Most recent Thoughts (quick links)
Thought 32: WHAT HAPPENS IF CERNS DATA IS CORRECT? -- INCOMPLETE
Thought 31: THE TV LICENSE
Thought 30: THE DEAD MAN
Thought 29: WHERE ARE WE?
Thought 28: THE DIMENSION OF MEMORY, THOUGHTS, DEJA-VU AND THE GOD DIMENSION(S)
Thought 27: THE POSSIBLE IMPOSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING BEING IMPOSSIBLE
Thought 32: WHAT HAPPENS IF CERNS DATA IS CORRECT? -- INCOMPLETE
Tuesday the 25th Oct 2011 at 02:24:37
Thought 31: THE TV LICENSE
Saturday the 15th Jan 2011 at 22:34:21
Thought 30: THE DEAD MAN
Friday the 12th Nov 2010 at 23:58:23
Thought 29: WHERE ARE WE?
Sunday the 19th Sep 2010 at 16:19:17
Thought 28: THE DIMENSION OF MEMORY, THOUGHTS, DEJA-VU AND THE GOD DIMENSION(S)
Saturday the 18th Sep 2010 at 19:23:49
Thought 27: THE POSSIBLE IMPOSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING BEING IMPOSSIBLE
Friday the 17th Sep 2010 at 14:29:06
Make Articles more readable (changes font size and lineheight) 
Make Articles more readable (changes article width) 
Revert back to original settings 
DISCLAIMER: Hi all. In the next couple of days (its now the 19th of August 2009) im going to be seeding this website.
Im expecting all sorts of people to find this site once I start so Ive written this disclaimer.
Please pay attention:
Most of the stuff you'll read here is for comedy value only, and should be taken as such.
Any small minded idiots who think Im attacking their race or beliefs may as well leave the site right now as you obviously dont understand what you are reading.
Im Scottish and as youll see from some of my posts I make jokes about my 'people' just as much as I do about other races.
The last thing I am is a racist, hell im a descendant of Nepal (mothers side) living in Scotland with a slaves surname, so being racist would only make me the fool.
Neither am I a homophobe, a sexist or anything else along those lines
I will not tolerate stories of paedophilia or rape in response to anything said on this website. If you try it you will be banned. Now Im a very open minded guy so to get banned from here will be a great achievement, trust me.
If you say something as a joke it will be taken as such.
As an example... paedophilia is a no-no as Ive already made clear
But jokes like the following are allowed...
A mercedes slowly pulls up to a small boy walking down the street
The driver shouts out to the boy
'If I give you a sweetie will you come in my car?'
The boy looks round to the guy and says 'Mr. if you give me the whole bag ill cum in your mouth'
Why is it allowed? Because its a fucking joke... im not condoning it if it really happened and im not getting into the moral implications or any of that bullshit.
You have been warned... act like adults and you can stay. Act like retards and youll be treated like retards (the bad kind, not the funny kind)... go and peddle your hatred somewhere else
Im expecting all sorts of people to find this site once I start so Ive written this disclaimer.
Please pay attention:
Most of the stuff you'll read here is for comedy value only, and should be taken as such.
Any small minded idiots who think Im attacking their race or beliefs may as well leave the site right now as you obviously dont understand what you are reading.
Im Scottish and as youll see from some of my posts I make jokes about my 'people' just as much as I do about other races.
The last thing I am is a racist, hell im a descendant of Nepal (mothers side) living in Scotland with a slaves surname, so being racist would only make me the fool.
Neither am I a homophobe, a sexist or anything else along those lines
I will not tolerate stories of paedophilia or rape in response to anything said on this website. If you try it you will be banned. Now Im a very open minded guy so to get banned from here will be a great achievement, trust me.
If you say something as a joke it will be taken as such.
As an example... paedophilia is a no-no as Ive already made clear
But jokes like the following are allowed...
A mercedes slowly pulls up to a small boy walking down the street
The driver shouts out to the boy
'If I give you a sweetie will you come in my car?'
The boy looks round to the guy and says 'Mr. if you give me the whole bag ill cum in your mouth'
Why is it allowed? Because its a fucking joke... im not condoning it if it really happened and im not getting into the moral implications or any of that bullshit.
You have been warned... act like adults and you can stay. Act like retards and youll be treated like retards (the bad kind, not the funny kind)... go and peddle your hatred somewhere else
What happens if CERNs data is correct? -- Incomplete (thought # 32)
Added on 2011-10-25 02:24:37
What happens if CERNs data is correct?
A lot of people are now talking about CERNs recent discovery
with regards to their neutrino experiment. It looks like these neutrinos
travelled 732Km from CERN to Gran Sasso in 0.0024s. That time was 60ns too
short however if the neutrinos were adhering to the speed limit set by light within
our 4 dimensions.
There are many people trying to show a way that this data
may be incorrect, however there are very few people out there asking the other ‘big’
question. “What if the data is correct?”
Unfortunately most of these scientists aren’t seeing the
whole picture. They are focusing solely on the ‘If that’s true, the Einstein was
wrong!’ And that’s not actually correct. What Einstein said was that within
the 4 space-time dimensions that he knew about at the time, nothing could
travel faster than the speed of light. There’s a reason that anything held
within these 4 dimensions can’t go faster than light, there isn’t enough energy
in our universe to propel a body up to the speed of light. Once we get passed
the speed of light however, the mathematics calm down and become workable
again. Anyway, that isn’t the point either. We need a theory based on the
possible fact that something can actually go faster than light as far as we can
tell based on the 4 dimensional data we now possibly have. Please don’t take
that last statement as meaning we might also occupy another dimension; it’s
just that I’m still not sure where our consciousness, dreams, ideas &
thoughts live. It’s just so hard to imagine something as complicated as those can
be held in the 4 dimensions we can appear to interact with the most. For
example, dreams don’t seem to obey the physics of the 4 dimensional reality we
inhabit such as the need for cause to be before effect and the idea of time
being a roller coaster from which we can’t escape its pre-set destination or
direction. Anyway, I digress; sometimes I can be side-tracked a bit too easily.
So, what if the neutrinos do actually move faster than
light? I’ve already said that I don’t think this breaks Einstein’s theory, in
fact I’m certain Einstein would take the new information and see how it fits in
with all the other theories we see today. So, in his absence, I am going to
look into it for him. I’m sure Stephen Hawking and many other thinkers will be
doing the same… assimilate and move forward.
So, let’s assume that the data is correct, at least until
its proven otherwise. How could something go faster than light, if ‘e’ does = mc2?
There are two possibilities. These particles we are measuring have no mass.
Well, we know that the neutrinos mass is small, but it definitely isn’t 0. The
other possibility is that the neutrino somehow left the fabric of space-time.
The only theory out there of note that has more than 4 dimensions is string
theory. Now I know what you might think, “explain the phenomenon by using
something that is improvable or un-measurable”… and I would like to add the
word ‘currently’ to that sentence. If we only relied on what we can currently
measure then we wouldn’t get any further forward now would we? That’s why we
call it theoretical physics J
String theory might hold the answers to the not-yet-explained like gravity,
consciousness and even the basis for religion. There has to be an explanation
with regards to religious stories whether it’s simply madness, dreams or
nightmares or something else entirely. I’ve learned to never take anything for
granted until there is an answer that won’t break under any pressure. And once
again I’m off on a tangent. Within the extra dimensions string theory affords
us there may be no limit to the speed of a particle, no matter what mass,
although I don’t think that anything much bigger than a neutrino would be able
to inhabit these other dimensions. It also begs the question as to what mass
actually is and how it might be portrayed in dimensions out-with the first 4.
The point is that the energy of the neutrino may be able to increase to a point
within these extra layers based on its entry speed, only having to slow down
again when entering space-time. It also makes sense that there may something
within the higher numbered dimensions that act on the neutrino forcing it back
into our speed limited 4 dimensions. Gravity maybe. However long the particle
is held within the higher dimension(s) it isn’t having to traverse the lower four
dimensions where it would have to respect the speed of light.
As a side note: The huge pressures within black holes may
also be able to push particles into these higher dimensions, which might be why
we can’t tell what is going on beyond an event horizon but I’ll come back to
this a little later.
It’s about this time I want to burst the bubble on time
travel.
We can’t yet test if the neutrino has felt any effect with
regards to moving back in time, but if the neutrino has done what was explained
earlier then there is no reason to believe that it would even be part of what
we call time never mind going backwards through it. [Just
as 3D objects bend space-time, so too could time (grammar?) feel the effect of
higher dimensions or at least have an effect on them.] ‘Time’ in its simplest
form is simply a measurement of something changing. Bringing that down to the
smallest movement possible in 4D space-time would maybe be the movement of an
atom, or even something smaller if it changes its position in space-time before
the atom does (which is very likely). Going “backwards” or “forwards” in time no
longer sounds like a reasonable assumption to make if there are higher
dimensions that can accept particles in some form that we currently don’t understand.
Going back to the black holes, it might be that the
particles that are falling into a black hole have no way back into the 4
dimensions of space time. This could explain the energy streams that theory
say are fired out of a black hole back into our 4 dimensions. The particles
moving into the higher dimensions that the black hole are consuming have no
need for the energy after the point of the event horizon, plus the fact that
the particles are being crushed into a so-called ‘infinitely’ small space (note:
I believe that nothing is infinite, we simply don’t have a way of measuring it
properly or a word to explain what infinite actually is). The destruction of
the particle (as far as we are concerned from our viewpoint inside the 4
dimensions) could simply be it moving into a higher dimension, available to
anything travelling beyond the event horizon of a black hole. The energy
released at this point returns to 4D space-time, where it originally came from,
or more simply, back to where it can exist. This brings a bit of reality back
to the ‘legend’ of the black hole. No longer do we have problems with
questions like “what happens if you fall into a black hole”, “what would an
external entity experience if watching someone fall into a black hole”. A
black hole might simply be the bridge between 4D space-time and the higher
dimensions. I still wouldn’t hold out for consciousness to be able to ‘live’
within a black hole and I’m sure that energy is a requirement for what we call
reality. So as far as you are concerned you simply wouldn’t exist, or at least
not in a form that we currently believe to be the only possible way in the realm
of our experience-able reality.
And on to theology we march. If it is possible to
experience a reality in the higher dimensions along with the knowledge that 3
dimensional objects can modify space into something we understand as the 4th
dimension of time. Is it also not feasible that something in a higher
dimension can interact somehow with the lower dimensions, whether it’s a conscious
interaction or not. Maybe, these are interpreted as dreams to us and could
explain quite a lot about the ideas portrayed in the bible and other well-known
religious books as well as people’s belief that it came from a higher entity.
