Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

G1 Smoketreader wrote:*It's not a debate, it's a discussion. Major diff.TROLLS look to lure ppl into debates in discussions.
*If you read or even skimread 50 posts and avoid contributing your own view but are willing to find and upload an image of Casper and declare yourself a chosen one, you have both time and inclination (to TROLL).
*You obviously consider yourself intellectually superior to everyone who had the balls to lay their TRUE point of view down in this thread. You tried to use ridicule, which tells every school student and above in the world that the issues are with you. Of all the ppl who were tempted to bag this thread, you succumbed. The rest resisted. Think about it.
*The genuine answer is given to your genuine question and you know it.
* The point of a discussion is to leave things open to discussion how is it that I fear being questioned if I leave others to draw their own conclusions? Who is pushing their belief sets, you or me?

Now, again: In the search for the presence or absence of a single word in an entire text, why is it wrong to reference an underlying text? It's not about whether those stories are real, whether the locations in those stories are real or not and whether or not they contain ghosts, it's about whether the English word GHOST is present in a non-English form that still ACCURATELY translates to GHOST in English in any edition of the same text (the Bible), or in foundation texts of said text.
It's not even the use of Spirituality but of Archival Reference. What does it matter if the story is real or not in the scan for the presence of a specific word?

What? Trolls want to lure you into a debate? The thinking man's wind up merchant! A little on the paranoid side, aren't you?

Yes, usually a lot of my posts are quite lackadaisical in nature, even in what you might consider to be 'serious' topics (I certainly have the time and inclination for that!). That's how I am. Stop taking life and what people post on a Transformer's message board so seriously and you might enjoy it a little bit more.

No, I don't consider myself intellectually superior to anybody on the internet. I don't know you past your handle and the way you come across in your posts. I don't think in terms of "his opinion is wrong, therefore I am superior to this person in every way. Now I shall post an image of Casper in a display of self assured mockery of all those who have posted previously! Mwa ha ha ha!"

I fail to see how I could be pushing my belief set in one instance, yet not bothering to contribute a viewpoint in another? Never mind. As for the rest of your post, I told you that I wasn't getting into a semantic debate. People are posting 'true stories' or experiences, you are treating us all to the fascinatingly contemporary fact that the afterlife was mentioned in works of fiction. I did not, nor do I not, understand the relevance to the actual discussion taking place!

My slightly jesting original post was designed to provoke an explanation, not this current tedious exchange.

Also, BeastProwl, I like to air my dirty laundry in public! Complete transparency is essential to an open democracy.

Understood Beastprowl. I prefer the arena of 1000+ views as well and the Troll is a Troll but I'll respect and stand down (for now).

The Stymphalide Ornithes (blade-tipped fowl) that Heracles fights match the overall description of Velociraptors. Not the Jurassic Park steroid version but the actual Museum combat goose version.
That being the cross reference of Pre Homeric Myth with a Spielberg movie.


The Feathered-Serpent-is-an-Alien story is the one, maybe the only one, that I can't disprove to myself so far. There have been allegations lately that Spaceship references appearing in Hindu Myth (I don't know enough but something about a flying superweapon) and Greek (The Argo, which 'glided over the water'). To be honest I stopped caring about stories regarding Aliens that left & will return in the year 1984,1999,2000,2012 etc ages ago.If they come, they come.If they don't, they don't.
HOWEVER, even tho I don't have an opinion as to whether the same aliens who allegedly came with the feathered Serpent were busy refuelling their Spaceships on the tips of the Pharaohs' Pyramids in Egypt (a popular 80s theory), Autopsy results on mummified Ancient Egyptians (of social status)have found Cocaine in their lungs & throats. Cocaine only came from South America at the time, so there was some kind of cultural exchange going on between the two groups regarding their two opinions of the skies (and reasons for Pyramids being aligned with sky themes).

G1 Smoketreader wrote:Understood Beastprowl. I prefer the arena of 1000+ views as well and the Troll is a Troll but I'll respect and stand down (for now).

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Blast Cannon wrote:

G1 Smoketreader wrote:Understood Beastprowl. I prefer the arena of 1000+ views as well and the Troll is a Troll but I'll respect and stand down (for now).

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

GTFO!
that made me laugh...

I've been watching weird ass 2-3 hour videos all day yesterday and today about this kind of stuff.

