Author Topic: there is only one god  (Read 1809 times)

white Boy

  • The totally random poster
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9006
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • Karma: -119
  • http://bigbowlofsoup.tumblr.com/
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #45 on: December 12, 2007, 03:19:31 PM »
^ if thats towards me, i just wikipedied the guy, and thought that was interesting, i like his universe of imagination shit, trippy stuff
 

LooN3y

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 4569
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Karma: -310
  • Paid Tha Cost 2 Be Tha Boss
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #46 on: December 12, 2007, 04:37:52 PM »
Allah says no.


But all black men are God and Cam Ron is a black man. You hypocrite.

theres no such thing as blasphemy,  thats just an old censor on free speech and free thought.....  fuck religion, spirituality is whats important


Sure Blasphemy is real. What God is exactly is unknown but God is good, meaning what is good is God. The spiritual energy that creates love is what God is. So going against what is right when you know it to be right and choosing to go against it regardless is what blasphemy is. Simply saying something stupid like "Fuck God", or walking around the mall with a T shirt with giant letters printed on that say "Jesus is a Cunt" (I saw it once in tha mall last summer) is not blasphemy, it's just idiocy; dumb kids trying to get attention. Even being upest with God for the rain that destroyed all your crops and coming out while it's raining with a shot gun and shooting the skies in an attempt to wound God or threaten him to keep him from letting more rain fall (I had a great uncle in Greece that did that once) is not blasphemy. It's simply being fucking pissed off, and a little nuts from what I understand. These may be all sins but they are not blasphemy. Blasphemy is watching an old woman fall right in front of you with no one else and around and watching her struggle to get up and you know you should help but you just stand there and watch because you don't want to help because you want to see her struggle and get hurt. That is going against everything that is right. Everything that is God. That is blasphemy.

say in a  life threating situation dont most people that r athiest say help me god anyways?
818

Tha Reella - Slap A Nigga Up Like Wyatt Earp / Sig downsized, too big.
 

QuietTruth

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9083
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Karma: 1181
  • Shoot 'em up bang bang, nigga die slow
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2007, 05:00:18 PM »
^ LOL, and I bet 'God Bless You' when they sneeze.
 

Elevz

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #48 on: December 13, 2007, 03:48:18 AM »
Eleven 2 Three;

I've read through your responses to me and to others and it seems you fail to acknowledge your science is largely based on faith. I admit my faith. I believe letting an old woman struggle and not helping her when she needs it is evil and goes against what is God. I believe that Good To be God. It's a feeling. A system of beliefs. I can't prove it and I don't intend to try because it cannot be done. I believe the good inside everyone is there because of God. I believe that everyone anyone that does not feel the need to help that woman is struggling with evil and needs to get rid of that evil. How exactly one would do that I don't know. How exactly that evil got their I don't know. I just won't allow myself to believe that someone can be born with a set of values that mean allowing a helpless woman to suffer causes pleasure. These are my beliefs about life. Because that is how I feel inside.

You attempt to use psychology as an explanation for certain feelings. Where is there any proof in that science? Science is in large part religion. People see patterns and deduce from those patterns "laws" but any scientific law is only a theory. Newton's laws of physics make sense to us now and they may make sense to us forever. You want to shoot a falling monkey that is on the same plane as you are and you have to aim straight and the bullet will fall with the monkey and strike it. You take air out of the equation any two objects of any mass fall at the same rate. We call it gravity. A magnetic pull that causes the objects, the bullet, the monkey to fall. But a scientific law is definite. And we can't be definite. We cannot predict the future. We do not know that every object from this point on will always fall at the same rate. It sounds stupid I know. I get it a lot. David Humew explained it much better than I and he changed the language of science.

People aren't born with any set of values. Humans are tabula rasa at the moment of fertilisation (for as far as we know - the truth may be slightly off but not far). Everything after that is part of the development of the person, in the same way a person continues to develop until they die. It's an endless circle of maintaining and creating or healing the body, and likewise developing the brains. That's also when the whole concept of good and bad commences: human beings learn what is good for them and what not, through observation, perception and interpretation. You experience pain and draw the conclusion that the experience was not enjoyable. You look for what caused the pain, and decided that cause is to be avoided. Thus begins the whole learning process of the creation of values.