This higher entity may be nothing more than the higher dimensions of the string
theory interacting with our conscious mind. I think this is a more logical way
to imagine the ideas in the Bibles, Korans etc. of the world. The thing about
all the ‘good’ books of the world is that they have unknown forces interacting
with our reality. But they all hold the same kinds of ideas, principles and
teachings as each other. This relative conformity shows us that the people who
wrote these books were being interacted with the same way (generally), possibly
the only way, from another reality which may now be explainable to us as more
than just nice stories.
This teaches us an extremely important point. We must
always take what we know and what we understand, and build upon it or we will
stagnate. You may also be open to ridicule by simply turning a blind eye to those
questions that contradict what you believe to be true. We can’t take something
written tens of hundreds of years ago and blindly accept it when we know for
certain that there are contradictions in the theory. Take that knowledge and
make it work with the information we have gained over the time in between.
Sorry, that was a bit of a rant there, I just wish everyone to be open to new
information and not to blindly dismiss it as heresy. That goes for the
religious as well as the physicists living in the position that they are in
just now where what they ‘knew’ to be ‘true’ may no longer be the case.
And remember, I respect everyone as equals. If you don’t agree,
or maybe if you have more thoughts on this whole thing, then reply using the
reply box… you can also email me if you would prefer J
Maybe the people who say that death is the transition on to better
things aren’t as wrong as we once thought. Who knows?
Conclusion
Alright, so what can we do with this knowledge? There are
many implications and new questions that arise with the CERN data if we assume
it to be accurate. It would appear that there are higher dimensions that we don’t
really understand. Can we somehow propel a physical body such as the neutrino
into the higher dimensions on command? What happens to the neutrino whilst it
is in this higher dimension? Is there a way to propel a larger body into this
dimension? What would happen to that body if we could? Can we happily assume
that as the neutrino is not destroyed neither would a larger body? How do we
begin to measure the higher (in number only) dimensions?
Could we use the event horizon of a black hole to project
something into the higher dimensions? I’ve singled this question out because
it requires a little bit of an explanation based on what we currently believe.
As a person reaches the event horizon of a black hole time would slow down to a
crawl from that person’s point of view, until every nanosecond in time for a
viewer watching this happen away from the event horizon would feel like an
almost impossibly long time for the person attempting the transition. I have a
bit of a problem with this ‘fact’ though. How long is impossibly long? We
know it isn’t infinitely long. If it was, then nothing would ever cross the
event horizon and this is simply untrue. [Whatever
light is made of (photons), we should assume that it cannot be compressed
infinitely. would be crushed to something so small that whatever gives it mass
will no longer exist.] This would mean that we would need to propel the
person into the higher dimensions before they actually reached the event
horizon. This negates the possible use of the black hole as a way to propel
the body into the higher dimension. The only use for the black hole after the
projection of the body would be to hold the body inside the higher dimension,
or more accurately, to block the bodies in the higher dimension from
transitioning back into 4D space-time. The bodies in the higher dimensions are
then out-with (most of) the affects we associate with the 4 dimensions of
space-time such as the idea of time and the requirement of a 3 dimensional body
to ‘live’ in. But would it be conscious? And if it is conscious how it might interact
with physical bodies that mainly interact with the 4D space-time that we
understand. If, for example, it does now reside in the realm of dreams and
thoughts etc. would we recognise any communication as more than just random
stories that we dream at night?
The TV License (thought # 31)
Added on 2011-01-15 22:34:21
The first thing that you have to know is that the TV license is a government backed tax of sorts that allows a single privileged corporation to extract money from consumers.
This is what first made me worried about what the TV license money actually goes towards and who’s ideas in the government can be expressed through the BBC’s multimedia channels.
When faced with a TV license guy at your door the first thing to remember is that no matter what they say to you they have no right to be in your house at any time unless it’s with your express permission, and with that comes the ability for you to have total power over what is discussed whilst in your own home. This includes the ability to condemn anything that is said by any other person that you do not believe to be true or at worst allows you to have the higher ground when it comes to what information the TV license person says went on in your house. This will be added to later in the document but I need to backtrack a little to explain why you may need a license at your address.
So here’s the legal bit of the TV license: The TV license is only required when you are watching a live broadcast (i.e. not time-shifted in any way). It is required when you are watching live broadcasts made by any of the 4 major broadcasters. These are BBC, ITV (and associates), channel 4 and channel 5. It used to be that the license was only required when watching a BBC channel but this is no longer true. Live broadcasts include the usage of the live portion of the BBC Iplayer service. Note that this means that if you are using the BBC Iplayer only for watching programmes that aren’t being broadcast live then you will not need a TV license.
You will notice on the TV licensing website that it says that if you own a TV then you need a license. This is very misleading and is basically untrue. What the website information team has done here is to remove required information that it doesn’t want you to know, the fact that you don’t need a TV license unless watching live broadcasts. This is compounded by companies selling you TVs saying that by law they require information from you with regards to current TV license at the address in which you plan to use said TV. This is also false. This information is privileged information and does not have to be handed over at the time of your purchase, or indeed at any later date. The only problem here is that the company selling you the TV can then turn round and deny you the ability to buy the TV. This is usually the case when buying a telly from say, Currys or Comet for example. The reason they deny you is because they believe that it is now law to take peoples information when buying a telly and this isn’t true.
OK, so the TV license guy is at your door. Before you let him tell him to wait at the door, go to your living room and remove the connection from any cable or Sky boxes you have that are connected to the TV and especially don’t get caught with an aerial anywhere near your telly. Go back to the door and let him in. Do not allow him to ask what you were doing; simply inform him that it’s none of his business. If your TV is on the TV license guy will first try and say that you are using a TV so you need a license. As mentioned earlier, this isn’t true so confront them with it. From your point of view they are representatives of the TV licensing company, whoever they might be. So they have to give you information that they believe to be law. And just because they have a suit and a badge doesn’t mean that they know the law whether it is of their company or of the government. So, anytime you catch them out make sure they know that you know they’re lying. The second thing they might say is that having a Sky box or a cable box (by Virgin media etc) which does have the ability to receive live broadcasts means that you need a license. Again this isn’t true. What the TV license guy has to prove is that the Sky box is connected to the TV in some way which would allow you to watch live broadcasts. A good example of having the ability doesn’t mean that you would break the law is to say that you have knives in the kitchen and hence have the ability of stabbing someone to death, just because your house contains items that can possibly be used illegally doesn’t mean that you are in fact going to use them illegally.
The third and usually final resort for them is to say that they have equipment that can detect when you are watching the TV. Now this is kind of true but isn’t as worrying as you might first believe. For a better explanation to the TV licensing’s ability to detect you using a TV I will leave you in the capable hands of http://www.tvlicensing.biz/detection/index.php
Basically what you need to know is this: The TV licensing people wish to keep secret the method in which they can detect TVs watching live broadcasts. This, unfortunately for them, means that they cannot use data taken from a TV licensing detector van and use it against you in a court of law. For them to do this they would have to divulge how the detector van decided you were watching a live broadcast which they are unwilling to do because this could give the normal person the ability to fight against the technology.
So, there you have it. Fortunately for us the government that wants us to pay to watch a live broadcast is hampered by the law. The law is there to make sure that the legal system cannot be used against anyone in an unfair manner that breaks our basic rights as human beings.
Even if you don’t let the TV license guy in your house they may try to press you into giving up information that could condemn you. Never answer any questions that aren’t directly related to the situation you are currently in. ‘Have you ever watched live broadcasts?’ for example is where they usually start, your answer should of course be ‘That has no bearing on this situation’.
If you end up in a pickle and the police end up at your door then you have just as much right to deny them access to your house as anyone else that wants to access your home.
If the worst comes to the worst and they send out some heavies with a warrant, make sure the TV is NOT connected to your Sky box etc. It’s your word against theirs until they can prove without any shadow of a doubt that you are watching live broadcasts. Circumstantial evidence of a telly and a sky box or aerial will not hold up in a court of law as long as you stick to your story.
The dead man (thought # 30)
Added on 2010-11-12 23:58:23
He had been cut clean across the gut. Almost through to the spine.
He hung there for a few seconds while the blood poured from his upper half.
He was dead within seconds. But the lack of blood in the upper part of his
body and the now heaving with blood lower parts were putting a strain on the
remaining muscles around his stomach and rib cage.
They ripped like paper and the spine snapped about 1/3 of the way up.
The skin at the back of his legs began to rip away from the muscles, the muscles from the bone.
Until the muscles were upon the floor, blood streaming out in every direction' said Wile-E-Coyote
'Fuck me' said roadrunner.
CUT - repeated the director for the 8th time. 'What the fuck was that all about?'
Where are we? (thought # 29)
Added on 2010-09-19 16:19:17
Another day another thought apparently.
I had a problem with one of my earlier posts. It said that there might be multiple universes (of a sort) all on a single plain (the mathematical type not the flying type;)) OK so if this was true you might be right in thinking the edge of one universe is encroaching on ours, so you should see light that you may postulate isnt coming from our universe.
What if, and boy is this going to take some faith, but if youve read my earlier posts then it may not be an impossibility. What if we are inside what we call a black hole. All we know about black holes is that according to the general theory of relativity, we cannot escape from one as we can show that light couldnt escape the barrier known as the event horizon. Who knows what might go on inside one, beyond the event horizon. For all we know the opposite may be true based on what we could call an event horizon from the inside of one. Now, if our so called universe was inside a black hole we wouldnt be able to see out of it, making the universe as far as we can tell, infinite... neither would we see light coming in to it from galaxies etc outwith the black hole. Ok, so now what we have here is another problem. How on earth did we get to be inside a black hole. Well, again according to a wee bit of mathematics you cant go faster than light (although numbers are very limited things for descibing some things)... as you approach the speed of light your mass becomes 'bigger'. Ive stayed away from saying 'infinite' because what if one of the 2 dont have a limit as described in the infinite article below. At some point the mass would break through the light barrier, or the light barrier would hold up. The mass breaking through is what Im deciding to go with at the moment. We all know that we do need a smoking gun for the big bang theory so there it is. What would happen if the (as close to infinite as we could measure) mass burst through the finite light barrier. A huge explosion strong enough, and with enough mass to create a universe?
