ForumGarden

Mickiel;1502238 wrote: Science is destined to prove God - Why? Because their knowledge is increasing;

Its academic , just give it time.

Hurry up and wait.


I think you're taking the Micky, Micky. You don't really believe what you're saying, do ya?

Fuzzy;1502264 wrote: I think you're taking the Micky, Micky. You don't really believe what you're saying, do ya?




Many more than me believe it ; in fact most people on earth believe it. 14% of over 7 billion people think like you do Fuzzy; you need to ask yourself why so few believe what I am saying.

Fuzzy;1502264 wrote: I think you're taking the Micky, Micky. You don't really believe what you're saying, do ya?




Hey , for once in 6 years can we flip the script, how about you giving us believers 100 reason why you don't believe in God?

Or is that a bit too much



....to ask??

I could do what you do and copy/paste at least a 100 reasons, but one reason ought to be enough.

I don't believe in god because it makes zero sense one (or more) should exist. Therefore god doesn't exist.

Fuzzy;1502280 wrote: I could do what you do and copy/paste at least a 100 reasons, but one reason ought to be enough.

I don't believe in god because it makes zero sense one (or more) should exist. Therefore god doesn't exist.






I don't think you can do what I do, that would not be fair to ask you so much ,I just asked you for 100 reasons why you think God does not exist. I am not going to question them for being right or wrong , I just want to see if you can do it.

Because I don't think you can.

In a Police Line-Up you can always tell the believer. He / she is the one with the dopey vacant expression on their face with no idea of anything to do with the real world around them. I didn't need to look any further than the very first of you supposed 300 'proofs' - "(1) If reason exists then God exists." - the very first one is based on a false premise. It is a an opinion stated as a fact & basing the rest of the argument on that non-fact. This is typical of all other 'proofs' of God's existence. There has never been any proof, because something that does not exist cannot be proven to exist. Even the basis "Cogito Ergo Sum" (I think, therefore I am) cannot be taken to be fact because the very basis of what thought is cannot be defined. It may be be hypothesised that I think, therefore I am, but it is by no means a fact. You first example - "If reason exists" - What evidence do you have that reason does exist? That, in itself, is a philosophical hypothesis. "Then God exists" - why? Why should the 2 have anything to do with each other? You might as well say "Then the Easter Bunny exists", and it would have just as much validity. (2) Reason exists - see (1) - it is not proven that it does exist. (3) Therefore God Exists. - Or "Therefore the Easter Bunny exists".

That is just your 1st 'proof' torn to shreds. The rest follow suit. You cannot come up with one iota of 'proof' that doesn't resort to opinion / hypothesis falsely being used as 'fact'.

The fact that we can see stars that are millions of Light Years only proves a few things. (1) That we can see them (that is, of course, if we are really here - but, for the sake of argument, let's assume we are). (2) The stars are Millions of Light Years away (as been proved by scientific observation). (3) What we are seeing of those stars now is what happened millions of years ago. (4) The Bible is wrong, because it claims the Universe is only about 8,000 years old. The fact that what we can see the stars proves the Bible to be wrong. Using your logic, that must mean that we can't really see the stars at all because the Bible has to be right.

Mickiel;1502281 wrote: I don't think you can do what I do, that would not be fair to ask you so much ,I just asked you for 100 reasons why you think God does not exist. I am not going to question them for being right or wrong , I just want to see if you can do it.

Because I don't think you can.


Yes, I think so too.:wah:

FourPart;1502303 wrote: In a Police Line-Up you can always tell the believer. He / she is the one with the dopey vacant expression on their face with no idea of anything to do with the real world around them. I didn't need to look any further than the very first of you supposed 300 'proofs' - "(1) If reason exists then God exists." - the very first one is based on a false premise. It is a an opinion stated as a fact & basing the rest of the argument on that non-fact. This is typical of all other 'proofs' of God's existence. There has never been any proof, because something that does not exist cannot be proven to exist. Even the basis "Cogito Ergo Sum" (I think, therefore I am) cannot be taken to be fact because the very basis of what thought is cannot be defined. It may be be hypothesised that I think, therefore I am, but it is by no means a fact. You first example - "If reason exists" - What evidence do you have that reason does exist? That, in itself, is a philosophical hypothesis. "Then God exists" - why? Why should the 2 have anything to do with each other? You might as well say "Then the Easter Bunny exists", and it would have just as much validity. (2) Reason exists - see (1) - it is not proven that it does exist. (3) Therefore God Exists. - Or "Therefore the Easter Bunny exists".

