Complete Mental Obliteration V2

Does this have anything to do with the series of happenings that occured the other day? Hope things work out
 
Would the babelfish work on Dewey? I'm not sure he has brainwaves and I'm not sure he actually has a language
 
It's worth letting you all know, I won't be on till around 5/6pm tomorrow from when I log off tonight.

Please try not to cause some global disaster please, folks.
 
Or even "Where can we find life on other planets?"

Sorry Burrow but this is a terrible question. First off, the way you've worded it could get you a "on the southern hemisphere of ____ planet", which doesn't help much.

But assuming you mean "where in the universe can we find life (other than earth): Even if the answer is specific coordinates, we have absolutely no way of getting there in the foreseeable course of human development. Thus the question and its answer are almost completely worthless. The only thing we would know is whether or not other life exists, but since we have no way of interacting with it through any channel, there's really no point.

Whoever said the "can we travel the universe in an acceptable time frame" question was a lot closer to the mark.
 
Don't worry about, this being the mental obliteration thread, we expect the unexpected. Not to mention, the completely wrong.

This is the spiritual home of the mistake.
 
Don't worry about, this being the mental obliteration thread, we expect the unexpected. Not to mention, the completely wrong.

This is the spiritual home of the mistake.

It was deliberate though!

So where are we in mental obliteration? Liam killed himself in a ridiculously convoluted way yet?
 
Liam is battling on, defying the odds and the boundaries of mental health.
 
I'm sorry but all this talk of religious wars etc is totally missing the point. If you asked 'is there a god?' And this omniscient superbeing said 'yes' you would know absolutely nothing further. The superbeing could be talking about itself, it could be referring to whatever energy/physics created the universe, it could be referring to a mystical tree in Vanuatu, there is no definition of god so it is an utterly pointless question.

If he answered 'no' then you'd still know nothing further as you don't know whether the superbeing has made some assumptions about what you mean by 'god'.

fecking retarded question.

I think that the people who thought that meant god in the traditional sense of the word and not an energy that created the universe, as the answer to this question would end the bloodshed religion brought us throughout history.

Everyone who doesn't see how many victims religion has caused are kidding themselves.

If the answer to this question would be 'no' then it wouldn't change much for everyone who doesn't believe in God, but it would for everyone else.
 
No it wouldn't.

Facts aren't needed for belief, as stated in comment a couple of pages back.

The Shroud of Turin was and is the example, the catholic church had it carbon dated, now carbon dating has a margin of error but they concluded via several sources that it was produced between the 11-13th century. A millennium or so after the death of Jesus, they immediately ignored the finding and tried to throw shit at the science. They claim a warehouse fire now affected the results somehow.

This is despite the fact that around that time (the crusades) religious relics were in vogue, about a million people had the toe bones of Christ etc.
 
I think that the people who thought that meant god in the traditional sense of the word and not an energy that created the universe, as the answer to this question would end the bloodshed religion brought us throughout history.

Everyone who doesn't see how many victims religion has caused are kidding themselves.

If the answer to this question would be 'no' then it wouldn't change much for everyone who doesn't believe in God, but it would for everyone else.

Thank you Vato, thank you.
No it wouldn't.

Facts aren't needed for belief, as stated in comment a couple of pages back.

The Shroud of Turin was and is the example, the catholic church had it carbon dated, now carbon dating has a margin of error but they concluded via several sources that it was produced between the 11-13th century. A millennium or so after the death of Jesus, they immediately ignored the finding and tried to throw shit at the science. They claim a warehouse fire now affected the results somehow.

This is despite the fact that around that time (the crusades) religious relics were in vogue, about a million people had the toe bones of Christ etc.

Alright, fair enough, there are people who will still believe what they want even with the proof. That's a 'downside' of getting a no. But get a yes and it would surely only be good for the world?
 
Surely that's been answered about 100 times already Liam, and it's clearly not all good at all.
 
It has been answered loads.

Idealistically yes, it would be a good thing, it would put paid to previously thought to be unanswerable question. Oh God exists, man I was soo wrong, whoops.

But, as stated humorously and definitively by several people (being secretly mind controlled by hectic or not). The ultimate impact of the answer to your question and the reaction, assuming you want to tell people, depends on the scope and the context of the answer, because not everyone worships the same God. If you prove one version right your basically calling everyone else's religion bullshit.

If their ideology is questioned, your going to get some pretty violent and abusive feedback.

For example lets say, you get the answer, the Christian God is real, everything in the Old Testament was him, new testament ... bullshit. Modern day Christianity holds it's foundations in the new testament and the teachings of Jesus Christ (hence the name). There will be wide spread anger over this.

Or what if it's, yes there is a God but he wants nothing to do with small time shit like the human race, he didn't create us in his image, it just happened as a by product of his work.

In a thousand years, wither history will judge you as a prophet of good or not it's hard to say but short term your screwed.
 
I doubt i will ever do something deserving of a ban but then i think what could harmless creature like Dewey would have done to deserve a ban
 
Actually yeah, what did Dewey do to get banned?

he was just being dewey, and being dewey deserves a ban. plus didn't he go on "strike" for losing the obliteration challenge against obstacle I think, demanding some kind of non existent price.
 
he was just being dewey, and being dewey deserves a ban. plus didn't he go on "strike" for losing the obliteration challenge against obstacle I think, demanding some kind of non existent price.
none of those things deserve a ban
Its his right to go on whatever shit strike he wants.
He's not harming anyone
 
none of those things deserve a ban
Its his right to go on whatever shit strike he wants.
He's not harming anyone

well, then I guess you are out of luck, if that is the reason he was banned (and I doubt it is) then my friend you are close to saying goodbye. so, um...goodbye.
 
none of those things deserve a ban
Its his right to go on whatever shit strike he wants.
He's not harming anyone

Hmmmmm....first you draw your inspiration from Dewey....itself something that will get the mods finger twitching over the banning button.....now you are questioning his banning. I fear for your future TB...honestly I do.