Posts from Forum

For example, no one has ever seen the atom with their own eyes; it was identified by secondary characteristics.
but we have accepted this information as truth without having any evidence.

When I learned about the atom, its existence had been confirmed many times by direct means.

We are told that Australia exists, shown pictures on TV, shown people who supposedly have been there — and we believe. But where is the guarantee that we are not being deceived, where is the evidence? Maybe Australia does not exist at all, and everyone who supposedly leaves for it ends up in another part of Eurasia or South America and becomes a slave in underground mines there.

And what if you are a figment of my imagination?

No one has yet been scientifically able to refute a single statement from any section of the Vedas.

Guys, watch this, I'm about to refute it now.
You wrote about a battle involving a million people. Nevertheless, archaeological excavations have not found a proper amount of weapons, equipment, cooking pots, latrines, let alone even the corpses and bones that should have remained after such a crowd. Check and mate!

Siverfale,
I hoped you were smarter.

You wrote about a battle involving a million people. However, archaeological excavations have not revealed the appropriate amount of weapons, equipment, food bowls, scissors, or even corpses and bones that should have remained after such a crowd. Checkmate!

Here is a refutation: The truth was hidden from us, and we were given different information that we accepted as truth without any evidence.

This is just as difficult as trying to explain to a person with a first-degree Orthodox mindset that there is no God.

Here's a refutation: They hid the truth from us and gave us different information, which we accepted as truth without any evidence.

Incorrect. First, he needs to prove his point of view. He should write about several independent archaeological expeditions that proved that everything was exactly as he claims.

He brought in the opinions of 2 very respected experts who suggested the possibility of such a battle.

Nevertheless, archaeological excavations have not revealed a sufficient amount of weapons, equipment, food bowls, scissors, or even corpses and bones that should have remained after such a large crowd. Checkmate!

Everything was burned, and the ashes were scattered by the wind. Child's play.

When I learned about the atom, its existence had been confirmed many times through direct means.

Confirmed many times through direct means? How exactly?

Did you see it, hear it, smell it, touch it, taste it?
I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm talking about how it was proven to us!

We all heard about the atom on television! From official scientific sources! Finally, in school programs, in physics, chemistry, and biology! And we accepted it as a given.

But we still don't accept as a given what we weren't told in school, despite the huge amount of archaeological evidence.

What if you are a product of my imagination?

Well, maybe.

Guys, watch, I'm going to disprove it now.
You wrote about a battle involving a million people. However, archaeological excavations have not found the appropriate amount of weapons, equipment, cooking pots, scissors, or even corpses and bones that should have remained after such a crowd. Checkmate!

And this guy is aiming for the Nobel Prize :)
__________________

I was talking about scientific evidence, and you've turned it all into a farce again, but I can understand why; what else do you have left?

The book "The Unknown History of Humanity" provides examples of several archaeological expeditions, with a huge number of archaeological facts - with illustrations.

In Eastern tradition, kshatriyas - warriors - are usually cremated!
But despite this, skeletons of huge people - giants - are found all over the world:
















Models of airplanes on frescoes in the Egyptian ruins of the Temple of Abydos.


A golden model of an airplane found in South America, resembling modern B-52 bombers.


Baghdad, Iraq, 3rd century BC. Batteries that work just as well as modern ones.

This is much the same as trying to explain to a person with a 1st-degree Orthodox mindset that there is no God.

But how do you prove to a person with a 1st-degree atheist mindset that God exists? If they simply don't want to believe it, no matter what?

There's no way! You have to give them the opportunity to reach the bottom, to suffer.

Ancient Eastern wisdom:
"He who desires oblivion, God grants oblivion"

God does not impose Himself on anyone, despite the fact that our existence completely depends on Him and on His laws.

___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

It's as pointless as trying to explain to a person with deeply ingrained Orthodox beliefs that there is no God.

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8F
I recently stumbled upon this by chance, it's quite amusing. Pascal breaks everything down logically.

Here's some interesting information: in Japan, it is customary not to administer any vaccinations to a child for up to two years – and the incidence of tuberculosis and hepatitis B has virtually disappeared. In Russia, a child receives a whole set of vaccinations in the first 12 hours, including vaccinations against hepatitis B and tuberculosis. Only people in high-risk groups can contract tuberculosis: prostitutes, homosexuals, drug addicts, or people who are genetically predisposed to it – 1%. Question: Why vaccinate all children against tuberculosis, and even within the first 12 hours after birth? __________________________________________________ __ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK7d2bZn_wk - "BIRTH TRUTH. Yaroslavl. GMOs and VACCINATION...", 1h 36m A female doctor by profession shares her personal experience: She has 3 children. The first and second children received the entire standard set of vaccinations from birth: the first began to get sick, specifically with the diseases he was vaccinated against; the second had an even more severe situation, with the diseases accompanied by severe allergic reactions. After the vaccinations and revaccinations were stopped, the allergic reactions subsided. The third child did not receive any vaccinations at all – he had no illnesses or allergic reactions that the first two children had. Added 1 minute ago

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8F
I recently stumbled upon this by chance, it's funny :) Pascal explained everything in simple terms.

