Jump to content

useless

Established Member
  • Posts

    30,128
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Posts posted by useless

  1. Palace have a tough rest of February and then March. Looking at it you might say that their easiest fixture is either Sunderland away or Southampton at home.

     

    Sunderland have had a good February but before that seemed to lack firepower, Johnson seems to have filled that gap but not sure if they can rely on him all season, for goals at least and they seem to have a knack for shooting themselves in the foot with own goals and red cards.

     

    I'm sure there are stronger cases for other teams though.

  2. I don't know if it's true or if it's been mentioned already but someone said on twitter that we haven't won a match that Vlaar hasn't played in since December 2012, when we beat Liverpool.

    • Like 1
  3. Lambert won't be fired, I still think that Randy want's out, the last thing he'd want to do is bring in someone else, I imagine it's much easier to keep Lambert until we're sold, even if that mean having to offer Lambert an extension, which I'm sure would have clauses in it making it easy for the contract to be cancelled at a later date.

  4.  

    Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver are having Easter at their holiday home with guests, after a long hunt Arnold is unable to find even one egg while all the others have mountains of chocolate.

    Maria asks him “Does this mean you hate Easter now, Arnie?”

    Schwarzenegger replies “I still love Easter baby”.

     

    Copyright Adam Buxton ;)

     

     

    I don't even know who Adam Buxton is, I copied the joke from another forum. I couldn't even begin to try and make my own jokes up, lol.

  5.  

    Some people try and turn it into a group though and some words can be loaded with more meaning than their initial purpose but even if it isn't a group I still reject the label for myself. Is there a term for people who don't believe in Santa or Ghosts? Maybe there is, but I'm sure people don't go around using the terms with as much pride as some people who use the word atheist, which is maybe one of the things that puts me of the word, it seems to be used by some as a mark of their superiority.

    The only word I can think of which sums up the position that I think you hold is "sceptic". At present that term hasn't become loaded with additional meaning.

     

     

    Thanks, sceptic sounds like a good word.

     

    God is either in existence or not in existence that's 50/50. It is a fact that I don't know either way, although I'm very sceptical to point where I am happy to say that I don't believe, if asked.

  6.  

    I don't believe in God or am I religous, but for some reason hate thinking of myself as an atheist just because I don't believe in something I don't think I should have to belong to a particular group, I prefer to stand alone.

    That means that you infer something into the word "atheist" which is more than it means. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god(s). It isn't a "group".

     

     

    Some people try and turn it into a group though and some words can be loaded with more meaning than their initial purpose but even if it isn't a group I still reject the label for myself. Is there a term for people who don't believe in Santa or Ghosts? Maybe there is, but I'm sure people don't go around using the terms with as much pride as some people who use the word atheist, which is maybe one of the things that puts me of the word, it seems to be used by some as a mark of their superiority.

     

    I think I just prefer to simply say I don't believe in Gods. Ideally I'd prefer to say that I haven't even thought about it, sometimes it annoys me when it gets mentioned as one of lifes big questions it might be for some but not for me.

     

    Maybe I haven't explained very well, but I tried.

  7. . Ever had a de ja vu moment, seen an image in your dreams, and then seen that exact same image in real life. Say no more.

     

    That might be because you saw the image before your dream without realising it maybe subconsciously and then dreamed about it. This might be a load of mumbo jumbo, but I read in a Carl Jung book the once that he believes that memories can be inherited, so if that were to be the case then you could be seeing what a relative has already seen I know it sounds daft just another suggestion. I think there was an Horizon episode about it, although they didn't mention Jung.

  8. I don't believe in God or am I religous, but for some reason hate thinking of myself as an atheist just because I don't believe in something I don't think I should have to belong to a particular group, I prefer to stand alone.

     

    I guess you have to take a leap of faith to certain extent when reading books of science, your kind of taking someone elses word for it unless your carrying out the research yourself.

    • Like 1
  9. Useless - Yes, I agree. Increased intelligence is not necessarily the next step in our evolution.

     

    It wasn't really my opinion but something that had been stated to me as fact and it made sense to me, which I repeated as best as I could.

     

    This video I found explains it better.

     

    Thanks for information by the way.

  10.  

     

    There is nothing wrong with educating and providing services for people in vulnerable positions. I don't think anyone is arguing for completely ignoring the troubles of others. However, comparing a drug addict to a kid doing something regrettable is rather questionable.

    You can help those in need, but you can't babysit a country. People will do daft shit and wind up dead, they always have and always will.

    I was trying to understand what was meant by 'Darwin Nominated' it sounded to me like it was being suggested that people were selecting themselves out of the gene pool through stupid acts. I probably should of thought of a better example than a drug addict though. Anyway I always thought Darwinism was about selecting for the environment and adapting to that rather than anything like filtering out people who might be deemed 'stupid'.

    As I say I'm just trying to learn.

    Essentially man kinds greatest evolutionary step was cognitive intelligence. The ability to reason, to absorb and to act upon sensory input.

    The Darwinism they're talking of suggests that for man to evolve further then we need the "less intelligent" humans removed from the gene pool, that this is a natural phenomenon.

    This fails on many levels. Not least because it's not necessarily a good thing that we get "more intelligent". It's my opinion that we'll act more and more ruthless as a result, as emotion and unity are set aside for the greater good of the individual. Or the fact that one random foolish act does not make somebody less intelligent, or less "useful" to the race as a whole.

    An important part of our evolution is education, we have the ability to teach and to retain information that we then pass on down our own blood line. What BOF seems to be suggesting is "**** it, let em die off"!

    Also, you know, I don't think sympathy is a dirty word. That it should be regulated.

     

     

    I'd read that the familar picture depicting an ape in a series of images as he eventually turns into man is one of the most misleading depictions of evolution, because it suggests that it's about becoming streamlined superhuman beings when all evolution is about is becoming more adapted to the environment and increasing your genes frequency.

     

    So although we have become more intelligent as a result of evolution that's not what it's actually all about.

    • Like 1
  11. There is nothing wrong with educating and providing services for people in vulnerable positions.  I don't think anyone is arguing for completely ignoring the troubles of others. However, comparing a drug addict to a kid doing something regrettable is rather questionable.

     

    You can help those in need, but you can't babysit a country. People will do daft shit and wind up dead, they always have and always will.

     

    I was trying to understand what was meant by 'Darwin Nominated' it sounded to me like it was being suggested that people were selecting themselves out of the gene pool through stupid acts. I probably should of thought of a better example than a drug addict though. Anyway I always thought Darwinism was about selecting for the environment and adapting to that rather than anything like filtering out people who might be deemed 'stupid'.

     

    As I say I'm just trying to learn.

  12. This sounds like a mugs game. I don't like the sound of this 'Darwin Nominated' stuff either, but what do I know? I'm not as clever as some of you lot on here, but I'm trying to learn by reading the threads. What about Phillip Seymour Hoffman was he Darwin Nominated or what?

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...
Â