Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
20 Jul 17
22:55
Joined:
Date Joined:
29 Sep 10
What is… in house research bias?
"We are Philip Morris International (PMI), the leading tobacco company, and we are committed to designing a smoke-free future.(2017)"
Can I have a Big Mac and a coke please?
The advert you saw last year told you that Macdonald’s only has potato in their fries.
Here are the ingredients - Potatoes, Vegetable Oil (Canola Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Natural Beef Flavor [Wheat and Milk Derivatives]*, Citric Acid [Preservative], Dextrose, Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate (Maintain Color), Salt. Prepared in Vegetable Oil: Canola Oil, Corn Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil with TBHQ and Citric Acid added to preserve freshness. Dimethylpolysiloxane added as an antifoaming agent. Contains: Wheat and Milk. *Natural beef flavor contains hydrolyzed wheat and hydrolyzed milk as starting ingredients.
Just who owns the medicines and the medical companies that is one of the leading causes of death - prescription drugs.
All these big pharma companies are usually part of a bigger corporation and tracking down who actually owns what company can be extremely hard.
The days of the lone researcher like Pasteur and Paul Ehrlich is in the past.
If anyone discovers some new therapy or medicine then they usually encounter a
Buy out of their company. Or litigation to take away their discovery?
Corporate takeovers are the norm.
If I have a headache should I drink more water or swallow an aspirin?
If my back hurts do I take ibuprofen and codeine or eat fish oil and nuts?
At one time Philip Morris stood before Senators and said that smoking was good for you?
Medicines make you healthy
GMO food is good for you
Eating fried food(olive oil) is good for you
Drinking wine is good for you.
They employ scientists and they blatantly lie about the food that goes into your belly.
They lie about your environment – fire resistance, asbestos, toxic metals in your teeth, estrogen levels, pollution levels…. All backed up by trust worthy scientists and researchers… It’s okay to kill you slowly with cancer. It’s being killed quickly that gets punished.
Evolution is a fact. ( can I trust this statement in a world were a Buck is more important than looking after Children – Mickey D’s, let’s go to Mickey D’s)
If they lie to you for a profit, use rafts of research to sell you a coke.
Do you think if you have a soul? They might lie to get it? Cash cows.
"We are Philip Morris International (PMI), the leading tobacco company, and we are committed to designing a smoke-free future.(2017)"
Can I have a Big Mac and a coke please?
The advert you saw last year told you that Macdonald’s only has potato in their fries.
Here are the ingredients - Potatoes, Vegetable Oil (Canola Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Natural Beef Flavor [Wheat and Milk Derivatives]*, Citric Acid [Preservative], Dextrose, Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate (Maintain Color), Salt. Prepared in Vegetable Oil: Canola Oil, Corn Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil with TBHQ and Citric Acid added to preserve freshness. Dimethylpolysiloxane added as an antifoaming agent. Contains: Wheat and Milk. *Natural beef flavor contains hydrolyzed wheat and hydrolyzed milk as starting ingredients.
Just who owns the medicines and the medical companies that is one of the leading causes of death - prescription drugs.
All these big pharma companies are usually part of a bigger corporation and tracking down who actually owns what company can be extremely hard.
The days of the lone researcher like Pasteur and Paul Ehrlich is in the past.
If anyone discovers some new therapy or medicine then they usually encounter a
Buy out of their company. Or litigation to take away their discovery?
Corporate takeovers are the norm.
If I have a headache should I drink more water or swallow an aspirin?
If my back hurts do I take ibuprofen and codeine or eat fish oil and nuts?
At one time Philip Morris stood before Senators and said that smoking was good for you?
Medicines make you healthy
GMO food is good for you
Eating fried food(olive oil) is good for you
Drinking wine is good for you.
They employ scientists and they blatantly lie about the food that goes into your belly.
They lie about your environment – fire resistance, asbestos, toxic metals in your teeth, estrogen levels, pollution levels…. All backed up by trust worthy scientists and researchers… It’s okay to kill you slowly with cancer. It’s being killed quickly that gets punished.