Blast Cannon wrote:

G1 Smoketreader wrote:Understood Beastprowl. I prefer the arena of 1000+ views as well and the Troll is a Troll but I'll respect and stand down (for now).

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Not a problem. You got a chuckle out of me.

What I've never understood is how belief in the paranormal is usually decried as silly or groundless, while belief in religion is totally fine, and even admirable. Belief in either requires an acceptance of things one does not understand or have concrete knowledge of. Yes, concrete, because no matter how hard either side rails on the notion of "it's true because I believe it to be true" (looking at you religion.....) that is in no way at all grounds for accepting the belief as true in a concrete sense.

I believe in the paranormal more than aliens, although the alien stuff is pretty cool for looking in to, but I am the first person to understand that my belief in it is simply that. But look, in all reality, if everyone conceded that belief in unseen presences and unexplainable happenings was silly and that there's no way someone could still inhabit the mortal realm after they've died or that visitors from the heavens came to us and somehow improved our lives or had contact with us, and that there was no reason to believe in stories that portray such events or that people who maintain a belief in them were not to be taken seriously, religion in general would be on the short list of things that now classify as a silly or pointless belief. I've never been sure how seeing a ghost is a hallucination and no other possible explaination is even needed but seeing Jesus' face in a potato chip is a sign of the true existence of god. If I think I woke up in the middle of the night and see an alien in my room I'm 'clearly' still dreaming, but if I replace the alien with an angel somehow it's a proof of my faith, when we know it's the same thing. We accept religion as a society and relegate the paranormal to something that guys in Ed Hardy shirts do on the Travel Channel.

Now, I know, I know. Religion is an act of faith, and you must believe in it for it to have meaning or be true. Somehow, that just isn't applicable to a belief in the paranormal though.

Dagon wrote:What I've never understood is how belief in the paranormal is usually decried as silly or groundless, while belief in religion is totally fine, and even admirable. Belief in either requires an acceptance of things one does not understand or have concrete knowledge of. Yes, concrete, because no matter how hard either side rails on the notion of "it's true because I believe it to be true" (looking at you religion.....) that is in no way at all grounds for accepting the belief as true in a concrete sense.

I believe in the paranormal more than aliens, although the alien stuff is pretty cool for looking in to, but I am the first person to understand that my belief in it is simply that. But look, in all reality, if everyone conceded that belief in unseen presences and unexplainable happenings was silly and that there's no way someone could still inhabit the mortal realm after they've died or that visitors from the heavens came to us and somehow improved our lives or had contact with us, and that there was no reason to believe in stories that portray such events or that people who maintain a belief in them were not to be taken seriously, religion in general would be on the short list of things that now classify as a silly or pointless belief. I've never been sure how seeing a ghost is a hallucination and no other possible explaination is even needed but seeing Jesus' face in a potato chip is a sign of the true existence of god. If I think I woke up in the middle of the night and see an alien in my room I'm 'clearly' still dreaming, but if I replace the alien with an angel somehow it's a proof of my faith, when we know it's the same thing. We accept religion as a society and relegate the paranormal to something that guys in Ed Hardy shirts do on the Travel Channel.

Now, I know, I know. Religion is an act of faith, and you must believe in it for it to have meaning or be true. Somehow, that just isn't applicable to a belief in the paranormal though.

100% ALL OF THIS
Especially the bolded part...

Dagon wrote:What I've never understood is how belief in the paranormal is usually decried as silly or groundless, while belief in religion is totally fine, and even admirable. Belief in either requires an acceptance of things one does not understand or have concrete knowledge of. Yes, concrete, because no matter how hard either side rails on the notion of "it's true because I believe it to be true" (looking at you religion.....) that is in no way at all grounds for accepting the belief as true in a concrete sense.


>>>>>Absolutely agree with you, but there are so many schools of thought cancelling each other out that anyone who investigates for themselves will get bogged down- the only thing immediately provable is that each group will distill or camoflage their own messages for marketing.