That is just your 1st 'proof' torn to shreds. The rest follow suit. You cannot come up with one iota of 'proof' that doesn't resort to opinion / hypothesis falsely being used as 'fact'.

The fact that we can see stars that are millions of Light Years only proves a few things. (1) That we can see them (that is, of course, if we are really here - but, for the sake of argument, let's assume we are). (2) The stars are Millions of Light Years away (as been proved by scientific observation). (3) What we are seeing of those stars now is what happened millions of years ago. (4) The Bible is wrong, because it claims the Universe is only about 8,000 years old. The fact that what we can see the stars proves the Bible to be wrong. Using your logic, that must mean that we can't really see the stars at all because the Bible has to be right.




Show me where the bible claims the universe is only 8,000 years old. You are wrong about the bible , it NEVER claims what you are saying it does. Your spreading lies.

Mickiel;1502313 wrote: Show me where the bible claims the universe is only 8,000 years old. You are wrong about the bible , it NEVER claims what you are saying it does. Your spreading lies.


Sorry - that should have been 6,000 - I was counting the years A.D. twice.

Date of creation - Conservapedia

FourPart;1502315 wrote: Sorry - that should have been 6,000 - I was counting the years A.D. twice.

Date of creation - Conservapedia


Let me repeat my request for the second time; and I am using English so I know you understand me ; "You made a claim that the bible claims the Universe is 8,000 years old, you changed it to 6,000 years old : I disputed you and said the bible does not make that claim. You dig up something on Conservapedia ;just show me in the bible where it backs up your claim. I say your claim is a lie;

Lets have it!

Mickiel;1502316 wrote: Let me repeat my request for the second time; and I am using English so I know you understand me ; "You made a claim that the bible claims the Universe is 8,000 years old, you changed it to 6,000 years old : I disputed you and said the bible does not make that claim. You dig up something on Conservapedia ;just show me in the bible where it backs up your claim. I say your claim is a lie;

Lets have it!


Perhaps a scan of the first page of my Bible...

FourPart;1502318 wrote: Perhaps a scan of the first page of my Bible...





Maybe I should stop this before you make yourself look worse; there are no verses in the bible that claim God made the Universe in " Any amount of years", and the "Creation Days" in the bible could have lasted billions of years , they were not 24 hour days.

I really don't mean to make you look bad , you just need to stop believing Christianity.

Mickiel;1502325 wrote: Maybe I should stop this before you make yourself look worse; there are no verses in the bible that claim God made the Universe in " Any amount of years", and the "Creation Days" in the bible could have lasted billions of years , they were not 24 hour days.

I really don't mean to make you look bad , you just need to stop believing Christianity.
That's not what Creationists would have you believe.

FourPart;1502326 wrote: That's not what Creationists would have you believe.




Again for those interested in the truth , there are no biblical verses that place an age on the Universe. Four Part , like Christianity and religion , is seeing what is not there.

Mickiel;1502328 wrote: Again for those interested in the truth , there are no biblical verses that place an age on the Universe. Four Part , like Christianity and religion , is seeing what is not there.
No I am not. You say that there is no single verse in the Bible that says that. I'm not arguing that. The dates were calculated from the ages of the generations listed in the Bible - far more than any single verse. This is the basis that Creationists make their claims of the Earth, and the entire Universe being about 6,000 years old. Furthermore, whilst all Creationists I have encountered have been Christians, there is technically no reason why they should be so. They could just as easily be Jewish or or Muslim, or any of the Religions that recognise the Genesis tale of events. Most people (even Religious ones) with any level of sanity will accept that the Universe is Billions of years old. There is overwhelming evidence to that fact. But no - the Creationists will always argue that it is no more than 6,000 years old BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS SO. Ask Pahu - he's an expert on the matter.

My Bible (or one of them, as I have several) has the chronological ages listed in it, as you can see, based on this information. Essentially it is basic maths. If someone was born in an undetermined year, and was aged 50 at the time of a known event, then it's not too difficult to calculate the year of his birth. You can just go changing the rules once it reaches the point when common sense & Biblical teachings come into conflict.