Evolution is a fact. ( can I trust this statement in a world were a Buck is more important than looking after Children – Mickey D’s, let’s go to Mickey D’s)
If they lie to you for a profit, use rafts of research to sell you a coke.
Do you think if you have a soul? They might lie to get it? Cash cows.
Show More
The evil big corporation schtick has been old and stale for a long time.
If you don't like what a company is selling, don't buy it.
btw, bias in various forms, is a problem with all science.
If you don't like what a company is selling, don't buy it.
btw, bias in various forms, is a problem with all science.
btw evolution is a fact
The biblical creation story is a myth.
The biblical creation story is a myth.
Which big pharma company were Darwin and Wallace working for , Zorro?
do you know nothing foin? they were both bought out by astra zeneca immediately after their discovery
It could be possible. After all there's no big money, gold and jewels, expensive land, art or financial dealings within religion, is there?
the big pharma companies are owned by the billionaire class.
the men who own you all. Some are freemasons. others Bilderberg.
others Yale(skull and bones) the freemasons went global more that 150
yeas ago. Erasmus Darwin was a freemason(FACT) his sons were freemasons(fact)
These guys are telling you what to believe. They're a strange sick joke to
the rest of us. With their aprons and rituals.
Their seals of Solomon, illumanati banners, their Eagle and phoenix banners,
But they rule this country. Even the Royal family have
members in the freemasons.
So Darwin is compromised - he's taken his grandfather's ideas and went forward with it.
If you buy these stories, you have bought the lie that you are an animal.
It's a degradation of your life. They feed you junk food, junk tv, and sell you a bucket list of aspirations.
The window is closing and no more bets will be accepted. Those on the wrong side are the losers.
Time is up.
EVOLUTION IS A FACT. won't stand up when The king is back in town.
the men who own you all. Some are freemasons. others Bilderberg.
others Yale(skull and bones) the freemasons went global more that 150
yeas ago. Erasmus Darwin was a freemason(FACT) his sons were freemasons(fact)
These guys are telling you what to believe. They're a strange sick joke to
the rest of us. With their aprons and rituals.
Their seals of Solomon, illumanati banners, their Eagle and phoenix banners,
But they rule this country. Even the Royal family have
members in the freemasons.
So Darwin is compromised - he's taken his grandfather's ideas and went forward with it.
If you buy these stories, you have bought the lie that you are an animal.
It's a degradation of your life. They feed you junk food, junk tv, and sell you a bucket list of aspirations.
The window is closing and no more bets will be accepted. Those on the wrong side are the losers.
Time is up.
EVOLUTION IS A FACT. won't stand up when The king is back in town.
the Germans told themselves they were Teutonic Knights.
They implemented Darwin's theories by employing Eugenics.
They were the MASTER RACE.
the lie only lasted a decade? But a whole country fell behind it.
Joseph Goebbels was the first great Advertising Executive.
He was the one of the greatest seller of lies that there has ever been.
Was there scientists in Germany at that time that piped up?
Yes, but they would be beaten down or fired, expelled or imprisoned and killed.
Today if someone speaks against Darwinism/evolution, they are called creotards,
they lose any credibility and some are fired from Colleges and universities.
Their "truth" must be protected. Evolution is a fact. ??
They implemented Darwin's theories by employing Eugenics.
They were the MASTER RACE.
the lie only lasted a decade? But a whole country fell behind it.
Joseph Goebbels was the first great Advertising Executive.
He was the one of the greatest seller of lies that there has ever been.
Was there scientists in Germany at that time that piped up?
Yes, but they would be beaten down or fired, expelled or imprisoned and killed.
Today if someone speaks against Darwinism/evolution, they are called creotards,
they lose any credibility and some are fired from Colleges and universities.
Their "truth" must be protected. Evolution is a fact. ??
Eugenics was popular for the best part of a century, and only went into disrepute after Hitler and WWII.
Eugenics is a misinterpretation of evolution by those who wished to portray themselves as superior in some way.
I prefer "Cretinists" Zorro.
I prefer "Cretinists" Zorro.
