Dan L

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by MistressRoxie [/i] [B][color=#9933ff]He said that you can't make snow men, or that you have to call them snow PEOPLE, because it's sexist, calling them snow MEN. And the same thing with gingerbread men. They're called gingerbread PEOPLE, instead, he claims.[/color][/B][/QUOTE] Either he was lying, or I am wanted on several counts of using gender-specific terms to inappropriate objects (ie. saying "gingerbread man" and "snow man")

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jeff [/i] [B]i'm also confused in this. in the bible, it says we are pre-destined/determined when we were choosen by God to believe Him. because God is all knowing, omniponent etc. but it means God knows who would not believe..but God isnt forcing us to believe Him..we are not buncha robots..He gave us free will. but He already knows..anyways, in secure way, predestined sounds good to me. [/B][/QUOTE] It's simple when you think about it. God didn't [i]decide[/i] what everyone is going to do from the beginning of creation, he just [i]knew[/i]. It's even easier (kind of.. you have to think about it though) when you realise the full extent of his omnipresence.. he's not just every[i]where[/i] (which is difficult enough to imagine, as it is), but he exists through all eternity too. Not as a point, like us, but spread out. Imagine youreslf, sitting at your computer now. You are, quite definately, at your computer, at ONE point. if you walk away, you could draw a line of where you walked, and say you existed everywhere along that line at some point, but at any one time, you existed at a point. In contrast, God, at any one time, exists throughout the whole universe, and at any one point (not "point in time" just "point") he exists throughout all time. Not did exist in the past" or "will exist in the fute" but "does exist through all time"- which is the difference betweenm immortality and eternity. Bearing that all in mind, it's easier to understand how God can know who will believe in him form the beginning of creation, and still give us free will.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by calumon_luver [/i] [B]Let it snow, Let it snow,Let it snow!!:D [/B][/QUOTE] *recoils in fear* Sorry bout that.. I heard the worst rendition of that song EVER, the other week. So the recoiling thing is a reflex.. heh

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Deus Ex Machina [/i] [B]Anyway, as for [i]psychics[/i], I have no idea. I believe we can hear things from God, but that's about where it ends. And I believe people in the occult can probably hear things too, but that's a different matter, from a different kind of being entirely, and the kind of thing I wouldn't trust. [/B][/QUOTE] [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jeff [/i] [B]umm..bible strictly forbids phychics/magic arts because it is considered using satan's power.. [/B][/QUOTE] hence "people in the occult can probably hear things too". What I mean is I don't know where I stand on some forms of "mediums".. I have my own reasons for that though, which I'm not gonna go into. But I'm well aware that any form of magic/mysticism such as psychics is considered using Satan's power. I just suspect that God might be able to get the odd word in here and there, in the very much less Satanic forms (again, this is more from experience than actual biblical backup) Anyway, so yeah. I realise that the Bible doesn't look too well upon psychics and that kind of thing. I just haven't worked out my own personal opinion on it yet (I do that a lot- rather than take the Bible's word for it, which makes you lose a lot of arguments...)

A diary.. heh... doesn't sound too bad by itself, until you realise that it's out of date ^^..

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnimeAddict [/i] [B]How do you know if you are physic?[/B][/QUOTE] I don't believe in Physics. Einstein, Newton, Feynmann.. they were all WRONG. The force of gravity doesn't exist, the reason we all fall down is cos if we fell up, that'd just be stupid. And the apple didn't [i]fall[/i] on Newton's head; someone threw it at him. And as for Einstein and his relativity... Anyway, as for [i]psychics[/i], I have no idea. I believe we can hear things from God, but that's about where it ends. And I believe people in the occult can probably hear things too, but that's a different matter, from a different kind of being entirely, and the kind of thing I wouldn't trust.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B]Deus Ex Machina, you shouldn't be laughing! I small leap means they are trying to use their heads! You always know when they are lying because it is to complex for a four year old! Joking... :P [/B][/QUOTE] heh.. I'm [i]still[/i] not quite sure what to make of that four year old comment. My question now: Who actually discovered the speed of light, and how?

