jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 20, 2008 12:06PM

We will know for sure if he is killed and rises from the dead afterwards. Wonder when the first part of this will happen?

Lexx Report This Comment
Date: October 20, 2008 02:28PM

so ADCBeast is from the sea, and all this time we've been wondering who he really is...it's been Obama?

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 20, 2008 06:00PM

To put any credence in the concept, 1st things 1st, ya gotta believe in religon, so .... I'm out on this one, even if it does involve our very own beastie boy

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 11:44AM

If you don't believe in religion and you see someone who is clearly dead and comes back from the dead days later, how would you explain that? If it happens in this day and age would you follow that person?

woberto Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 12:43PM

Zeitgeist, download it free or donate the $5 at [www.zeitgeistmovie.com[]

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 03:08PM

JG, since it's never verifiably occured in recorded history, it's hard to say. If this statement seems odd, do a simple search to see what type of historical records you can find of Christ outside the ones found in the bible. Seems strange that an individual so great and miraculous by biblical accounts seems to have had no impact historically, nor are historians even convinced he ever lived at all in that time. As Lewis Carols Alice was quoted to have said "Curiouser and curiouser."

Would I follow them? Only if I believed in the same things they did. This is afterall the most relevant in my thoughts in what I pursue anyway. Never been much for the follower/sheep mentality or mindset

BTW, like woberto mentioned, check out Zeitgeist, though I can't say I agree with everything in it there sure is a lot of interesing ideas presented within that gives one pause for thought along those lines. And, thinking is a seemingly lost art these days, but a very good thing and something the world as a whole would greatly benefit from if more of it were done, especially in a less than linear fashion

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 04:32PM

in my eyes people who willingly brainwash themselves into believing a book written years ago by who knows who is not only dangerous to himself but more importantly others. a perfect example is the lack of separation of church and state. another would be the "platforms" of republicans and democrats (abortion and right to life). the first thing the us does in another country is to try and convert the people to Catholicism, Christianity, yada yada yada. "those people are heathens, it is our duty as religious thinkers to save them".?!?! what the fuck gives you the right to decide what is right and wrong?!?! your beliefs are founded on myth and legend, no factual evidence whatsoever!

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 04:34PM

and no the sky is clear with no evidence of lightning anywhere around me. so............

woberto Report This Comment
Date: October 21, 2008 10:42PM

I like things that challenge convention, it doesn't have to be 100% right but then it's not 100% wrong either. That's why I like that movie, it makes you think but it's not selling itself as 100% truth either.

shaDEz Report This Comment
Date: October 22, 2008 02:59AM

the question is no longer whether or not gods are real or not, as that has never been proven and in fact everything that has been proven by now contradicts the myths of that particular religion. The question now is what were the societies like back in the day these myths were being created... and why now are we seeing these blatant moves toward Christian fascism in our present time. Read this book some time, it is a perfect reflection of the societies back then in those ancient times and all of its underlying ideology coresponding to its social and production relations. And another thing worth noting; all of this technology and it is being used to promote this backwardedness... and how many people are "lost to the art of thinking". Why are so many of the few people that are thinking do so in a linear fashion???

z_^Az^zz
you need really strong eyes to read this size text... like pro_junior has



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22/10/2008 03:03AM by shaDEz.

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 22, 2008 11:22AM

There are many if us who believe in religion but do not believe in church and do not try to convince other to believe as we do.

Just keep in mind what I said about rising from the dead when it happens to Obama.

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 22, 2008 03:09PM

Come on now JG, if Obama were indeed the anti-Christ do you honestly think his death and subsequent resurrection would be known publicly, unless of course his death happened to occur in public, in which case it would more than likely simply be played off as a miraculous thing that he never died at all, so as not to arouse such suspicion ?

I mean really, that would be exactly the ammunition the whole Christian world would want to use against him, were it known, doncha think

BTW, the hoards of Satanists depicted in movies awaiting their masters rise to power is every bit as ficticious as the movies you find this stuff portrayed in, so where do you think such an army of followers/supporters is gonna spring forth from anyway?

