Thank you - I was aiming for the maximum heinous evil that I could fit into one post.



Oh yes you will...*



Yes they are - well spotted.



*See

How about actually enjoying the life that you have - rather than trudging along, hoping that there's something better waiting for you in an afterlife? There you go see - the power and control of religion, forcing you to think and behave in a certain way, based on a promise that you're earning something that doesn't exist, in a place that doesn't exist, promised to you by something that doesn't exist. It's a cult and if your twisted view of the world is any indication, it's not doing you any good.

Excuse me but my life is very enjoyable, the perceivement breakdown you seem to suffer from is blindingly obvious. You don't know me or my life. What a weird comment. Also my Christian faith is not contolling, twisted, or a Cult. where on Earth are you downloading this disimformation from. The meditation spirituality side of my faith brings a collective surplus of positive fulfillment which is doing me more than good thanks. To be honest this is indicative Atheistic waffle you continue to puke up is quite the norm for Atheists with perceivement breakdowns.

Like i said to thebutcher to no reply. Love is proof of God. In your big bang worldly Religion your Children cannot be blessings which is a terrible problem for any parent to acknowledge.

So please enlighten me how love evolves from rock. I'm dying to know. I've heard the saying Love on the rocks, but never Love evolved from rocks. How ridiculous.

One thing I can't get my head around, is why would God create the blind mole rat? Was God doing some doodles for a laugh and this one slipped through into production?

And yet it compels you to see a centuries-spanning, worldwide conspiracy in absolutely every aspect of life; it has you wearing a tinfoil hat and perceiving skulduggery in all of the events that happen in the world; and it seems to have convinced you that modern technology is all one big CGI trick, designed to do only you know what - and all of this is a carefully orchestrated, deliberate attempt to stop more people believing in god? If that is your version of a collective surplus of positive fulfilment, you can keep it.

Your point about children evades me - and I would very much like to respond to your love on the rocks question, but I haven't a bloody clue what you're on about.

Evasive reply with typical playground waffle. knew you could not comprehend. Alas there is no point throwing pearls to the swine. You sound very Butcheresque by the way. How can you say that God does not exist, when you don't have any concrete idea of what God is or could be. This is what gets me about Atheists in that they have no requirement of ethics or morality and so they can view that a lie is not a lie because they do not believe in God. Religious people will make a stand, but we have to chase down the Atheist just to try to get them to admit their own self identity. Are the Atheist afraid of their own beliefs, it looks that way with them flexing their vexed tongues in every postings they make its a common satanic trend. Its pleasing and funny to see that your whole foundations of your argument is based on a Stanley Kubrik film-set. HaHaHa
.

You got so excited about my vexed satanic tongue Stan, that you forgot to switch identities...

I have a very well developed sense of ethics and morality thanks - and I managed that without reference to a work of fiction written 2,600 years ago to instruct me. Do you need religion to help you avoid murdering and raping - or do you just know that it's wrong?

Riddle me this Stanley - how was human life created and how long have we been here?

Hello Butcher,You're very wrong with your assumptions just like your perceptions on life. Please divulge in how love evolved from Rocks.

[iWhat a shame. A poor lost soul what's been deceived by the very system he advocates. The atheists are just another tool of the occultists If you look at who the creators of the modern scientific method were for example Francis Bacon, the 'father of empiricism', they were all Occultists Bacon for example was a Rosicrucian. Isaac newton was an alchemist. These guys formed the 'invisible college' which was full of freemasons and Rosicrucians =#FF0000They don't really believe that there is nothing beyond matter, they're just selling YOU that idea[/i
[i
They're kabbalists who believe that the so called 'material' world is an emanation from higher dimensions and a realm of infinate possibility.Ultimately the outer is also the inner. So why teach everyone the pre-eminance of matter? because it roots everyone in the left brain and makes them easy to control as they are only consciously aware of half of their essential existence.

Organised mainstream religion does the same thing...it denies the unconscious mind. The 'devil' is the animal nature within us that the Christian church sought to deny The Christian church denied matter and made sex a dirty thing, whilst 'Communists' denied spirit and said there is nothing beyond matter thereby diminishing our existence

Ultimately both imbalances are sold to us by the same Occult network because by providing contradictory positions they create a state of cognitive dissonance by which we are ultimately rendered confused and without direction. Steer well clear of mainstream Religion and Atheist Big Bang narratives and focus on the solemn words of Christ to avoid the hypnosis. is my advice..[/i

Here is your basic mistake. Newton did many things but his well-known scientific theories have stood the test of time and the rigorous examination of all subsequent scientists who have tested them. He will also have had, as all people do, views on a million different things and been involved in a thousand other activities. Maybe he kicked cats. Or pushed old ladies over. It isn't relevant, the theories were put up for examination, were tested and were passed. In coming up with them, Newton shed unprecedented light on key scientific areas.

If he also danced naked at dead of night before statues of Satan while waving his todger and singing Justin Bieber songs, what is the relevance? His theories were tested and examined just the same as if he'd been a monk or Buddhist, who comes up with them isn't the point.

Totally swerved both of my questions - although you did remember to switch identities this time.

Also, who in the world "teaches the pre-eminence of matter", whatever that may be?

As scientists readily accept and agree that the Universe is almost entirely made up of something which we have no idea what it is, (temporarily labelled "dark energy" and "dark matter" for ease of reference) how can such a weird claim be made? If anything is "pre-eminent" then whatever dark energy and dark matter really are would emphatically be it.