Human observation (not to even mention perception and interpretation) is far from flawless. I'm well aware of the concepts of epistemology and ontology; make no mistake about me knowing that science isn't definite. It is however the closest approach available to understanding reality. The generally accepted findings of science have proved themselves to be the most accurate approach of reality. The very same thing goes for psychology, which as you put is even more based on assumptions than most other sciences. Falsifiable theories and hypotheses about what might be possible are tested. The ones that aren't rejected remain standing and form the basis of more theories. Just because psychology is a stunningly complex field of science, doesn't mean that everything in it is disposable. Remember that psychology (and its predecessors) have placed the fundaments of everything that mankind is today. If it weren't for psychology, your parents wouldn't have known how to raise you. Behavior and development would have been mysteries. Civilization would have been none. So is it irrational to believe in the approaches of psychology? I think it's the most rational option available. Just because science isn't absolute doesn't mean that it's disposable.

Gravity is a phenomenon that we can have named and observed but you can't see it or test it. We just know that when you let go of something it falls. It's pulled. Do you know for sure that it isn't pushed? Do you know for sure that it isn't an energetic order that decides that this object at this time will fall, but at any other time it could be ordered to not fall. There is no evidence that that will happen, YET. And they yet is the point. We cannot assume that it is impossible for that to ever happen.

Let's say it did happen. All of a sudden certain objects with nothing in particular in common started floating while others did not. Scientists would come up with various theories to explain it even though they wouldn't have any clue because Newton's Laws would cease to exist but they'd make something up and a consensus would occur and majority rule would give us a new theory. Al Gore would blame it Global Warming. But is that really that much more concrete than some yokel claiming it's God's way of punishing us or whatever he'd say? Is it really? Have you seen gravity? Have you touched it? Opened it up inside and tried to figure out how it works?

What's the difference between pushing and pulling? The origins of the energy don't change the effects of the phenomenon. That's what science has proved: the closer you get to the center of the earth (or any grativational object for that matter), the stronger the energy becomes. It has proved to be constant thus far, which doesn't say anything about a possible change in the future, but judging from the way things have developed up until now, there's no change in sight.

Scientifical theories provide you with the insight to provide a prediction of the future. That doesn't mean those predictions will necessarily have to come true. Science is only an approach of reality; it is flawed after all.

Let's say it did happen. All of a sudden certain objects with nothing in particular in common started floating while others did not. Scientists would come up with various theories to explain it even though they wouldn't have any clue because Newton's Laws would cease to exist but they'd make something up and a consensus would occur and majority rule would give us a new theory. Al Gore would blame it Global Warming. But is that really that much more concrete than some yokel claiming it's God's way of punishing us or whatever he'd say? Is it really? Have you seen gravity? Have you touched it? Opened it up inside and tried to figure out how it works?


It's merely a phenomenon that we cannot see so we figure out ways to explain it. We agree on what is the most logical but we can never really figure it out. For someone to convince themselves that it is figured out is foolish. It's not much less foolish to claim to know the earth is warming because fossil fuels are being over used and too much carbon is in the air than it is to say God made it warmer for fun. One may seem more logical but we have no real studies of how the sun works from the inside and we can't say for sure that it's not just the sun going through a warming cycle that will cool in time. Believing in a certain science because it makes the most sense at the time is fine so long as you understand that it is faith in that science. Faith you cannot prove. Presenting that science as concrete fact and teaching it as such to people that don't know any better is no different than teaching about Adam and Eve.

Let's not say it did happen. Let's say monkeys are blue, human beings are immortal, Martians landed in Indonesia the oher day and George W. Bush goes fishing every weekend with his dead grandmother (who was immortal after all?).

We don't know what will happen in the future, but to assume gravity might change its course all of a sudden is simply ridiculous. What use is it to take all those possibilities into account, whilst knowing by reason that the chance of them actually happening is second to none?

