insane

It doesn't matter where french fries originated from, what matters is that poutine comes from Canada! Oh goodness that looks good...

As an avid playstation marketing style hater, this is awesome :D

Thanks, that makes more sense now. This evolves from the Heisenberg principle?

Bananas are also good at reducing cramps, or so I've heard.

Okay, so thought paterns are merely probabilities? You're still left with a probable list of actions, not a free choice. I don't know where you're going with this, it seems quantum physics plays with terms like "cause" for the purpose of proving a point. Bear in mind I don't think anyone here aside from you has a university backing in quantum physics (closest I have is chem, heh.); at least no one has quoted you and made a half-decent reply or implied they have an understanding of what you're saying (myself included). You may be right in what you say, but bear in mind you're one of the only ones here that has a clear understanding of what you're saying.

If that ever happens, report the post, please. I think the reason he and other Christians get on your cases for calling us that is because it's rather one-sided. The Christian takes the hit 99 times out of 100 on these boards.

He explained the reasoning behind the reference.

Agreed here. But like Oy said, don't just sit down and try to write a song, else you'll end up with an unoriginal, uninspired song. It's got to come to you.

@Evadek; I love that tone :P and I only play a couple styles of music (I hate metal, for instance), so it works for me. Btw, I'm Canadian, not American.

I can't run early in the morning. I just run later at night. It works for me.

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?t=256

Appealing is all you can do. There is nothing we at tip.it can do to help your ban appeal. Locked.

I don't understand what free will has to do with matter. Maybe you can explain more/link me to a wikipedia page about it. Here's a syllogism to help explain it; P1. The Universe is purely material (from your POV) P2. All material things follow cause and effect (aka. Determinism) C. All things in the universe (including humans) follow cause and effect, and are completely determined by other material things. Free will is non-existent. Knowing != Causing. If a fortune teller tells your future, does the fortune teller cause your future or just know it?

@BlueLancer - The Kalam argument is what I base(d) most of my posts on this thread - I just do/did a bad job of verbalizing my thoughts ;P If you are looking for potential answers to your questions regarding the argument, alot of the links within the article will give you answers. (Browsing article links on wikipedia is one of my favourite things to do when bored :P) Also, a question for you - if God does NOT exist, and all that exists is matter, wouldn't it logically follow that free will does NOT exist either; since all material things follow cause and effect, and everything, including thought and action is purely material?

Arguments based on 'obviousness' and 'ability to comprehend' are not, I'm sorry to say, logical. This has no bearing on your candidacy for idiothood or not, it's simply that they do not provide an adequate case against the argument of the OP: that there is no rational way of determining the truth value of 'God exists'. That's why I stated it was my personal belief, and not an objective answer. If you want what I think is a logical reason for my belief in God, it is found here. It is a simple syllogism with very few objections.

And it doesn't make more sense from my point of view, as I already explained. You can say it is less likely that a God we don't know exists created this, but to me, it is obvious. I cannot comprehend inanimate, unintelligent matter always existing and causing all of this. In fact, the more I think about it, the more ludicrous in my mind it becomes. And I don't think I'm an idiot :P.

If I were to get a Fender, it would be a higher-end Fender, so I wouldn't have to worry about hardware problems (as much as a mid-range). As for a guitar catered to my specific wants, this is why I have chosen the semi-hollowbody Thinline - it's got a cleaner sound for the guitar I want to play, but isn't a full hollowbody so it allows some versatility. If I were to go other than Fender it would be Ibanez. But at the moment the guitar buying is looking rather bleak as I am paying $300 more for textbooks this semester than I anticipated >.<

It is, by the definition of logic, equally plausible both ways. You have no tangible evidence that matter has always existed. All you have is evidence that matter has existed for x amount of time. An eternity is impossible to prove. Impossible. Thus it is just as illogical as my belief. So, it's more logical to take this hunk of iron and say "Yes, this exists, therefore it has always existed in some form or other." Than to say "There's an all-knowing, all-seeing being, that exists, somewhere. You can't see him, but he created this hunk of iron, simply by saying a word. You must take it on faith that he exists. That's what he wants, as opposed to showing us himself in some obvious way." Yes. That makes absolutely perfect logical sense. As I said, don't confuse beleif and logic. Your beleif is intrinsically illogical, that is why it's a beleif. You dodged my argument - prove an eternity please.

Not coffee - once it wears off you crash. Try eating an apple.