FourPart;1502329 wrote: No I am not. You say that there is no single verse in the Bible that says that. I'm not arguing that. The dates were calculated from the ages of the generations listed in the Bible - far more than any single verse. This is the basis that Creationists make their claims of the Earth, and the entire Universe being about 6,000 years old. Furthermore, whilst all Creationists I have encountered have been Christians, there is technically no reason why they should be so. They could just as easily be Jewish or or Muslim, or any of the Religions that recognise the Genesis tale of events. Most people (even Religious ones) with any level of sanity will accept that the Universe is Billions of years old. There is overwhelming evidence to that fact. But no - the Creationists will always argue that it is no more than 6,000 years old BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS SO. Ask Pahu - he's an expert on the matter.

My Bible (or one of them, as I have several) has the chronological ages listed in it, as you can see, based on this information. Essentially it is basic maths. If someone was born in an undetermined year, and was aged 50 at the time of a known event, then it's not too difficult to calculate the year of his birth. You can just go changing the rules once it reaches the point when common sense & Biblical teachings come into conflict.




You still don't know what your talking about, if anyone who can count even uses the listed generations in the bible , they alone are over 30,000 years.

Hello? You can get over 10 thousand years just from the generations of Noah. You can count 1658 years between Adam and Noah.

A Strange Discovery from the Days of Noah

About a 1100 Year gap between birth of Adam and the birth of Noah, Genesis 5:1-32 | Bibleview

Abraham lived over 4,000 years ago;

Abraham lineage

Garden of Eden may be 60,000 years ago;

Old Earth Creation Science, Big Bang Receives More Confirmation

Hey using just my biblical calculations , I have come up with at least 90,000 years of just Old testament times.

I refer you to https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=what+ ... 8AeR_Z3wDg

This is not just one specially selected site. If you Google any site to find the year of Genesis you'll come up with roughly the same answer.

FourPart;1502337 wrote: I refer you to https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=what+ ... 8AeR_Z3wDg

This is not just one specially selected site. If you Google any site to find the year of Genesis you'll come up with roughly the same answer.




The creation days were each an extended long period of time ; nobody knows how long;

Genesis 1: The Literal Interpretation of the Creation Account

They could have been thousands or millions of years??

Mickiel;1502340 wrote: The creation days were each an extended long period of time ; nobody knows how long;

Genesis 1: The Literal Interpretation of the Creation Account

They could have been thousands or millions of years??




Is God real? I think he is, because if he is not ,then neither are we.

Mickiel;1502492 wrote: Is God real? I think he is, because if he is not ,then neither are we.


What is your foundation for that? The opposite logic makes far more sense.

Are we real? I think we are because if we were not, then neither could God be, because the notion of a God is a human invention.

FourPart;1502512 wrote: What is your foundation for that? The opposite logic makes far more sense.

Are we real? I think we are because if we were not, then neither could God be, because the notion of a God is a human invention.


Organizing power is my foundation; great power that established patterns in reality that produced many beginnings of varied foundations that all point to reality as it is. They all point to a great being of purpose.

The mind of the ordinary man is in so imperfect a condition that it requires a creed; that is to say, a theory concerning the unknown and the unknowable in which it may place its deluded faith and be at rest.

Winwood Reade.

Things have been established so well in the universe ,I see deliberate power behind far too many circumstances that we can use as circumstantial evidence for a God being the power of powers.

Too much power in the possibilities for a God, to turn around and not consider a God in the possibilities.

You can't fool reality; God is too real to classify him as not being real. God would have to be fake to un prove him.

When a snowflake falls, is it placed where it falls by a conscious thought, or does it happen randomly? Then the next - and the next. All totally random events, yet after all the snow has fallen everything is covered evenly. This is not a plan action. It is something that simply happens. It doesn't need anything to cause it to happen. That the structure of a snowflake is also so complex that it is believed that no 2 snowflakes are alike (although this, of course, can never be proven). This, once again, is not something that takes special design. It just is. Only a moron would believe otherwise - but then, you probably do.

[QUOTE=FourPart;1502570 It just is. Only a moron would believe otherwise - but then, you probably do.


I hold no need to insult you and call you names ,why you "Need" to do that to me is obviously a reflection of the desperate need to try and give the impression that this is a debate ,instead of a slaughter.

Mickiel;1502575 wrote: I hold no need to insult you and call you names ,why you "Need" to do that to me is obviously a reflection of the desperate need to try and give the impression that this is a debate ,instead of a slaughter.