A cuppla things I feel real sure of is that there are a helluva lot more Christians/Jews/Buddists/Muslims in the world than there are Satanists and that pretty much all of them would be the anti-Christs universal enemies. The second thing is that the very same black following Obama now has here in the US is itself largely Christian based in their faith and in the event he were to be viewed as the son of Satan they would immediately condemn him too

Holy shit, I can't believe I even devoted this much verbage discussing mythical characters and completely rediculous hypothetical scenarios. Those here with rational minds please excuse my transgressions into such depth regarding such a nonsensical set of evenets

talldarkandold57 Report This Comment
Date: October 22, 2008 08:09PM

“I see the effects of the wind, but I’ve never seen the wind...”
I see the effects of God, but I've never seen God.

I know there is wind, therefore I know there is a God.
None of this just happened, it was all created. If you believe in evolution, why haven't we seen anything evolve?
I can't remember the last time I saw a fish walk out of the ocean......hummm
Oh well then again I've never seen an atheist in a foxhole.

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 22, 2008 09:44PM

"None of this just happened, it was all created. If you believe in evolution, why haven't we seen anything evolve?
I can't remember the last time I saw a fish walk out of the ocean......hummm "

so you think evolution happens overnight? or in a single lifetime? maybe i should show you some fossil records



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22/10/2008 09:46PM by fossil_digger.

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 01:20AM

I know there is wind, therefore I know there is a God.

Hmm, seems your logic train hasn't left the station, nor is it likely to. Seems like somebody's obviously onboard and loudly blowin the horn, but it ain't goin anywhere.

Wind has a scientific explanation for being, which religon does not. Psychology will however offer many examples of WHY people hold beliefs in religon.

Try utilizing the brain you were born with and explore a bit on the topic of wind. What such an exploration will yield is how science can easily define the wind, measure its forces and even its reason for being, then try again to draw an analogy between a verifiable physical phenomenon and one based in myth. To say your analogy is weak and simple minded might seem mean spirited, but at least it's correct.

Science can and has defined and de-mystified many things in this world and outside of it that defy simplistic understanding. With that in mind how is it that it can not also demystify the concept of religon? Why is it that the tenets of all religon require suspension of natural and physical laws to believe in them? Why is it that when confronted with such things the response given by believers is that one "must have faith" to believe?

With the continuing dilution of the gene pool by those of lesser intellect, I'm sure you can find lots of people to take such a requirement in "faith" as reasonable ... just don't expect anything like that to arise from this side of the screen.

BTW, your "athiest in a foxhole" comment is fraught with exactly the same "hedging your bet" mentality that also leads people near death to embrace such otherwise illogical concepts, even some fellow athiests who have lived their lives totally outside the confines of religon.

That however is simply a response orchestrated by weak minded psyches who want so desparately to believe that in the event of their death there will be some great meaning attached to their earthly existence or something wonderful to go on to after their death. Try a bit of study in psychology on this topic, it's well documented and undertood there, and no "faith" in otherworldly powers will be required to understand it.

I've never been in a foxhole thankfully, and at this point in life, doubt I ever will, though I do know as do all humans who are born, that we all die. I can unequivocably state that I will die believing just as I do today that when I'm gone, the only thing that will happen is that I will cease to exist. To believe in anything else, with nothing but "faith" to go on, seems like absolute lunacy

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 11:00AM

I can't imagine that my life on this world means nothing more than just existing for a few years. There has to be a purpose to life which puts us above that of other animals. To go through life with only the purpose of surviving a few years is not enough. If there was no larger meaning to life then why should we live our lives following the moral path? If there is no larger meaning then why shouldn't you just take what you want out of this life regardless of who it belongs to? If there is nothing more to make our lives strive for than why do most of us respect moral living and not just do what ever we want without regard to others? Why do the laws of man respect moral living for the most part? If there is no higher being guiding us then why do we have any respect for anything?

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 02:18PM

I've had these and similar questions posed to me before, like :if you're an athiest, how can you have morals, and where are they based if you do?