Its only a theory, but then, arent all the best parts of physics, theology etc., theory :)
Hope you enjoyed this wee post... it pushes the barriers past what I can imagine so it may take a couple of days for me to figure it out :P
The dimension of memory, thoughts, deja-vu and the God dimension(s) (thought # 28)
Added on 2010-09-18 19:23:49
Based on the idea that if string theory is to work there may be 11 dimensions.
When thinking about the 11 dimensions it kind of occurred to me where memories are passibly kept.
According to string theory it needs 11 dimensions to explain some things seen in physics (specifically to quantum mechanics?). It says that there are 7 'layers' of dimensions that we cant see, well perceive (as well as the four dimensions that our perception of reality is made up of).
Now what I was thinking is this: is it possible that our memories are linked to the 4th dimension (time) but are more prominent in say the 5th dimension. In this example we could prove that so-called psychics can somehow connect to other persons 5th dimension, pick up tit-bits around the person they've chosen so that it looks like, well, magic I suppose. OK so we have this dimension or dimensions that hold information (memories) and that the 5th (6th etc) dimension can talk to other memories in the corresponding dimension or dimensions.
In dreams though, we can be places that weve never seen, meet people we dont know and even interact with these people that we somehow know in this dream state.
This means that the dream state, if it lives in the same or another dimension to our thoughts, is interacting (possibly) with other memories and thoughts based on their perceived reality (Although perception might only work in the first 4 dimensions). And this is their perceived reality, which in turn is connected to our reality.
Now, this opens up the possibility of a God and so called ghosts/spirits/whatever, or rather something that has no connection to the 4th dimension (time) or below, but has a capacity for memory and the ability to work things out based on their total knowledge. If this [entity] has the ability to be perceived by the other extra-dimensional part of us, wait, is this the soul we are talking about here - possibly, but soul may be just another name for the other dimension we are talking about for the non-scientific community. Where was I? Well, anyway, this entity could be perceived based on our reality having 4 dimensions, just like the above psychics showed us, by being created in our 'minds eye'. In the same way that dreams are created not in the 4 dimensions we know, however, we still see them as a 3D (4D?) which is based on our understanding limited/perception of reality. So we see this entity we've decided to call God as a 3D entity at a specific time. However, what we are seeing is only a representation based on our perception of reality for an 'another dimensional' consciousness.
Ok, so I mentioned deja-vu in the title, lets move onto to that shall we? We decided that memories are attached to the 4th dimension, but were 'based' in another, higher dimension. Dreams having no link to time or space are not linked to the 4th dimension but are presented to us in a way we can comprehend i.e 3D with a beginning and end in perceived time but outside the actual dimension of time . What if we have access through dreams to the dimension where memory is kept but isnt limited by/to time.
Theres been many times where I had a slap from deja-vu and (albeit after the fact) remembered it from a dream. So as far as my memory is aware (the part of memory that's attached to my 4 dimensions) it received this information during a dream. However, it wasnt from a time that had already been, as perceived by me... it was still to happen.
Maybe aliens are already here mingling with us, but not in the way silly TV programs would make us believe. What if other dimensions 'so-called beings' could interact with that part of us that isnt in the physical world? Thousands of years ago this could have been seen as a God, though nowadays people perceive it as aliens. Just because in this perceived reality the closest planet that may have physical aliens on it might be millions of light years away (in the physical world) might not matter. As 'gods' outside the 4 dimensions of time and space are not limited to physical properties such as travel time, distance etc. This also helps the idea of omnipotent and omnipresent beings as thats exactly what 'they' are. The only problem is that this would make us higher beings as we are connected to all 11 dimensions, where as Gods live only in a select few of the higher dimensions, but it is also a very real limitition to us physical beings being trapped/manipulated by space/time.
Wait, this also opens up the ideas of lucid dreaming, astral projection and out of body experiences all being possible too.
Ive come up with another side-affect from the above post. Ive never taken LSD myself or any other mind-altering drug of that type. But, Ive spoken to people who have taken it. Recounts of these times include uncommon thought (for them) about solutions and answers to what man has been asking about since the dawn of time, be it time travel, other worldly holidays, OBE's, other entities that they havent 'seen' before or simply random images, smells, tastes that they may have or may not have been subjected to prior to the 'hit'. However, I have had first hand knowledge of accelerated memory recollection, quicker problem solving skills, shorter memory and increased thought brought on by the THC found in cannabis. Maybe these drugs are simply creating a temporary bridge across to the other dimensions Ive been talking about.
I just want to add that my little jaunt into smoking hash was a good while back now and that my questions were only based on what I learned in my life up until the point I did smoke hash. ie the goverment may be right that hash could stop you from learning properly when going through school.
Damned if I know, so 'Stay away from drugs kids'.
Im sure I have more to add to this thread, so I will be back. Pouring my thoughts out onto virtual paper can sometimes slow me down so that thoughts are thought and quickly forgotten again. And in a bid to get everything down ill add information as it comes back to me. For all I know the above could be an all jumbled up mess that I will have to re-write. Thats excitement for you :)
ADDENDUM: Ive realised that the chemical that may be the key to OBE's and 'the light', Dimethyltryptamine or DMT, is simply a naturally occuring drug in our bodies that have the same effects that LSD etc. Or rather, the other way around as LSD is man made. This gives weight to the fact that LSD may be a chemical bridge to the extra dimensions that I was talking about earlier.
The possible impossibility of something being impossible (thought # 27)
Added on 2010-09-17 14:29:06
Ive been thinking again, havent I?
The definition of impossible is something that can not be done, no matter the resources. So with that in mind lets kill off a personal bug-bear. If somone says to me that theyve done something impossible then they are lying. One of two possibilities in this case must have been true.
1) What the person is telling me was only thought to be impossible by them. In other words what they have done was only the improbable or incalculable (Ill talk about this soon).
2) They are lying about doing it.
Now, I think we should only use the word improbable instead of impossible unless it can be shown by definition not to be possible. A good example of this would be that if you had a string the length of the universe on a single axis, ie it isnt looped in on itself in any way. As youll remember in a previous thought I said it was impossible to have something that is larger than the current universe in which we are in (ill explain another theory in a second regarding this). This means that, in the above example, it is impossible for the string at that time to be say 10% larger than the universe. So theres a possible impossibility.
Now to jump back a wee bit, I specifically said in the universe in which we are currently in. What I mean is that theres a possibility that there were multiple big bags that have occurred in what we call the nothingness of space at possibly difference times. This fixes one of our problems, the problem with the string being the largest it can be in our universe as it adds the possibility of another universe being bigger than our own. So the largest a piece of string can be is the length of the earliest universe from big bang to its current size which in this example will be, say, 1 billion, billion years before the big bang that created our universe.
Ok so now weve got a bigger piece of string, but if the universe which we now think is the oldest universe isnt actually the oldest, in fact in terms of 'universe creating big bangs' it might only be the oldest we can understand because its relative closeness to our universe. So we now have a BIG number that we cant understand, and remember from the earlier post this number will be finite. Now, you have a piece of string the length of the oldest big bang. Proving this may be impossible for us but it is real. So, now we have a real impossibility based on what we can achieve with our past, present and future resources... but that universe, as has been shown earlier does actually exist.
OK, I think thats sorted now.
I have another problem now. Some point in our (more than likely) VERY distant future, our universe may collide with another universe. And that doesnt sound like fun!
Also something that may sound impossible like a piece of glass materialising in mid air and cuts someones head off is only improbable. The chances of thousands of atoms creating something like glass in the air cannot be found to be impossible, who knows what freak of nature might be the cause of this but all the atoms are there to create glass so its not impossible, again, its only improbable.
What about people flying you say? In dreams we sometimes do fly and dreams are only an extension of our reality, so flying is possible in dreams. If you dont go for that extension mumbo jumbo which i will be talking about at a later date regarding string theory, its multiple non visible dimensions and where the mind (and soul? HA HA HA!) might sit may help you come round to my way of thinking (sorry for the long sentence there, lol). I also have a theory based on the multiple invisible dimensions that may promote the chances of what people think is a God as being possible i.e a (much?) older non physical entity 'being' that lives only in those or some of those extra dimensions.
Free will is not an illusion (thought # 26)
Added on 2010-09-16 16:51:44
Ive seen old (and young) hippies saying the following: 'Free will is an illusion'... well, it wont surprise you to know that I have a problem with that sentence. An illusion, to my mind, would be something that wasnt there, existed etc. However, free will does exist.. the problem with free will in a legal sense would be to allow things like murders, smoking hash, paedophilia (see what I didn there? :P) etc. The thing is that these *are* allowed to be done by law i.e. you cant stop someone before the crime and say that theyre going to jail on the premise that you would have continued doing said illegal act had they not been stopped... because this means the actual illegal act was never commited and hence is not punishable using law. So, you do have free will before the time you do something illegal. Only after commiting the crime would your free will be more limited than it would be in the outside world... but you still have free will to do anything that you think might be possible inside this cell. Basically what Im getting at is that Free will is not an illusion, its simply that free will is illegal. Now, if more people knew that our free will was being hampered by law, what percentage of those people would actually have the balls to say 'I would prefer free will to what youre offering', knowing that free will is the most basic human right.
Maybe people dont really understand what theyre asking for... are they asking for free will on the basis that theyll then go and kill somone? If that hypothesis turned out to be true would you really want free will? If true free will had been given to say, Hitler, then no-one would have stood in his way to stop the global domination of the Nazi's, hence free will after the (f)act needs to be illegal.
What we need to sort out is what should be illegal and what should not. Heres a starter for you, everything that doesnt cause serious harm to any other single person (or more) should be legal... That means that junkies are now legal because until they batter somebody for their money they arent hurting anyone but themselves. And as mentioned above, a crime that was never commited can not be punishable. People who murder other people can only be found to be acting illegaly after the fact once again. Below that you get attempted murder, i.e. if we didnt stop you, you would have committed murder. Or the other which should be illegal, GBH. As this actually caused another person damage. However, attempted GBH is legal, because (altogether now) if the crime doesnt hurth anyone else it isnt a crime.
Last time? Free will is NOT an illusion.
How God betrayed his own children (thought # 25)
Added on 2010-09-16 01:00:16
So, another fun filled thought for you to mull over...
