Some plants can strangle others with their roots. [/b][/quote] Ok then,and Dean's crazy fighting plant counts aswell then
Prove it to me that it's my nature. I've been talking in circles here, and you haven't adressed any of my points, TRADE and MUTUAL BENEFIT prove you incorrect. Human beings were given, by whatever process a MIND to REASON, and therefore has no NEED to fight other organisms for its survival.
Yes I do believe it was ment to be funny. But don't you think he's actually got a really good point. God is just like an imaginary friend. There's no real proof he exists but yet when we need him, we will go to church , mosque etc. so that we feel better. Rather than God makin them safe, the idea of a God makes people feel safe. [/b][/quote] I don't believe in god but i dont think religion is a bad thing. I know someone very close to me wouldn't be standing here right now if it wasn't for the idea that someone believes in him and could help him, god.
^ oF COURSE religion IS NOT A BAD THING....IT HELP us shaping our faith to god( whoever god is it)..... In my heart and soul, I believe god exisits....I dont have to go to debate juz to prove if he really exist I juz look and feel deep inside of me...and then I have the answer..yes I DO BELIEVE ON HIM....
Prove it to me that it's my nature. I've been talking in circles here, and you haven't adressed any of my points, TRADE and MUTUAL BENEFIT prove you incorrect. Human beings were given, by whatever process a MIND to REASON, and therefore has no NEED to fight other organisms for its survival. [/b][/quote] So basicly you're saying that if someone came up to you and started beating the living shit out of you you wouldn't try and defend yourself? Because your mind will sure as hell switch off there and your body will go into instinct mode.
So basicly you're saying that if someone came up to you and started beating the living shit out of you you wouldn't try and defend yourself? Because your mind will sure as hell switch off there and your body will go into instinct mode. [/b][/quote] if you are a good person i doubt anyone would wanna beat the shit out of you, unless its some thief, maybe ill defend myself but i wont go to the point of killing....never.....
if you are a good person i doubt anyone would wanna beat the shit out of you, unless its some thief, maybe ill defend myself but i wont go to the point of killing....never..... [/b][/quote] I didn't mean killing
So basicly you're saying that if someone came up to you and started beating the living shit out of you you wouldn't try and defend yourself? Because your mind will sure as hell switch off there and your body will go into instinct mode. [/b][/quote] ? Where do you get that from what I said? Why would anyone INITIATE force? It's unreasonable, and NOT in their best interest.
Hellflame, you're trying to rationalize your statements and completely missing Link's point. Read over everything he said one more time.
On the contary,I get what he's saying completly and on a level I agree with some of the valid points he's making but he's trying to tell me that its not human nature to fight.My point was that in the face of danger your mind switches to a kind of instinct mode where you will do anything to defend yourself wether its rational or irrational because it is human instinct. To trigger off the instinct to fight you need something to fuel it like the need for revenge.If someone pisses you off to the maximum limit you're gonna wanna hurt them. And Link04,some people like initiating force for no reason at all,we call these people bullys or murderers,sick people who don't know the meaning of the word remorse. Which brings me back to God,if God created every living thing then why would God create people such as cerial killers or rapists,the bible teaches that god is all loving but how is God showing this by creating people who's love is making people suffer.
I remember something about Jesus having to drive Satan from Mary Magdolene's body when she was a prostitute, or something.
Just because it's human instinct doesn't mean that weapons are stupid. They're merely tools to help that instinct when its called upon by the subconscious. They're an addendum to our hands. Rational or irrational, weapons are extensions of our own intuition.
Just because it's human instinct doesn't mean that weapons are stupid. They're merely tools to help that instinct when its called upon by the subconscious. They're an addendum to our hands. Rational or irrational, weapons are extensions of our own intuition. [/b][/quote] Yes,however its still stupid because with the amount of weapons we have we could blow the earth up on countless times.There is a bomb somewhere in this world that just one push of a button the world will be destroyed.Supposing that gets into the wrong hands somehow.Thats a stupid creation.
Yes,however its still stupid because with the amount of weapons we have we could blow the earth up on countless times.There is a bomb somewhere in this world that just one push of a button the world will be destroyed.Supposing that gets into the wrong hands somehow.Thats a stupid creation. [/b][/quote] Well, first of all, I don't think that there's one single weapon that could annihilate the entire planet. Second of all, it's not a stupid creation just because of that. It's a product of our intelligence. In case you haven't noticed, "smart" and "stupid" are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. Instead of saying things are stupid, say that they're against common sense. Just because these weapons can destroy the world hundreds of times over doesn't make them stupid. They're a way to keep other world powers in check, as every major world power has them. I don't think that those world powers are going to use the weapons enough times to blow up the world, anyway. That would be stupid. Even if North Korea used nukes against another country, they'd stop at some point because destroying the world would be against all rational thought and reason. If you're a leader trying to take over the world, would you want it destroyed? No.
Well, first of all, I don't think that there's one single weapon that could annihilate the entire planet. Second of all, it's not a stupid creation just because of that. It's a product of our intelligence. In case you haven't noticed, "smart" and "stupid" are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. Instead of saying things are stupid, say that they're against common sense. Just because these weapons can destroy the world hundreds of times over doesn't make them stupid. They're a way to keep other world powers in check, as every major world power has them. I don't think that those world powers are going to use the weapons enough times to blow up the world, anyway. That would be stupid. Even if North Korea used nukes against another country, they'd stop at some point because destroying the world would be against all rational thought and reason. If you're a leader trying to take over the world, would you want it destroyed? No. [/b][/quote] I think what Hellflame means when he says "with one push of the button the world can be destroyed" is that when one country fires upon another, each side will fire upon each other until the world is destroyed. Kind of like in War Games...
