User Controls
Posts by Obbe
-
2015-09-19 at 10:18 PM UTC in Morality and LawDo laws that enforce moral beliefs serve any significant purpose in modern times? Please explain your opinion.
-
2015-09-19 at 9:56 PM UTC in Freedom or Security
Good, because leftists are generally terrible people. I make a grudging exception for Lanny.
Lanny remindes me of tthis:
-
2015-09-19 at 9:38 PM UTC in Freedom or Security
well, a lot of leftists tend to think that they know more than the average person, and it is a very leftist thing to have a username exhorting the reader to 'open their mind', as if you were absolutely sure that their minds were closed before, and assuming that you have either the authority to command them to open their minds, or that your mind is much more open than theirs, or other such leftist chicanery.
you can see where I may have been mistaken in my assumptions
I just thought it was hilarious when I picked it, for obvious reasons. It also reminds me to be more open minded.
But I don't think of myself as "leftist". -
2015-09-19 at 9:14 PM UTC in Freedom or Security
just a snap judgement I made from your username, and the post above referencing being paranoid about burglary
a lot of anti-gun people like to accuse gun owners of being overly paranoid, and I just thought I caught a whiff of that stench.
He claimed to be as free as he wants to be. I challenged that by suggesting he isn't as free as he wants to be because he worries about burglary.
How do you judge my username? -
2015-09-19 at 8:23 PM UTC in Freedom or Security
Let me take a wild guess here and say that 'open your mind' is extremely anti-gun
AActually I'm pro gun/2nd amendment. Why you assume that? -
2015-09-19 at 1:52 PM UTC in Ideas for homebrew wines?I've been drinking some homemade crabapple liquor. It's delicious.
-
2015-09-19 at 1:28 PM UTC in Freedom or Security
I'm as free as I want to be, your just scared to be free like me.
Now for security I have a shotgun and a home security system.
After my house got robbed a few years ago I went for the full monty,alarm,video,all networked into my phone.My job is just 1.3 miles down the street.I can be home in no time.
nobody is as free as they want to be.
WWouldn't you feel more free if you weren't paranoid about burglary? -
2015-09-18 at 10:36 PM UTC in Freedom or SecuritySome would say true freedom and security are just ideas, and while we try to convince ourselves otherwise, you can never actually be truly free or truly safe.
-
2015-09-18 at 4:48 PM UTC in New fonts
The spirit of Totse will live on; whether you acknowledge it or not is entirely irrelevant.
It lives on in the people who were a part of it and apply what they learned there to their lives.
It doesn't live on in this place though. Besides the theme. This place is not so much about information and knowledge as it is about circle jerking. -
2015-09-17 at 3:57 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?I watched Interstellar the other day. Pretty cool shot.
-
2015-09-17 at 3:18 PM UTC in This isnt how is was supposed to beThis is exactly how it is supposed to be. If it was supposed to be a different way it would have been different. But it isn't because this is the only way it could have ever been. You were always meant to be a dumb failure who ruined his life.
-
2015-09-17 at 3:20 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?Well apparently time is affected by black holes:
Gravitational time dilation is a form of time dilation, an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured byobservers situated at varying distances from a gravitating mass. The stronger thegravitational potential (the closer the clock is to the source of gravitation), the slower time passes.
This has been demonstrated by noting thatatomic clocks at differing altitudes (and thus different gravitational potential) will eventually show different times.
Are you saying time and light must have mass to be affected by black holes? Maybe not.
-
2015-09-16 at 11:52 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Bingo, that is the only thing which is real. All else is an illusion.
I don't think I can agree with you. First, I would have to ask you what does it mean to be real? What does it mean to exist?
What is an observer with nothing to observe? Do you believe an inside can exist without an outside?
I don't understand how I could possibly exist without some sort of universe or reality to exist in.
-
2015-09-16 at 11:26 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Yes, all that we know is dependent on consciousness or sentience.
Then, by "that logic", everything you know is subjective. It doesn't mean that nothing exists. At the very least your consciousness/sentience exists. -
2015-09-16 at 10:11 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
By that logic nothing exists.
Not necessarily. -
2015-09-16 at 3:40 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?Here is another persons opinion:
The phenomena which we call a rainbow, a colored arch formed in the sky under certain circumstances is not an objective phenomena.
Color is a phenomena of the mind. The phenomenon which we call Light is a very thin range of frequencies in the Electromagnetic Spectrum, and these range of frequencies can oscillate differently, our brain is capable of identifying between these changes in oscillation, and that mental differentiation of said oscillations is what we experience as color.
So since the colored arch is not independent of consciousness or sentience, it is not objective. The phenomenon which becomes the rainbow is, but not the phenomenon of the rainbow itself (the colored arch). -
2015-09-16 at 12:48 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Rainbows are light and light has mass.
Better call Wikipedia then. The people need truth! This is a very important one! -
2015-09-16 at 11:46 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?From wikipedia:
A rainbow is not located at a specific distance from the observer, but comes from an optical illusion caused by any water droplets viewed from a certain angle relative to a light source. Thus, a rainbow is not an object and cannot be physically approached. Indeed, it is impossible for an observer to see a rainbow from water droplets at any angle other than the customary one of 42 degrees from the direction opposite the light source. Even if an observer sees another observer who seems "under" or "at the end of" a rainbow, the second observer will see a different rainbow—farther off—at the same angle as seen by the first observer. -
2015-09-16 at 2:28 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
>implying im mad just because I use vulgar language and call you names
How new to the internet are you?
I take that back. You were not mad. You're just a dumb cunt.
-
2015-09-16 at 12:23 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
Oh your are trolling. I didnt think anyone could actually be this retarded.
Well, you are retarded enough to actually get mad during a semantic debate on the nature of rainbows, and you clearly have poor athletic abilities since you were obviously confused about the difference between the optical illusion of a gigantic colourful arches in the sky and the very real phenomena that create these illusions.
So there's that.