If God is omnipotent and omnipresent + the other 3 onmis why didnt he stop his children eating from that so called tree of knowledge? Ive had an answer to this as follows: 'He gave man free will to do what he wanted to do'.. Right, well this answer begs questions and ill show you why. I tell my son not to go into a cupboard because theres bleach in a bottle... and for arguements sake he has to live in that same cupboard with this bottle in the middle of what is his entire world. At some point the boy would go to the bottle and drink from it. However, Im omnipotent and I see what the boy is going to do... I love the boy, so to keep me with him I stop him from drinking from the bottle... Yes he still has free will, but for my own sanity I stop him from drinking from the bottle... OK something a little less harsh then... 'Dont eat those skittles that are in cupboard, or youll be forever removed from my house'... whats he gonna do? Eat the skittles... now Ive given him free will and hes decided to eat the skittles anyway, so I throw him out of the house and I never see him again... does that sound like someone who loves you? If that happened today and I threw out my, say, 8 year old son Id be sent to jail and my son would be taken from me and it would have been my own stupidity to have pointed out the skittles at all, or even one better than that, why the hell have I put the skittles in a place that would tempt my children... but its OK for 'our father' to do it to us, in fact Id be surprised without DNA proof that this supposed carer is even related to me at all.
So anywho... I believe that sub-consciously all god fearing christians have this idea in their head somewhere which is why christian fathers can be such arseholes especially when talking about their families.... murderers, rapists and even the ones who torment their families without his fists but using his idiotic little brain to put down anyone that might have an idea.
And last but not least, I dont need people saying 'ahhh but God was vengeful in the old testament, blah blah blah'. If you were the ones putting the bible together in the 4th or 5th century... why would you include the bit where 'your father' is being an arsehole... especially if its actually Gods word... why the fuck would a father say, 'yeah write a book about me, oh and dont forget the bit where I was being a cock to my children'.
God has a lot to answer for, and I want answers now bitch!
I said God was meant to be onmipresent, however, what if the control interface was incorrectly programmed at that time and he had fucked up the x-axis (horizontal) and instead of left it goes right and vice-versa. Maybe he saw Adam and Eve going to the tree and by the time he got to them with the fucked up control pad that he was using it was already too late... Maybe he should buy new C++ developers to get that fixed.
The trouble with infinity (thought # 24)
Added on 2010-09-15 21:18:02
Im going to add line breaks only to make the reading of this more manageable. Without it you might be readin over the same bit a hundred times thinking, thats not what I was thinking about.
The trouble with infinity is that it doesnt adhere to anything else we believe to be true. It says that you can have an infinitely large or small number. This simply cant be true.
There is a specific number that can be the current finite number, however over time that number in our minds can become larger. That doesnt make it infinite. The number beyond what you could say to be the largest number then becomes the largest number.
The closest thing we could say is a infinte number (albeit at that time) would be if somone or something could start at the (supposed) big bang using something as abstract as time.
Now time is simply a number that explains when the next big number is possible. Everytime something happens in the universe i.e. a proton moves from one finite position to another then you can call this differece+1. So if we decide that difference+1 is what we call time then it has to have a finite number associated with it. Lets say for arguments sake that it is one trilianth of one nano-second.
If whatever it was started counting and added another 9 to the end of that number the next time it could, i.e. another proton move that didnt happen when the last ones did then there is an albeit HUGE number but a finite number none-the-less the only thing that is stopping that number being any bigger, is the amount of time that has passed... hence, you cant have a large infinite number.
You can have a number that can be no bigger than it currently is... but another trili-nano second later it has increased by another number 9 at the end of the already massive number. So there goes the infinity bubble.
This makes the universe a finitely large place which is only bigger when it can be, by using our explanation of time shown earlier. What space is expanding into is quite literally nothing.
As of the big bang, I assume a photon was discharged and from that point onwards the photon was at the very edge of space/time. At this point space was miniscule as light was at the edge of the possible universe. Now, this is a finite distance just as it is 14 billion years on. What makes our universe as we know it is that photon, or one like it, being as far as it possibly can be at that time... only to be much further on in say 10 minutes time.
As you can see, infinity cant be measured with what we call numbers, so that means as a numeric answer 'infinity' or 'infinite' is like asking someone what the biggest number they can think of and them replying 'balloon'. They are making just as much sense as the person replying 'infinity'. Ask them for an example of what that number might be and most people if not everyone would start with a number. The only thing stopping it being a bigger number is the ability to add that next number to the sequence.
The second problem begins when someone tries to make something physical infinite. A simple example is to ask whats the longest a piece of string can be...
well, the piece of string can only be as long as where the big bang started from to the point where that photon (inc the -1 of that photon) is at this point in time. Now in 1 trili-nano second the universe is going to be bigger by some measurement.
Now, the person that said the string can only be as infinite as the size of the universe is now wrong because the universe is now bigger, and had someone the time and patience they could measure that original piece of string which can be proven to be made bigger at the point when the measurer reaches the end... the only thing that has changed is how long it took the measurer to measure said distance. So theres another example of how infinity cannot be used when counting somethings length for example.
The third and last problem is this: The infinitely sharp sword that can cut air, or even hydrogen, or even a proton of hydrogen, or whatever that proton can be made up of. The first thing with something being sharp is that it must be able to cut something. That would mean it would have to be physical in nature i.e. made up of a string of atoms that can affect other physical things such as another atom. This means that there is a point when the blades(?) atoms(?) become so disperesed that it wouldnt cut through that atom, it would simply pass between the 2 pieces of matter that its trying to cut. The fact that we can think of it being cut in twain means (such as splitting the atom) that it isnt as physically small as something can get. If it was as small as something can be and you tried to cut it it wouldnt split. So, the infinitely sharp blade has a point when its sharp against what it is cutting and then it simply doesnt work. There goes infinitely small (again).
Here be dragons (thought # 23)
Added on 2010-05-07 22:53:33
This was an email that I sent to the author of 'Here be dragons' as youll see, by the end of it Im a little annoyed, lol
Hi there... first things first why give a feedback form to allow feedback that doesnt go to the person making the claims. That seems a little silly. Anyway, ive just been watching your video... there are so many things you say are correct, however like that idiot David Icke you also uses obvious truths followed by implausible information so that the watcher says 'well hes right on that point so ill go along with the next as I dont understand it'. You mention media using this technique to sell information to the masses and yet you use the same psychology yourself. Please note, before going any further, this is not a 'I hate your video and your wrong in everything you say and do' email.. just before you hit the delete button :)
There are some out and out lies that people actually believe to be true and you have quoted them as being fact, the best example is that people used to think the world was flat. This is simply untrue and was created by the media in the 70's to show how far we have come since the dark ages. So unfortunately, you laughing at people that believe networks such as the lying Fox network is as funny as it is ironic.
Like I said, this is not a slagging match at all, I just think that if you are trying to sell something as truth then dont get caught out and preach the things you believe to be true simply because you havent looked into them. Isnt this the fact that your trying to get viewers to understand and stand by? Another great example of this is the preudo-science known as hands-on healing (in the UK, not sure what its called in the US). Although scientists have not confirmed that this is a true science they havent yet been able to disprove it either... and they have tried. The reason they havent yet dis-proved it is because of such things as so called aura machines which can take pictures of the aura. Now just because you may not like the name Aura simply because its not a name invented by the science community doesnt mean that it doesnt exist. In fact, the electric field that eminates from the body is very real. We dont know its effects or how it is affected by other things such as two of these fields interacting with one another. So for all I know hands on healing could be quite real... just saying that it isnt real because it hasnt been scientifically examined in a great deal doesnt mean that its fake.
Another thing that you mentioned in your video was the autism and vaccine jab thanks to coralation. Autism is now testable within the first tri-mester of the pregnancy
It also hasnt yet been proven who was in the planes that were in the 911 disaster. Especially as one of the supposed bombers were actually watching the TV in his house as he was named as one of the pilots. This can be checked online if you want, which I suggest you do because unlike some people I dont have an answer... was it Bush, was it Bin-laden? Who knows... and to be honest even if your government does know the truth, in 60 years time when they have to release the files im sure theyll be half marker pen, half printer ink like the UFO files that were released i.e we'll probably never know.
What your video did do however was prove to me that minds that are too closed off thanks to believing what they assume to be good facts given out by one media group can be as dangerous to the wandering idiocy shown by conspiracy theorists believing in their flawed information.
New compunds that are supposedly made better etc by science
Last year my aunt, gran, granda and uncle all died in 1 year and i thought what a bloody tragedy... im sure i would remember a year where 10 people i know died. Youre calculation, or rather the fringe scientists calculation is also flawed. Here's why:
I know, say 100 people. To be dreaming about all of these in one dream is implausible so that then changes the calculation thus: I know 100 people of which 10% die that year. That means in 10 years everyone I know, care or think about will die within 10 years... of course it will be a little longer as in year 2 i will now only know 90 people, 10% of which is 9 so in year 3 there will actually be 90-9=81 people. But to keep the maths as simple as they are in your video we'll go with 10 years=everyone dead, 11th year ill be dead. Thats implausible so lets look at this properly shall we. I know, think or care about 100 people at this moment in time. 10 of which are going to die this year... well, no, that doesnt sound right either does it... lets change that to the worst year Ive had in my 34 years so far (last year when I lost my aunt etc)... so we have 4 people dying. I dream about 1 of these people no more than once a year so that makes our year a maxmim of 'the amount of people likely to die' * 'the length of time it takes for me to have a dream about all these people' ie 365 days * 4.. which equals 1460 days. Now we have to ... in fact never mind the mathematics of this is becoming too difficult to finish when all im trying to do is show you that youve over simplified it... maybe just a tad
Another 2 quick notes below... I was going to send you a complete email about your video but I think people with any understanding in psychology will spot the errors.
Fiddling about with what looks like scientific equipment when talking about testing new drugs etc although you mention that if someone is shown in a white lab coat etc should be streered clear of. I think you may be right on that actually
Smart people believe weird things - taking away my questions as Im a clever person believing silly stuff
'Claiming you know better' is a direct quote... but isnt that exactly what you are doing? Claiming you know better?
At the start of the email I wasnt going to be judgemental, nasty or flame... however, like your knowledge hating opposite David Icke you too are trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes by telling them you know better. I hate that :)
Regards,
-------------------------
The here be dragons website can be found at:
http://herebedragonsmovie.com/
This is less an introduction to critical thinking and more believe what I say because I am all knowledge... By the way I would have left this message to Brian Dunning on his facebook site, but for some odd reason you arent allowed to leave comments... wonder why. Also I would have left comments on Brian Dunning googlevideo page but for some odd reason you were allowed to leave messages on there... wonder why. Also I would have left this message to Brian Dunning on his youtube videos site but youre only allowed about 250 characters on there. Also I would have left this messsage to Brian Dunning via the main video website but messages left there dont actually go to him apparently... wonder why...
