Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:30 pm
It is a made up ratio which has nothing to do with what is actually true, right, and correct.
It's not a ratio, it is a
relationship.
But you believe your whining and squealing has to do with some thing, correct?
You're asking the wrong person - it is a question you need to ask yourself.
If you can not explain anymore, then so be it.
Believing there is anymore to explain betrays the need for primordial reciprocity to be subject/context invariant.
This is true in the sense that 'I' am Everything, and thus thee Observer. So, literally, Everything is relative to thee Observer.
But whether this is what 'you' were referring to or not can only be known by what you share, and explain.
You have it the wrong way around: "I" is nothing, with everything
in relation to. Believing "I" to be "Everything" is equivalent to believing to be something one is not. In this case: anything at all.
How many times have I told you I do not believe any thing?
Are you capable of understanding and accepting this?
What you "tell me" and what is
true, are
opposites.
You are incapable of understanding this,
the same the reason I don't even bother to try.
So, do you believe there are no physical things?
No.
Remember it is 'you', "nothing", which believes, and it is 'I', which does not believe.
You have it backwards -
fascist pig entails projecting one's own nature onto another.
It would
certainly take a believer to believe their own internal state is that of another.
But considering you believe that atoms are not physical things, what do you believe it is that you observe in motion?
Obviously you believe there is NO physical Universe, so what is it you believe is in motion?
No, I do not
believe there is "NO physical Universe".
But that is EXACTLY NOT the contradiction I was talking about. So, everything you have said here is completely irrelevant and was so completely unnecessary.
The contradiction you are talking about does not, neither never existed, exist except relative to yourself.
I can not address
imaginary contradictions, only clarify why there never was one.
Again, you are living up to that name as you really are saying nothing.
Saying nothing is much better than believing to be "Everything" and being
dead wrong.
Are you ever going to understand that it is 'I' who does NOT believe, and it is 'you', "nothing", who believes, and is therefore 'you' who is the BELIEVER?
You have it backwards.
Are you able to elaborate on what this is actually meant to mean?
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=28045
What is this in reference to exactly?
Are you saying that you do not know what I am actually talking about and referring to?
If not, then why did you write mirror?
It is what you need to look at: a mirror.
But you are the one who said they are stuck in it.
Hence: CKIIT is designed to liberate the idolators in/of.
Is this all you can do here?
You are asking the wrong person again.
Only the problems that 'you' make, obviously.
I acknowledge problems already in existence.
Denying problems exist would require
belief.
The denial entails substituting the reality for a belief-based one.
Such denial is an indication of
delusion which is the same as Islam.
This says and shows a lot about 'you'.
I am
nothing - it would take a believer to believe otherwise.
Whereas you believe yourself to be "Everything",
I know myself to be nothing.
There difference is between belief and knowledge.
Before you try to invert: it is already predicted.
Will you prove that you have already demanded evidence, from me?
No, because I never demanded evidence from you in the first place.
As already indicated: I am not interested in what you say, knowing
you
clearly insane. I only engage to further understand insane people
and upon what grounds they (believe to) stand.
It helps my work, and will help others as well.
Can you not understand what that means?
I can and do. We may disagree on what the meaning is, but again,
your perspective is not of any interest to me
whatsoever.
What was already explained to me. I think you have, once again, completely and utterly MISSED the point.
You, not me.
Did you forget it was 'you' who separated them.
And, even if you left them as one, they are not things in which other things could exist (nor be) in, obviously.
I know you tend to believe only what lends itself to your complex, but
I treated them as separate in consideration for the people who believe they are separate.
This, again, was already explained, but you selectively ignore.
Space and time are not "things"
period.
How quick you forget, you said space and time are observable, and therefore things, which are implied to be physical.
I did not say space and time are observable,
am unsure as to how you came to believe I did,
and not caring enough to know how.
You really do like to change your view and perception of things, as we progress in discussion.
This is not a discussion, from my end it is me studying your insanity. Results are being used to temper CKIIT.
You are also the one who separated the things, which you said were observable, but which you now say are not even physical and not even separable.