Here are some names of historians who wrote about Jesus;



Mickiel;1436462 wrote: Was Jesus Real? If we consider God being Real, then we should consider was Jesus real. Well according to these people and writers in history, he was;

Sextus Julius Africanus

Celsus

Tacitus

Pliny the Younger and his Correspondance to the Roman Emperor Trajan

Thallus

Origen

Josephus

Lucian

Tertullian

Dionysius the Areopagite

Hegesippus

Clement

Conon

Porphyry of Tyre

Polycarp

Eusebius

Irenaeus

Ignatius

Justin Martyr

Phlegon

Mara Bar-Serapion

Julian the Apostate

Ussher

Paulus Orosius

The Toledot Yeshu

Clemet of Alexandria

Chrysostom

Macarius the Elder

Or one could ask what credible historians ever claimed that Jesus did not exist?

just a bit more Mickiel;1436463 wrote: As to Jesus being real, more people wrote about him;

Aristides the Athenian

Quadratus of Athens

The writer of the espitle of Barnabus

We have the actual bone box of Caiaphas, the High Priest who slapped him in the face

We also have the bone box of Simon the Cyrenian who helped carry his cross

We know the actual location of his death at the mountian of the Skull, Golgotha

We have the lake he was baptised in , Jordan

We all know Jerusalem is still there, and the Sea of Galaliee where he performed many of his miracles

We have the actual house of his friends Mary and Martha

Not to mention Peters house

We have the Via Dolorosa

The Damascus Gate

Hey man, when you got the bones of people Jesus met and interacted with, the houses of people he knew, the place he was killed, the river he was baptized in, two possible places he was buried in, the city he preached in, the actual spot of a garden he prayed in, a well he drank from, over 40 historians that wrote about him and the Babylonian Talmud that mentions him; good grief what more do you need?


Just a bit more. This stuff is a bit old ,but hey , still relevant ,just like the bible.

Proving that Jesus existed is a natural straw in the hat of God existing. And then using non biblical sources as proof is pumping way more straw into the hat ;



Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible? | Cold Case Christianity

Little bit more;

Did Jesus Exist? Searching for Evidence Beyond the Bible - Biblical Archaeology Society

Religionists are extremely naive.

Fuzzy;1502631 wrote: Religionists are extremely naive.








Atheist are extremely naive; they persecute the bible for over 500 years , try to belittle it, try to stop it and shrink its meaning , yet it remained a best seller for over 400 years; and they don't see the miracle in that?

Mickiel;1502666 wrote: Atheist are extremely naive; they persecute the bible for over 500 years , try to belittle it, try to stop it and shrink its meaning , yet it remained a best seller for over 400 years; and they don't see the miracle in that?




I mean when a book that your group has been persecuting for over 400 years in the world, has become more important to the world than your group has ; maybe your group needs to consider a different target?

In my view of belief in God , there is room for every kind of unbelief one could imagine, including all forms of Atheism. All human mental conditions will be changed by God, none of us will be rejected for any reason; we all have the same wonderful destiny ; we all need a God who understands everything we can go through , and will forgive all sin ; in this manner the " Sting and fear of death is removed", and religion is not needed. Everything is pardoned;

it would require a God to do such a thing , so this helps greatly to believe in him, having the correct knowledge of him. I am staking my life on these things being true about God ; I believe he is all merciful, meaning he will have mercy on us all. He Loves us all, wants to be with all of us in eternity. He has first given us the " Bad example of life", so when he finally gives us the real life, we will always know the difference.

There is room for everyone in the Kingdom of God , there is much more to life than what we know. If God does not exist ,then none of this matters ;

but he does exist or we would never have this conversation. This conversation is the consciousness existing before the body; which came first , the consciousness or the body? The consciousness was placed inside of the body. It all makes sense.

God's mistakes in roughly chronological order

Creating female counterparts for all the males of each species, yet forgetting to make a female human until at least a day later.

Creating Eve out of Adam's rib, rather than out of thin air like his omnipotent self. First, the poor guy's missing a rib for the rest of his life. Second, Eve was then made out of Adam, so all love from then on out was reduced to narcissism and all sex reduced to incest or self-gratification (i.e. sin).

Letting sin exist

Letting things on Earth get so out of hand that he had to wipe the slate and start over.

While he's wiping the slate, He simply refuses to wipe the slate totally clean. He has to save Noah and family for the next round of inbreeding, instead of re-creating humanity from scratch. This leads to the next round of wiping the slate known as the Great Tribulation[wp] or Yawm ad-Din.[wp]

Going nuts because of the Tower of Babel, but doing nothing about Burj Khalifa, topping at 2,722 ft.

Forgetting to smite Abraham for his incestuous marriage to his half sister Sarah.