Conscious, Sub-conscious (pre-conscious) and unconscious (thought # 22)
Added on 2009-12-06 16:50:17
Hi all. Recently ive been reading some stuff on the demented wisdom of Freud. However, even though he was mental and primarily used women who were nuts to base his ideas on there are a lot of questions regarding what the difference is between the 3 (although most concentrate on the sub and unconscious mind). I have noticed that people say you can use them interchangeably which is absolute nonsense. They have no idea what theyre talking about.
The reason I started reading up on this was after watching a program with Derren Brown in it... he was talking about the unconscious mind as being the secret of his manipulation (mainly). But I had always been told that things like NLP, hypnosis etc was manipulating the subconscious. Anywho... i decided to write this thought as there is a lot of bitching about what the right word is for whatever part of the mind and I wanted to add my 2 cents (ha'pennies?).
Some psychologists, psychoanalysts etc call the subconscious the pre-conscious which is a bit strange considering they are renaming something that freud gave us because they simply dont like the word subconscious (another type of stupidy in political correctness - I know Ill take what youve created change one thing in it, rename it and call it my own.... god damned glory-hogs). So get over it... now I know the more knowledgable will say that there is a reason for this change in name, but basically its because Freud didnt mention everything that psychologists see today when creating the subconscious idea. So instead of simply saying that Freuds subconscious could be added to they changed its name to pre-conscious. Tits.
So anyway. From Freuds interpretation (seeing as it was him who coined the 3 terms): The conscious mind is what is concentrating on the now... whats happening.. should we be sidestepping the oncoming car etc. The subconscious is where easily retrieved memory is held such as post codes for houses youve had in previous years, phone numbers of friends and even your own old phone numbers. For example if I think hard enough I can even recall my Irish girfriends home phone number which started 0035 345 blah blah blah. This isnt in my conscious mind as I have to think about it and concentrate on 'seeing' the number in my head. The unconscious mind is where deeply repressed memories reside. Things like, and this is horrible to even think about, but if a child is abused when theyre at a young age but dont remember anything about it at all unless faced with the determination of psycho analysis etc (I told you it was horrible to even think about).
Now, without knowing too much about how the brain works and where the conscious, sub-conscious and unconscious minds reside (ie are they all part of the same thing or are they trully seperate) this is the closest definition to what the three are so far.
As I learn more about this myself I will no doubt modify the thought above. So if someone comments and it doesnt seem to be appropriate to the text I will add add a comment to explain why this has happened. For example, I know from reading stuff that I wrote when I was younger that some of it was contrived or sometimes down-right silly and so, have ammended it over the years. So expect me to look at this in a year and think... 'damn that was stupid' lol :) i.e I have been known to make mistakes :) Shoocking... I know.
PS. As for the medical industry to use the term unconscious as meaning knocked out is totally incorrect (did you see what I did there, I used to inappropriate word to prove my point, arent I clever... lol)
UPDATE 1:
Hi all... right ive been thinking about what Derren Brown said about talking to the unconscious mind and I think I can see what hes getting at. This is the problem with not having a brilliant picture of how the mind works and only basing it on a concept in someone elses mind.
I think in the case of hypnosis the hypnotist is obviously originally talking directly to the conscious mind, however its trying to confuse the conscious mind (this is the main idea behind hynosis... confusing or boring the conscious mind) so the the subconscious mind takes over.
Now, when people are in deep hypnosis and are being told to do silly stuff like 'upon hearing the music you will think youre John Travolta and youll start strutting your stuff' this must be held in the unconscious mind which is only currently accesible to the hypnotist by telling the victim that they are under their control (and also using a gesture to start the command such as touching their left shoulder for example). I believe this to be the case because simply thinking of the time you were hypnotised does not bring back the command to dance like a loony when music is played... that could cause big problems for someone like Paul McKenna, lol. So through using the 3 states of the mind, stage hypnosis can be created.
However, something like NLP does not bore the conscious mind. The NLP guy (or girl) simply adds gestures that the sub-conscious or unconscious mind picks up on (im not sure which yet.. ill get back to you on that).
Something like ideomotor reading is the sub-conscious and conscious mind knowing what the reader is looking for and their conscious actions and sub-conscious muscle movements giving them away. Ill be back with more im sure, lol
Think outside the box Mr Robot (thought # 21)
Added on 2009-12-02 04:43:22
I have a lot of time to think about stuff. Sometimes I come across things that dont make sense... kind of like this
I have these degree things, some HNC's a couple of HNDs, boring stuff like that. I used to even teach people what Im about to tell you. Not because I believed it to be right, but because I was told to teach it. Anyway, the point. When we go to school and college and the likes We have all been taught to think inside the box. Regurgitate what we are told. Dont think for yourselves.
The next thing we're told to do is get a job. Now at this point we have to regurgitate, once again what weve been told. 'Tell me what you learned. {Were you a good boy, did you get high grades? Can I trust in you to conform with the rest of my sheeple?}'.
'Do you prefer to work in groups or alone?' Of course there is no good answer to this. If you say youre good with people then are you reliant on them? Do you prefer to get on with the job in hand on your own - are you a loner that isnt good in a group?
OK, so you pass this test. The hypocrites then, after making sure you act and look like everyone else, ask you to think outside the box. HAH!
Its funny, but the rant that Al Pacino goes through in The Devils Advocate just sprang to mind. 'Too busy chasing your own tails to question things'. Corporations, managers, bosses, all playing God with your little minds.. keeping you chasing your tails so you dont know which way is up and which way is fragile.
The next time your boss asks you to think outside the box, ask them this, 'which box?'. Watch their little mind collapse in on itself. Theyll try to tell you YOU are being silly. Theyll laugh, theyll smile. They will do anything to make it your fault. Remember this. It will help you along the way.
And remember, to start thinking outside the box you have to actually start thinking.
Dont believe what you hear just because youre hearing it from someone who is meant to be more clever or in the know than you. These people are usually so closed minded its actually quite sad. These are the people who will not believe that you really have faith. They cant understand it because it isnt something that they can be taught.
They cant believe in gods, ghosts and things that havent (yet) been explained or proven to be true. Remember there was a time when people didnt understand relativity. There was a time when people thought we were the center of the universe. Just like gods and ghosts, people reallly thinking 'outside' the box were scorned and/or laughed at. Only for time to prove them right.
This era of human understanding and development is being held back because were are forced to think like everyone else. Start thinking like Einstein, Plato, Pythagoras, Socrates, Aristotle. And, of course, Stephen Hawking (a man who can even turn round after saying one thing, realising he was wrong and letting everyone know he was wrong - black hole theory, or was it the shape of space, whatever... hes a great man). Oh, and Bono... yes U2's Bono, is not a great thinker of our time... hes simply doing what he thinks is right, and in my humble opinion... he is right... but knowing the difference between right and wrong doesnt make you a great thinker.
The Loudness Wars (thought # 20)
Added on 2009-11-22 21:30:13
Ive just been introduced to the Loudness Wars. Unfortunately it was because I was listening to metallicas new album Death Magnetic. It was a friend that told me that this has been all over the internet now for ages (where have I been? lol)
Apparently when the studios are mastering albums for digital distribution they started making the audio on the tracks as loud as possible. This isnt a problem, loud tracks, thats ok, however they have also been compressing the dynamic range of the songs to make them louder. This destroys part of the music by upping the low volumed parts to be roughly the same as the high volume parts and upping the overall volume of the tracks as far as it can go (sometimes too far). Now when you do this (too much) the sounds become distorted. On the new Metallica album this makes the guitar and drum tracks sound distorted. You can sometimes even hear the clipping of the tracks (which is fucking stupid if you ask me).
Anyway, theres some good news. If you really want to hear the new Metallica album then apparently there is a version that has been taken from the Guitar Hero Metallica game which sounds better than the CD release. This is a shocker for several reasons but the main one is that CDs arent compressed (file size) where-as the Guitar Hero versions I believe use either MP3 or OGG type compression (pretty sure its MP3 tbh). So a 320Kbps mp3 compressed copy is actually better sounding (as it has more dynamic range in the tracks) than the CD original.
All I can say is ... LAFF
And remember I dont condone anyone downloading the Death Magnetic album from somewhere like isohunt.com.
Thats weird. Someone seems to have put a tick box on my website for ISOHunt. So typing in, for example, death magnetic guitar hero, clicking on the isohunt box and clicking the button might take you to something thats very illegal. So you better not do that. OK.
Also, there is a petition if youve bought the CD and are not happy about it, just search for it in google. Wikipedia also has more on loudness wars... its a good read :)
Lars told the petition mob that 13,000 names (fans) was insignificant, so Lars, go fuck yourself ya prick. What would your mum think... in fact hold on ill just ask her.....
Lars, your mummy says youre a very naughty boy
And all this after the napster cafuffle... Is lars the fall-guy for Metallica or wot?
Sorry, its been pointed out to me that Lars Ulrich is neither a twat or a prick, he is in fact a cock. Proof has been added to this story
UPDATE 1:
Well fuck me sideways if Metalica arent talented as fuck... they may be a corporate money making machine but if Metallica Magnetic Tour, Nimes comes out on DVD you have to buy it.... god damn... and not matter how big a cock Lars is he can play drums like fuck :) Rock on and shit
Img1 
Img 2Img1: ... Sorry Lars, you cock
Img2: Example of the waveform differences between Guitar Hero's the Judas Kiss (Death Magnetic) and the version from the CD
Heroes ... my ass and wtf etc (thought # 19)
Added on 2009-11-11 06:04:51
Right... hold on a minute... just watched heroes season 1 (for the first time... yeah I know Im 2 years behind). It was as pish as I thought it might have been. Another 'Lost'. 23 episodes that could really have been cut down to about 3... anyway, thats not why im bitching....
Peter Petrelli... the guy that soaks up everyones powers and can use them on call by simply thinking of the person who had the original power as noted by thon invisible type English bloke. Right, well why in the hell did his big brother Nathan have to come and fly him away at the end of Season 1??? He had already 'soaked' up this power... it was even shown in the episode where he confronted his brother on top of the building.. remember.. he walked towards him from the ledge and then realised he was floating...
So why the hell didnt he just use the flying power on his own instead of bringing his brother down with him? Did I miss something?
This series doesnt make sense...
...and talking of series' that dont make sense. Have we found out yet what the black smoke is in Lost? What are we on? Season 63? 64?. Something like that anyway...