For some unfathomable reason "people of faith" percieve that morals can only arise in others based on their faith, and hence, if one espouses no faith, they can not then have a moral base, which is total BS. In truth, each religon will bend or manipulate morality based upon their beliefs, with each religon then having it's own idividual concept of what is then moral. This then will often put each varying religon at odds with the morality espoused by another faith, and there my friend is where the root of all religous persecution/discrimination of differing faiths and subsequent misery begins in how members of differing faiths treat others.

It's really simple JG, we (many or most of us) live and act morally because it's benificial to ourselves and those around us in making life easier and more pleasant. Laws only exist as a protection against those in the world who choose not to respect the concepts of common sense and good manners in how to treat or interact with others.

There's an interesting movie called KPAX that has an interaction between the 2 main characters, an alien from KPAX and a psychiatrist where the alien is relating that on his planet there are no laws to which the psychiatrist then asks "If there are no laws, how do you determine right from wrong?". The response he gives is so simplistic, yet oh so real and direct, which is "Every living being knows right from wrong".

Most people will by nature reflect the morality (or lack of it) exhibited by their parents, or at least use these concepts as a basis to either agree or disagree with them once the individual reaches the point of formulating cognizant thoughts of their own. This concept is the basis for the idea we are all, at least initially, products of our environment, though we as thinking animals are also capable of making changes to ourselves, or to put it into another context, are free then to evolve socially and individually, regardless of what we were initially taught or shown earlier on.

I have a hard time grasping how a basis on a belief that we are to continue on in some other plane of existence once our physical bodys here cease to be supportable has any bearing upon how life ocurrs or how we interact with others while we're here. The feelings you stated about wanting to feel as if we have some greater purpose or meaning to our lives and that if that were not true, then why would we choose to act morally if not, to me misses the point of life totally.

Since most of us want to be happy, wouldn't it make sense that as a apart of that, we find happiness through doing things that make us happy? We love and care for others because it validates us individually as humans to do so, which brings us to the basis of most things which is that it's all really for self anyway, but that's another really long topic, so ....

I understand the psychological dynamic relevant to one wanting to feel as if we will carry on after our own death, but my thoughts are this is only a function of individual vanity, since conceding the idea that we only have what we have while we're alive is a seemingly cruel cosmic joke that's perpetrated upon us all, but my thoughts are that indeed, that's all there is.

I try in my godless way to live a life that makes me happy and in turn makes others around me happy because that feels good to me and because I believe that's the way we were meant to live, for ourselves and the betterment of our fellow humans. I know that even in my death, some of me will live on here in my children and their childrens children and so on and that the time I have shared with others here will also have impact on their lives in some way. Many things I have built, written, and even the thoughts I've shared with others will in some small way live on after I cease to exist here and that's plenty for me

talldarkandold57 Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 05:11PM

Atheist's thinking:
If God exists there would be convincing proofs of his existence. There are no convincing proofs of his existence. Therefore God does not exist.

Premise: If God exists there would be convincing proofs of his existence.
Response: This is not a logical necessity. To say that there would be convincing proofs of his existence is an unfounded statement. If God exists, he may or may not choose to provide sufficient proof for his existence.
The Bible teaches us that God works through people and history and that there is evidence for his existence. But, people dispose of the evidence due to the hardness of their hearts, i.e., their presuppositions that negate God's existence.

It may also be that there are convincing proofs of his existence but people choose to ignore them or explain them away or are not aware of them. The premise admits the possibility of proofs of God's existence. But since all proofs cannot be known by any one person, it is possible that there are proofs that exist that are not known.


Premise: There are no convincing proofs of his existence.
Response: This is an opinion since the word "convincing" is included. For some, there is convincing proof of God's existence. That is why this is a subjective statement, an opinion. Because it is subjective it is not a proof.


Premise: Therefore God does not exist.
Response: Therefore, because of the subjective nature of the alleged proof, this attempt does not disprove God's existence.

Lexx Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 05:26PM

Are any of you really ignorant, and decieved enough to believe that Satanists are the only ones who worship Satan?

Don't ya think, if you believe there really is a devil, that he would be smart enough to fool people into worshipping him when they think they are worshipping another god?

A rather large number of people too.

*edit*

I was going to stop there but since I read MrKim's walls of text, I am going to add this. Hoping some of you might read it all.

