Knuckles
Lives under a bridge
Primates are certainly more coherent than some......Unfortunately some people evolved BACKWARDS from the monkeys. I wonder who that includes spermie?
Primates are certainly more coherent than some......Unfortunately some people evolved BACKWARDS from the monkeys. I wonder who that includes spermie?
Tough question I guess - with a little bit of personal preference thrown in. Personally I would recommend seeing it in IMAX at least once while it's showing, as I'll explain below. Pls ignore if you're not really 'into' movies as such as it'll probably all sound like a big wank - in which case the TLR; version: I'd def see it in a cinema at least once, otherwise yeah, a good plasma/LCD/DLP Projector with a proper 5.1 or more channel sound system will be better than not seeing it at all. A handicam job would suck though - it deserves 1080p BluRay at the very least.I have heard about the movie, is it a movie that has to be watched in a theatre to appreciate, or will a decent sized plasma be good to watch it?
Bermshot is most likely still a primate...an often incoherent primate...but a primate nonetheless. Unless I'm in the wrong movie and he's a Replicant.Primates are certainly more coherent than some......
I talked science, albeit a anti. Nor did I talk Hollywood. The expectation of me "likely" being base and traveling in mean streets of consciousness appeares to be correct, Oh Yeah!Bermshot is most likely still a primate...an often incoherent primate...but a primate nonetheless. Unless I'm in the wrong movie and he's a Replicant.
But if they used "the science" to confirm it, then who do we believe?!We have Gobekli Tepe, confirmed 'at least' 10.000BC......
can you verify what this photo is, aside from a diver looking at some underwater blocks? where are your references? what even is *this*? and what is the 'but nothing'?How does dribbling academia explain this? (And it's but nothing compared.)
View attachment 302317
well, see above, I won't write it out again. They look like blocks of concrete. prove to us that they are something actually worth investigating.Of course that dog Aweiss (? Egyptian "historian") won't go near this.
View attachment 302318
Is this not science? Nay, do these enigmas not warrant proper scientific investigation? If ye say no, Lo the woman that is denied truth.
um, yep. it's a pretty picture. If you made that with shit balls, it's a fucking amazing bit of art. But science? where?Oh shit balls!
View attachment 302319
I was curious myself ... love underwater shit like this. A quick google image search reveals it is indeed an underwater pyramid apparently found only late last year near the Azores. Precisely 5 minutes of googling later and I can only mostly find conspiracy theories about it's existence, which is itself interesting. My guess is it's just bad planning on behalf of the builders.can you verify what this photo is, aside from a diver looking at some underwater blocks? where are your references? what even is *this*? and what is the 'but nothing'?
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_of_the_Pregnant_Womanwell, see above, I won't write it out again. They look like blocks of concrete. prove to us that they are something actually worth investigating.
Apparently called 'Shi Cheng'. Another underwater city find that's sposed to be like super old. As with the first one ... might do a bit of reading myself. Try and sort the nutter crap out from anything actual scientific folk are doing.um, yep. it's a pretty picture. If you made that with shit balls, it's a fucking amazing bit of art. But science? where?
Young Earth creationism has a surprisingly large swathe of misguided folk (mostly Christians & Jews) who genuinely believe Earth, and indeed the Universe, to be roughly this old. They way I understand it, someone literally tried to match everything in the bible to time periods and came up with this magic number (or range). I love their response to dinosaurs - well known to have existed tens of thousands of years prior. I've read a few: "Fossils are hoaxes or secular lies from the devil himself" or... "The fossils were placed by god to test our strength of will" ... or something like that. Oh ... sorry. I lower-cased god. Crap ... did it again.re: civilisation, where do we 'get taught' that civilisation began magically 8000 years ago?
The azores, a volcanic island chain near the junction of three tectonic plates. I see no reason why things should stay above water permanently. If it is even actually a pyramid...I can help you out here:
...indeed an underwater pyramid apparently found only late last year near the Azores.
...
"Reckon it'll be alright here on this island?"
"Shit yea brah, call in the slaves"
Ah that. The BFS.Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_of_the_Pregnant_Woman
Nothing too exciting. Big fucking stone. The SciFi nerd in me likes that it's called a Monolith. Doubt it'll be full of stars though.