PISH. Thats what I say.
Can someone write me an essay on what happens in season 2 and season 3 of heroes so if there is a stupid plot fuck up I dont have to wait 23 more episodes to see it. While youre at it, write me an essay on what has happened in Lost since the end of season 2... should only take about 300 words or so.
UPDATE 1:
Right, bastards... (the writers of heros that is). Why the big finale in season 1 only to bring everyone back again for season 2. Peter is OK, so is his brother?? So is Gabrielle (Syler.. is that how u spell it) after being stabbed by Hiro... god damned writers cant even decide on who to kill.... AAARRRGGGHHHH Series 3.. WTF! They kill off the psychic junky artist dude, only to give the ability to Arthur Petrelli... well how else would they make you keep coming back (must show future to show what theyre fighting for... how we do it? Oh, why not make dead man alive man and give him see-y into the future power....KL!! lolz0r... is there a point to this story... is it me or is it being written by 10 year old school boys.... Thing is... I cant stop watching it... does that make it good?
UPDATE 2:
So in series 3 Peter Petrelli's dad (Arthur) can travel through time to go back and steal the light from Hiro before Arthur steals Hiros power... eh?
And, the lassy that can run really fast... is she the one that nicks everything? Including the formula? If it is how can hiro find her 200m medal (or whatever it was) in her appartment from when she was 12 or was it 12th grade... it doesnt matter... she says A year ago this is the way I was, walking about on crutches etc because of cerebral palsy... how could she win that race with such an illness? Someone better make the doctors aware... Or ... eh? wot? Im confused... was it a different person... I wasnt really watching properly, lol
UPDATE 3:
Lols out loud... kill Arthur... now how are we gonna show whats gonna happen and keep the viewers watching? Oh, I dunno... give the drawing the future power to the police who cant draw!!! ah, they wont see that coming... ffs :S
PS. Dont get me wrong. No, I probably couldnt do better but Im not paid stupid amount of money only to make mistakes like they do.
At least this story is fast and fluid unlike Lllllllooooooooooosssssssssssstttttttttt NEWS FLASH: Lost Season 797326173 starts this fall. Dont miss it... find out what the mist may have been... expect more questions than answers... you know it makes sense. And is Charlie really dead? well, probably tbh.... WAAALLLLTTTT!!
The Final Destination (thought # 18)
Added on 2009-11-02 01:40:17
Do you know what the Final Destination series tells me? Dont move to America its falling appart... oh and dont get me started on the SAW series :)
TV Licensing (thought # 17)
Added on 2009-10-10 17:57:10
Right. Im bloody sick of the TV licensing mob. After bitching and moaning about them for so long I decided to have a look at their website to see why Im actually paying it. And surprise surprise, theres no actual reason other than because the law says you have to.
I did know about most of the points im listing below, but just in case you didnt here are some of the wise words found on their site :::
Do I need a TV Licence if I am blind or severely sight impaired?
If you are blind or severely sight impaired, you need a TV Licence to use any TV receiving equipment to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV.
This includes the use of a TV set, digital box, DVD or video recorder, computer or mobile phone.
If you use a digital box with a hi-fi system or another device that can only be used to produce sounds and can't display TV programmes, and you don't install or use any other TV receiving equipment, you don't need a TV Licence.
Do I qualify to receive a blind concession?
If you or someone you live with is blind or severely sight impaired, you qualify to receive a 50% concession on the cost of your TV Licence.
If the person who is blind or severely sight impaired is not the current licence holder for your address, you first need to transfer the licence into their name by calling 0844 800 6790. That person can then apply for a blind concession.
How much does a TV Licence cost with the blind concession?
The blind concession reduces the cost of your TV Licence by 50%. So a colour TV Licence will cost £71.25 and a black and white TV Licence will cost £24.00.
I haven't got a TV. I watch telly on my laptop.
It makes no difference how you watch telly - whether it's on your laptop, PC or mobile phone or through a digital box, DVD recorder or good old-fashioned TV set - if you use any device to receive television programmes as they're being shown on TV, the law requires you to be covered by a licence.
Do I need a TV Licence?
You must be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV. It makes no difference what equipment you use - whether it’s a laptop, PC, mobile phone, digital box, DVD recorder or a TV set - you still need a licence.
You do not need a TV Licence to view video clips on the internet, as long as what you are viewing is not being shown on TV at the same time as you are viewing it.
If you use a digital box with a hi-fi system, or another device that can only be used to produce sounds and can't display TV programmes, and you don't install or use any other TV receiving equipment, you don't need a TV Licence.
EMAIL SENT TO TV LICENSING :::
Hi there.
I have looked everywhere on your site and still havent found an answer to the simple (and I think, most obvious) question.
Why do I need a tv license?
Yes, yes, you say many times that if I can decode the signal while its being made available then I need a license. But that doesnt answer my question.
Why am I paying the fee? I remember you used to use the excuse in the 70's and 80s that it was BBC who required the money and that if we didnt pay a license then they would have to add adverts to the programming.
Now it seems to be more the fact that if you can see these pictures as they are being sent out that you need a license. But why? We pay for the decoder (such as the TV or a PC TV card) at the time. So why the extra charge of nearly £150 per year? If its for the BBC (and Ive even heard mention Channel 4) then why doesnt it mention them on your site? If its for the decoding why isnt it added to the price of the TV? or the TV card even. Having said that who would pay £170 nowadays for a TV card.
I have two TVs by the way. Neither of which are used to watch the TV. One is used for watching BluRay films and the other is for my XBOX. Why do I need to pay a TV license when Im not watching TV? And the answer 'you dont' isnt good enough (even though it says that on your website). If I really dont have to pay then why, when buying a telly for Currys, am I forced to give my details to them on your behalf. And it is on your behalf by the way. I specifically asked the women in Currys why I was giving the details and they said its for the TV license department and they have to now ask for the info by law.
Now the last question. If I use Zattoo to watch some TV channels this means that Im no longer decoding the TV signal. I am aware that you lot are not happy about Zattoo, but hey ho, Im not happy with you either so get over it. I understand that it is then Zattoo's problem to pay the license. Is that correct? Or would you make the user pay for that too?
Please note, the reason I am being rather verbose is for 2 reasons. I dont want you misinterpreting anything Ive said and 2, Im putting this on a few websites and want to let my userbase see that my questions couldnt have been misconstrued.
Your reply will also be made public on the websites because I think its fair that if you are asking blind people to pay for a TV license then you have to be held responsible like a big boy or girl.
Oh, and the answer 'because its the law' isnt good enough.
If your answer is the above Ill make sure that the next 50 or so thousand emails you lot receive will be from my user base. At least then we will be making you work for our hard earned cash.
Please also note that this isnt a 'WE HATE YOU' email. This is more of a 'JUSTIFY YOURSELVES' email.
Regards,
Steven Freeman
// --------------------------------- //
I will of course publish their answer, which will probably be 'because the law says so'. Fucking useless robbing bastards.
Oh yeah, if the response is unacceptable the button below will be enabled :) ... Cant wait tbh :P
RESPONSE FROM TV LICENSING :::
TV LICENSING
BRISTOL
BS98 1TL
Tel: 0844 800 6702
Fax: 0844 800 5816
Email: enquiries@TVLicensing.co.uk
Our Ref: TVL#####467
12/10/2009
Dear Mr Freeman
Thank you for your enquiry.
A TV Licence is a legal permission to install and use television equipment to receive or record television services. Although Parliament has decided that TV Licence revenue should be used to fund the BBC, it is not a charge for BBC services. A TV Licence is required if you watch or record BBC, ITV, Channel 4, 5, satellite, or cable programmes.
A colour TV Licence costs £142.50, which represents excellent value for money. For around 40p a day, the BBC provides its full range of television channels, five national radio networks and numerous local radio stations.
Additionally the BBC aims to extend its Subtitles service to the full range of BBC television programmes.
?TV Licensing? acts as agent for the Licensing Authority, which is the BBC. We do not set the level of the TV Licence fee, which is determined by the Government. All TV Licence revenue collected is passed to the Treasury, who in turn fund the BBC.
If you want further information on how the BBC use the TV Licence fee you can email them on info@bbc.co.uk or visit their website at www.bbc.co.uk
I hope this information is helpful.
Yours sincerely
S---- C-----
TV Licensing
Well, wasnt expecting that :) Id say thats a decent response. So now you know people. Its the government thats screwing us as usual. We really have to do something about this mob. What are you all doing on the 5th of November :) lol
The Economy (thought # 16)
Added on 2009-08-01 23:13:57
Heres something for you to mull over.
How do you think the banks got all their money? I mean originally? Hard work? Nah, who wouldve paid them? Thieving and profiteering.. ahhh, now were getting somewhere.
When a bank turns round and say something along the lines of... 'would you like a credit card? or maybe a loan' The first thing you should do, before checking how much you have to repay is say 'Yes'. Yes please Mr Bank. Thank-you Mr Bank.
Take the fucking money... and fucking run.
I mean thats what they did. They found gold in them thar hills, and because they found it (on OUR planet) it was then decided that it was theirs... by who? Well by themselves of course.
Finders Keepers and all that.
Anyway, I digress.
Take the money and fucking run. It doesnt matter if its 2% or 200%. The reason why? Because you arent gonna pay it back, thats why. 'Oh but you cant do that' I hear a cry from the audience. And why the hell not? They done it to whoevers land it was they were stealing it from.. oh wait, yeah, OUR fucking land.
Thats the reason the economy is in such danger of permanently doing itself an injury.
Whether people have realised thats the reason they dont pay it back, or the simple fact that they cant afford to pay it back doesnt matter.
For some odd reason weve learned to listen to these thieves we call the rich, and to go by their new rules.
For some reason doing what they did in whatever century they did it in is no longer OK in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Well all I can say is HA-fucking-HA. It serves you right you war-mongering thieving sons of bitches.
Im glad you pushed the ordinary folk so far that they couldnt even attempt to pay back the money you gave them which you fuckers stole in the first place.
HA-fucking-HA. Your little machine is broken 'cos you pushed too hard.
HA HA HA HA HA.
Fucking idiots.
Political Correctness (thought # 15)
Added on 2009-08-01 22:28:30
Hello all,
A lot of you arent gonna like this but to be honest I really dont give a fuck.
Ive had it with political correctness. As soon as Ive given you all a way to talk back to this website I want to make it clear that the following words are ok to use on my website.
Faggot. Poof. Nigger. Cunt. Retard and pretty much everything else youre no longer allowed to say.