That is what happens when you polarize against people 'you!' 'you! 'you!' -
you begin only seeing what feeds the enmity in order to sustain/justify it.
You firs said those words here in this thread, so what is 'yang' and what is 'yin', which it is 'you', 'nothing", that talks about them and writes about them
The yin-yang is a symbol.
To write about some thing, as though it is some thing, in order to 'try to' explain some thing else, but, which is really not any 'thing' at all, sounds like a really rather silly and foolish thing to do, from the beginning.
Why do you do it then?
This is just more evidence and proof, which you are providing, that you really are incapable of backing up and supporting absolutely any claim you have made here.
Your projections are certainly evidence and proof of
something.
[/quote]Using words as though you are supporting your claims, but then when challenged further you reply with, "They are not any 'thing'", anyway, says more about who is truly ignorant here.[/quote]
I would not ever support a claim to anyone who is, by default, incapable of confronting it.
I know that would be a waste of time.
What has those two words, which is how 'you' behave, have to do with what I just wrote here?
Islam divides the world on the basis of "believer vs. unbeliever"
and has for 1400 years - hundreds of millions are dead.
CKIIT reconciles this division which Islam perpetuates.
This is what you have said numerous times already, but have shown you are completely incapable of explaining what it actually means and how it applies to any actual thing.
Not incapable, just unwilling - especially to someone like you who is completely incapable of understanding it.
Is this meant to actually mean any thing?
In the broader context (of which you are invariably ignorant of): literally everything (and nothing).
But there is NO beginning as there was NO end, to the One and only.
Every moment is a valid beginning/end. As indicated: you will not understand.
Are you even aware that have to be able to back up and support your claims, instead of just claiming things.
It depends on the (formality of) the context.
What you are doing is exactly like a believer believing some thing to be true, but not at all being able to back up and support what they say and believe in with absolutely any evidence nor proof at all.
Who is asking for it? Nobody I know of.
For your information, contrary to your belief, that picture, without explanation, does NOT prove, NOR is evidence, for any thing at all, to me.
It was not intended to - I know not to try to prove anything to an insane person.
And an absolutely ignorant answer.
A question is asked to learn and understand more. So, questions are not ignorant. But, answers, for example like yours, can surely show how ignorant one is.
The question is only as good as the one addressing it.
Some questions are ignorant if/when the questioner is ignorant.
In this case, the question was ignorant because
the questioner is ignorant.
I can think absolutely any thing, but it is 'your' answer of what is 'space' and what is 'time' that I am asking for.
I already have a view. I am trying to ascertain your view of these things, obviously.
But you appear to be completely incapable of explaining thing and elaborating on what you believe is true.
The endeavor is inevitably tainted with your enmity and general loathing of/for humanity.
There is a difference between "incapable" and "not stupid enough to bother".
This does not make sense to me.
Sorry.
You forgot to finish your sentence, because as it stands, to me, you are, once again, saying nothing at all.
I am able to split my sentences to accord with the flow of your inquiries.
You don't take notice to this, because you focus word-by-word
searching for anything that feeds the enmity. You miss the whole
which has a strange irony to it - nonetheless, I learn from it.
Are you able to explain what this could actually mean?
Yes.
Your complete racist and hatred views shine once more.
Your accusation confirms my designation of
fascist pig.
Islam is
not a race - it is an ideological 'state' comprised of
many races.
Islam is itself rooted in hatred viz. "us vs. them" viz. "believer vs. unbeliever".
Very substantial revealing (!).
Why does it appear you at 'least try to' explain things when it evolves "others" and your obviously hatred of and for "others". but you are completely incapable of explain other non hatred of "others" claims?
Your accusations of "hatred" confirm once again: you are a
fascist pig.
If you continue to play the "hatred" card, I will continue to exploit it
to no end.
What is both beautiful and tragic.
All I can see here are you misguided and misinformed wrong views of "others" and their views.
The shouting of "Allahu Akbar!" is a seal indicating one is
certainly ignorant of the admonishment of Genesis 2:17,
thus any/all such individuals are certainly ignorant of any possible all-knowing god.