Fossil brought up fossil evidence. Well I play a lot of video games and they often have huge skeletons of dragons/dinosours or whatever. They are basically just backgroud ambiance to give the level,scene, area more atmosphere. Yet they are not in the game, they never really existed. What looks like remains were put there to make things look more interesting.

Ok then if you believe the creation theory and the Bible...what little we do know about how God created things... One thing we know is God created things as fully mature adults...Man, the plants and animals were all created as adults and any scientific tests on them would confirm that. So by that logic wouldn't the universe and our planet be created as what in God's eyes would be "adult" and fully developed?

I'm not going to spell the rest out for you or tell you what conclusions to make from what I said, I just wanted to put that out there as some things to think about.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/10/2008 05:36PM by Lexx.

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 05:35PM

old59, I can take the reverse of your logic and use every bit of it to mean there is no proof of any gods existence. To say that no proof exists (as you basically have done quite nicely BTW) since you mention the proof is all simple subjective opinion anyway only amounts to you having said there is no such supportable evidence of a god.

Thanks for helping clear that up

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 07:00PM

chronological history

this proves nothing, but is a good read

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 07:03PM

Lexx, are you trying to say God put dinosaur remains here, and then gave them varying ages and stages of evolvement stretching over millions of years to "make things more interesting"

Yeah that would really make it more interesting alright, most especially since it would also in turn invalidate the time-line creationists claim for the earth itself and basically do the same to any proof of his existence all in one fell swoop.

The question that just BEGS to be answered if that were presumed true would be WHY?? WTF would be the point of doing these things?

But, here's the one that really gets me, so try and clear this one up while you're at it. Why would a god, any god, being the omniputent and omniscient being they are supposed to be need, much less require they be worshipped by anyone? Ever wondered wht such a being would require such an extreme act of vanity by their creations.

Having brought 2 kids into the world (with some fun/help), I've never even thought they should be required to worship me, though by that same logic, all gods do require worhip by their progeny, why so

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 07:10PM

watch machines of the gods on the history channel sometime, it will tell you just how long priests and rulers alike have cheated the people out of their money.

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 07:17PM

part 1

part 2

part 3


part 4

part 5


yeah i resorted to you stooge for these, but this is a great show



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23/10/2008 07:19PM by fossil_digger.

Lexx Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 10:06PM

I don't think I directly said any of what you were asking there Kimster, and I never told you what I believe. I just tossed out an example and a couple facts from the Bible and let you draw your own conclusions from them. From the looks of your reply it does look like I got you thinking too.

I am not a preachy or religious person, you'd have to really hound me to get me to share what I do believe. And then if I did I see many of the people here using anything I say to tear it apart and tell me why my beliefs are wrong.

I will give you something else to consider though. Instead of asking why a god would want or need worship, perhaps you should ask why humans feel the need to worship a god. Why most every culture throught history, even the totally isolated ones, had some kind of spiritual or religious beliefs. If it's all fake and a scam, and used to control and brainwash people then why does most everyone fall for it? Why do we humans in general seem to need something higher to believe in?

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 23, 2008 10:53PM

body mind and soul control. they are only happy when all are in line.

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 24, 2008 12:04PM

body mind and soul control. they are only happy when all are in line.
------------

I would say body mind and soul health. they are only happy when all are in line. Control would denote that others would have control instead of ourselves. Also another thought, do aethiests have souls and if they do not believe in God then why would they need one?

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 24, 2008 02:31PM

To me, the word soul is a figurative and descriptive word relating more to the personality of a person. Do I have one? In my thoughts, no, but then I don't see anyone as having one either in the literal sense

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 24, 2008 02:39PM

the concept of the existence of a soul is what is the big question.
how do you know you have one?
because the priests said so?
because the bible says so?
or maybe you have the ability to see someones soul?
or is it just another way for you to comprehend the complete consciousness and awareness of the concept?

i can go on for a lifetime. the important thing here is for you to decide for yourself what is myth and what is reality. you and you alone must follow the path you deem reality and leave everyone else to find their own consciousness no matter what you believe. throughout history man has forced their beliefs down peoples throats and even killed in the name of "god", when in reality ( and this is where my beliefs intersect ) there is only one person/thing/or deity that may judge you....yourself.

i have been called an atheist by some and a completely enlightened individual by others. the truth is i am not any of those but i am a completely free thinking person.

Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: October 24, 2008 03:07PM

My thoughts are not to tear down others ideologies but to encourage looking at things from a perspective of reasonable logic instead of through the confining d constrained views religons foist upon folks. Most any person who deems themselves as a follower of some faith will find plenty of folks to chime in and 2nd the tenets of their faith, even when sound reasonable inspection of them will not reveal them to seem as logical.

What few people of faith ever receive is a perspective based in logic that encorages them to look at things with a more open mind and attempt to view the world around them using their own eyes and minds as opposed to what's been related to them over and over and over again by the parrotors of their faith.

Only when we choose to truly push the boundaries of accepted ideologies will real vision tend to reveal itself. In turn, few new ideas ever will present themselves if one chooses to simply accept what's thrown their way unquestionably. Like I mentioned elsewhere here, real thought is something we'd all benefit from if more of it were done

shaDEz Report This Comment
Date: October 28, 2008 10:10AM

bleh... started to read all of that and then quit (sorry, I'm hella busy right now, I'll try to read it all later... maybe)

but I gotta warn yall fellow atheists (despite there apparently is a ton we disagree on) to not spend too much time arguing with these creationist loonies. They do not have an argument. Until they can provide us with proof that their god(s), or "higher power" or whatever the fuck they call it, exists... that will require material evidence that can be tested, verified, and proven (or disproven - which is what they will likely find out just as Darwin did actually when he found material evidence verifying evolution which ran contrary to creationists myths to be actuality. Darwin originally went to South America to attempt to disprove the early evolutionists theories that creationism myths were just that: myths). On the other hand evidence (materialist) has been brought to the table that proves evolution is real, just because the masses understanding science has become a problem for the ruling class, which became a fetter on the French (bourgeois) Revolution (see Engels' Socialism: Utopian and Scientific) and now fetters the U.S. program does not mean that all of a sudden it becomes untrue (which is the pragmatists, or "Bushists", imposing ignorance of science and philosophical-idealism and religion on the masses; the phenomenon of said quality). In the beginning science was essential for their revolution, but by the transformation in society, that became problematic for them to continue this monopoly of power, their dictatorship and so now they gotta say that it wasn't so. The brits knew better than this from the beginning and you can see both the French and the Brits models in the U.S. coming into antagonism... perhaps unintentional? but can't help to be awed by this... (again check out Socialism: Utopian and Scientific) Am I coming off as making any sense or not? (lol)

this is a nice read, although I personally find it for the most part a bit underneath my understanding (what I've read of it thus far anyways), but may be a good read to present a youth struggling with this silliness
The Science of Evolution and The Myth of Creationism
and there is a ton more info via the web about evolution and a really neat one called The Tree Of Life Project that show our actual family tree (instead of that Adam begot forty men leading up to Jesus bullshit you can read about in the Judeo-Xtian mythos book, the Bible)

z_^Az^zz
you need really strong eyes to read this size text... like pro_junior has

shaDEz Report This Comment
Date: October 28, 2008 11:39AM

oh and another little thing:
speaking as a former Satanist; Satanists do not worship Satan... not the way that things appear due to endless slander
Satanism was an attempt to get free of Christian oppression and takes other names under different religions. Satanism fails to do this because it is after all a religion - a set of dogmatic rules, guidelines to live by- and it fails to understand the actual underlying cause of all of this worthless and unnecessary shit we suffer from... it fails to get at the actual cause, and many atheists fail to get at this as well. Religion itself is not at the base of this or any society, not now in the present or any time in history. Satanism is actually a humanist and heidenistic religion, and really does not intend to enforce the oppressive relations that we all have with each other, but in failing to grasp what is the root of all evil winds up doing just that... It correctly goes against the feminist line, but winds up objectifying women in the final analysis... it attempts to do away with sexual abuse, but actually winds up promoting rape in an almost identical way to the "free sex" movement of the 60's (which itself was created in the 60's in the U.S.)... it attempts to free everyone, but fails to do so because of the way it winds up creating and promoting individualism(which if we investigate this, indiviualism crushes the individual by creating congregations of self-absorbed idealists becoming a type of mindless colectivism ).
Not saying that there are people calling themselves Satanists that don't go around sacrificing animals to the devil just as Christians and Jews (particular sects) sacrifice animals and people to god... but lets not jump to conclusions, and further lets understand that all that shit that (supposedly) went down during the 80's U.S. was nothing but mass hysteria, really no different from the mass hysteria promoted in Germany in the 30's.