Meh. Hate uni. Physics just doesn't seem as interesting.. Biochemistry just seems more tedious than ever. The only thing I really enjoy here now is the C.U. (Christian Union) Meh.. I'm at the point where I'm seriously pondering just.. quitting uni altogether.. but I don't think that'd go down too well with Mum and Dad, so I stay anyway.. I just don't know where I want to be right now.. >_<

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i] [B] Deus; Well yes, but small is big when it comes to computer technology. :) [/B][/QUOTE] Yeah I know.. what I mean is when government ministers start saying there's going to be a quantum leap in *insert area here*, it's quite funny. For me, anyway..

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Matt [/i] [B][color=red][b]Sound a little like the US is doing? We have been doing this since the 60's with the communists. Comments?[/b][/color] [/B][/QUOTE] Yeah, but it also sounds alot like how most wars have started. Judging by the limited amount I know about them, it even seems a lot like how the "Holy" Crusades got started, and pretty much any other religious war. So yeah.. I don't think it's [i]just[/i] America..

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Elite [/i] [B][b]I sound like such an intelligent person in that AIM conversation Deus, heheh.[/b] [/B][/QUOTE] heh.. yeah. I would've added something to it to make your part look more intelligent, or add a few LOLs into what I said to make me look dumber- but that wouldn't have been right.. heh.. besides, it's funnier that way.. by the way, good luck with the vegetable list.. heh

[quote]DeusExMachina92: damn Flash.. heh.. when's he gonna put the next eviction thingie up.. he said he was doing it on Monday.. heh ^^ Elite Dragon0: lol DeusExMachina92: ...I say that and he puts the thread up... Elite Dragon0: lol[/quote] I literally said that just as you were putting the thread up.. heh

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i] [B]Unless there is a 'quantum' leap in technology (pun intended)[/B][/QUOTE] One of the few things I remember my old physics teacher saying was "[i]it's funny people started using the term "quantum leap".. Quantum actually means "very small" or "the minimum possible amount"[/i]" heh.. there are also lots of other meanings, but he never said that ;)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Sara [/i] [B][size=1]Remarkably, my first attempt at posting in this thread did not appear. And so, this post is brought to you by [i]Sara Revisited.[/i] Not actually real, but an incredible re-creation.[/size] [/B][/QUOTE] *pokes the e-clone with an e-stick* :p I considered calling you just a "clone".. but they are real.. so yeah.. ^^

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i] [B]Deus; Not according to my understanding of quantum physics. In fact, as I understand it, particles can exist in different states at the same time. But I'm not about to get into a debate about quantum physics here since I'll be the first to admit my knowledge is pretty limited in that area, but mainly because an understanding of quantum physics is not necessary to solve this apparent paradox. So the problem still stands. :D [/B][/QUOTE] heh.. I have no illusion about the fact that the problem can be solved without reference to quantum physics, I just couldn't think of the proper answer.. heh. Anyway.. yeah, some particles can exist with in the same state, [i]but[/i] they can't exist [i]between[/i] states, so the lowest amount that you can break any distance down to is the individual states, which is a real (ie, not infinitely large or small) distance. Hence, you can never actually break the distance down to an infinitely small space ;)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i] [B][color=red] ::Holds up fist in triumph:: Hah, the early bird [i]does[/i] get the worm :p[/color] [/B][/QUOTE] Only on Wednesdays. It won't happen again. *shakes fist*

I'm here cos I just never left. I keep telling people- I don't remember how I found this place. I just ended up here one day, signed up as Dan Lucking, and made my best effort at insulting you.. heh.. I don't know what got into me that day. Anyway, I pretty quickly turned myself around and ended up staying for a while.. Not a lot more to it than that. Actually there is, but I really can't be bothered to go into any huge amount of detail in the matter.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by GinnyLyn [/i] [B][color=crimson]Deux (sp?) too![/color] [/B][/QUOTE] *adds Deux to the list of funky spellings of "Deus"* :p Just so you know, the list is so far: Dues (most common- nearly everyone says this at least once) Deuxs Desus Deux Dueche (only actually happened once) there's a few more, but heh.. I can't remember them (there's only a limited number of ways people can mis-spell a four letter word). A big Otakuboards convention sounds good.. heh.. Adam would have to wear a Darth Vader mask or something though- it wouldn't be right to actually see the face of "The Mysterious and Scarce One".. heh..