I thus don't care about the "views" of others unless they point towards truth - I care more about what is true and/or not true.
There is NO such thing as a 'your' "mind" existing.
If you so choose to
believe.
If you continue to write things the way that you did and do,
then obviously you believe that 'you' are better and more superior to some "others".
Please do not scapegoat
your own pathology onto me.
You were 'trying' so hard to make out you were more superior to "another" or "others" because you supposedly know some thing already, which they do not.
No such effort was made - if the firmament of your mind interprets it that way, the comparison is yours.
Yet you appear to have no understanding of how knowledge is obtained and collected.
I try
I test
I falsify
Truth-by-Way-of-Negation
NO assumption, NO problem, NO treating you as a source. Just LOOKING AT and SEEING 'you', "nothing", for who and what 'you' ARE, which, by the way, you are actually totally unaware of, YET.
Are you obsessed with me? If so: it is the same as idol worship. Love or hate, attachment is attachment.
Once again, completely and utterly incapable of explaining any thing at all, when asked for.
Unwilling, not incapable.
Once again, this says nothing at all.
The name says it all, remember?
But, if there is NO two, then there is ONLY One.
Is there two?
If yes, then what are those two?
alpha and omega
Trying both: TO (alpha) and NOT (omega) to BELIEVE
Testing both: TRUE/FALSE
etc.
You have to subject each belief to it's
own inverse. Eg.
+A: Islam is a religion of
peace.
-A: Islam is a religion of
perpetual conflict.
Which is more true?
If for some reason one is incapable of doing this,
they are certainly
anti-Christ.
It appears that you can read "others" writings, and repeat them, but are completely incapable of explaining those writings "yourself".
Certainly
not incapable - I was not even asked to.
These appear to be questions you are asking 'yourself" here. Are you even able to explain or answer your own questions that 'you' ask "yourself"?
I was not asking myself - they were meant to inspire thought.
OF COURSE through working together, and through 'logical reasoning' together, the words that create thee One True Picture of Life, exposing and expressing thee Truth of ALL-THERE-IS could be created.
But this will NEVER happen if there is a "i am right" and "you are wrong" attitude in people discussing.
Any confusion would take a believer to believe themselves to be right if/when they are wrong.
See: Islam. The "believers" religiously do this.
I do NOT believe any such thing.
Your believing or not believing has no bearing on whether or not it exists.
I KNOW what I KNOW, and as 'you' say I am comparing if your claims are in line with and aligned with mine. They are, to some extent, but because you appear to never explain what it is that you are saying and claiming, then I can never find out what it is exactly that you are claiming and/or proposing.
Your finding out what/how I see is not in any interest of mine that you should know.
Thee Truth may be we both want to explain and express the EXACT SAME thing, but if you will NOT be OPEN and Honest with me, and just answer my clarifying questions, then I nor we will ever find out.
You are not open and honest with/about yourself - why should you expect others to be with you?
You clearly believe you are, but that is the impasse I have no patience to circumnavigate.
But 'you' could NOT be any more further WRONG. If one is to LOOK over what I have written so far about "us verses them" attitudes, and discovers what I KNOW about thee 'I' and the 'you', then how WRONG 'you' are will be SEEN and UNDERSTOOD.
I am not interested in what you
believe to know.
It is what has made you upside-down such that you would conflate self with other.
Also, are you aware that 'you' wrote about an "us verses them" attitude because I use the 'you' word, yet here 'you' are using the same word because 'you' are LOOKING AT and SEEING 'me' as some thing, which, by the way, could not be further from thee Truth of things.
I don't religiously obsess over 'you' as a person as you do me. I care about ideas moreover the person making them, especially if I can not even see the person I am talking to.
Your constant LOOKING AT 'me' and "others" (especially in islam) has created a Truly "us" verses "them" attitude in 'you'.
Please stop trying to blame the division of Islam on me - I did not create the believer vs. unbeliever division, and would not develop a practical theorem that solves the "believer vs. unbeliever" conflict if I wishes for such a division to be perpetuated.
There is no "us" and "them", there is only "us" and "us" - the Muslims need to be given the truth about Islam.
