Evolution theory turns colleges into hellholes of depression

[viole]

I am just spreading the news of the evils of evolution theory, and warning people not to associate with Harvard university, as it is a hellhole of depression.

Do you think Harvard is the only place where they teach evolution?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

No, the problem is that Harvard is riddled with over-emotional believers.
Try as they might, even the magnanimous atheists there have been
unable to help the religiously impaired find peace & happiness.

Yes, and probably that is why there are, allegedely, more suicides. It can be hard to be shown to have been wrong all along.
I cannot imagine an atheist committing suicide after learning what supports her view.

Ciao

- viole

 

[dust1n]

Do you think Harvard is the only place where they teach evolution?

Ciao

- viole

That's what I was wondering. Shouldn't Muhammad basically be recommending us not to associate with any accredited university with a science program, as opposed to just one of the thousands?

 

[MARCELLO]

You know these evolutionists are all alike, and have no idea about the truth in the heart.

The only truth is the science. Heart only pumps blood to the body,do you know this? Islam says that woman is created from the rib bone of man. Are you serious or joking?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

That's what I was wondering. Shouldn't Muhammad basically be recommending us not to associate with any accredited university with a science program, as opposed to just one of the thousands?

That's true. In general it is ill advised to go to university if you value your soul, because all are evolutionist, and you can well see all around what sort of person you then become.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Yes, and probably that is why there are, allegedely, more suicides. It can be hard to be shown to have been wrong all along.
I cannot imagine an atheist committing suicide after learning what supports her view.

Ciao

- viole

You are just fantasizing what suits you. There is always a threat of the head vs hart battle in education, and at times such as these it is very apparent that the universities are churning out coldhearted calculating people. The rejection of subjectivity has never been more blatant and crude in history, it is well advised to stay away from it.

 

[dust1n]

That's true. In general it is ill advised to go to university if you value your soul, because all are evolutionist, and you can well see all around what sort of person you then become.

If going to university involves becoming a person that isn't anything like your debating tactics or propensity to insult people, I might need to look into a getting a second or third degree.

 

[viole]

You are just fantasizing what suits you. There is always a threat of the head vs hart battle in education, and at times such as these it is very apparent that the universities are churning out coldhearted calculating people. The rejection of subjectivity has never been more blatant and crude in history, it is well advised to stay away from it.

I think that saying that the only alternative to being a cold hearted calculating machine is believing in scientific nonsense, is a false dichotomy.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

If going to university involves becoming a person that isn't anything like your debating tactics or propensity to insult people, I might need to look into a getting a second or third degree.

Is ridiculous, at universities there is continuous insulting to try to kill the subjectivity. They go out of their way to be insensituve because slamming down on subjectivity is understood to prove devotion to objectivity. You are not one to talk, many or most your posts carry some level of insult, or do you deny this?

 

[dust1n]

Is ridiculous, at universities there is continuous insulting to try to kill the subjectivity. They go out of their way to be insensituve because slamming down on subjectivity is understood to prove devotion to objectivity.

Really? How many of these universities have you been to? If you've never been to them, how do you know what they are like?

You are not one to talk, many or most your posts carry some level of insult, or do you deny this?

Generally, when people insult me often enough, my posts will carry some level of insult when I respond to them.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Really? How many of these universities have you been to? If you've never been to them, how do you know what they are like?



Generally, when people insult me often enough, my posts will carry some level of insult when I respond to them.

Well I am always open to technical discussions about how choosing works, or subjectivity. 100 percent of the time evolutionists respond with insults or gaming the issue. There is not a single evolutionist I talked to who can put a thought together on how choosing and subjectivity works. There is nothing there. One should not complain about being accused of rejection of subjectivity when not having any coherent thought about it

 

[dust1n]

Well I am always open to technical discussions about how choosing works, or subjectivity. 100 percent of the time evolutionists respond with insults or gaming the issue. There is not a single evolutionist I talked to who can put a thought together on how choosing and subjectivity works. There is nothing there. One should not complain about being accused of rejection of subjectivity when not having any coherent thought about it

There ya go again. So how many of these universities you are saying kids should avoid have you been to yourself?