Leading his people out of slavery in Egypt only to settle down in the only part of the Middle-East where there's no oil.

Fathering a son through an engaged virgin (secretly, and without any prior notice to her fiancé) in open defiance to the laws he himself set back in Deuteronomy 22:25[2], and expecting her to be honored.

Writing the Old Testament and then having to send his Only Begotten Son down to Paul and some anonymous latecomers revise it, leaving everyone thoroughly confused.

Forgetting to smite Himself/Jesus for working on the Sabbath.

Still failing to get his message across properly even after his Only Begotten Son had come and gone,[3] meaning that a few hundred years later he had to get some messenger called Gabriel to dictate[4] Version 3.0[5] to some bloke called Mohammed. And possibly another version 3.0 to some bloke named Joseph Smith about 1000 years later.

Telling us (through clergies) that we will be judged on how we decide to act in life, while designing the world around the idea that how we decide to act has been predetermined.

Allowing the Holocaust to happen, along with Stalin's Purges, Mao's Culture War, Pol Pot's Killing Fields and 9/11 along with countless other atrocities.

Letting ISIS exist

Failure to use intelligent design protocols when creating humans

Not designing the human body the way he wants it by having all human males born circumcised like Shem.

Physical birth defects.

Making our adrenal glands too big.

Aging, which is quite literally caused by a biological error in cells.

Placement of the male external genitalia in a rather easy to attack position (unless it was deliberate to allow women easy retaliation).

And on the subject of genitalia¦ why are the same members that are used for body waste excretion also used for what is widely considered to be one of the most fun and interesting activities that humans can engage in? And why is a man's G spot in his anus if anal sex is forbidden by God?

Not being able to correctly calculate the number of teeth necessary to fill the average adult human mouth.[7]

Use of a particularly inefficient system when making the vertebrate eye.

Error in testosterone management system which consequently makes many men go bald.[8]

Giving humans appendixes, which occasionally swell up and try to kill their owners and don't really need to be there because we don't eat grass. Why don't they all just leave our bodies and go and live in the backs of books?

The provision of a really bad, sometimes lethal, system of giving birth. (Though it may not have been so bad at first — He deliberately made it more painful to cruelly punish all women for the original sin thing.)

Failure to provide a system to synthesize vitamin C (or the failure in design that humans need vitamin C to begin with).

Drinking and laughing at the same time — makes the drink come out of the person's nose. Or potentially choke the victim of such a lousy design.

Human back — seems to cause a disproportionate number of problems which is usually followed by Vicodin addiction.

Spinal cord injuries being (at this point) unfixable

Auto-immune disorders, cause we all know we are our own worst enemy.

The inability to operate at anything like an adequate efficiency without regular and lengthy periods of sleep.

Hangnails

Referred pain[wp] — You might actually be having a potentially fatal heart attack. Unfortunately your body is telling you have pain in your shoulder, neck or left arm.

Cancer.

Oncogenes — genes that exist solely to give us cancer.

Memory — or, why can you remember exactly where you were on 9/11, but you can't remember where you laid down your keys five minutes ago?

The ulnar nerve — aka, "funny bone" — is located on the outside of the elbow joint. Thanks to this placement, if you bang your elbow against a hard surface, you will feel like you were stabbed in the elbow. Bang this nerve hard enough and you may lose the use of your fingers.

Humans will pass out at 12 Gs, and will die at 18 Gs. Cockroaches can survive 120 Gs! How come those creepy crawlers are harder to kill than us!

And while we're at it, why can't we rotate our heads more than 180 degrees? An owl can twist its head almost 360 degrees! It's not like an owl needs to back up a car or keep track of high-spirited children!

Other primates have nostrils that face forward, making it impossible for them swim face down. Human nostrils point down, so we can swim. So why don't we come with a persistent and innate ability to swim rather than just a primitive reflex that we quickly lose? Or at least tread water? Does God like to see His children drown?[9]

Intoxicants: Pleasurable (good); addictive, DTs, can diminish your inhibitions to the point you might harm yourself and/or others, potentially harmful to your health, possibly lethal (bad). So, (a) why create them in the first place; and (b) why make them so pleasurable and addictive?

And what the hell is up with OCD, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, dyslexia, aphasia[wp], depression, anxiety etc.?

Homosexuality (if you view it from a fundamentalist viewpoint). If it's so wrong, why does the almighty allow it to exist[10]?

Giving Humans the same passage to swallow food and breathe, a major choking hazard.

