Oy_the_Great

I'm sorry, I don't really seem to see what the problem is. Two guys sitting in a car, staring at the both of you. Is that a reason to condemn them? Or were they doing something else? If everyone suspicious should be trialled, there would be a hell lot of useless trials. Or perhaps you have a good reason not to trust them?

I advise you to change the title, right away. People who don't read what you said will go to the site. Tell people that the site contains virusses and spyware, then mention the name. If you guys have any spyware; I recommend you to install 'Hitman Pro'. A great program with the best free anti-spyware all in one. It does everything by itself as well, you only have to click once or twice to do the entire scanning and deleting process from the several anti spyware programs. It even rid me of virusses that bugged me.

So do you know why Hitler chose the symbol? I'd like to know that.

1. Roger, of course. Even if he had to play in a wheelchair he'd make the games end with tripple 6-0 ;) 2. Blake 3. Hewitt 4. Rod[bleep] For the women: our own Justine Henin-Hardenne vs Mauresmo, obviously :)

It's 7 AM here and I'm (still) awake. Going to bed now, to sleep 6 hours. I need little sleep lately.

Do you have to play the bumblebee man? :

Waterpolo eh? Cool! A friend of mine (just had dinner this evening in his new appartment, he's a good cook too :)) plays in the national team of Belgium :) It's nothing I'd be good at though, it requires an aweful lot of endurance and muscles. It's probably one of the toughest sports there are.

Pour salt in your eyes. I'll guarantee you you won't get sleepy. And a useful trick: keep on as much light as possible.

Sexor, Tiga's album Great lounge-like techno.

was she deaf? /just saying :P :lol:

Right. Sure. 10 seconds would've been a world record 40 years ago, and the gear has not changed that dramatically. http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_70.pdf I play tennis and football, but I don't excel in them. Just a pass-time.

:-s You sure know your world.

If you can't do it now, you'll never be able to write a song. I make drawings from time to time, and they're always about something philosophical or about an opinion. Basically the same songs are about. If you don't have that inspiration, you won't get anywhere.

Yeah, you Scots are only good in throwing rocks and poles. Go back to the highlands and stay off the field mate.

Yeah, you're right, this is taking far too long. New rule: no cover for more than 12 hours: some one random can post. Here's the next one. I give it 15 minutes before some one will guess it.

There. The answer to the 'true love or money thread'. I hope all those lost souls that voted money someday realise this.

Well, this thread is all about proving God is logic. You assume he is, but none of the posters like me think like you on that matter. There's nothing more illogic to me than the existence of a God that created the world according to the Bible stories. I trust my thoughts, because according to me the knowledge I received through education and life experience is trustworthy. I can't accept the fact that both science and the God you believe in can live together. Because they can't, there's no way it's scientifically possible that for example no solid proof of remainders of the tower of Babel has been found. Or proof that the world is only a few thousand years old, when God created it. There is proof, however, that the world is 3 billion (or something, perhaps 4) years old and is a remnant piece of the Sun. Also, history has proven that religion, and Christianity in particular (I don't know a lot about the rest), has nearly always failed in explaining Earthly phenomenoms that have now been scientificly proven. There are a number of clear examples of that.

Naah, you're just human ;)

Yeah, you paraphrased it well, you believe in God, I don't. And out of that logic, our interpretations erupt. So we can't really argue about that, and I respect your opinion :) 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? Well, this is not really what I meant, you claim all chemical processes are identical whereas I think every kind of chemical process is unique. My stomach can't think, yet it is working due to input signals from my brain, so chemicals. That doesn't mean the process of digestion is the same as the process of thoughts. Nor is thinking the same as growing. BUT: the roots are the same; they're both chemical processes. You could compare it to a man running and an animal sleeping. Two activities from living creatures, but very different.

Go and talk to her! Just ask about where she's from and regular stuff. Everyone likes it if people show interest in them, and girls like it especially. Just be yourself, try not to impress her, try to stay normal, and every nice girl will love it. The only girls that don't are the ones you don't want to date.

the Arcade Fire - Rebellion (lies) The entire CD is gold. No, better.

Wauw, an unbeliever :D I've yet to discover a song from Bob that doesn't appeal to me.

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. Thanks for the reply Insane! But to me, and many others, something we can feel, see, hear, smell and taste is a lot more realistic than something that can possible be. So I believe in your latter statement: the eternal presence of matter, rather than a God that created it. I do somehow think a supreme force, unknown to us, is behind the 'missing links' of the evolution (meaning: evolution of everthing existing). It's just impossible I think that it started somewhere without a trigger. That trigger is my definition of God, something that has no reason that it exists. Perhaps a spark that created a series of chemical and physical reactions, or reactions we can't describe yet, resulting in our universe. Well, I do believe in coincidence. If you know that there are almost infinite stars all with their own planets, there are a small percentage of planets that most likely evolved into planets with the ideal conditions of life, or at least with what we consider ideal, then I do think evolution always finds its ways. I'm also 100% sure (well, not 100%, nothing's absolutely sure) that there are in fact thousands and thousands of planets in our galaxy with creatures very much like ourselves. The thing is; we'll never meet them. The planet closest to our own Sun is several (hundreds of) lightyears away. And odds that the planets there are suitable for life are very small. But since there are trillions of stars, I also believe in thousands of other planets like ours. Why can't a sequence of reactions be intelligence? Because that's exately what it is. If you can't believe that, you can toss away every form of psychological, sociological and medical research. Because medication that works on the brain, and not only those meds, but also many others that stimulate the brain to create certain protective elements in our body, works by activating or stimulating these reactions. They of course, and it's a bit lame of me to say so, do not stimulate God to help us. Nor do they tell the mind to change. Our minds are just billions of living cells, but I consider cells to be life, no matter what you may say. Perhaps I even consider everything subjected to changes from the environment to be life. H2O molecules for example, are the primal form of life IMO. edit: hahaha, I just realise this is one of those posts no one is ever going to read, except for you Insane, sine it's a reply of your visions. The only people apart from you that'll read it will only do so because they read what I now said :

Yeah, I don't get why you don' like Dylan's voice Bubs, it's not smooth or anything, but I like singer-songwriters a la Bob Dylan to be raw. Kurt Cobain's voice wasn't perfect either, yet he's one of the singers that move me most, not just because of the lyrics.

Yoho mateys! Now I know all wannabe singer-songwriters want to be as creative as Bob Dylan, as popular as the Beatles, as funky as the Peppers and as handsome as me. But unfortunately, that's impossible. So if you were banned from civilised world and you were allowed the albums of only one singer-songwriter, who would it be? And if a moose on acid would chase you and it would allow you only one CD, which one would it be? Dire choices, indeed, but who knows what might happen eh? My personal favourite album would be Dylan's Best of CD. I wouldn't tell the crazy moose it's a double CD of course.