[QUOTE="htekemerald"] What dilema? On the one hand we have people who want evidence to prove things exist. You know, real copper bottomed empirical evidence that things exist. While on the other we have people claiming that oh unless you discount every remote possibility that something could exists it must be accepted as existing. One side is sane while the other is not.Vandalvideo

I agree with you from a logical point of view, yet I I can't imagine that you live by this reasoning. Surely, you have opinions and beliefs that have very little if at all any evidence to support them?

It's a luxury. I could easily find some thing to replace it with, leaves or something.

So long as you agreed with the revolt, and you believed that a revolt were necessary, would you actively participate in the revolt? Could you ever see yourself on the street with other like-minded revoltees, throwing molotov cocktails at the police force?

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]Another thing: "alright" is not a word, but all right is.

McJugga

It's the correct usage however. Alright is not a word. Instead use "all right".

A few mistakes that I see quite frequently deal with the subjunctive mood, when to use "was" and "were." It is not correct to say in any occasion the following phrase: "If I was to eat there, I would become sick." That just makes you sound like a hick. Instead, say "If I were to eat there, I should become sick." In almost all if statements, the verb is were, not was. Now why did I use "should" instead of "would"? Well, to express a conditional statement using a modal verb in the first person we use should (shall). This isn't really an English mistake so much as it is a difference between the British English and American English, however.

This is the big one: when to use your and you're. I detest it when people say "your just an idiot", because I then I must ask, "Who is just an idiot"? And then things become crazy. If you want to call someone an idiot, say "You're an idiot."

Another thing: "alright" is not a word, but all right is.

Taco Bell tastes like ass.

[QUOTE="Bluestorm-Kalas"]

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] That's what Jesus said.. but if you read the old testament you will find it never says that.sonicare

Then that is spam! :P

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]

I like the idea of the thread but you went about it the wrong way, the question you asked could have been a lot better.

eg. isn't it arrogant that you pray to god despite the fact there are people dying of starvation and diseases and god doesn't help them. Always makes me laugh when people pray for something which is practically meaningless in comparison to people who are REALLY in need, then they have the arrogance to say (if it did work out) that it was God helping them.

An example which is perfect is some woman I know; her dog ran out the house and came back 2 days later unharmed, she claimed god guided him back to the house and protected him and that she was paying for him to return... I mean you really think God cares enough about you and your dog and actually guides your dog back home but completely ignores the people who are born into poverty, who die from disease because there's no clean water, who die from starvation etc. etc.

Brainkiller05

Calling something twisted doesn't make it so. I've read quite a compelling argument in favor of the theory quod, malum est, ergo nos bonum postularum

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] I see heaven as more of torture then ultimate reward.. You are stuck there for eternity, your being has changed.. I don't want my self to change on who I am and what not.. Furthermore eternity is its own prison.sSubZerOo

If Heaven is anything as I imagine it, being there for an eternity would be nice.

Neither you nor I can fully comprehend what eternity is. I don't know that either of us knows what real torture is either. However, I do know that time has no meaning when you're dead. :P

I like the idea of the thread but you went about it the wrong way, the question you asked could have been a lot better. eg. isn't it arrogant that you pray to god despite the fact there are people dying of starvation and diseases and god doesn't help them. Always makes me laugh when people pray for something which is practically meaningless in comparison to people who are REALLY in need, then they have the arrogance to say (if it did work out) that it was God helping them. Brainkiller05

Perhaps God helps as many of those who starve as he does those who do not? There are many stories of people who've suffered immensely in their childhood, from starvation, homelessness, war, poverty, ect, and who are chosen to attend colleges in the United States and abroad. Is this God's will? It depends upon your beliefs, but some who suffer, reap the fruits of their suffering later.