>> ^Trancecoach:

Great movie.
I especially like the description of Jew's seeking the Ein Sof... "nothingness without end."

Anyway, I think Gosling was really good in this, but I wouldn't say he's a great actor.
The Notebook? Really?
Ed Norton, on the other hand...


That's like saying Leo Dicaprio isn't a great actor. The Titanic, really??

Great movie.
I especially like the description of Jew's seeking the Ein Sof... "nothingness without end."


Anyway, I think Gosling was really good in this, but I wouldn't say he's a great actor.

The Notebook? Really?

Ed Norton, on the other hand...

You don't have to, I've re-watched it many times and still love it

It's a great haunted ship movie within a sci-fi setting and it does it well.

It does have two very cheesy moments, mind you, 'Hey that looks like a black void of absolute nothingness.. I think I'll stick my finger in there!', and, 'Was that my son? I should go back!'. But I can forgive it.

..and where has QM run off to anyways? Dude has good taste in movies.

I agree, Shyamalan's next movie should have no twist. Although, you could fairly say that's what he did with The Happening (which I was only able to enjoy by calling it "The Nothing Is Happening" in my head. That movie doesn't end with a twist, it just sort of faded into nothingness, like the smell of a fart).

But, westy, by its definition, nothingness really does not exist.

Oahmmmmmm. Oahmmmmmmmm.....

with his exsplinatoin of nothing ness he is basicly making the argument that nothingness dose not exist as in the concept is a false one.

I don't get why he cannot just say that , that he believes nothing is actually something.


I would agree that space is important and that cultraly people forget the relivence of space and its function. but I don't see how that proves or disproves the exsistance of "nothingness" existing or not. or even how it helps understand what nothingness is.

I would be inclined to say that nothingness dose not in fact exists and in fact everything is something. and the route of us believing in nothingness is due to the way humans perceive time and squentulize everything. If you remove time / perceptoin of time then everything can exist for ever and nothingness dose not have to exists.

of course nothingness could exist I don't know much on the subject , its the type of thing that's a semantic mine failed and this guys use of language is reckless.

>> ^Edgeman2112:
Why do they all have to be tiny little specs of nothingness on every image, every video? Why isn't there one image that's a foreign space craft firing disruptors at the space shuttle?
CMON! It can be anything from dust on the lens, bugs that maybe hitched a ride upon launch, or any amount of billions of pieces of debris in orbit. I believe in UFOs because of their definition: Unidentified flying objects. It's way way too presumptuous to say it's some alien craft.


to me the outright dismissal of the idea that there could be alien beings outthere with ftl technology can also be interpreted as presumptuous. besides, presuming they do posess such superior technology, they could well be hidden from our sight, observing our actions since before we started nuking each other or polluting the universe with radio waves. as a matter of fact, they could well be running our governments and the global economy, which would certainly explain a lot of nonsense we're faced with these days. or don't you guys watch V ...

Why do they all have to be tiny little specs of nothingness on every image, every video? Why isn't there one image that's a foreign space craft firing disruptors at the space shuttle?

CMON! It can be anything from dust on the lens, bugs that maybe hitched a ride upon launch, or any amount of billions of pieces of debris in orbit. I believe in UFOs because of their definition: *Unidentified* flying objects. It's way way too presumptuous to say it's some alien craft.

O, I wasn't really ranking them per say, those are just how they occurred to me at the time.

I don't really buy Dawkin's being anything other than a strong atheist. Mind you, I don't mean that as pejorative or anything, nothing wrong with strong atheism. But after reading hearing him enough, you have to abandon the notion of a neutral position with him...he has an axe to grind. Strong atheism is basically the negative position of belief. In the absence of absolute truth, they are the positive and negative assertions of each other, and as a result, the only sides of the coin that can really directly attack each other. The fact that they aren't speaking the same language doesn't matter. It would be analogous to an optimist and pessimist, they aren't in the same thought universe. I think this is evident in his general pursuits and tone when addressing people of faith...and conversely people of faith towards him.

But ya, I understand the spirit of the question now, do you kinda think there is something out there, or don't you.

I would be curious to ask a more basic question then about how yall experience the world. I know I have a dualist way of seeing things much like Pascal. That knowledge and experiment tell us much of the world we live in. That helps us build buildings and make new medicines. Science and reason all give us deep insight in to the one area of understanding humans themselves are capable of, the finite. But in a realm of Gods or infinitude, man has no tools for comprehension. I can't put it more elequantly than the man himself

"For after all what is man in nature? A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either. The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret. He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed."

How do yall deal with the vastest of everything? How do you pear into the deep recesses of the infinite universe and process the information? Or the problem of the infinity of God not being able to understood by man unless he is shown the door?

Meh, just not that funny. She got that it was a lame joke and nothingness ensued.

>> ^quantumushroom:
Why does he fear death? It's just nothingness.
For eternity.


Why do theists fear death, since they're going to a "better place" when they die?

Atheists fear death BECAUSE it's nothingness, BECAUSE we only have one life. Life is precious.

See what happens when you talk it out? Granted, it doesn't fit very well with the religious dogma in your argument but I'm confident you'll figure a way to handle it.

Cheers.

Why does he fear death? It's just nothingness.

For eternity.

The reason there's so much conjecture about the conditions before the big bang is because we have absolutely no way of observing what came before. It seems that everything about our universe that we can detect or experience; space, time, light, matter and energy were all created at the Big Bang.

This is exactly why the Catholic church accepts the Big Bang as the method of creation. They know that what came before is safely outside the realm of empirical knowledge. It is the final sanctuary for their "God of the gaps".

If you watch it again you'll see she wasn't saying any one theory was correct. She started out by saying that generation from nothingness was the "simplest" theory, then went on to give a couple of very different alternatives.

I know you disagree, but I'm here to say I hate Kronkite and consider him a traitor for his one-sided reporting on Vietnam. Yes, the article said he was 'pro-war' up until '68 and obviously his personal bias would creep in, but finally whatever he said yielded this:

When LBJ heard of Cronkite’s comments, he was quoted as saying, “That’s it. If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost middle America.”

The US won every battle in Vietnam but lost the war due to the warping of public opinion by media that wasn't then tagged as liberal, and wouldn't be challenged in any serious way until the 1990s when the other HALF of the country had forums (cable news and intertubes) that couldn't be rigidly controlled.

Though I said I hated the bastage (for his perceived misdeeds) ultimately hatred is a waste of time and depending on your views, Kronkite is now either worm food and Nothingness or being karmically judged and Elsewhere. I personally am glad to see the age of the "Single Most Trusted ANYBODY" in media gone for good.

I know you disagree, but thanks for the forum.

>> ^EDD:
>> ^alien_concept:
When is someone going to assasinate Fergie? She is an abomination with a vagina and I detest her

You're treading on dangerous ground there, a_c.
I mean - assassination would only make her a martyr. We don't want that. Better let her fade away into the nothingness that is a miserable self-indulgent ex-celebrity heroin-addict existence.


the only thing i saw in that post was ass ass