At the smallest scales, no particle has been found that could be made of "matter" in the sense of "here is a tiny bit of solid stuff and this is ultimately what everything is built from". Maybe it never will be, our technology for finding ever smaller building blocks (arrange an ultraviolent collision and try to work out what the bits are) whilst exceedingly brilliant, also does lack a certain element of finesse. Maybe ultimately everything there is, is just energy fields. Certainly in a very real sense, you an I are, since like all humans we are 99.999999whatever% empty space, so in a sense, just an illusion, a swarm of unconnected quanta of energy. But it's all we have, and we can only work with what we have. which ends up creating what we perceive as our reality - when we are awake, at least. Whatever that is!

Many scientists are open to the ideas of other universes, a multiverse, branes etc and these are not beliefs, they are a variety of theories that are put out there to be considered, peer-reviewed and tested. Also I've seen a few mentions of "something out of nothing" creep in of late. I don't think you'd find many in the scientific community nowadays who would tend to the theory that the Big Bang came from "nothing", or that there was no "before" the Big Bang. But, of course there are at least for now limits to how far back in time we can physically reach, and it is hard to see how we might ever have a means to "see" before the Big Bang. Nevertheless scientists will, in time honoured fashion, ponder these issues and maybe some day some new brilliant mind will come up with the next step to see further.

Speaking of satellites, the decommissioning of a GPS satellite (SVN23), which was taken out of service in the evening of 26 January, led to difficulties for DAB listeners receiving digital radio signals.

[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35463347Article explaining the background[/url

Those with DAB radios who do not believe in the existence of satellites were presumably unaffected

[u[iMore Plagiarism. Youtube Again You're comedy Gold. FA.[/i[/u

Your dish points to the nearest tower...not to the sky..no difference between a TV aerial and a dish...every Skydish on Earth points to a ground based signal. Always has and still does.....they never point to the sky. No Flyby's needed.

Stan, you are L[size=200YING[/size again. You know, that thing where you deliberately do not tell the truth?

Is this trait a new deliberate ploy, or have you completely lost the plot?

Stan, that is a very poor troll indeed. 0/10

[iTalking of Satellites I'm now going to expose the Satellite myth and prove Sky TV works just like Freeview. Here is a typical mast. With regards to Sky TV being analogue transmitted here is the proof that nails Satellite TV to the coffin.[/i

[iAs you can see Analogue signals are not obsolete. Your freeview box or Sky box transforms the analogue signal to Digital. Now i'm not saying Sky and Freeview carry the same analogue band. They both receive different frequency bands. Here is another piece of evidence Satellite signals are Analogue [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogue_television_in_the_United_KingdomSee Here[/url
Satellites don't exist. Now you show me true authentic photo evidence of your working satellite.I await more CGI Ad Hominem verbal Diarrhea.[/i

Haha.

Stan. Do you even read the links you send? Try reading it again. Analogue and digital are just different delivery methods. Satellite tv used to be analogue (Maybe still is in some parts of the world, I don't know) but they switched to digital because digital is less prone to interference. I'm not sure what the signal type has to do with proving satellites don't exist.

I worked in the military for quite a few years in Intelligence, specifically Imagery-based intel. Stuff from satellite, aircraft, that kind of stuff. How do you suppose those precision weapons, operations planning, encrypted communications, modern avionic systems etc etc work without satellites? I presume the satellite imagery I used to see regularly was just fake?

Get a grip of yourself, Stan.

[iFirstly. We're talking SKY TV. Nothing has ever changed signal wise. The analogue signal recieved through your dish is digitalized through the Skybox. That is simply how it works. Then Sky dial into your broadband and supply the varied package.

Secondly. So called Satellite imagery is through high altitude Drones. Why do the military use drones if Satellites are up there. Durrh. All other communications are Ground based. There's 18 x platforms of ground based technology that can be used singular or entwined. Theres nothing you could tell me about Ground Based Triangulated technology Mr Infantry man.[/iy. Simples.

Great! So, can you explain to me how come a satellite phone will work at the North Pole, then? Or in the middle of the Sahara? Or the Amazon rainforest? Or the middle of the Pacific? Or any other utterly remote place on the globe?

It was phoneline. Durrh.

Military drones are unmanned aircraft that do the very same jobs as normal military aircraft, and that my crazy friend, is all fact from someone who worked with them. Me. The reason we use drones in some instances should be fairly obvious. To do with sensitivity of where they operate and/or the danger posed to human pilots doing the same job. Satellite imagery is from satellites. Not drones. Again, an actual fact for you. To even suggest that UAV's provide coverage of the entire Earth with satellite imagery shows three things.

1. A massive gap in your knowledge, research, and critical thinking.
2. You have to be monumentally stupid or lazy for this to happen by accident.
3. You're being deliberately ignorant.

I don't think you're stupid. I do think your research is lazy and sloppy. But your biggest problem is deliberate ignorance.

By the way, there's nothing you can tell me about aerial and satellite based imagery in the military Mr Armchair liar.

Your Gps will triangulate in most baron places through new tesla radio technology. Look it up. Its quite fascinating.

[iSatellites are more secretive then Drones for reconnaissance. So why use drones. I understand the use of drones instead of manned planes but surely if satellites existed they would be the perfect reconnaissance tool than drones. Seems like i'm talking to drones Mr indoctrinated Infantry man.[/i