Al Gore is not a scientist. He's only a person trying to be noticed by the public, and he's doing a good job at that. You might as well compare him to the 'yokel who claims it's God's way'.

As soon as a theory in science is falsified, the theorists who based their ideas on that original theory, will have to go back to the drawing table and revise their ideas. They'll have to start testing their hypotheses all over again, and probably look for new explanations to be tested. That's all there is to it.

To ascribe phenomena as an act of God has always been the easy way out. "I don't know, maybe God knows. I'm too ignorant and lowly to know. I shouldn't challenge God's ways, as it will lead to nothing." That's a submissive attitude that's far from helping mankind to develop. It's mental suicide. It is to denounce your own thinking and to disqualify the capabilities of mankind on a whole. It's a rejection of everything man has achieved. That's misanthropy at its finest.
 

QuietTruth

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9083
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Karma: 1181
  • Shoot 'em up bang bang, nigga die slow
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #49 on: December 13, 2007, 06:31:57 AM »
What pisses me off about Atheists is that they get dumb and disrespectful. I don't disrespect, unless I am first. This prolly doesn't even apply to any of ya'll on this board who don't have in faith in God anyways but here's what I can't stand.

They somehow think they have 'power'. Taking mangers of The Green is unnecessary to THEM. You don't believe in NOTHING, why should you care?? You don't believe than you shouldn't care if it doesn't apply to you. We don't say, 'Atheists you are not allowed to practice atheism', WE DON'T say that, so what gives YOU the right to tell us. You don't believe in God so you just simply ignore, JUST LIKE everythang else in the world. If somebody you don't like shops in the store you work at, you ignore them, you don't ban them and say, 'hey, you can't shop here'! They are taking away OUR rights becuz they don't agree with them. That's wrong! Soon, Christmas music will be banned from playin' in stores becuz they say the word Jesus. Sorry, I apologize, but that pisses me off. I understand you have rights, and we accept that, BUT you are taking away ours, slowly. And I don't accept that.

Taking down The Declaration Of Independence and taking down the Bill Of Rights out of classrooms is fuckin' nonsense niggas. Nonsense! Becuz to them that teaches spirituality?? Get the FUCK outta here! That's our History. That the fuckin' U.S. history. It's gettin' ridiculous.

I hope I'm dead before it get's worse, not even playin'. I don't know what this world is comin' too. You have the right you practice what you want. But guess what? So do we.

I mean are the fuckin' holidays next? I mean really are they? Or is that a nah, BECUZ they celebrate that shit. Christmas is Jesus's Birthday, Easter is when is rose, how do ya'll sit and celebrate that shit after you just threw damn near a tantrum becuz the world believes in God.

Everywhere there's appreciation. The manger is on The Green, right next to the Hanukkah candle light, maybe there's nothing for you, and that's becuz you don't believe in it. So do you see where I'm coming from? They disrespecting me now. They taking away my rights.

Again, this prolly don't apply to ya'll, but you best tell your fellow believers to chill out for a second and think.
 

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #50 on: December 13, 2007, 07:02:47 AM »
I never said any of it is disposable. I was trying to establish that a lot of what people consider "science" is based on speculation and faith. I'm not talking about figuring out how to build a car engine that goes as fast as possible with using up the least amount of fuel. I'm talking about the science used to figure out the universe. I used gravity as an extreme example of something that's been the same since as far back as we know and hasn't changed and just wanted to show how little we know about it. So big bangs, and evolution, and global warming aren't even close to with in our realm of knowledge (yet?) but it wouldn't seem that way when you hear them discussed in school or on TV. I was trying to show that this new science that has made its way to the public is a lot like a new religion.

I'd compare it to the old Greek myths. Based on what I've read by the scholars of ancient Greece it didn't seem like any of them prayed to or believed in Zeus or his cohorts. The myths were used as a tool by the wise to explain the unknown but were used as tool by those in power to keep the masses in order. Sacrifice that goat or Hera will curse you with terrible weather and storms. Drive that hybrid and recycle or the earth will curse us with terrible storms. The very first God according to the ancient Greeks was Gaia, the earth, and now a few thousand years later we worship her again. What created Gaia? The chaos; what the greeks called a dark void of nothing the the rest of the world expanded from (sounf familiar?). Jung and others brought forth the idea of archetypes and how every people from all over the world come up with similar basic ideas. Is science our set of archetypes? I don't know.