Darwin was in favour of controlling the populations when it was a billion.
It's a tool to justify murder of the animals.
first you devalue the enemy, make him an animal, less than human and then you kill them all.
That's why they shave their heads, pull out their gold teeth, starve them and then take off their clothes before stuffing them in ovens.
dehumanization. Tool of satanists and freemasons.
It's a tool to justify murder of the animals.
first you devalue the enemy, make him an animal, less than human and then you kill them all.
That's why they shave their heads, pull out their gold teeth, starve them and then take off their clothes before stuffing them in ovens.
dehumanization. Tool of satanists and freemasons.
Darwin believed in controlling populations when it was one billion on the planet.
to dehumanize the enemy, by treating them as animals - it makes it easier
to kill them.
That's why they shave their heads, pull out their gold teeth, delouse them, take their clothes off them.
turning them into animals and animals are sent to the slaughterhouse.
Animals don't pray to God.
to dehumanize the enemy, by treating them as animals - it makes it easier
to kill them.
That's why they shave their heads, pull out their gold teeth, delouse them, take their clothes off them.
turning them into animals and animals are sent to the slaughterhouse.
Animals don't pray to God.
WTF - that was some lag. Thought my post was lost.
no show for five minutes? is this a new moderator thing?
no show for five minutes? is this a new moderator thing?
Now you're misinterpreting Darwin, Zorro. It's clear that you still haven't read his book. Shame on you.
Darwin and Thomas Malthus - quot'um
In opposition to the utopian thinkers of the day, Malthus believed that unless people exercised restraint in the number of children they had, the inevitable shortfall of food in the face of spiraling population growth would doom mankind to a ceaseless struggle for existence. Out of that unforgiving battle, some would survive and many would not, as famine, disease, and war put a ceiling on the growth in population.
These ideas galvanized Darwin's thinking about the struggles for survival in the wild, where restraint is unknown. Before reading Malthus, Darwin had thought that living things reproduced just enough individuals to keep populations stable. But now he came to realize that, as in human society, populations bred beyond their means, leaving survivors and losers in the effort to exist.
Immediately, Darwin saw that the variation he had observed in wild populations would produce some individuals that were slightly better equipped to thrive and reproduce under the particular conditions at the time. Those individuals would tend to leave more offspring than their fellows, and over many generations their traits would come to dominate the population. "The result of this would be the formation of new species," he wrote later. "Here, then, I had at last got a theory by which to work."
That theory, of course, was none other than natural selection, the driving force of evolution. Though scholars have debated just how influential Malthus was in Darwin's thinking, there can be no doubt that his view of the struggle in society enabled Darwin to appreciate the significance of the struggle in the wild.
In opposition to the utopian thinkers of the day, Malthus believed that unless people exercised restraint in the number of children they had, the inevitable shortfall of food in the face of spiraling population growth would doom mankind to a ceaseless struggle for existence. Out of that unforgiving battle, some would survive and many would not, as famine, disease, and war put a ceiling on the growth in population.
These ideas galvanized Darwin's thinking about the struggles for survival in the wild, where restraint is unknown. Before reading Malthus, Darwin had thought that living things reproduced just enough individuals to keep populations stable. But now he came to realize that, as in human society, populations bred beyond their means, leaving survivors and losers in the effort to exist.
Immediately, Darwin saw that the variation he had observed in wild populations would produce some individuals that were slightly better equipped to thrive and reproduce under the particular conditions at the time. Those individuals would tend to leave more offspring than their fellows, and over many generations their traits would come to dominate the population. "The result of this would be the formation of new species," he wrote later. "Here, then, I had at last got a theory by which to work."
That theory, of course, was none other than natural selection, the driving force of evolution. Though scholars have debated just how influential Malthus was in Darwin's thinking, there can be no doubt that his view of the struggle in society enabled Darwin to appreciate the significance of the struggle in the wild.
oops - i found a mine, i found a mine. goin diggin down a mine...