z_^Az^zz
you need really strong eyes to read this size text... like pro_junior has

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 28, 2008 11:52AM

But can you prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that God does not exist using concrete verifiable evidence?

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 28, 2008 04:43PM

sure, i've never seen him, good enough for me.

shaDEz Report This Comment
Date: October 29, 2008 11:32AM

no, dude, first you must bring evidence that God exists... until then you do not have an arguement

what if I were to say that there is an invisible flying dinosaur that will kill you if you do not believe in it? you would say (at least I am hoping you would say) that I am completely nuts and I need to go and fuck myself.

evidence of evolution on the other hand has been brought to the table

z_^Az^zz
you need really strong eyes to read this size text... like pro_junior has

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: October 29, 2008 12:03PM

But if you believe in the invisible flying dinasaur then that is fine with me and I will not try to disuade you in your belief.

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 29, 2008 04:47PM

there are plenty of flying dinos out there, but they are all invisible, you can smell them however if you haven't snorted too much coke in your life.

GAK67 Report This Comment
Date: October 29, 2008 11:59PM

shaDEz, please provide this so called evidence of one species changing into another that evolution is based on, and I'm not talking about a small adaptaion within a species, I want evidence that a moth became a bird, or a fish became a frog, or that a reptile became a mammal. To paraphrase fossil - i've never seen it, good enough for me!

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 12:52AM

how about the raptors evolving into present day birds?
would that be enough?

GAK67 Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:08AM

Just taking your word for it fossil - no!
What unrefutable evidence is there that raptors evolved into birds? I know there are similarities between them that 'suggest' it may have happened, but my understanding is that it is only a scientific theory that the evolution from one species to another actually occurred.

I'm not saying I am anti-evolution or pro-creationism here, I'm just trying to point out that what you are asking for on the creationist side you also cannot provide on the evolutionary side of the arguement either.

Darwin's research did not provide proof of evolution, he developed a theory of evolution and gathered evidence in support of that theory. As with all scientific theories it will be, and has been, altered as further evidence is discovered and if evidence comes to light refuting it a new theory will be developed in it's place.

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:21AM

i can show you all kinds of evidence pointing towards this, but it seems that you only want to argue the opposite side of everything which proves absolutely nothing. the evidence is there, find it for yourself. prove it to yourself or don't, i really don't care.

ORLANDO399 Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:27AM

You call it arguing,i call it converasating

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:29AM

converasating?

GAK67 Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:31AM

You got me all wrong fossil, I am not just arguing the opposite, I am trying to get ignorant people from both sides to open their minds to the possibility of the other.

There is too much stuff in this world that is so far beyond comprehension that, IMO, it is impossible to not believe in some sort of higher power. On the other hand there is a lot of evidence to support the theory of evolution, so much that, and again this is just my opinion, it is hard not to believe it. How I reconcile those two statements is my own personal demon and no amount of arguing from either side is gonna help me make up my mind.

fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 03:33AM

so i'm ignorant now? funny supposition there.

woberto Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 08:58AM

Didn't some guy weigh a bunch of terminal patients just before and after death, to come up with a figure the the soul weighs?

shaDEz Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 09:55AM

oh just fuck it!

z_^Az^zz
you need really strong eyes to read this size text... like pro_junior has



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 30/10/2008 10:59AM by shaDEz.

woberto Report This Comment
Date: October 30, 2008 11:34PM

Ah, here it is, they even made a film called 21 grams back in 2003.
*
[www.snopes.com]
*
Or this site is less credible.
[www.ghostweb.com]