1300 years old, Han dynasty, flooded by a hydrolectric dam in 1959. nothing to see here unless you're a recreational diver.Apparently called 'Shi Cheng'. Another underwater city find that's sposed to be like super old. As with the first one ... might do a bit of reading myself. Try and sort the nutter crap out from anything actual scientific folk are doing.
fixed that for youI love their response to dinosaurs - well known to have existed tens of millions of years prior.
Ta. I blame sleep depravation for getting my factors of 10 incorrect.fixed that for you
So you discredit Wikipedia on the basis that it's bullshit, yet source drivel from the wiki of a church cult that has taken (then modified) most of their articles from wikipedia in the first place?Good on the self investigation nuke.
OK, so like many other things, the history books are not being re-written for what has and is being discovered.
As this Is the case whether you adhere to it or not, you have no choice but to do your own research, as nuke stated, one must cut through the BS, (wikipedia?)
Of course you Must tow the party line as a academic, it is your job. Let's be clear here, self interest is at stake, to present even blatant evidence against the current curriculum will bring ruin. And if you are too persistent, death.
What is funny is whilst I try to write, I'm bombed by bigger scumbags than you propose to be.So you discredit Wikipedia on the basis that it's bullshit, yet source drivel from the wiki of a church cult that has taken (then modified) most of their articles from wikipedia in the first place?
Also, are you saying that if a scholar proposes new research that doesn't support the current curriculum, they'll eventually be killed? Is there any evidence of this claim?
I don't know what's funnier...?
Sorry, nothing to do with me - I'm not proposing to be anything. You've labelled me as a scumbag because I pointed out that your argument (Wikipedia being BS), clashes with the fact that the site you referenced copied (mostly) the same Wikipedia article. Not that I try and pass off Wikipedia as a highly credible source - all my assignments ask for peer reviewed work.What is funny is whilst I try to write, I'm bombed by bigger scumbags than you propose to be.
Yes, you put up a belief that they were around 100,000years before children of the sun. I don't deny indigenous belief - I don't think I can? But I don't believe in most indigenous belief - For instance, I don't believe that a great rainbow serpent created all the rivers and valleys in Australia...First, I put up a belief from the Ainu, if you choose to discredit that source fine, the source isn't important, use Wiki if it pleases you. The point was 'Ainu belief,' (do you deny indigenous belief?) or are you still on attack?
Ok so the die reference was just being melodramatic - that's fine by me. I understand now that you are saying that if there is a groundbreaking revelation, it will be hushed up and you'll hear no more about it from academics that are outside the 'network'. A conspiracy, if you will?2nd: I said a academic that produces evidence -strong- that opposes current curriculum will by necessity find themselves quickly as an outcast. If by their evidence and self belief they attempt to present knowledge outside the "network," and it is too important for the mundane, or if the mundane find out, you will "die."
I don't really know how to respond to that? I'm not a scientist (yet), but I'll keep my eyes and ears open!I will give you nothing on the scientists that have "died" for truth. If you are one, you know what to do.
I call troll. Or stoner. Or 15 year old. Or 15 year old stoner troll... But here, have some bait. Scientists spend all their time finding evidence (real, actual evidence as opposed to photoshopped internet pictures) which alters the way we view the world. And then they spend a metric fucktonne of time making sure that the evidence is actual, real evidence. Well, that's how it's supposed to work anyways. I'm trying to finish a PhD right now, and have been involved in publishing a bunch of stuff. Some of it is new, some of it is incremental, all of it changes ever so slightly how our physical world is viewed.What is funny is whilst I try to write, I'm bombed by bigger scumbags than you propose to be.
First, I put up a belief from the Ainu, if you choose to discredit that source fine, the source isn't important, use Wiki if it pleases you. The point was 'Ainu belief,' (do you deny indigenous belief?) or are you still on attack?
2nd: I said a academic that produces evidence -strong- that opposes current curriculum will by necessity find themselves quickly as an outcast. If by their evidence and self belief they attempt to present knowledge outside the "network," and it is too important for the mundane, or if the mundane find out, you will "die."
I will give you nothing on the scientists that have "died" for truth. If you are one, you know what to do.
No sorry mate, can't do that.Fuck of back to b bermshot.