User Controls
Posts by -SpectraL
-
2015-11-07 at 12:37 PM UTC in Anyway, IDK if ya'll have heard or care but...Baphomet mod. Murdered by the feds in his own home.
https://twitter.com/SpookyRapist/status/657990889810350081 -
2015-11-07 at 4:51 AM UTC in Never ever make a mission statement
Bottom line is everyone except you is absolutely fine with that.
And you don't speak for the masses, so there, Mr. Smartypants.
-
2015-11-07 at 3:27 AM UTC in Never ever make a mission statementBottom line is Lanny is just too lethargic to bother making this place into anything but a large scribble pad. It may be an unpopular opinion, but it is the truth.
-
2015-11-07 at 1:25 AM UTC in Never ever make a mission statement
Maybe some of us enjoy this small community for the enjoyable shitposting and the rare decent thread. Maybe we arent defeatists but rather content with what we have. Maybe we never want to get anywhere because we are happy where we are.
You are the only one here clinging to the totse vision and being negative. We dont care to be as big as Totse. We dont want to be like Totse. We simply want to be we. Totse is gone dude, get the fuck over it.
Just because we don't share your vision does not make us "lay-down naysayers". Look at the tech section, its a wealth of people doing and working and assisting eachother. There are threads with great conversation. The thing is you tend to be the one who has no idea what you are talking about. You asserted human beings arent made of matter and energy and that you could "hack someones" brain.
You are fucking stupid. Thats the truth.
You don't scare me.
-
2015-11-06 at 5:22 PM UTC in Never ever make a mission statementThe only real issue here is you guys are like dogs that just roll over in the road with your tails between your legs. You're defeatists. You never get anywhere because you never try. Negative this and negative that. Of course any place could be as big as Totse was, but it takes people who actually have vision, not a bunch of lay-down naysayers who have no clue what they are talking about. Sorry the truth hurts. Actually, I'm not sorry.
-
2015-11-06 at 3:03 PM UTC in Does anyone here miss iron johns post?
I've spoke to iron john and he says he's not coming back here.
Iron John has been known to lie before.
-
2015-11-06 at 3:01 PM UTC in Never ever make a mission statement
lel because mission statments are what drives people to a site amirite? You are a fucking moron spectral.
If you don't have a mission statement, it's basically just a blog. There are literally billions of blogs out there already. It ain't rocket science, bub.
-
2015-11-06 at 2:59 PM UTC in Make someone a ModMake Psycho or TheDarkRodent a super mod and watch them clean the place out and turn it into a ghost town in six months or less.
-
2015-11-06 at 2:54 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?The technology exists. There are those out there who have it, those who have not yet revealed themselves fully. It's only because we don't have the technology that we think it is impossible, when in fact, anything and everything is possible. Through a higher understanding of what is possible, everything becomes possible. This is why their languages were deliberately confused during the building of the Tower of Babel. If human understanding had developed too quickly, none of us would have survived. Even today, we find technology unraveling the deepest mysteries of science, much of it refuting previous understandings, shocking us profoundly at turn after turn. The truth of it all is too overwhelming for us to fully grasp at this point in our development, and may well be far too dangerous for us to know without competent guidance.
-
2015-11-06 at 3:55 AM UTC in Does anyone here miss iron johns post?So, do you guys want the cameo appearance, or the full-fledged, glorious return, or would you rather just stick with tDR?
-
2015-11-05 at 11:43 PM UTC in Does anyone here miss iron johns post?No.
-
2015-11-05 at 11:41 PM UTC in Never ever make a mission statement
Why don't you make it less than 14?
tl/dr
-
2015-11-05 at 11:20 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?Let's put it this way. If I could connect directly into your brain pathways with a computer and a program designed to manipulate it, I could convince you that you are somewhere else, feeling the wind against your face, out at sea, on a ship, smelling the salt air, rocking with the waves. I could make you bump your knee on the mizzenmast, and you would feel the pain, because I simulated the pain in the program and sent the necessary data through your brain pathways, which, in turn, forwarded that data it to your nerves, to make you to "feel" the pain, sent the necessary data to your eyes to make you see the mizzenmast and your knee colliding. You would fully believe you were on a ship at sea bumping your knee and reeling with pain, because you see it and feel it, because that's what I made your brain believe when I spoofed and altered the data from the nerves going into it. And throughout, you are not actually on a ship. You are not actually at sea. You are not really feeling pain at all, but at the exact same time, you are.
