narikm44 (@narikm44) profile picture

narikm44

@narikm44

A simple atheist, i always block stupid.

Joined March 2020
  • Tweets2.2K
  • Following35
  • Followers18
21Media
Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)Photo by narikm44 (@narikm44)
Neurons firing creating first person conciousness. Like transistor firing in a computer, running a software where a self awareness routine is used to favorise self preservation.
1
2
It seems that Daniel Dennett is the closest to my views, you can read him for more.
1
Replying to @Bilalkhan0_0 @uwantkash @_Halaby
Read a little about virtual particles popping out of nothing Then notice all scientist have mental issues according to you But before prove your nothing is indeed possible,not a simple view of the mind And prove the universe is not cyclical, nor the multiverse eternal Good luck.
1
2
So your god cannot have created itself? Then simply copy/paste your special pleading to the universe/multiverse.
2
Replying to @TuuBiiSan @TenMillionIQ
teapawt.net/narikm44/…
narikm44 (@narikm44) profile picturenarikm44@narikm4410 Dec 2020
Replying to @TuuBiiSan @TenMillionIQ
Even less valid premices that's goedel original one. If momo is a pedo, allah is no god Momo is a pedo So allah is no god This is a computer tested proof. "At the same time the offered simplifications are very far reaching, eventually too far" "Also monotheism is not implied"
1
Also funny that you give philosophical crap to argue for a skydaddy, and empirical test against astrology. But it is true that only unproved assumptions can save your skydaddy, even the authors noticed and criticised themselves.
1
Replying to @PunishedHamza @NeuroMaliki
No, since the opposite view place our biology as the only good one to argue for fine tuning. Simply noticing the vast amount of others possibility unaccounted for is not irrelevant. It is like the texas sharpshooter fallacy, putting the target at our existence.
2
1
Funny by the way that you classify me as a radical modal skeptic when you denies any others possible lifeforms and biologies that ours to try to get a probability...
Replying to @LeppIdd @TenMillionIQ
No. It only "obliterated" a strawman, using his assumptions... No genetic fallacy, child, simply showing WORKING way of life selected by nature itself... not by the results of a 7 century child rapist. Sad.
1
Al-lat isn't strong enough here...
Image from narikm44 (@narikm44)
1
Replying to @narikm44 @TenMillionIQ
Blocked me ? Sad. Read a little 0.00000001iq book, and french history to notice france abolished slavery definitely in 1848, even if it was no more used in mainland... en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barb…
1
"The white slave trade and markets in the Mediterranean declined and eventually disappeared after the European occupations." From 0.00000001iq book, vol 3. He probably "forgot" to add this...
Twitter and Instagram deleting all hunter stuff getting posted #HunterFootJob
8
130
13
368
Replying to @HamzaIbnBased @TenMillionIQ
Read very patiently the definition of necessary being. Then notice the nbc cannot choose to not create them. So he has no free will to not create them. Done.
3
Note also that it only try to "prove" under the author assertions, read a little on the subject to see how each can be neutered.
Replying to @Kibo_Returns @sabrshukur @TenMillionIQ
Good argument.
1
1
Hope you noted the subtle irony in my response. Since you missed the consequences of the subjective choise of god, I'm not sure.
Replying to @narikm44 @_Halaby
To respond to a child that block/ unblock me There is nothing behind space. As scientists postulate. There is nothing before time, else he couldn't change to initiate time. I personnaly thinks that a parent universe with time already present, make our, with our time. All cyclical
1
Also there is no proof for a finite universe, most scientists postualte an infinite one.
Replying to @_Halaby
Yes. But then notice that his actions follows a timely sequence, directed by his will, so he cannot be out of time. Elseways​ he couldn't do xyz at T time. This is very well explained in the first link I gave.
2
1
Since the little child reply then block me again. I have no choise but to block him. He his spiralling down... Child. Read. The. Text. Not your assumptions, simply the fatwa.
Replying to @_Halaby
This is a simple assessment. When the link and quote I gave show that this view is incompatible with his temporal actions, that you agreed upon. teapawt.net/narikm44/…
narikm44 (@narikm44) profile picturenarikm44@narikm4417 Jun 2020
Replying to @_Halaby
Yes. But then notice that his actions follows a timely sequence, directed by his will, so he cannot be out of time. Elseways​ he couldn't do xyz at T time. This is very well explained in the first link I gave.
2
Since the little child reply then block me again. I have no choise but to block him. He his spiralling down... Child. Read. The. Text. Not your assumptions, simply the fatwa.
Load more