Sure a lot of science is credible and tested. So was a lot of science in ancient Greece. One scientists measured the circumference of the Earth. One called the milky way a collection of distant stars and expressed the possiility of aliens living on other planets. Those aspects of math and science are pretty similar and so are our "sciences" that try and disprove a God or explain creation; we don't know so we make up.

I'm not trying to prove God, I just don't accept the idea of athiesm. Athiests have a God; it's called Science. Agnostics I understand. Everyone is a bit agnostic at heart. No one really knows, but those that mock religion and turn to science instead are just adhering to another religion. I'm not talking about you, but athiests in general. When Christianity arose many pagans traded in their idea of idols and turned to this one holy creator, and when Science arose publicly in the renaissance many Christians traded in their Holy God for Science.

Most of ancient Greece knew a lot more about the world than most of the renaissance era Europe and even then Greek scholars came to accept Christianity as true. Greeks were among the first converted Christians, long before Rome or the councils. Was this because they saw something that convinced them or because they knew that some things couldn't be explained and the concept of Religion was beneficial to society? I don't know but just like Science is not disposable, neither is Christianity, or Bhuddism, or etc.


P.S. I was comparing Gore to a yokel.
 

Elevz

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #51 on: December 13, 2007, 08:46:37 AM »
You're definately right about how much we don't know. I'll also cosign you on your point about the way science is portrayed in the media and in schools. In fact, I believe that's exactly where lies a huge threat to society. Judging from QT's post, it seems religion is steadily perishing from the public. The new way of looking at science will only further that development. The 'problem' is that science is much more than a collection of facts. People abandon their religion and choose the 'facts' of science, while forgetting about the thought behind it. If you're going to turn your back on God as your ruler and 'shepherd through the valley of darkness,' then who will guide you? Abandoning God leaves an empty hole in the spirit of many men. They think science and atheism teach them something about a lack of purpose and an unlimited freedom that comes from the carelessness it is entwined with. Drugs, alcohol abuse, mindless living, mistreating people, rudeness, egocentricity... A neverending consumer chain, pleasure seeking and hedonism... Science is constantly in search of evidence against the acts of God. It is God's enemy number one. In a way God may be irreplacable though.

I'm seeing it all around me in the hedonistic kingdom The Netherlands have become. Twelve year olds massively give head in exchange for a breezer now, and they think it's great economics. People are getting ruder; tolerance is going down hill; the public morality is gone. As opposed to the U.S.A., the majority of the people have lived without religion for half a century now. The depillarisation and secularisation kicked in early. While everything was okay at first when -even though people didn't go to church anymore- at least the morality still stood strong, the second generation of atheists is about to collapse. They don't have a clue about the reasons why their parents acted as they did back then, and they assume it is natural for man to live without restraints. It is painfully becoming visible exactly why the contribution of religion to a people can't be missed.

In a way, all of this was hard to avoid. The way science is presented to the people makes it seem as if religion has been a bullshit concept from the get-go. That's what they oppose to. There wasn't much to be done against that, knowing that most science already was ahead of society. Society didn't have an alternative, but people did start cutting the strings. The way things are going now, I think as time goes by it'll only become harder to get people back on track. A lot of people believe in nothing now. That's a pretty hopeless situation, which makes the view on further changes sceptical. Even if society collapses tomorrow, people won't know what hit them.

I strongly disagree with you on one point: atheists don't necessarily have an absolute faith in science. If they do, then I'm not one of them. I believe it would be more accurate to put that atheists believe in absolute reason.