Well, first of all, I don't think that there's one single weapon that could annihilate the entire planet. Second of all, it's not a stupid creation just because of that. It's a product of our intelligence. In case you haven't noticed, "smart" and "stupid" are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. Instead of saying things are stupid, say that they're against common sense. Just because these weapons can destroy the world hundreds of times over doesn't make them stupid. They're a way to keep other world powers in check, as every major world power has them. I don't think that those world powers are going to use the weapons enough times to blow up the world, anyway. That would be stupid. Even if North Korea used nukes against another country, they'd stop at some point because destroying the world would be against all rational thought and reason. If you're a leader trying to take over the world, would you want it destroyed? No. [/b][/quote] If you put a nuclear bomb deep enough in the ground it could destroy the world because it would set off chain reactions of volcanic eruptions and earthquakes etc. And sure alot of mind power was put into building these weapons but to be honest I dunno why anyone would actualy get a thrill out of using their smartness to build tools for killing. IMO no one will ever be able to take over the world because theres more than 6 billion people in this world and about 70% I'd say don't want some evil bastard calling the shots.It would lead to mass rebellion and alot of blood would be shed but at the end of the day some dude and his army are not gonna match up to 6 billion+ people.
Stop watching movies. Do you know how almost-impossible that is? Before anyone even got that deep they'd die from the heat, and most equipment would melt. Also, the bomb would most definitely explode before it even got that deep because of the heat, even with heat shields or whatever. No one said that these people are getting "enjoyment" out of creating these weapons. They're improving upon creations, just like scientists improve upon processing chips for computers. It's no different. Have you read the book 1984 by George Orwell? The book is about how a single entity known as Big Brother who controls a huge chunk of the world (North America, South America, Europe and North Africa) fighting against two other factions who also control huge chunks of the world. The book is very realistic and everything about it is entirely possible. Perhaps not in today's world, what with our weapons and all (which is a good use for them and you cannot tell me that you'd argue otherwise), but something like that could've happened in the past and might still happen in the future, depending on circumstances. Hitler was able to take over much of Europe before he was stopped, and almost everyone was swearing allegiance to him because of his tongue. Had he not been stopped, he very well could've controlled the entire world, or at least a huge chunk of it.
Stop watching movies. Do you know how almost-impossible that is? Before anyone even got that deep they'd die from the heat, and most equipment would melt. Also, the bomb would most definitely explode before it even got that deep because of the heat, even with heat shields or whatever. [/b][/quote] I beg to differ considering conflicting reports have said that if you were to drop a nuclear bomb into a volcano then chain reactions would happen all around the world and earthquakes and tsunamis would follow.We already know how an earthquake can cause a tsunami big enough to flood a huge amount of east asia. I'll tell you why he wasn't stopped...because people were forced to vote for him by the SA,people were intimidated by the SA and the SA were hired for one purpose: intimadation. And the French,the English and the rest of the world just stood there while he invaded all these countrys (until they invaded Poland).Had he not been allowed to invade these countrys he would of been stopped before much before 1945. What I could never figure out is why about 200 concentration camp workers could dominate over thousands of prisoners.If the prisoners wanted to then they could have easily overpowered the workers if they worked together but they were just too intimidated by the workers weapons. And I would much rather die before I go along with people saying that Hitler could have taken over the world.Hitler was the biggest hypocrit ever to exist.His vision of a 'pure' arian race was everything he wasn't.He was a coward because he never dared start anything with Britain,he tried it on France and he even got close to invading it but at the end of the day he could never take over it.He could never have taken over Russia either.Hitler took over the parts of Europe that had small armys therefor he took over much of Europe but nowhere near a majoirty.He was only ever even allowed to be voted for because he kissed the German social workers party's ass. He had floors in all of his plans and if he couldn't beat Russia, Britain and America then how the hell could he have taken over the rest of the world,the way people say he could of taken over the rest of the world they make it seem like there are only a few other countrys.
Aha! The premise of your flawed argument. Nothing happens without reason (as in, cause). Nothing. ESPECIALLY no human action. It doesn't matter how POOR the reasoning is, every human action is done because of a reason. Even if we do not know the reason behind something, say, something as big as our existence, that doesn't mean there wasn't a cause that drove the effect. Bullies and murderers are no different. However poor their reasoning, there is a REASON (at least one) why they're a bully or a murderer. And there is a reason WHY they bully or kill. In fact, the only way to stop such actions (you'll find terrorism is uncannily parallel) is to trace the action to the root and eliminate the CAUSE. I don't believe in God, but your argument is tired, to say the least. Here's one thing from your last post I found humorous: "What I could never figure out is why about 200 concentration camp workers could dominate over thousands of prisoners.If the prisoners wanted to then they could have easily overpowered the workers if they worked together but they were just too intimidated by the workers weapons." Man, you just described the governments' hold on citizens. A monopoly of force is meant to play on fear. And, you said Hitler never tried to start anything with Britain. Hello? The Battle of Britain?