General/Off-topic |
|
|
|
Two pennies for your thoughts ....!!
|
6010. |
26 May 2010 Wed 10:10 pm |
well dear handsome what can i say... first of all i think everyone is lucky, the difference is that luck arrives at different times of life for everyone!! so just be patient...
otherside if you are not kidding, i DO have a sister and she is single!, she is very intelligent and to be honest, very beautiful!!... ... you will have to pass me your CV so i can study it... ah and dont forget picture is obligatory!!
But Kemale..
I have been patient all those years and nothing has changed I dont think I am lucky at all.. I really think that actually I am sooo unlucky..
But who knows..May be my luck is changing I am sure your sister is very beautiful and smart. Of course. Because She is YOUR sister 
I am sending you my CV with a picture 
You will also see my email and tel number, in case you need to contact me
|
|
6011. |
29 May 2010 Sat 04:19 pm |
But Kemale..
I have been patient all those years and nothing has changed I dont think I am lucky at all.. I really think that actually I am sooo unlucky..
But who knows..May be my luck is changing I am sure your sister is very beautiful and smart. Of course. Because She is YOUR sister 
I am sending you my CV with a picture 
You will also see my email and tel number, in case you need to contact me
aawwww thank youuuu! 
im am shy now  
peki o zaman senin cv´ini bekliyorum! huahauha 
|
|
6012. |
30 May 2010 Sun 06:48 pm |
Thought this was worth some thought. How many argument fallacies can be identified on this website? We are ALL guilty!
Top 10 Argument Fallacies Of All Time
1. Ad Hominem Argument: Disputing a position or argument by criticizing its source.
2. Straw Man: Disputing a position by exaggerating it, misrepresenting it or otherwise distorting it
3. Argument from Outrage: This should be self-explanatory. Many political talk shows are often reduced to shouting matches where guests compete for the loudest volume and sharpest insults
4. Scare tactics: Utilizing fear, not evidence, in one´s argument.
5. Hasty Conclusion: Also known as over-generalizing. For example, it´s a hasty generalization that all baseball players use steroids simply because a few have developed bulging neck muscles.
6. Group Think: When loyalty to a group values affects one´s own judgement in ways that range from the amusing to the dangerous.
7. Red Herring: This attention-span fallacy works best on people who are unable to stay focused long enough to notice that the question answered is not the question that was asked.
8. Wishful thinking: A refusal to acknowledge the truth.
9. Argument from popularity: Believing that if "everyone" believes it, it must be true.
10. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc: Just because two things happened around the same time doesn´t mean one caused the other.
Source: Moore. B & Richard P. (2008) Critical Thinking (8th Ed)
|
|
6013. |
30 May 2010 Sun 11:48 pm |
Diyorsun ki! Aşık oldum, "Yalan". Aşk ile yanmadan gelme kapıma... Diyorsun ki: Yanıyorum, tamam ama "kül" olmadan gelme kapıma...
|
|
6014. |
31 May 2010 Mon 11:40 am |
If this wasn´t leading to a horrible environmental disaster, it would be quite funny to see how BP is coming up with idiotic plans all the time to stop the oil spill. Who would have thought, that the "let´s shoot garbage at it" plan would fail?
|
|
6015. |
31 May 2010 Mon 02:42 pm |
If this wasn´t leading to a horrible environmental disaster, it would be quite funny to see how BP is coming up with idiotic plans all the time to stop the oil spill. Who would have thought, that the "let´s shoot garbage at it" plan would fail?
Bloody pathetic - if only that was strong enough to describe this nothing short of catastrophic disaster....... I know "we will drill some more holes" plan sounds like another good one, that is if the "lets use robbots" plan fails!
|
|
6016. |
02 Jun 2010 Wed 05:52 pm |
For Barba´s attention.