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i] [B][color=red] You know what? What somone does is actually made by who they are. And, opposingly, people are who they are because of what they do. It's all interchangable and rather contradictory.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE] *kicks Mitch* Damn you, Mitch.. I wanted to say something to that effect. Something like this: "Who we are dictates what we do, you wouldn't always (though there are exceptions, as I know pretty well) go and do something against your character, which is why people take advantage of your character. In the same way, what we do dictates who we are, as we are the sum of all our experiences, plus a little bit extra thrown in just for fun ^^" But yeah.. even so, there is a distinct difference between liking someone because of who they are, than liking them for their ability to do things. Ultimately, who we are dictates what we would do, if we could. Those who like us for who we are stay around even when we can't do that, or if we do something out of our character every so often. I think the best way to put it is that there are some people who like what they can get out of you, whereas some just plain like you as a person regardless. My vicar hates taking advantage of people. He asked me to do some decorating in the church, during the holidays, and I did. When he asked me, he said "I'll pay you to do it (not because I didn't want to do it- he offered this from the start)", and I said I'd do it. When I finished the job, I said I'd rather have it as a voluntary thing, and forget about the money, as the church could do more with it. It took a few minutes (the long kind of "a few minutes, not the short kind") to persuade him to keep the money, cos he didn't want to think he was taking advantage of me in any way. I had to explain that I didn't see it that way at all.. heh

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i] [B]But if every distance can be broken down to smaller and smaller distances, AND every distance takes SOME time to travel, then how will you EVER reach the shops?[/B][/QUOTE] Not really: there's a distinct limit to how far you can break a distance down, according to quantum physics. It's all based on the fact that there are distinct energy levels, and every particle in the universe has to exist in either one or another; not in between. Hence, once you break the distance down to the limit (which is incredibly small, hence we never notice it in our everyday lives) you can't break the distance down any more, because there's no energy level for the distance to fall into. Hence, if you can only break distances down to a certain point, then you can never actually get anywhere near the point where you may have to worry about an infinite number of little distances which take some time. Hence, the question makes a wrong assumption and is, in fact, invalid :p I'll post up a question when I think of one..

hmm... there's a few.. sorry if I miss any names out.. heh Mystic's Knight, D_A, Sara, Ginny, Duo M, Rain, Lady A, Sere, James, Justin, *strains mind*.. can't think of very many right now if I missed you off and probably shouldn't have, it doesn't mean I don't like you, it just means my brain was a bit insensitive and forgot about you. Sorry. heh

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B]Okay fare enough, answer this though. Mis-hearing and mis-thinking how do you know this was not responsible for the bible? You may not answer with "It says it is" or any thing of the sort because that could be applied to any visions and/or hearing things. At the moment I am not disputing "God" I am disputing the Bible as truthful record of events that may or may not have happened.[/B][/QUOTE] OK.. that's fair enough. The only real thing I can say is that I believe it to be accurate because of what I've experinced, the prophecies I've actually seen come true, and a whole range of other things that lead me to the conclusion that it is true. However, it's a very personal thing. I don't like to say "the Bible is true because it says it is", and I never really say that, nor give references to the Bible without explaining them. I only tend to quote the Bible if my reasoning actually backs the quote up, not just if the quote backs the reasoning up. Hence I never say "The Bible is true because it says it is", because the reasoning is solely dependant on the accuracy of the quote, and you're not likely to use that as an argument with people who actually believe the Bible is true. (though I know a lot of the more "traditional" Christians don't share this opinion) [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B]I think you need to reread it a bit more because even my RE teacher said there were more discrepancies than that. (And he's been a priest most of his life.)[/B][/QUOTE] There probably are.. that was just one example which struck me the first time I finished reading all 4 of the gospels. I personally don't believe that the Bible is 100% God's word, as in, not a single word was misunderstood by the prophets who wrote it. Have you ever read the book of Ecclesiastes? the first chapter starts off "life is useless". What a lovely message. If I singled out that one verse and gave it to someone as God's word, and they actually believed me, they'd probably jump off a tall building. But I wouldn't do that, firstly because it's not the whole point of the bible, and also because I think that that verse was the personal feelings of the writer at the time. Read that book and you'll see what I mean. Throughout the book, the writer of ecclesiastes says many inspirational things, and does conclude that we should follow God, but although I think the book as a whole was inspired, I think that a lot of it is based on the writer's personal way of viewing things. Ultimately, I view any discrepancies in the same way, as human errors at the time of writing, mistranslations, the writer allowing his personal thoughts to get in the text, anything like that. It's important to remember that although God inspired the bible (or so I believe) He didn't actually write it. I still believe the whole thing to be God's word, but in a complicated way. [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B]This is not to go off topic this is just to get Deus to think a bit instead of being a sheep.[/B][/QUOTE] Don't worry about that. I was a non-Christian for.. about 19 years before I actually converted, it's a very recent thing. I'm not one for just believing things because someone says so, I'm one of those who actually questions, and comes up with a reason why I believe. I won't reply after this, either.. heh (just to be clear on that).. PM me if you want ;)