Creating psychopaths, which is pointless because you can only get into Heaven by loving God, so why would he create people who are incapable of love? And who are at a very high risk factor of making life quite miserable for other people? Is he just a sadist?

Fetuses can get cancer

I don't know God, but if I could meet him and have a conversation, I too would have along list ; but they would all be questions.

Questions that I am very curious about.

I think it would be quite something if that could happen.

And trust me ,I would ask these questions as respectfully as I could.

Mickiel;1502700 wrote:



And trust me ,I would ask these questions as respectfully as I could.


I would just come out with a straight question: Hey ********, why can't you get anything right? And then: If you are omnipotent, omniscient, and all that, who's the idiot who created you?

I'm just glad it wasn't me. The things I've created actually work sometimes.

Fuzzy;1502708 wrote: I would just come out with a straight question: Hey ********, why can't you get anything right? And then: If you are omnipotent, omniscient, and all that, who's the idiot who created you?

I'm just glad it wasn't me. The things I've created actually work sometimes.


My first question to God would be "May I ask you some questions?" And if he permitted it , I would go from there.

Quite frankly I find the notion of there existing a bone believed to be (not proven to be) from someone who is reputed to have slapped a person whose very existence has never been proven to be evidence of the latter is just laughable.

Not one of those supposed historians has ever come up with anything that can be validated - just rehashed stories. The closest is the famed Tacitus, which on closer spectrographic analysis has been proved to have been edited & faked in order to change the meaning.

FourPart;1502788 wrote: Quite frankly I find the notion of there existing a bone believed to be (not proven to be) from someone who is reputed to have slapped a person whose very existence has never been proven to be evidence of the latter is just laughable.

Not one of those supposed historians has ever come up with anything that can be validated - just rehashed stories. The closest is the famed Tacitus, which on closer spectrographic analysis has been proved to have been edited & faked in order to change the meaning.




An interesting find ;

https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/vi ... igh-Priest

Top Ten Biblical Discoveries in Archaeology – #8 Caiaphas OssuaryParchment and Pen Blog

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 142513.htm

Even IF the bones were those of the priest, that would only prove that the priest existed. Nothing else. Conan Doyle wrote of Sherlock Holmes meeting with Queen Victoria. Although there can be no doubt that Queen Victoria existed, her existence cannot be taken as proof of the existence of Sherlock Holmes.

FourPart;1502853 wrote: Even IF the bones were those of the priest, that would only prove that the priest existed. Nothing else. Conan Doyle wrote of Sherlock Holmes meeting with Queen Victoria. Although there can be no doubt that Queen Victoria existed, her existence cannot be taken as proof of the existence of Sherlock Holmes.




Oh no, it also proves that the bible is a valid historical document. When it writes about Kings and Queens and people and places that is called "History."

Mickiel;1502897 wrote: Oh no, it also proves that the bible is a valid historical document. When it writes about Kings and Queens and people and places that is called "History."
The same rule also proves that the Sherlock Holmes stories are also valid historical documents for exactly the same reasons. Throw in a few factual places, events & people, and fill the rest in with fiction & use the former to validate the latter.

FourPart;1502899 wrote: The same rule also proves that the Sherlock Holmes stories are also valid historical documents for exactly the same reasons. Throw in a few factual places, events & people, and fill the rest in with fiction & use the former to validate the latter.


Your depending on fictional reasoning to explain non fictional history. But your reasoning itself is fictional , so I understand why you figure as you do.

Hey, Mickiel! It's nice to see you!

Don't be a stranger - join in some other conversations.

Ahso!;1502906 wrote: Hey, Mickiel! It's nice to see you!

Don't be a stranger - join in some other conversations.




What others are you suggesting?

Mickiel;1502907 wrote: What others are you suggesting?


Any other fairy tale story thread would be fine.:wah:

Mickiel;1502907 wrote: What others are you suggesting?What do you think of Hiromi's music?

I recall you know a bit about music. Do you know anything about The Trio Project's Anthony Jackson?

Fuzzy;1502912 wrote: Any other fairy tale story thread would be fine.:wah:


Life does seem like a fairy tale.

Ahso!;1502914 wrote: What do you think of Hiromi's music?

I recall you know a bit about music. Do you know anything about The Trio Project's Anthony Jackson?


Never heard of any of them.

Mickiel;1502925 wrote: Never heard of any of them.You know that famous bass riff on the O'jays' tune For The Love Of Money? Anthony Jackson wrote that riff.