I never understood why everyone goes googoogaagaa over this question. Everything that is able to make a sound makes a sound. If didn't have ears the sound would still be there regardless of... I think the poeple who say it dosen't make a sound are right wing and the people who say it does are left wing.St_Stu

Stupidest thing i've heard in a long time, even more foolish than the question.

This particularone has little philosophical value, other than teaching the mind set to be in for philosophy

You didn't answer my question though. If a tree falls and no one hears it, then the only way it wouldn't have made a sound is if the laws of physics changed and sound didn't propogate. It doesn't depend on anyone being their to hear it and verify it, since the laws of physics make it happen. Unless someone could prove that the laws of physics changed, then it must have made a sound. I don't get why this is a philosophical question.

Buffalo_Soulja

The laws of physics don't really have much to do with this.

Sound is our brains interpretation of the oscillating waves of particles caused by motion so if no one is around to interpret the oscillations then it doesnt really become sound.

I think its a foolish question as well but its not quite so black and white as it appears

I don't really think much of it. Every living thing dies eventually, and probably just because I've wondered about it in the past so much it doesn't bother me anymore. I believe in reincarnation after death...kornholio360

The worlds population has doubled in the last 50 years so where have all the new souls come from? I'm curious to know what people who believe in reincarnation think of this. If you believe in it you have to accept that you have only a 1 in 6 chance of actually being anything more than a first round human

THis is just ******** disgusting. If theres one thing I hate more than torture and gang beatings, its animal cruelty. Its just ******* sick, especially since its a 8 week old kitten that probably can't even defend its self. Plus the fact that the girls were laughing, while the poor kitten was basically screaming, sickens me to the most. This type of thing is worse than murder, as long as the person murdered wasn't tortured before death.

Torturing someone or an animal should be punished more heavily than murder. Murder, the person doesnt have to feel as much pain or agony as opposed to a person who is being tortured. Therefore torture of any type of animal and humans should be punished more heavily.

BEAN_LARD_MULCH

Torture is evil and utterly inhuman but it is not worse than murder. Killing someone ends their existence on earth, torture can be recovered from, death cannot

Well the bible seems to mention them... And well some skeletons have been found... if there real or not idk...Meh___Guy

Well there is some evidence found of a ancient nuclear explosion, and they found a tablet explaining how to make batteries, it may be fake though.Meh___Guy

What evidence? Where were these skeletons and tablet found?

[QUOTE="erc500"]

So your arguments have let you down and you have resorted to arguing semantics, you obviously understood what i was getting across but couldnt think of an appropriate response.

My point, just to clear it up incase any one didnt get it, was that the government shouldnt regulate whatpeople do when it doesnt harm others.

The "maybe" i added in was to indicate that taking cannabis may or may not be harmful to an individual not that it could be harmful to more than just the individual, sorry if that wasnt clear.

You havent seen any evidence that would change your mind? All that means is your ignoring evidence, being selective. There is no such thing as unbiased research, it is all funded by someone with an agenda. You have to exam each study and evaluate its merits. Most studies that are still creditable find no evidence of many of the harms that the government would have you believe.

You are never going to be convinced that cannabis should be legal, you have made your mind up.

Out of simple curiosity, have you ever tried it yourself?

LJS9502_basic

Actually...it was your argument that let you down. I can ONLY respond to what it is posted. Drug use is NOT a victimless crime anyway dude...so you're wrong on that count as well.

I've read the research from the medical community. I've yet to see them endorse widespread use of marijuana. It's appropriate in a few cases with a prescription. The medical community is the closest you'll get to unbiased. Not to say it's perfect...but close.

I never say anything is totally 100%...however, I have seen no compelling evidence to agree with you at this time. Don't tell me what I will or won't do...you don't know me at all.

In fact, I haven't argued either side of the equation. I haven't come out for legalization nor the status quo. I just point out the flaws I see in arguments...mostly those who jump on alcohol.

Perhaps.;)

Clearly you have not understand my point, i am not saying everyone should take drugs, what i am saying is that cannabis should be given the same status as aclcohol since it is a safer drug.

The only reasons there are victims at all due to use of drugs like cannabis is because they are illegal. We need to take the drugs out of the hands of dealers and regulate use by legalising it, as i have said before

[QUOTE="erc500"]

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

LJS9502_basic

Doesn't matter...the government is still telling you what YOU can do. You argument was that the government shouldn't be allowed to do so. Clean up your language and be more specific then.

Second...the maybe you added shows that perhaps there is a chance of harm to others.

I haven't seen any evidence yet that changes my mind about marijuana....if a report is biased it's definitely not strong. All the links provided in these topics are from pro use groups. That's not strong evidence.

Actually, the government doesn't spend that much simply on marijuana. The illegal drug business entails many more drugs so that argument is out....unless you are advocating legalizing hard drugs as well then there will be minimal effect on the so called drug wars costwise.

So your arguments have let you down and you have resorted to arguing semantics, you obviously understood what i was getting across but couldnt think of an appropriate response.

My point, just to clear it up incase any one didnt get it, was that the government shouldnt regulate whatpeople do when it doesnt harm others.

The "maybe" i added in was to indicate that taking cannabis may or may not be harmful to an individual not that it could be harmful to more than just the individual, sorry if that wasnt clear.

You havent seen any evidence that would change your mind? All that means is your ignoring evidence, being selective. There is no such thing as unbiased research, it is all funded by someone with an agenda. You have to exam each study and evaluate its merits. Most studies that are still creditable find no evidence of many of the harms that the government would have you believe.

You are never going to be convinced that cannabis should be legal, you have made your mind up.

Out of simple curiosity, have you ever tried it yourself?

Actually...the report said...MAY reduce the chances. Not does. Inconclusive does not equal fact.

The government tells you many things about how to live your life. No robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assualt, murder...etc.

At the current time there is differing opinion on marijuana. Stating the objectives of a pro use group, however, is simply using biased arguments.

LJS9502_basic

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government