Now let's say I tapped into the brain which was the brain of the version of you on the ship, which I had created with my program. After all, to the "you" on the ship, you are real, and you felt that pain, and you really did feel and see the mizzenmast hit it, because your brain, the one NOT on the ship, told you it was so, and it was as if it was the brain on the ship was the real one. And because you fully believe the brain on the ship is the real one, because of my hacking, I could hack into that one as well and make THAT brain believe it was on the top of a mountain, looking down, instead of on the ship. And that imaginary brain would actually think it was on top of the mountain, and not on the ship at all. I could make that third brain see and feel and touch and smell, in such a way that it wouldn't be able to tell it was all just an illusion.
But what is the relationship between the second and third brain? Both are not really real, and yet the second brain can affect the "reality" of the third brain. How can something that is not real affect something else which is not real? And remember, it is the first brain which set off the chain of perceptions, but we are focusing on the results of the third brain in relation to the second hacked brain, which was hacked by the first, which was also itself hacked. How can the second and third brain feel like they are the "real" ones when they are not even real? Why does the first brain get to be the "real" one, when the others feel exactly the same, that they are the "real" ones? "Reality" is like layers. Layers and layers and layers of clever illusions. And it all comes from a single source, which is the Hacker himself and his programming. The only thing we and everything else really are is clever programming. We don't really exist as matter and energy, but we're more like sound, wavelengths, and the waveforms are the programming which make up our reality as we know it. Does sound have particles? Does sound have energy it of itself? No. And yet it can exert "real" force. It is "real" in that it can affect its surroundings. All of reality is like sound waves, like music, you could say. All of reality as we know it is like a song being sung, and we're right smack inside that music. -
2015-11-04 at 9:16 PM UTC in Never ever make a mission statementThat works... if you like less than 15 people on the site until it closes.
-
2015-11-04 at 9:15 PM UTC in Notifications Piling Up?You're both cowards of the lowest quality.
-
2015-11-04 at 9:13 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
You know what? I'm not even going to stoop to the level of asking how you propose to know this because I have such unshakable certainty that your answer would be fucking moronic that posing the question would do nothing but give stage to your lunacy.
There used to be a day when you'd at least bite.
-
2015-11-03 at 10:27 PM UTC in Notifications Piling Up?
Indeed.
That's pretty funny, coming from a guy who needed to cower behind a staff control panel and ban anything which upset him personally.
-
2015-11-03 at 8:30 PM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?
That's retarded, the best you could do is argue for Humean skepticism about an external world (although Moore's proof makes a strong argument to the contrary), if you don't have reliable access to the external world then you fundamentally can not make statements about how it is or isn't, specifically you can not say "the external world doesn't exist" based merely on a lack of reliable direct perception of it.
You have built a logical strawman. The illusion of "existence" as we know it does not preclude a lack of reliable access to it, "it" being nothing more than the product of our own perceptions. We see it, we hear it, we feel it, we smell it and we measure it. We have full access to it. But that doesn't directly translate to any of it not being just a vast virtual array for our own entertainment and amusement. Nothing is really there. It is only what we and others perceive that is "real" which make it "real". Neurons firing in the brain, electrical pathways in the nerves sending ones and zeros, chemical solutions being formulated in the body, and even all of that is just a product of its own creation. -
2015-11-02 at 7:41 AM UTC in WWYD if you heard knocking on one of your windows in the middle of the night?You'd need a white magic witch doctor for that.
-
2015-11-02 at 5:09 AM UTC in Do rainbows exist objectively?All of reality, including color, is nothing more than just perspective. None of it is really there, it's just perceived as being there by our brains, our nerves, or senses, all of which are designed in a similar fashion. Even our own bodies are not really there. It's just that we feel and sense, and so we think we exist, but we really don't. We, and everything in the cosmos, is simply a perception.