Its OK to say that faggots spread disease and that some nigger shagged a monkey and thats why weve got AIDS.
Now I know that these statements arent true but that doesnt mean Im gonna get all uppity and self-righteous and tell you that youre wrong for saying it. If you know its wrong then you dont really believe it and if you think youre right by saying it then I think thats funny too, because, lets face it.... you are a retard.
Political correctness is trying to tell me that the word retard isnt funny, and im sorry, but it definately is. Niggers, and you know who you are, are sooo funny too. They hates the white man bwoi coz they all wanna beat the black man down. Fucking idiots. All Irish people are thick as fuck, all Scottish people are tight with their money and all black people dont wash and thats why theyre black. Gypos and Pikeys put spells on people, but only because the 'people' are too fucking stupid to realise that to make such a spell work you have to believe it can work. Most of their ill-fate is caused sub-consciously by themselves.
Oh, and Afghans, well those towel-head bastards are all suicide bombers and terrorists.
The french are cheese eating surrender monkeys
And all Germans are Nazis.... its a fact (lol)
And I wish I could remember the ones that got all pissed off over someone making a cartoon out of their god, coz those motherfuckers are all cunts who cant take a fucking joke.
Here are some truths:
The monarchy can go fuck themselves, fucking german wankers... they think they can take our money every year and get all bitchy when theyre told they have to pay taxes like the rest of us? Cunts. If you werent all human beings I would quite happily watch you all burn in hell you fucking upper class pricks.
Those bastards that like to chase foxes on horses (although Ive never seen a fox on horeseback) are cunts too.
Anyone older than 25 and less than 4ft is a midget.
Deaf people are deaf, not hearing impaired... we created the word deaf specifically for them.
Dumb people cant speak.
The DVLA can go fuck themselves if they think they can take something that cost me 12 grand and crush it because I havent paid my road tax.
Retards and spastics are simplified names for, well, retards and spastics. I want to have a National Retard Day and a Kiss A Spastic Day
Calling me ginger wont upset me.... I am fucking ginger
The TV License people can go take a flying fuck to themselves too. I now have to give my address everytime I buy a TV? Fuck off, usually ill tell the shop to stick their telly up their arse... other times I just give a fake address. PS... The BBC who started all the license pish... Go fuck yourselves
Here endeth the rant.
2012 (thought # 14)
Added on 2009-07-07 18:57:15
OK Its time to put and end to the completely idiotic thought that 2012 will be the end of the world.
After the farce the was the millennium bug I thought that Id put a stop to this being another such idiot party (see Money Making Scam).
The simplest way to explain why this is so stupid, Ill hand you over to the infinite wisdom of Wikipedia (Please note, this quote isnt from some nobody age 12 thinking they understand the way things are) ::
Despite the publicity generated by the 2012 date, Susan Milbrath, curator of Latin American Art and Archaeology at the Florida Museum of Natural History, stated that "We [the archaeological community] have no record or knowledge that [the Maya] would think the world would come to an end" in 2012.
"For the ancient Maya, it was a huge celebration to make it to the end of a whole cycle," says Sandra Noble, executive director of the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc. in Crystal River, Florida. To render December 21, 2012, as a doomsday or moment of cosmic shifting, she says, is "a complete fabrication and a chance for a lot of people to cash in."
"There will be another cycle," says E. Wyllys Andrews V, director of the Tulane University Middle American Research Institute (MARI). "We know the Maya thought there was one before this, and that implies they were comfortable with the idea of another one after this."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar)
A detailed explanation of why its silly to think that its the end of the world can be found on the above wikipedia page, but heres a quick overview of how the Mayan calendar works.
Our calendar has several pieces to it we have days (sorry americans, you can just switch these first two around), months and years in the format of ##-##-#### (d/m/y). The Mayan calendar works this way to, it has specific splits in it, in the format of [x]-[x]-[x]-[x]-[x] using a base 20 (instead of our base 10 counting system which we use for counting to 10 or 100 for example). However, like our calendar, to the people outside of this planet is quite difficult to understand. for example the last day of March for example is 31, this creating a date stamp looking like 31-05-2009, however, the last day of September would be 30, so to an outsider we would have to explain that although the months always reach 12, within those months we have a different amount of days. And so comes the confusing bit - as if it hasnt been already... the 3rd part of the mayan calendar only reaches 18. Right enough of the madness. The Mayan calendar counts 144,000 days (the 4th set of digits ie [x]-[X]-[x]-[x]-[x]). The 143,999 day just happens to be Dec 20th 2012. This means that their calendar goes from 12.19.19.17.19 back (yes, back.. ill explain this in a minute) to 13.0.0.0.0.
Now I said back, apparently according to the Mayans we are in the fourth world / creation (where the Gods were able to place man). Every 13.0.0.0.0 is a new creation for the Mayans... not the end of the world, but the start of a new creation. This table has been taken from wiki, although it shows 16 Baktuns (new cycles)
| Long Count | Gregorian Calendar Date (including proleptic) GMT (584283) correlation |
|---|---|
| 13.0.0.0.0 | August 11, 3114 BCE |
| 1.0.0.0.0 | November 13, 2720 BCE |
| 2.0.0.0.0 | February 16, 2325 BCE |
| 3.0.0.0.0 | May 21, 1931 BCE |
| 4.0.0.0.0 | August 23, 1537 BCE |
| 5.0.0.0.0 | November 26, 1143 BCE |
| 6.0.0.0.0 | February 28, 748 BCE |
| 7.0.0.0.0 | June 3, 354 BCE |
| 8.0.0.0.0 | September 5, 41 CE |
| 9.0.0.0.0 | December 9, 435 |
| 10.0.0.0.0 | March 13, 830 |
| 11.0.0.0.0 | June 15, 1224 |
| 12.0.0.0.0 | September 18, 1618 |
| 13.0.0.0.0 | December 21, 2012 |
| 14.0.0.0.0 | March 26, 2407 |
| 15.0.0.0.0 | June 28, 2801 |
I hope this makes sense. If it doesnt do a bit of googling, remember dont only base your knowledge on Wiki... sometimes youre being taught by a 12 yr old on there ;)
Ducks... Quite Mad (thought # 13)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:43:26
This duck walks into a bar and goes up to the barman.
'Any bread?'
The barman looks at the duck...'Excuse me?'
'Any bread' repeats the duck.
'Erm, no....sorry'
The duck nods and looks at the barman for a few seconds...
'Any bread'
The barman looks at the duck... 'No, I just told you, we dont have any bread'
'OK' says the duck and walks out.
The next day the duck walks back into the bar, walks up to the barman and says...
'Any bread?'
The barmans confused...'Didnt you come in here yesterday asking for bread?'
'Any bread' repeats the duck.
'NO! We dont have any bread'.
The duck looks at the barman. 'OK, OK' says the duck.
'Any bread?'
'LOOK' says the barman, 'we dont have any bread, we never will, and if you ask me for bread again Ill nail your bill to the bar, OK!'
The duck looks at the barman, with a hurt look on his face, goes to open his mouth again, decides against it and walks out.
The next day the barman watches the duck walk towards the bar.
The duck turns round to the barman and says 'Any nails?'
This totally throws the barman off... 'What? Eh? Er, no we dont have any nails'.
The duck looks at the barman.....
'Any bread?'
Guns Dont Kill People... My Arse (thought # 12)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:42:51
Please note: This isnt an anti gun post, more of a anti-stupid-bastard post.
It pisses me off no end when the government (ok mostly in America :P ) say that guns dont kill people. My other favourite is 'you are more likely to be killed by a car'.
Lets look at the second statement first...
I should bloody hope so.... cars are on the road and have a means to an end (getting from a to b usually). They are not created to kill, however we are talking about 1 ton of metal careering along roads at up to 70 mph. Shit, if you walk in front of that, you aint gonna be happy, lets put it that way. Plus there are plenty more 'legal' cars than there are 'legal' guns in the world, so logically, you would think that, yes, you are more likely to be killed by a car than a gun....tits.
So, the first part of the statement. Guns dont kill people. Give me strength. And what does? The bullet? The guy pulling the trigger? When was the last time you saw someone throwing a bullet at someone else and actually killing them. I have a sneaking suspicion that guns actually do help in the 'killing' process....quite a bit I may add.
Thing is, its the same people who use both statements above (usually in one sentence). Im sorry, but you cant be logical and thick as f*ck at the same time. Get over it.
Oh and by the way... people who break into houses deserve to be shot in the head by the owner. Theyre in your house, trying to rob you of what you have painstakingly saved up to buy over the years. And even IF they get caught, they'll probably do about 80 hours community service for it. Bastards. My point is this: F*ck 'em.
Luv n hugs, SJF
2+1=2 (thought # 11)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:42:08
Proof that 2+1=2 (bear with me).
Einstein was right... pretty much everything is relative.....
If you have 2 apples and 1 orange and add them together, you either have
a) a bunch of fruit
b) 2 apples and 1 orange
So, 2 apples + 1 orange is still 2 apples and 1 orange. (Or a bunch of fruit)
Next time I try 2+1 on my calculator I expect it to come back with 'a bunch of fruit' as the answer.
Not All Jokes Are Funny (thought # 10)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:41:37
3 guys walk into a bar. The 1st guy says 'Ow!', to which the 2nd guy turns round and punches him in the mouth saying 'that joke was never funny'.
Meanwhile the 4th guy walks up to the bar. The barman says 'What happened to the 3rd guy?' The 4th guy explains that due to an error in the joke the 3rd guy never actually existed and was all part of the vivid imagination of 04. The barman continues 'So what about the 3rd guys wife?'. 'She didnt really exist either, again, another problem with 04s joke'. 'And fluffy... the 3rd guys pet dog'. 'Nope, didnt exist either'. 'Oh right' says the barman, 'What will it be?'. 'Whiskey please'.
The 4th guy walks back to the table. Guy 1 isnt talking to guy 2 because guy 2 hit him earlier.
The 1st guy turns round to the 4th guy and says 'So... hows things 3rd guy?'. 'Sorry' replies the fourth guy 'but Im not the 3rd guy, the 3rd guy didnt really exist due to an error in the joke. Seeing as how theres no third guy I will take his place I suppose. Unfortunately, as there is no 3rd guy, as I mentioned earlier, I dont exist either' and promptly disappeared into a catch 22 scenario, where they do the really good 'Primordials Extra Tomato Tomato soup'. As it turns out, never to return.