Yes, but now we reach the eternal question. If God being higher than us, created us, must there not be something, by your own logic, higher than God? Who then created God? And who created God's creator? God by definition is uncaused. I already said it was just a belief of mine, just the same as matter being eternal and uncaused is a belief of yours. It is my personal belief that a hunk of matter that has eternally existed is less logical than a God. It is completely mind blowing to me that people would believe that something so inanimate, unintelligent, inactive and random would just "always exist". Like I said, it was a belief, and is impossible to prove either way. It is, by the definition of logic, equally plausible both ways. You have no tangible evidence that matter has always existed. All you have is evidence that matter has existed for x amount of time. An eternity is impossible to prove. Impossible. Thus it is just as illogical as my belief. While we're on the subject of empirical evidence - can you give me something other than empirical evidence for the validity of the scientific method itself? Ironically, you cannot test the scientific method scientifically, making it self-refuting, in a logical sense. Because it requires time and energy that would not have existed beforehand?

I'm not denying the existence of matter (because I can see, smell, taste, etc). I'm denying the eternal existence of matter; for the exact same reason you deny the existence of God - you cannot feel, taste, touch, or observe matter in an eternal sense - you have no information to suggest that matter has existed for eternity, because an eternity is simply impossible to measure. Hence the "impossible to prove" aspect of God vs. Eternal matter. And my God is the definition of that trigger :P and so much more. Yes, but this is all rather irrelevant to me if you consider my starting belief - that matter is not eternal. If you want to disprove God to me personally, you need to attack the root of my argument - not something that stems later on. Ironically, you cannot attack the root of my argument, since it is a basic belief. Nor can I attack the root of your argument, since that is a basic belief as well. Hence, it is impossible to argue :P Because that is too broad of a category. When I say intelligence, I mean something that we can assign truth values to. If you classify a thought process the same way that we classify a tree growing, then a thought process can have no more truth value assigned to it than a tree growing. And we all know it is ridiculous to say "that tree is true", or "that pencil is false". Thus, if you classify thought in the same group as all other material processes, then why does thought get to have truth values assigned to it, and nothing else?

Yay for Postal Service! Only, Death Cab and Postal Service are very alike, considering they have the same lead singer, i think. The music is completely different. Just the same vocalist.

I would appreciate it if people gave reasons for their opinions. I have a Fender Acoustic and it plays like gold, and is worth $1000 more than I paid for it. Just saying "All Fenders are crap and are ugly and play lame" makes your opinion look rubbish. Taste in music is very subjective. Just because you think it is terrible doesn't mean I will. To each his own I guess. What is the cost of this "midrange Ibanez?" I gave my range as up to $1000 - does this mean pushing it would put me over that? And when I said Fender Strat/Tele, that would include the American Series, which is a midrange as well. (I did play the Ibanez Artcore and loved it - I'm not "hellbent" on Fender - I've just had good experiences with them in the past and see nothing wrong with continuing to buy from them).

The universe exists. Therefore a creator exists. In my mind, this is a more logical statement than. "The Universe Exists. Therefore it always existed and was not created". It is always going to come down to what you believe can have always existed - inanimate matter or a supernatural being? In my mind, it is a closed case. A supernatural being makes alot more sense to me than a hunk of matter. There's no logic to prove God's existence or disprove God's existence. All science can do is try and come up with a method of creation that does not require a God. But just because something is not required does not mean it cannot exist. It is my personal belief that it is more logical to believe that God created rather than an infinite chain of cause and effect that results in a random explosion into a perfectly functioning universe, and that on this planet a bunch of atoms randomly came together to form an incredibly complex cell that didn't die (God knows how) but somehow eventually became millions of animals and the six billion humans that exist today. Furthermore, the existence of this "higher intelligence" (or human intelligence) violates the law of cause and effect. If the effect (humans) is logical, intelligent, self-sustaining humans, I would argue (in a very vague and indirect way) that the cause would have to be at least as great as this, and not a bunch of random atoms. If you argue that intelligence/thought is nothing but chain of electron sequences and nothing but an effect of a previous cause, then intelligence does not exist, and thus the very thought of atheism and agnosticism cannto be true. Thought has to be supernatural for any truth value to be assigned to it. I'll explain this later, if someone challenges me on it. But this is an incredibly unorganized rant that I really need to think about more before I post my logical reasons for believing.

Probably the 2nd worst band in the world :P