Eye for an eye is an ancient law to regulate the social life. It is not about hitting one another as you simplified in your example. It was an actual law practiced in its all seriousness. There was a judicial system who took care of disputes. You intentionally broke someone´s arm or leg yours would be broen as an act of justice, so you would learn a lesson of pain and misery.
People like you or your guru Ghandi pay no attention to the ancient civilizations reality but analyze it through the eyes of a humanist. You cant simply comment on the issues that happent long time ago.
|
|
6017. |
02 Jun 2010 Wed 09:18 pm |
For Barba´s attention.
Eye for an eye is an ancient law to regulate the social life. It is not about hitting one another as you simplified in your example. It was an actual law practiced in its all seriousness. There was a judicial system who took care of disputes. You intentionally broke someone´s arm or leg yours would be broen as an act of justice, so you would learn a lesson of pain and misery.
People like you or your guru Ghandi pay no attention to the ancient civilizations reality but analyze it through the eyes of a humanist. You cant simply comment on the issues that happent long time ago.
An eye for an eye was a good law when it was written. I know this, I have read my bunch of history (and religious) books. Before it was, you break my teeth, and I will kill you. But to go on about how "an eye for an eye just makes people lose on eye" is clearly not understanding the point Ghandi tried to make. People seem to think that what horrible actions they do are justified, because somebody else did something to them first. American airplanes bombs a mountain village in Afghanistan because an Afghani trained-terrorist bombed a building killing thousands... seems to be eye for an eye, does it not? If you are only looking for a calculation sum, you are clearly missing the point.
And yes, I think Ghandi was a pretty great guy. You disagree?
|
|
6018. |
02 Jun 2010 Wed 11:20 pm |
An eye for an eye was a good law when it was written. I know this, I have read my bunch of history (and religious) books. Before it was, you break my teeth, and I will kill you. But to go on about how "an eye for an eye just makes people lose on eye" is clearly not understanding the point Ghandi tried to make. People seem to think that what horrible actions they do are justified, because somebody else did something to them first. American airplanes bombs a mountain village in Afghanistan because an Afghani trained-terrorist bombed a building killing thousands... seems to be eye for an eye, does it not? If you are only looking for a calculation sum, you are clearly missing the point.
And yes, I think Ghandi was a pretty great guy. You disagree?
This is an ancient law that you and your friend Ghandi are turning into a philosophy and thus feeling you are smarter than those in the ancient times.
I have no intention to understand Ghandi. My reason is you dont make an ornage out of an apple.
Now, talking about bombings in Afghanistan. This is politics and this is money. War is a big business. The war in Iraq is not held out revenge but out of politics and business. "The Revenge" was created for the mass via mass media.
As for Ghandi. No, I dont think he was a great guy. Neither is Mandela together with Dalailama.
|
|
6019. |
02 Jun 2010 Wed 11:47 pm |
If you don´t understand the great influence of people like Ghandi and Mandela, than your brain works in a totally different way than mine. You must not see the greatness in people bringing peace without firing guns. If you don´t see that, than anything I might say here will have the same effect as talking to a wall. For whatever reason you don´t think that what these people did is special, I disagree with you. This does not mean I have disrespect for past customs. It is just a disagreement. Let´s just keep it at that.
|
|
6020. |
03 Jun 2010 Thu 09:08 am |
If you don´t understand the great influence of people like Ghandi and Mandela, than your brain works in a totally different way than mine. You must not see the greatness in people bringing peace without firing guns. If you don´t see that, than anything I might say here will have the same effect as talking to a wall. For whatever reason you don´t think that what these people did is special, I disagree with you. This does not mean I have disrespect for past customs. It is just a disagreement. Let´s just keep it at that.
That is absolutely correct.
Strange, yesterday I too wanted to write the same "talking to the wall".
I believe in God and only Him I respect and worship. Everything and everyone that is not from God is evil. Men´s good deeds are filthy rugs in the eyes of God.
People create their own heros and gods such as Ghandi or Mandela or even Obama.
This is the reason.
|
|
|