Search results

then again you have become that which you're talkin shit about, not i nor TBT started anything hostile, you have with you quick snapped attitude and aggressive speech. you're talking of destruction and violence but speak of love and compassion, how can you be serious? thats like saying im...

without government, its no longer politics, and becomes, morals or beliefs that influence your decision.

actually since you want to take it and be a DICK about it, then fine you prerogative, however i have read about anarchism and just as any ideology one simple flaw...the books you read doesnt mean thats what the true defined anarchism is, more or less just a version of the authors, and IF it WAS...

and i also seem to notice all the ppl that come and trash me have one thing in common, "Dr. Greenhorn" should've figured tho. ppl come hostile to my thread already, before i've even spoken to them otherwise, why? have i offended you or any of the others? if so how? i dont see a single thing i've...

see you all are hypocrites to your own philosophy, you say i misconstrue what i read or hear to suit my beliefs, as opposed to you right? you live an un bias life? no actually atheist do the same thing, and on top of it all i dont refuse evidence, show me current verifiable and reliable sources...

im not here to start a problem, but just to ask a question, why does having a different opinion, and independently thinking make ones own deductions have to mean they are brainwashed?

First, anarchism isn't a misunderstood political philosophy. Because its not political, its defined as having no gov't, a state of lawlessness and confusion, it holds no political standing.

idk vi the fact he held debate on whether legalisation or not combined with the other 13 states to my knowledge pressin for legalisation might prove to be a good step. then again we DO have a president who promised to pull all troops in 12 months, now sending more and and spending billions more...

again scientist not having connection with the church ray rogers and his team in 08, are the ones who have seemed to confirm its authenticity, if ppl arent gonna know what their talkin about whats the point of debating? this is a common problem in america today, its a becomming a common trait in...

didnt feel like sifting other threads, rather start a new one, and you must be a big man, i mean no one was talkin to/about you, what got you to the point of randomly talkin shit idk, sounds pretty stupid to me. unsubscribe, i really dont care, i dont strive on attention, i started this thread...

if you wanna take it to that maturity level ill let you sit and play by yourself down there.

as you see here im not the one who said i read the bible AND koran and if it was my baiting comment you're refering to, i dont have to know the koran to bait ppl into telling the truth, a liar can be off set and made uncomfortable easily, so if we all are going to continue to post things...

wow greenhorn, maybe you're post would be insulting if it made sense, seeing as how i never said i read the bible and koran, someone else did, and i brought their statement into question. it'd be great if ppl actually read. and stoney whether you're done with this thread or not isn't my concern...

also noting this exceprt "If we rely only on peer-reviewed science journals we know this: The Shroud of Turin is at LEAST 1300 years old. The images are a darkening of an otherwise clear starch and polysaccharide coating thinner than most bacteria...

wrong, actually they were dated to the 14th century in 1988 with carbon 14 tests and recently voided with the los alamos tests done in 08 with micro-chemical and other analytical tests dating it back around the 1st century....incidentally. oh and also, historically, romans used a.d. and b.c...

well stoney, in the areas i misunderstood what you were sayin, i apologise, how ever for you to say that there was no jesus, is still just as illogical, because so far, everything that science supports can fall into the same thing, the skulls as i have posted on above, how can they say they were...

scientifically quite a bit, the skulls of cromagnums and Neanderthals are similar to ours coincidentally, but what exactly is that proof of?

thats true, however at this point in time, what other evidence are we going to find? we've found john's grave (mary's second son) and the iconic figure shown in the cloth is again, an identical match to the description givin in the bible, blood from the forehead (crown of thorns), hundreds of...

but what exactly does that have to do with the shroud? and the evidence that it is backdated to when christ was supposedly around? also the shroud shows all of christ's specific wounds he endured and to falsify the cloth is impossible for the time it came into public eye much less the time of...

they HAVE retested and it was a docu on discovery channel, they piece they took from the older documentary is actually from whenever it was almost destroyed by fire, and the wove together new tapestry when the templar knights were holding it. so the pieces they snipped from the corners WERE from...