 

[Revoltingest]

Well I am always open to technical discussions about how choosing works, or subjectivity. 100 percent of the time evolutionists respond with insults or gaming the issue. There is not a single evolutionist I talked to who can put a thought together on how choosing and subjectivity works. There is nothing there. One should not complain about being accused of rejection of subjectivity when not having any coherent thought about it

If you were to have a technical discussion, you'd need to largely replace subjectivity with objectivity.
Otherwise, you'd only be using technical sounding words in a non-technical fashion.

 

[Deathbydefault]

You are just fantasizing what suits you.

Coming from you...

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

If you were to have a technical discussion, you'd need to largely replace subjectivity with objectivity.
Otherwise, you'd only be using technical sounding words in a non-technical fashion.

....it's not right.

You all make the huge effort to reject the obvious. And then the succes is that subjectivity is rejected, and colleges turn into hellholes of depression. That's the truth.

 

[Vishvavajra]

Is ridiculous, at universities there is continuous insulting to try to kill the subjectivity. They go out of their way to be insensituve because slamming down on subjectivity is understood to prove devotion to objectivity.

I have attended multiple universities and currently teach at one, and I can affirm that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Well I am always open to technical discussions about how choosing works, or subjectivity. 100 percent of the time evolutionists respond with insults or gaming the issue. There is not a single evolutionist I talked to who can put a thought together on how choosing and subjectivity works. There is nothing there. One should not complain about being accused of rejection of subjectivity when not having any coherent thought about it

You are not. In this thread alone you have been invited to support your assertions and have refused every single time, usually responding with ad hominem attacks against whoever invited you to engage in technical discussion, calling them stupid and deluded for not already agreeing with you, while you have continued to refuse to explain your thinking in sufficient detail for anyone to actually do so—presumably because your ideas aren't coherent to begin with, so all you can do is repeat them over and over and impugn the intelligence, moral character, and fashion sense of anyone who steps up to call you on it.

Me, I'm just in awe of how long an obvious troll thread like this has managed to run with no real conversation occurring at any point. It's really just a bunch of folks passing by to gawk at the truly bizarre and uncanny.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I have attended multiple universities and currently teach at one, and I can affirm that you have no idea what you're talking about.


You are not. In this thread alone you have been invited to support your assertions and have refused every single time, usually responding with ad hominem attacks against whoever invited you to engage in technical discussion, calling them stupid and deluded for not already agreeing with you, while you have continued to refuse to explain your thinking in sufficient detail for anyone to actually do so—presumably because your ideas aren't coherent to begin with, so all you can do is repeat them over and over and impugn the intelligence, moral character, and fashion sense of anyone who steps up to call you on it.

Me, I'm just in awe of how long an obvious troll thread like this has managed to run with no real conversation occurring at any point. It's really just a bunch of folks passing by to gawk at the truly bizarre and uncanny.

You could have just responded by stating how subjectivity technically works, and how subjectivity is valid. In stead you wrote accusatory garbage.

You reject subjectivity, that is the truth, no trolling. And rejecting subjectivity leads to depression, that is obvious.

 

[metis]

You could have just responded by stating how subjectivity technically works, and how subjectivity is valid. In stead you wrote accusatory garbage.

You reject subjectivity, that is the truth, no trolling. And rejecting subjectivity leads to depression, that is obvious.

Ah, you've used the old trick of "accusing the accuser". V is quite correct when saying that you don't verify your "facts" and that you use ad hominem attacks against those who disagree with you, which is the main reason why I normally prefer not to engage you in these discussions.

 

[Desert Snake]

Do you think Harvard is the only place where they teach evolution?

Ciao

- viole

I do.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Ah, you've used the old trick of "accusing the accuser". V is quite correct when saying that you don't verify your "facts" and that you use ad hominem attacks against those who disagree with you, which is the main reason why I normally prefer not to engage you in these discussions.

It is enough verification that I demonstrate how subjectivity works technically by explaining how an opinion like "the painting is beautiful" is put together, and then show all the evolutionists rejecting it without any argument whatever.

There are no honest evolutionists, they simply do not do the subjectivity required for honesty.