Regarding "Its true cuz I believe so": At a party I was at once there was a Muslim kid pretty much alone in the corner. I decided to chat with him and found him very (defensively) standoffish but decided to stick at being friendly-(Confession:It was at the early[ish] stage but I could see he was getting increasingly isolated, drunk and violent and I had decided to intercept that).
He continuously turned the chat to differences between Australia (where this happened) and the Middle East and the culture shock in him was evident,even tho he was 2nd Gen. I saw him leaning towards spiritual/religious fundamentals, so I decided to just cut to the chase and ask him to tell me about Islam, Allah and the Q'Ran. It took a few tries (and I'm in no way stereotyping ANYBODY here,BTW), but he eventually acknowledged that I meant what I was asking. He calmed down visibly and immediately, locked my gaze with a very strong, MATURE AND WISE one of his own and said "Allah is a state of mind", with a demeanor to the effect of "How many times will I have to tell you before I get through to you?".
My point: How definitely can one argue that this is not a scientific approach, and how can the consideration "I believe because I believe" remain unsupported by a scientific comment which in this case is close to perfectly Mystical?

Each group has enough 'perfectly scientific & yet Mystical' arguments to prove the rest out as non believers.

(Go to a Hardcore Christian who grew up afraid of "The Commies" during the Cold War, and tell them "The only Communist was Jesus-He owned nothing and Shared anything he had with him" and they might even go a little berserk) (even tho the counterargument is "Whaddaya mean he owned nothing? The Dude is like the Prince of Heaven and Earth!").

I believe in the paranormal more than aliens, although the alien stuff is pretty cool for looking in to, but I am the first person to understand that my belief in it is simply that. But look, in all reality, if everyone conceded that belief in unseen presences and unexplainable happenings was silly and that there's no way someone could still inhabit the mortal realm after they've died or that visitors from the heavens came to us and somehow improved our lives or had contact with us, and that there was no reason to believe in stories that portray such events or that people who maintain a belief in them were not to be taken seriously, religion in general would be on the short list of things that now classify as a silly or pointless belief. I've never been sure how seeing a ghost is a hallucination and no other possible explaination is even needed but seeing Jesus' face in a potato chip is a sign of the true existence of god. If I think I woke up in the middle of the night and see an alien in my room I'm 'clearly' still dreaming, but if I replace the alien with an angel somehow it's a proof of my faith, when we know it's the same thing. We accept religion as a society and relegate the paranormal to something that guys in Ed Hardy shirts do on the Travel Channel.

Now, I know, I know. Religion is an act of faith, and you must believe in it for it to have meaning or be true. Somehow, that just isn't applicable to a belief in the paranormal though.

>>>>> I suggest that asking ourselves if we saw a Ghost, Alien, Angel and so on is an act of faith as well (as is asking ourselves if we didn't but totally wanted to). Moments of truth are always faced alone, and all of us will eventually have to ask ourselves what we are experiencing on the paranormal side of things. I reckon almost all of us (not including a bunch of Zen Masters somewhere, the odd Golden Child, a Rasputin or two) are unprepared for that final truth because of our conditioning (and we shouldn't hold other peoples' conditioning against them but we do and our religions and Sciences even tell us to).

Re: Truth vs faith- Science will track brain 'energy', concluding that we only use (up to 15% now, depending on the source) of our brain without saying that electrical frequencies that change can't be accurately tracked and without counting the Brains' messages in the spine and nerves as Brain Energy.

Science has been sitting around ignoring the sudden inability to disprove the existence of Chi,Ki,Qi when the actual term KInetic energy starts with what sound?

The Church of scientology published an article I found in a TV guide (!) saying that anyone who reported past life recollection in which they were royalty were in fact just lonely & sad & needed help from a special book available via phone order. Later, so many ppl who watched the Titanic movie had past life experiences about being on the Titanic that you could fill 45 Titanics with 'em. So do ppl 'invent' past lives about being rich & unstoppable or about suffering horribly?

BELIEF
ARGUMENT
DISBELIEF
ARGUMENT
BELIEF


This isnt a thread about beliefs, its a thread about experiences with unexplainable things.
Like, after I read this popular "Creepypasta" about Jeff The Killer, I thought, eh, not that bad a story i guess, but then I saw his face after the incident, and now that damn face of his haunts me, and the reason why is simple. I was able to read the story behind WHY his face turned out the way it did, so now that everything scary about him is explained, the un believable becomes believable and so on. The story was made to make his face believable, thus making it haunt you. They never mention that, but thats the only thing that makes any sort of sense. Heres his mug BTW: You may want to close your eyes before scrolling down if you dont want to see him. It's hard to un-see his horrific face. At least for me...
|
|
|
|
|