Thanks, very interesting article

Pascal, like most people, confuses the concepts of "faith" and "religion." He presents it as an aphorism: faith is beneficial, while religions are harmful. "Religion is the opium of the people" (a quote), and this is the best thing that has been said about it, even though the quote is somewhat cliché. Following idiotic dogmas, renouncing worldly pleasures, piety, and godliness – PROFIT!!!:D But one must believe in something to avoid being a bipedal animal.

Okay, I'll try to outline my perspective. Firstly, Ariputra has repeatedly relied on demonstrably false evidence, quotes, demotivators, the Allen Dulles plan, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and information about vaccinations. The Allen Dulles plan, as is known to discerning individuals, is a compilation created to attract neophytes to the banner of those fighting against a global conspiracy. For example, regarding "Eternal Call," I won't provide quotes here that clearly confirm the falsity of the Dulles plan; I'll just say that Ariputra, due to his ignorance, once again managed to provide a link to an ENGLISH TEXT that has a significantly DIFFERENT meaning than the Russian version. Furthermore, for someone who speaks English at a decent level, it is obvious that the so-called Dulles plan could not have existed in any of the Romance languages; it uses exclusively phrases characteristic of Slavic languages. Regarding the Protocols, things are even more interesting: a very interesting correlation is found with the fictional work "Dialogue of Machiavelli and Montesquieu in HELL"; I'm not guaranteeing the accuracy of the title, but again, all of this is publicly available. Also, a linguistic analysis of the text of the "Protocols" is quite curious; I'll refer you to the relevant open sources. I must admit, I don't possess the same breadth of knowledge as Ariputra, who is ready to fight for anything, from elephants in orbit to AIDS denial. But at the very least, it's quite foolish to deny that vaccinations against whooping cough and scarlet fever have eliminated these diseases from the list of life-threatening ones. There was even a poem in Soviet times about the death of a pioneer from scarlet fever. Moreover, comparing infant mortality in the 20th century with what it was before is somewhat absurd; the difference is many times greater. So, what seems to me to be one of the specific characteristics of Ariputra's style? I've noticed that he often writes conclusions that are completely opposite in meaning, and he does so with the same pathos. Secondly, he was clearly raised on POPULAR SCIENCE. Serious literature is difficult for him; it seems to depress him, so he also presents himself in a popular science style. Specifically, when he is asked to provide documents, even just about excavations, he prints comics with skulls; I could just as easily dig up clips of ghosts from YouTube and use that as evidence to prove the existence of a poltergeist. Ariputra, in every picture, you need to indicate the source, and also in any of your statements that rely on any events. This is one of the reasons why no serious person will take your arguments seriously (or is this just a "retransmission"?). Regarding Jews, I certainly won't presume to judge everything with the authority of Ariputra, but according to him, Jews appear to be some kind of exceptional carriers of something special, almost like people from another planet. In reality, the situation takes on a different perspective. Jews are NOT a nationality in the common sense of the word. ANY person can become a Jew (although there are still exceptions) who is willing to undergo the ritual. Moreover, prominent figures even in ancient Jewish history (King David) were not descendants of Jews but were so-called "gerim," that is, non-Jews who adopted Judaism. From this perspective, any attempt to paint a global conspiracy in Jewish colors seems relatively schizoid. Given that Ariputra has been trained to be negative towards Jews, I will provide a link to a website for those who are interested in learning something about Judaism: www.toldot.ru

Oelm, aren't you Jewish by any chance?;)

I am a Druid.

And are druids Jewish? Or Jew-druids?

Added 6 minutes later
Ihtiandr
Pascal distributed them and decided it's better this way than together with Bruno.

For example, no one has ever seen an atom with their own eyes; it was identified by secondary characteristics.
but we accepted this information as truth without having any proof.

Have you seen it, heard it, smelled it, touched it, tasted it?
I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm asking how it was proven to us?!

What kind of heresy is this? {facepalm} Tell me, what is a primary characteristic? Why do we need to see or touch atoms? Why do we need to prove their existence? An atom, like everything that humans give a name to, exists BY DEFINITION. The term was originally conceived to designate an object. If the object in reality does not have exactly the properties initially assumed, this does not affect the existence of the object, in this case the atom.
Let me give an example: it was originally believed that the law of attraction was that all objects except, well, stars and the Sun, are attracted to the Earth (maybe I'm exaggerating, but the point isn't the precise wording, so let's accept it for now). Then clever people figured out that gravitational forces apply to all macroscopic objects. In other words, the law of gravity turned out to be different. And now the question: did we need to see, hear, or smell it to say that it exists? No. We perfectly determined its existence through indirect signs. The law of gravity itself was defined incorrectly, but we knew it existed. The same goes for atoms, microparticles, ourselves, and our planet. All these objects may turn out to be something entirely different from what we think, given the current state of science and the inherent limitations of our thinking. But they definitely exist, no matter what we mean by these terms.

Now, for playing Heroes with Ariputra, everyone needs a new firewall to catch the heretic, blessed by a priest.