Free Allegiance Forums

qqqqqq wrote:QUOTE (qqqqqq @ Aug 5 2012, 03:21 AM) . . .

He's right, unfortunately. Just have to convince them to want to learn!

kramari wrote:QUOTE (kramari @ May 18 2012, 12:45 PM) Alpha Centauri for $2.99 at GoG.com. Just started playing again. If we played now I predict a most embarrassing loss on my part. Normally I play with Lady Deirdre Skye

Ahhhh, Easymode.

I miss that game. I wish i still had things

lexaal wrote:QUOTE (lexaal @ Jul 30 2012, 02:06 AM) The logic behind my statement is that you can only force those to learn who are able to.

fuzzylunkin1 wrote:QUOTE (fuzzylunkin1 @ Aug 5 2012, 02:20 PM) He's right, unfortunately. Just have to convince them to want to learn!

But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.
- Luke 16:31

Learning can only happen if someone is willing to learn.
Most are only willing to believe that which can be explained and verified. (Or so they say.)
Trouble is, not much is explained or verified.

Then people jump to conclusions just because they don't like a particular something. Even if it doesn't have anything to do with the idea in question.

There is more merit in saying, "I don't know.", than claiming you do when you don't.

Also wtf who necroposted this thread?

Really, this thread keeps going, yaaawn. I mean, pages and pages of the same opininions, again and again and again, the goundhog thread.

The real question is why would a supposedly rational person argue with someone who prefers @#(! found in a book written by an unknown author and attributed to some supernatural being, over scientific theories which are for all practical purposes proven?

There are either circumstances probably beyond the influence of a $#@!ing forum thread at work that's clouding his judgement, or he is a moron. Either way it's futile.

SumVeritas wrote:QUOTE (SumVeritas @ Aug 6 2012, 11:03 PM) Really, this thread keeps going, yaaawn. I mean, pages and pages of the same opininions, again and again and again, the goundhog thread.

I know right. I logged on today for the first time in weeks, and was like wtf... That thread died off months ago.

Spunkmeyer wrote:QUOTE (Spunkmeyer @ Aug 6 2012, 11:57 PM) The real question is why would a supposedly rational person argue with someone who prefers @#(! found in a book written by an unknown author and attributed to some supernatural being, over scientific theories which are for all practical purposes proven?

There are either circumstances probably beyond the influence of a $#@!ing forum thread at work that's clouding his judgement, or he is a moron. Either way it's futile.

Practical purposes...?

It's a war of ideology.

it's a war of

$#@! you you're retarded

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Aug 7 2012, 12:07 AM) it's a war of

$#@! you you're retarded

What do you call it when no one can prove a particular something either way, but everyone still fights over it?

Alien51 wrote:QUOTE (Alien51 @ Aug 6 2012, 09:11 PM) Learning can only happen if someone is willing to learn.
Most are only willing to believe that which can be explained and verified. (Or so they say.)
Trouble is, not much is explained or verified.

And so they make things up.

QUOTE Then people jump to conclusions just because they don't like a particular something.[/quote]
You mean like saying there is a god?

QUOTE There is more merit in saying, "I don't know.", than claiming you do when you don't.[/quote]
Hey, you're starting to understand science! I completely agree with this.

Do you know that there is a god? You do not know. You are Agnostic. You believe. You are a Theist. Therefore, you are an Agnostic Theist.