God forgive me for writing so long & egotistical a letter; but it is your fault, for you have so delighted me; I never presumed that you would have time to say a word in defence of the cause which you have so often defended. It will be a long babble, after we are dead & gone, as we may infer from Malthus even yet not being understood.11 Great is the power of misrepresentation.
a lovely site - mischievous - where is my precious... mr frodo
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/
all the letters of mr Darwin.
God forgive me for writing so long & egotistical a letter; but it is your fault, for you have so delighted me; I never presumed that you would have time to say a word in defence of the cause which you have so often defended. It will be a long babble, after we are dead & gone, as we may infer from Malthus even yet not being understood.11 Great is the power of misrepresentation.
a lovely site - mischievous - where is my precious... mr frodo
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/
all the letters of mr Darwin.
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-7958.xml;query=thomas%20malthus;brand=default
Darwin's bulldog, yes sir, me look for the precious.
Darwin's bulldog, yes sir, me look for the precious.
Thanks for the link, Zorro. A lot of interesting reading there which I intend to dip into.
Here is the preamble to the Religion section.
Darwin is more famous, and more notorious than ever. Nowhere is this more evident than in the ongoing controversies over science and religion. Today’s debates, from the teaching of intelligent design in schools, to questions of free will and human values in light of modern research in genetics, have deep roots in the nineteenth-century controversies surrounding Darwin’s work on evolution. Yet Darwin is most often used in ways that distort or oversimplify his views. He is misquoted or misrepresented in order to support a particular position. Whose Darwin is the true Darwin, and what are the implications of his theory for the present?
Here is the preamble to the Religion section.
Darwin is more famous, and more notorious than ever. Nowhere is this more evident than in the ongoing controversies over science and religion. Today’s debates, from the teaching of intelligent design in schools, to questions of free will and human values in light of modern research in genetics, have deep roots in the nineteenth-century controversies surrounding Darwin’s work on evolution. Yet Darwin is most often used in ways that distort or oversimplify his views. He is misquoted or misrepresented in order to support a particular position. Whose Darwin is the true Darwin, and what are the implications of his theory for the present?
As Darwin puts it - God forgive me for writing so long....
what is it when you lie to yourself ? the third secret?
what is it when you lie to yourself ? the third secret?
Darwin lived in a different age to us Zorro, one in which it was social suicide to deny god.
Darwin's wife was deeply religious and out of respect for her he delayed publication for decades.
It was only when Wallace started publishing along the same lines that he decided to make his work public.
Darwin's wife was deeply religious and out of respect for her he delayed publication for decades.
It was only when Wallace started publishing along the same lines that he decided to make his work public.
that's a nice excuse, only he's writing to Huxley who was his closest supporter
Huxley describes how he came to originate the term "agnostic" as follows:
When I reached intellectual maturity, and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; a Christian or a freethinker, I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until at last I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure that they had attained a certain "gnosis"--had more or less successfully solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble. And, with Hume and Kant on my side, I could not think myself presumptuous in holding fast by that opinion ...
So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic". It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant; and I took the earliest opportunity of parading it at our Society, to show that I, too, had a tail, like the other foxes. [Quoted in Encylopaedia of Religion and Ethics, 1908, edited by James Hastings MA DD]
Huxley describes how he came to originate the term "agnostic" as follows:
When I reached intellectual maturity, and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; a Christian or a freethinker, I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until at last I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure that they had attained a certain "gnosis"--had more or less successfully solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble. And, with Hume and Kant on my side, I could not think myself presumptuous in holding fast by that opinion ...
So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic". It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant; and I took the earliest opportunity of parading it at our Society, to show that I, too, had a tail, like the other foxes. [Quoted in Encylopaedia of Religion and Ethics, 1908, edited by James Hastings MA DD]
That's how it was, it's not an excuse.
Huxley is showing intellectual honesty, rather like Epicurus did long before Christianity was invented. He contrasts this with the position of religionists or gnostics who delude themselves and mislead others in claiming to know what they can't possibly know.