Reason does tell me God has no direct influence on earth. Even if He does, it would be so little that praying for Him makes no sense to me.
Reason does tell me science isn't absolute, yet it does provide plausible explanations for phenomena.
Reason does not tell me whether or not God created this earth.
Reason does tell me the posibility of religious concepts being entirely fictive is very real.
Reason does tell me there is an explanation for everything, even though that explanation may be hard to come by.
Reason also tells me the thought of religion as being true, is not entirely ridiculous. We just don't know.

Reason tells me it makes no sense for me to walk around with a bulletproof vest, just because ever since the invention of gun powder it has become possible to get shot and die from it. I can't say I won't get shot down, but I can't let the possibility of that happening reign over my life. I'm not going to spend my money and time on buying a bulletproof vest and walking around in it.
I look at religion in the same way: (probably) ever since man came on this earth, we've been wondering about our existance. Just because it is possible that a God created this us and He now demands our respect and prayers, doesn't mean I'll have to devote my life to that possibility. It's only a suggestive option to me. Science does provide me with a whole gang of alternative explanations for the phenomena religious people tend to ascribe to God. These explanations seem far more reasonable to me. Yes, reason tells me. That is my state of mind as an atheist.

P.S. I was comparing Gore to a yokel.

That just went totally over my head... +2 lol
 

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #52 on: December 13, 2007, 09:43:33 AM »
If you believe in the possibility of God are you an athiest? I see athiests that see no God like devout catholics see God. A no doubt about it. Admitting you don't know how the world was createed and not believing in any one explanation makes me call you an agnostic.



I wasn't really trying to tie in morality with religion. I'm not so sure that with out organized religion we wouldn't have a moral society. Remember I do believe that the holy spirit resides in all of us and the concept of what is good is present in everyone. You can argue that we learn it from being taught it. I argue that we learn it naturally. There has never been any significant tests on human growing up in the wild to support either claim. And I think we can both agree that to conduct such studies would be wrong. So we may never get to the bottom of that one.


Some things in my opinion don't have any reason. Why are we born? We do we exist. Why do we need oxygen to live? Why does gravity keep us grounded on the Earth and keep us from flying into the unviverse? Does reason answer any of that? Can it? Can Science? And whys can never be answered. I'm not saying that the bible answers them. I just don't think about the whys because I'm confident we can't figure them out. We're here. We can figure out how to make here easier to cope with but we can never figure out why we're here, not with any science I've seen yet anyway.

I was raised with a religion that suits me and I choose to believe what I've been taught and what I've concluded myself. I guess in the end I don't want to believe that we just live for 80 or so years and die and that's it. I want to believe that there is something bigger, more premanent for us. Wishful thinking maybe but I have to believe in a spiritual connection and spiritual existence.
 

Elevz

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #53 on: December 13, 2007, 11:29:23 AM »
If you believe in the possibility of God are you an athiest? I see athiests that see no God like devout catholics see God. A no doubt about it. Admitting you don't know how the world was createed and not believing in any one explanation makes me call you an agnostic.

Remember I do believe humans will figure it out one day, just by calculating (which in its turn is based on observations). I hardly believe anything written in the bible, and the probability of the existance of a god is very low to me. There is nothing which points me in the direction of the existance of any higher power. I don't know if that really classifies as agnostic...

I wasn't really trying to tie in morality with religion. I'm not so sure that with out organized religion we wouldn't have a moral society.

I'm not saying it's impossible to have a moral society without religion, but the switch from conservative Christianity to atheist 'liberty' went too quickly without having anything to replace the old morality. Bringing back morality, that's exactly what attracts me to this field of science.

Remember I do believe that the holy spirit resides in all of us and the concept of what is good is present in everyone. You can argue that we learn it from being taught it. I argue that we learn it naturally. There has never been any significant tests on human growing up in the wild to support either claim. And I think we can both agree that to conduct such studies would be wrong. So we may never get to the bottom of that one.