The 2nd guy gets pissed off with this as he really likes tomato soup and wished it was him who was originally guy number 4, stands up and puts a bullet through the 1st and 3rd guy... who didn't exist... This kills the 1st guy and a rabbit at a nearby table who was already suffering from mixing his toasties in an earlier joke that the 3 guys had missed.
The 2nd guy then puts on a horse costume and walks up to the bar. The barman says 'Why the long face?'. The 2nd guy tells the barman to 'shut up' and orders a Whiskey.
The 2nd guy starts to walk back to his table and sees 2 nuns, a Werther's Original, a small piece of tar from the m8 in Scotland, a Scottish, an Irish and a Englishman, a small dog with lots of money and a poodle sticking out of his mouth and a singing frog at his table. As he arrives back at his table the 2 nuns, the Werther's Original, the small piece of tar from the m8 in Scotland, the Scottish, the Irish and the Englishman, the small dog with lots of money and a poodle sticking out of his mouth and the singing frog all attack him and go back to where they were originally sitting. After which, much hilarity ensued.
The End
Stop the Press (thought # 9)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:40:40
Alice looked at the mirror in her bedroom which stood almost 3 feet tall, and was intricately decorated with baubles and ribbons.
She ran towards it as fast as she could, unfortunately this time the mirror did not take her into a parallel universe where she had met all her friends including rabbit and the mad hatter as it had the other day. No. This time it smashed against her head and left her with concussion.
The doctors have informed this reporter that Alice is in a critical but stable condition in 'J' ward at Inverclyde Royal hospital, and added, that 'this will teach her not to be such a dozy bitch in future'.
End of report.
Update: As stable as she was, the doctors did not inform us as to how critical Alice was the first time round. It turns out that she is actually dead from hemorrhaging within the brian. The doctors were heard to say 'Well you dont get any more stable than being dead...bastards'. We consulted the dictionary and can confirm that stable can indeed be interpreted as 'not moving'.
Simon (thought # 8)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:40:06
Simple Simon met a pieman going to the fair,
Said simple Simon to the Pieman 'what have you there?'
Said the Pieman to Simple Simon 'think you're funny wee man?'
Merry Fucking Christmas (thought # 7)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:39:43
Hi all,
Ok I have a bit of a dilema on me hands...
I like the idea of Hannukkah and being able to have a non-stop (8 day) party at the expense of someone elses belief system and I also like the idea of dreidels and Menorahs (being all pretty and that). However, I also like big chubby men, that dont shave, talk to weird looking horses with bits o' tree coming outta their head, wear red dresses and ask me to sit on their lap and think of better times. What should I do (apart from possibly see a psychologist / psychiatrist)
The Human Race (thought # 6)
Added on 2009-07-05 01:39:06
This just in.
The human race was cancelled today as no-one could decide from which country it was to start from, or indeed where it had started as it already appeared to be running but without proper management.
A proper human race has been pencilled in by an almighty being, however atheists are not to be invited this time around, as god doesnt see any reason why he should bother when they dont.
Also, holland has been removed from future races due to alleged drug taking. More on that next week.
Nothing (Lost Love 2) (thought # 5)
Added on 2009-06-23 19:03:04
I'm standing at the edge of my nightmare, waiting for the darkness to go away.
Waiting for the day when you open back up from the knot you've tied yourself into.
Waiting for the day we're back together, happy in our own little family.
This nightmare feels like it will never end.
I patiently tell to myself that its only a matter of time.
I miss your touch, your happiness and your warmth that heals my heart.
You are my everything and without you I feel empty.
My heart sinks every time I think of you, knowing that you may never be mine again.
I know its my fault for the place where I am.
The anger seethes into every cell of my body, knowing that I am my own worst enemy.
I have caused this through my own insanity.
The darkness before me deepens.
There is no path before me.
I have tried to answer to my own wicked ways, but have had no response.
My own god doesn't understand me.
For my sins, I have been left with nothing.
I surround myself with people who love me.
Hoping that they will melt away the darkness, even a little.
I will be here forever; nothing to look forward to.
I have seen to it that you can no longer be everything you once were.
Over the years I have tried to distance myself from other people.
I hate the idea of losing everyone I know.
My conscious mind has managed to bring hatred down on my own head.
I am my own undoing.
I wish that nothing were to harm you like I have harmed you.
I wish I could face my fears and love you the way I do in my own soul.
I wish I could show you that its my own fear that makes me the way I am.
I wish I had never brought you into my own little world of hate and anxiety.
I am the reason you are closed away to the world.
I am the reason you hide behind that wall.
I am the reason you will never come around.
I am the hatred and fear that you have to turn away from.
I need you to know,
No matter what I say,
No matter what I do,
I will miss you all with every beat of my heart.
Fear (thought # 4)
Added on 2009-06-21 02:46:05
I'm sitting in the centre of the room... there's blood all around me.
Its not mine, actually I dont know who's it is.
The walls feel like they're closing in on me.
The darkness is suffocating.
Something is watching me, I can hear its laugh in my head.
It's everywhere, ringing in my brain.
Every atom in my body strains at the darkness outside, like a billion hands trying to find that one safe place.
Unfortunately that place doesn't exist here.
It never has and never will.
I'm tired.
I don't know how many days I've been in here.
Could be a couple, could be more.... I don't think I care anymore.
In the darkness your demons manifest themselves as all sorts of evil, nasty things.
The walls creak, I think I can hear whispered words every time they do that.
Something... well I'm not sure if it was to be honest.
I look into the darkness and can see.... something, something looking back at me.
It's face is white, I can see its neck fade into the inky blackness.
Am I really seeing this?
It's looking back at me, I can see its eyes.
Its starting again.
Oh God no... why do you torment me?
Mist starts to appear from the floor, engulfing me.
Within the whiteness I can see the faces that have been haunting me since I woke all those days ago.
Their eyes glow like they're on fire, burning through the cold mists that are swamping around me.
I can taste the sickening sweetness of fear at the back of my throat.
The pins are spreading through my entire body, it washes over me like a wave of anxiety.
My head feels like its falling into my body.
I cant seam to concentrate.
Even when I try to force my vision into focusing it only makes my head spin faster.
If I am going to die, I just wish it would happen.
This feeling is worse than death.
It settles into you and doesn't let go.
As soon as it started its over again.
I'm sitting in the darkness with only myself for company.
Wait! Maybe the darkness is inside me.
I'm sitting back in the center of the room, only my thoughts to comfort me in this darkness I now call home.
The Nature of the Devil (thought # 3)
Added on 2009-06-21 02:39:34
Ive been thinking lately. The devil (Satan?), I'm not so sure that hes really as evil as everyone thinks. Obviously I'm going to have to back that statement up before you start to think I'm some sort of devil worshiper... far from it to be honest and you'll probably understand a little better after reading this.
OK, the first thing that bothers me about the devil, or should I say The Angel known as Lucifer, is that he was an angel. Created by who? God. Yeah thats right. God made the most evil angel that he could then allowed him to be close to him without thinking that he might turn on him. Are we saying that God made a mistake here? According to some books only man was given the ability to choose and make their own path. Angels weren't given this opportunity. Angels were made to serve God. Now if they were made to serve God, surely God, being all knowing, wouldn't even allow the ability of free thought to come into the angels psyche. It simply doesn't make sense for this situation to happen. The situation being the revolt of some of the angels against God.
Now, God decides that all good isn't possible so he creates a negative of himself to balance everything out. So, the devil scenario now makes sense. Or at least we now have a reason for the devil actually being in existence. So, we have an entirely evil entity. This doesn't make sense either. Right, just for a minute, think of how evil something can really be. Hatred towards everything, no sense of compassion, humanity or positive feeling. Now, we have people who follow him, well, thats what they say. Lets ignore the idiots on earth that follow him based on what they think they know. Based on what? Maybe what the good book says? They should really think this out for themselves. I suppose its possible they have thought it through the way I am just now, but to follow that you would have to be some sort of freak. If he/she is the epitome of evil then no matter what you do on earth is going to make you noticed by this thing. Why would it care what you did. It doesn't need helpers, why would it want them. It doesn't need companionship, understanding, what does it care if you understand it. It's evil. Anyway, Ive been sidetracked. Followers of the devil... in hell... Right, for the same reasons as above, and remember, we are talking about angels / demons here, which, I would imagine are easily more intelligent than anything on earth. As we really aren't all that clever, no matter what the egomaniacs think. Now, demons (or angels) that can think as well as we can (at worst) haven't thought that this devil character wouldn't reject them. Surely that would be out of character for something that didn't 'care'.
As evil as the devil may be, I think it's safe to say that our worst nightmares wouldn't even come close to what really is out there.
Oh, and seeing as how we are all worrying about going to hell. Why in the devils name, would it care if you burned forever, or were in eternal agony for the rest of time. The only thing I think that might happen if you really are that evil in your lifetime is that you will be left outside the gates of heaven for all eternity. Now that really would be hell. No chance of ever being accepted. No contact from anything or anyone? Think about it. Be nice to each other, not in case you go to hell, but in case you don't. In my opinion, something is better than nothing. Even if that something is being tortured for the rest of time. At least you would be welcomed somewhere.
Hillary Clinton : What the Chinese reply SHOULD be (thought # 2)
Added on 2009-06-19 00:45:08
Hillary Clinton was in the news last week demanding that the Chinese should/better(?) tell her and the Americans what really happened in Tiananmen Square... who died etc... oh fucking really Hillary, and when did the Americans start ruling China?
Well, heres what I think the official reply from the Chinese government should be:
Go FUCK yourself Hillary... its got fuck all to do with you. And you should remember what happened the last time you stuck your fucking nose where it wasnt wanted... Vietnam anyone?
As much as I think China are wrong for what they did, they dont have to bend to America just because America want answers.
America.... go fuck yourself
Hillary... go fuck yourself too... you fucking bitch.. mind your own fucking business
DVLA, the Police, and them stealing and destroying your car (thought # 1)
Added on 2009-06-18 21:11:11
I keep seeing the advert on TV where they show you a guy and his gal walking up to his car. Apparently he hasnt paid his road tax and it shows you the car crushing itself in front of your eyes.
So, you dont pay your road tax and they have the right to take your car... owned by you, paid by you... take it and crush it?
What the fuck? Who the fuck do these cunts think they are? How would they like it if I went into their house and crushed their mail order brides (or boys) which they have taken all their lonely years to save up for and buy....
Bunch of fucking bastards... DVLA and the police... go FUCK yourselves. How fucking dare you take our private property and destroy it. This cant be legal surely.