Huxley is showing intellectual honesty, rather like Epicurus did long before Christianity was invented. He contrasts this with the position of religionists or gnostics who delude themselves and mislead others in claiming to know what they can't possibly know.
they are both very tentative about their beliefs.
lying to themselves. they know there is a God.
self delusion.
they know they are exiting God''s world.
Erasmus Darwin and his sons were freemasons
they're the most self deluded of all.
they have that 'great architect' thing.
which is revealed to be Satan when you hit
the upper levels of freemasonry.
lying to themselves. they know there is a God.
self delusion.
they know they are exiting God''s world.
Erasmus Darwin and his sons were freemasons
they're the most self deluded of all.
they have that 'great architect' thing.
which is revealed to be Satan when you hit
the upper levels of freemasonry.
You're deluding yourself, they both knew there isn't a god but there is no way of proving a negative.
Those who claim to know there is a god have never been able to prove it thus demonstrating intellectual dishonesty.
Those who claim to know there is a god have never been able to prove it thus demonstrating intellectual dishonesty.
proof - jesus has set the exam up for faith.
Thomas wanted proof.
(he was wounded in the house of his friends.) zachariah.
you have no faith therefore you are not saved.
If you saw god before you you'd believe, anyone would.
God is testing your faith. You have none.
you are dead seed. you never germinated.
the next test is about proof - are you willing to die or will you take the mark.
Thomas wanted proof.
(he was wounded in the house of his friends.) zachariah.
you have no faith therefore you are not saved.
If you saw god before you you'd believe, anyone would.
God is testing your faith. You have none.
you are dead seed. you never germinated.
the next test is about proof - are you willing to die or will you take the mark.
no - i paraphrased it from memory.
the quote is more floral -
If someone asks, 'What are these wounds on your body?' they will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.'
zachariah 13:6
that's a quote.
the quote is more floral -
If someone asks, 'What are these wounds on your body?' they will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.'
zachariah 13:6
that's a quote.
Erasmus a high level mason - on record, on the rolls(Kilwinning chapter).
his sons , including Robert (darwin's father) Freemason too.
Huxley (freemason) Huxley took Darwin's findings to the Royal Society (all masons, all registered) Freemasons take it forward promoting the idea. So quickly that Darwin's literary competitor Wallace is left in the dust.
conclusion - High level freemasons reveal that the great architect is Satan, the bearer of light. Naturalism was always there from the Greeks and the other ancients. The first cogent theory came from Erasmus who passed his beliefs down to Darwin who advanced the theory a few more steps.
It's a satanic philosophy.
Let's examine what evolution is?
in Eden Satan said to Jane and Tarzan?? pluck the fruit and you shall know everything that God knows, you shall be like God. You shall be gods. (bible stuff)
evolution - where is it going? nature is too slow. we can't wait for the upgrades as it would take several millions of years by NATURE'S clock so we are going to ditch nature and marry machines to humanity. The computers keep doubling in computing power each year. The angel particle recently discovered could skyrocket that processing power way beyond reasoning. So quick melding of man and machine will take man forward
into quicker and quicker evolving?. Eventually reaching a summit called Godhood.?
there you go - revealed - Satan's little ruse. Geometrical progression of intellect.
by destroying man and making him a artificial creature. same outcome - Godhood.
Only satan knows that God's gonna wrap it all up. Satan is the prosecutor. He is doing his job. convicting man under the law.
If evolution was true. Then it's a natural process. But plans are in place to take it out of nature's governance? so that shows it's really philosophy. Nature can't do the job quick enough. So it's artificial manipulation of mankind. Dumping of the soul, and becoming a hybrid.
his sons , including Robert (darwin's father) Freemason too.
Huxley (freemason) Huxley took Darwin's findings to the Royal Society (all masons, all registered) Freemasons take it forward promoting the idea. So quickly that Darwin's literary competitor Wallace is left in the dust.
conclusion - High level freemasons reveal that the great architect is Satan, the bearer of light. Naturalism was always there from the Greeks and the other ancients. The first cogent theory came from Erasmus who passed his beliefs down to Darwin who advanced the theory a few more steps.
It's a satanic philosophy.