About two centuries of work of social scientists has just been redirected to the trash bin. Poor Emile Durkheim would turn in his grave if he read what you said there. There has been so much effort put into understanding the human learning process that it isn't necessary to experiment with humans raised in the wild. In today's world there's millions of children being neglected by their parents. The outcome is only too obvious - those that aren't taught the difference between good and bad, end up as anti-social beings. They simply never learned to interact with others. Or what about those who are taught the wrong morals? Kids who grow up in poor neighborhoods, hanging around the wrong friends, becoming criminals... How do you explain all of that, when  the holy spirit is supposed to tell us good from bad? Me personally, I'd rather believe in theories of social cohesion and behaviourism...

Some things in my opinion don't have any reason. Why are we born? We do we exist. Why do we need oxygen to live? Why does gravity keep us grounded on the Earth and keep us from flying into the unviverse? Does reason answer any of that? Can it? Can Science? And whys can never be answered. I'm not saying that the bible answers them. I just don't think about the whys because I'm confident we can't figure them out. We're here. We can figure out how to make here easier to cope with but we can never figure out why we're here, not with any science I've seen yet anyway.

What makes you think there's an answer for every "why"? What makes you think everything has a specified purpose? Is that because God supposedly made life on earth perfect? You get what I mean. If God's creation were perfect, Adam and Eve wouldn't have eaten that apple. War, homosexuality and atheism would've been nonexistent. The fact that there's so many unexplained "why's" can tell you two things.
* Not everything in life has a purpose. Not every "why" question has a fitting answer. However, every "how" does.
* God does exist and His ways are above ours. What's a "why" to us, is evident to Him.

You already know why I'm going for the first option.

I was raised with a religion that suits me and I choose to believe what I've been taught and what I've concluded myself. I guess in the end I don't want to believe that we just live for 80 or so years and die and that's it. I want to believe that there is something bigger, more premanent for us. Wishful thinking maybe but I have to believe in a spiritual connection and spiritual existence.

I know people see certain unexplained things as an act of God, and to them these things justify their faith in Him. But just how does one believe in the afterlife? Religions contradict each other when it comes to issues of life and death, and there is no proof of any afterlife (is there?). Where does all the blind faith come from?
 

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #54 on: December 13, 2007, 12:02:46 PM »
Agnosticism - is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of God, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the nature of subjective experience.


A cathloic is someone tat says for certain there is a God. An athiest is someone that says for certain there isn't one. An agnostic just admits to not knowing or not being able to know.



All those social studies are done with outside negative influences. I think people can be raised bad and learn to agree with what is wrong. I just don't think it naturally takes them over. The studies of kids with out parents and what not don't account for that.

Where you lean on the why wasn't the issue. Where I lean wasn't the issue. I don't think the whys will ever get answered by us. We'll either find out when we die or we'll just die.

The faith comes from desire. I want to live forever and keep going. And so do most people. They don't like the idea of their children dying young or disease taking people out of life early. Or it comes from people that have seen the unseen and passed it on down to their children. I guess which side you'd lean towards.
 

AboveTheLaw

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #55 on: December 13, 2007, 03:52:43 PM »
^ From all your posts I take it you read "The God Delusion" inside out?
 

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #56 on: December 13, 2007, 05:49:16 PM »
^ From all your posts I take it you read "The God Delusion" inside out?


Never read it.


Who keeps propping me? I've never gotten to 100 before. Thanks.
 

AboveTheLaw

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #57 on: December 13, 2007, 07:49:28 PM »
I don't agree with everything in it. It's a good title nonetheless and not as biased as the title seems:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion

After reading it a few times I got hold of a .pdf version, I'll send it if you want to read it.
 

Elevz

  • Guest
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #58 on: December 14, 2007, 09:42:42 AM »
Who keeps propping me? I've never gotten to 100 before. Thanks.

I'm sorry, LOL. It's a tendency I have for people who enter a discussion with me :D
 

Shallow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 7278
  • Karma: 215
  • I never had a digital pic of myself before
Re: there is only one god
« Reply #59 on: December 14, 2007, 10:45:16 AM »
Who keeps propping me? I've never gotten to 100 before. Thanks.

I'm sorry, LOL. It's a tendency I have for people who enter a discussion with me :D


I don't mind. It was just nice to see 3 digits for the first time. Here's a prop for you.