Meh.. I'm naturally lazy. I've been close to failure so many times it's almost scary.. but somehow I always manage to come out ok.. and now I'm in university.. I don't know quite how it happens, but for some reason I just keep managing to scrape myself up everytime I look like I'm going to fail. I really must stop doing that (getting into that situation, I mean). Still.. don't worry too much. I'm sure you'll do fine. And I really mean that.. you seem like a bright enough guy

New thought of the day: [i][b]Truth exposes truth[/b][/i] meaning: If you lie about something, then fair enough.. you'll avoid someone's feelings being hurt, you'll save yourself from trouble, you'll protect yourself from the way someone may feel about the truth, but this is all in the short term. When people eventually find out that they were lied to (and they more often do than don't), they will be even more hurt than if you told them the truth from the start. This may not seem to apply to all situations, but that's all because we make a false justification of our actions because "it doesn't do any harm really".. but we fail to see that by creating an atmosphere of lies we make the truth even more unbearable on the day when we must all face it. That doesn't mean we have to shout every truth from the top of a rooftop, or embarrass people in public with the truth, but rather, don't let yourself fall into the trap of thinking that little "white" lies (notice how they almost sound sweet, due to the wording) are any less lies than the bigger ones. But anyway, my real point is this: The truth doesn't make things better. Like when Shy told his friend, things didn't get any better. By telling the truth we aren't going to have a perfect life, and live without any worries whatsoever, but instead we are going to live a life of truth, and of acceptance of everything that is wrong in our lives. By letting people know the truth about us and what we think, we uncover their true opinions on our [i]true selves[/i]. Meh.. that's my little(ish) rant on truth.. interpret it as you will.. And no, I don't tell the truth all the time. I never said I did, but I happen to believe that I should, despite the fact that it is immensely difficult, and doesn't always make me look good (glorification shouldn't be my goal).

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Elite [/i] [B][b]I think you heard wrong. The government are trying to make the word "gay" counted as an offensive word, for TV etc. Let me explain. In English slang the word "gay" is used to describe a bad thing. So instead of saying "you're an idiot", a lot of people say "you're gay". This isn't true for all people who speak with a lot of English slang, it's just used by a certain group of people, or idiots as I like to call them. Of course a lot of gay people take this the wrong way, for good reason. It's incredibly hard for me to describe this... you would really have to "experience" it for yourself. Homosexual is in no way an offensive word, and I doubt highly that the UK government would try and list it as an offensive word.[/b] [/B][/QUOTE] Ahh.. so [b]that's[/b] what's up.. heh.. sorry.. I'm not very up to date with the news at the moment. I just assumed that sage was right in what he said.. but yeah.. in the uk, "gay" is used by a lot of people to describe something generally bad, such as: Guy no. 1: What do you think? Guy no. 2: It looks gay... (guy no. 1 could be referring to many things, hence I didn't specify) I never tend to say it myself, but it is a pretty common thing.. (among idiots.. heh)