Let's examine what evolution is?
in Eden Satan said to Jane and Tarzan?? pluck the fruit and you shall know everything that God knows, you shall be like God. You shall be gods. (bible stuff)
evolution - where is it going? nature is too slow. we can't wait for the upgrades as it would take several millions of years by NATURE'S clock so we are going to ditch nature and marry machines to humanity. The computers keep doubling in computing power each year. The angel particle recently discovered could skyrocket that processing power way beyond reasoning. So quick melding of man and machine will take man forward
into quicker and quicker evolving?. Eventually reaching a summit called Godhood.?
there you go - revealed - Satan's little ruse. Geometrical progression of intellect.
by destroying man and making him a artificial creature. same outcome - Godhood.
Only satan knows that God's gonna wrap it all up. Satan is the prosecutor. He is doing his job. convicting man under the law.
If evolution was true. Then it's a natural process. But plans are in place to take it out of nature's governance? so that shows it's really philosophy. Nature can't do the job quick enough. So it's artificial manipulation of mankind. Dumping of the soul, and becoming a hybrid.
I just solved the equation - evolution is BALLZ. here is why.
Evolution is a natural process. (that's it) game over.
that means it's no good to anyone.(what?)TIME. it takes time.
the strongest dog there is in the world naturally is the WOLF.
it survives the snow, the outside conditions it's the APEX creature.
take now the Scottie dog, it's a pet. it's not going to survive in the wild?
we have selected the Scottie(highland terrier) to be a pal to us. It's
un-natural. If we died out - the Scottie goes too. the Wolf is back in play.
So evolution takes millions of years. It's no use to us.
But we as a species are taking evolution as a NATURAL process
and are trying to escape it's boundaries, force evolution's hand?
RIGHT THERE - did you see - evolution isn't doing the job we need
it to do? therefore it's a philosophy. a religion.(a construct)
we want to engineer a better man. we are playing GOD. the final outcome
is to be a GOD. (eat from the tree of knowledge and you shall be like God)
If evolution is natural then leaving it alone is natural.
If however you need to manipulate a gene? a species? in some way, you are
advocating godhood. Man is a God. we are the master.
man-ipulation. It's no longer nature that selects the next stage it's man.
that takes it out of the world that is NATURE, away from natural selection,
it becomes a stranger to nature. They are using terms like trans humanism,
hybrids, blending AI with Man - all sorts of ideas to beat death. It's an
end run round God.
I'm scared of dying BS. I cannot rely that there is a God. So I will make
it happen. let's look around and build something. It's sad.
It's desperation - evolve or die is the mantra. they actually say that.
sounds very master race.
Evolution is a natural process. (that's it) game over.
that means it's no good to anyone.(what?)TIME. it takes time.
the strongest dog there is in the world naturally is the WOLF.
it survives the snow, the outside conditions it's the APEX creature.
take now the Scottie dog, it's a pet. it's not going to survive in the wild?
we have selected the Scottie(highland terrier) to be a pal to us. It's
un-natural. If we died out - the Scottie goes too. the Wolf is back in play.
So evolution takes millions of years. It's no use to us.
But we as a species are taking evolution as a NATURAL process
and are trying to escape it's boundaries, force evolution's hand?
RIGHT THERE - did you see - evolution isn't doing the job we need
it to do? therefore it's a philosophy. a religion.(a construct)
we want to engineer a better man. we are playing GOD. the final outcome
is to be a GOD. (eat from the tree of knowledge and you shall be like God)
If evolution is natural then leaving it alone is natural.
If however you need to manipulate a gene? a species? in some way, you are
advocating godhood. Man is a God. we are the master.
man-ipulation. It's no longer nature that selects the next stage it's man.
that takes it out of the world that is NATURE, away from natural selection,
it becomes a stranger to nature. They are using terms like trans humanism,
hybrids, blending AI with Man - all sorts of ideas to beat death. It's an
end run round God.
I'm scared of dying BS. I cannot rely that there is a God. So I will make
it happen. let's look around and build something. It's sad.
It's desperation - evolve or die is the mantra. they actually say that.
sounds very master race.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539