I just can't understand why one would want to lie about something, that can be discredited so easily, if you only took 30 seconds of your life to apply some critical thinking.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
I just can't understand why one would want to lie about something, that can be discredited so easily, if you only took 30 seconds of your life to apply some critical thinking.
That's 30 seconds of critical thinking more than some people will use in their lives, especially where religion is concerned. Theologists can make claims like that safely because there is little chance that their intended audience will do anything other than blindly accept.
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
How in the world do one come up with such crap, and call it science?
All that is required is a willingness to lie.
I don't think they are intentionally lying. In their twisted little view of reality that is the truth.
These people do all sorts of gibberish underworld activities as long as they are with thier 'gang'. - Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
-
I don't think they are intentionally lying. In their twisted little view of reality that is the truth.
These people do all sorts of gibberish underworld activities as long as they are with thier 'gang'. - Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
You are far too naive.
-
It's not altogether crap. the concept is sound, just the attempts to use it, and what they attempt to prove, are crap. Ancient scholars used to use such devices to guard against forgery etc. You could call it a form of steganography.
Brady Kelly wrote:
the concept is sound, ju
The concept is the stupidity of applying statistics for random events to something completely non-random like writing. Not sound at all, since there is no reasonable reason to presume the occurrences will be the least bit random.
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
the concept is sound, ju
The concept is the stupidity of applying statistics for random events to something completely non-random like writing. Not sound at all, since there is no reasonable reason to presume the occurrences will be the least bit random.
I should not have used the word sound. I was having an ecstatic epiphany[1] and hurried my sentence out. What I meant was, there is probably some evidence for deliberate, ooh what does one call it, manipulation, or composition for hidden patterns. [1] In discovering I can fool the VS2005 designer into creating instances of a user control derived from an abstract base.
-
You are far too naive.
Feeling grumpy today? Maybe you just need a nap. :((
These people do all sorts of gibberish underworld activities as long as they are with thier 'gang'. - Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
-
Demon Possessed wrote:
That is just unbelievable. How in the world do one come up with such crap, and call it science? The mind boggles.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
That is just unbelievable.
What do you mean? It's true. It also proves that Bin Laden is a disciple. He attacked New York on 9-11! 9 + 11 = 20 He has devised an attack flying airliners into skyscrapers exactly one time 20 + 1 = 21 which is evenly divisible by .... YES! SEVEN 3 x 7
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
That is just unbelievable.
What do you mean? It's true. It also proves that Bin Laden is a disciple. He attacked New York on 9-11! 9 + 11 = 20 He has devised an attack flying airliners into skyscrapers exactly one time 20 + 1 = 21 which is evenly divisible by .... YES! SEVEN 3 x 7
There it is!
3and7! And 37 is exactly the waist-size of my Jeans! Now it is proven by the Bible:I am OBL!:omg::wtf:
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
Douglas Adams, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"