What it
is, what it is
not.
alpha/omega
It's a shame you can not piece things together after you have ripped them apart.
So, once again, you write words, I ask what do they mean, you provide absolutely nothing.
You really do live up to your username here of "nothing".
If one is nothing,
What does one stand to lose but nothing? Moreover,
what does one stand to gain but anything and everything?
I like win-win situations. Much better than believing to be Everything and being upside-down wrong.
What is IT 'you' now BELIEVE 'I' am doing?
Projecting your own nature onto others as if belonging to them, instead of yourself.
Such a practice is precisely the nature of
fascist pigs.
And, if 'you' were an Honest and OPEN person, then 'you' would NOT continually 'try to' turn things around from what it is that 'you' have done and 'try' and put the attention on to 'me', personally, instead.
This is exactly what you earlier attempted to do with me - you're drawing from your own nature.
In case you are still unaware it is 'you' who LOOKS AT the person, and NOT the writings nor behaviors.
I discard both if/when I know their limitation(s), for knowing them already. Much else to focus on.
It is OBVIOUS, well to the readers anyway, that I am LOOKING AT your words, and what 'you' have said. Whereas, 'you' continually 'try to' LOOK AT and SEE 'me', as the "fascist pig" or some thing else.
You speak for the readers?
You speak for others?
Don't fascist pigs do that?
Speak on behalf of others?
I have absolutely NO know.
Incoherent.
I KNOW what 'you' are 'trying to' say, which is: The reason WHY the "world" is in the mess it is, is because of people like 'me', and 'mohammed', which you have already judged to be wrong and evil "persons", and if every one was like 'you', then the "world" would be a much better place now.
You are dead wrong - this has nothing to do with "people". I don't worship "people" as you do (ie. yourself).
However, 'you', unfortunately, have proven that you are NOT able to explain nor prove how this is even remotely true, let alone being even close to thee Truth of things.
I can't prove something I never claimed - you are attempting to impose your own wishful imagination of what I am "trying to say".
Only a Truly ignorant one would even think such a thing, let alone saying it out aloud.
Does capitalizing words make them Definitely True?
Ignorance means one knows not.
You have to also start being Honest, that is; if you REALLY want to SEE thee actual Truth of things.
You should take your own advice here.
This is all you appear to be able to say when the OBVIOUS Truth of what 'you' do is POINTED OUT, to 'you' and "others".
I only say it when you are
whining and squealing like a pig. They are related in that way only.
That was meant to be 'Or'.
Sorry for the confusion.
Now, are you able to do what I asked you if you could do?
Certainly yes, but unwilling.
So, to you, I am projecting a likeness to the words and/or the symbols you use. Is this for ALL the words and/or symbols your use?
The words/symbols are irrelevant.
Also, can you please define how 'you' use the word 'enmity' because, from my perspective, 'you' could NOT be more WRONG, even if you wanted to be.
Your perspective is not reality (thank God).
Well that is exactly what you appear to be doing.
Appearances can be deceiving, no?
Once again, calling some one a "fascist pig". This is a prime example of concentrating on the 'you' and calling 'them' a name.
Are you attempting to drag me down to your own level by accusing me of the same you are guilty of? If so, it would be interesting as it affects the finding of CKIIT.
You can believe whatever you want to believe. The proof is here to LOOK AT and SEE, which the readers can do if they so please.
I don't think they care. I've already received private correspondence not to even bother with you. The advice was sound, however I indicated I would continue as I wish to continue learning about your pathology of accusing others of what you were/are guilty of. That you would then attempt to invert and throw back my way is interesting to me, and invariably valuable for the development of CKIIT. Invariably there is an element of the Judeo-Islamic pathology of Canaanite mentality present.
If saying, "space/time (as: speed) = observable", does not mean that space/time does not move, or is not in motion, then what does it mean?
Will you explain what that means instead?
I will not, beyond it requires understanding that implicit in the relationship is a subject/object. I am not confident you can understand this.
Okay, if you say so.
This really is very secretive. Why is it so?
You're asking the wrong person (again).
