LOL....is the same as not getting off the bus at your stop

Apologies if it's already been mentioned on this thread but I thought it'd be fun to share something I learnt last week.

0.999... (recurring) is exactly equal to 1

Discuss.

Just no...does not compute.....ur always short of the whole number

Plz.....surely

Page removed....sigh!

If you are from a country that taxes winnings, why would you not try and negotiate a deal?

presumably you have to pay tax on your official payout as deals are not sanctioned and the us taxman isn't going to believe you. if they'd chopped 3 handed for 5.5m ish each and lamb had gone on to win the tournament he'd have taken home 5.5 minus about 3.6 in tax so would get less than if he didn't deal and finished 3rd

That's some crazy shit there....really?

Absolutely shocking.....

Im in the shower when the power trips out so i shout out to the bird to check downstairs to see if its all off, 30 seconds later she shouts back up, "all the lights are out but the laptops still on"

Lol

RIP

whilst religion has given us some nice architecture and a lot of wars.

I am an atheist and I would argue that this is absolute hogwash.  Just off the top of my head I could argue that the best universities in the UK originally came from the Church, the Church played a huge part in the development of football in this country, religion was the major driver behind the invention of the printing press.  Just because something is factually incorrect and based on myth doesn't mean that it can only be a negative force.  I think this is where the arguments of Dawkins etc fall down because they seem so intent upon proving that religion is bad and evil.  For a lot of people (especially in very poor countries) it is one of the only positive factors in their life and I am not sure how helpful debunking them of their myths is tbh.

Religion only has these postive attributes when it is constricted by a secular society and becomes a lifestyle choice in that society.  When not constrained it will not tolerate dissent.

This is just not true. The UK does not run under secular lines.

Our Head of State is also Head of the Church. Leading Bishops sit in the House of Lords and are higher in the Country's order of precedence than the Prime Minister. Yet all these positive things came about through the church mainly in the UK.

The UK does not run under the anachronistic institutions you mention. The Queen is for tourists and the order of precedence is for wikipedia. The House of Commons runs the show.

Doesn't the queen have final say in passing new laws........in theory she can say no to whatever the house of commons passes on to her to sign,but doesn't to avoid a constitutional crisis.........would be a laff if she said "feck off Mr.Cameron...one will not sign this law"

Was just doing some amateur thinking there in a similar note....there are countless gods in countless religions.....and there can only be one.....right?.....one ultimate designer/creator.......that must be perturbing to say the least for the faithful....knowing that statisically your backing the wrong horse......but if your an athiest then Woohooo if your right....or am I just debating pascals wager?...

Hope there's no cheats or cowards in the final

What do you mean by cowards....

Certainly during breaks I'm phoning friends for as much info as possible......who wouldn't?..

Winning a score on a bingo scratchcard tonight....wiiiii

Wish I hadn't seen it.......

The story is enough.....

Think I join the prick camp for watching it...

This is the worst thing I've seen in a long time....poor girl.....


I may not have watched if I had seen this thread first...very upsetting and almost impossible to understand.......first thing people here would do is run to her for help

Disgusting......

Maybe antitheist (as proposed by Mr Hitchens) is a better term than atheist? It doesn't carry the same 'baggage'.

Must admit i don't like the negativity of antitheist and that is part of my problem or uncomfortableness (is this even a word?) with my atheism in general.  It just isn't very positive or comforting.  A bit like saying at someones funeral or to your grandmother - "Nothing after this...just getting eaten by worms".  In gambling terms it has often occurred to me that non believing is like the ultimate -EV bet.  There is basically no upside to it at all.  If there is even a 0.00001% chance of God existing presumably by not believing in it I have made it difficult for myself and there isn't much to be gained from not believing.  If I am right then I just become dirt.  unfortunately there is nothing in my brain logically that can think anything else although Buddism appeals on a couple of levels.

Good post......

Hitchens has wrote sometimes believing in something,anything has many psychological advantages.....as in we have a purpose.....there is a point to this life thing....and you will be rewarded......but you have to remain in a state of delusion or fervour to not question your faith......

Was reading about the Mormon religion there......its very new and researchable......and in my humble opinion and hitchens an utter load of claptrap originated from a convicted fraudster and plagurist.....now if this religion could be so easily picked apart for what it is....a nonsense....and if the same could be applied for other ancient religions(much more difficult).....then there isn't much left to debate...

Oh shit....I think the swing has swung for me....tbc

I got the book about Pablo Escobar that Hopkin recommended in Ray's diary and thoroughly enjoyed it, as Ray pointed out it was rather one sided...

I followed that up with 'Killing Pablo' by Mark Bowden which is the same story viewed from the perspective of the Columbian Authorities and US embassy/forces - which is pretty much the opposite side to the one above. It's odd in that the two books contradict each other in the most mundane ways - e.g. This one says they used messenger pigeons when in jail and the other book denies it. I also enjoyed the book though and ended up buying several more by the author (inc Black Hawk Down) and will let you know if they're any good.

I'm currently reading John Peel's (auto)biography. Brackets because he died halfway through writing it and his family took over, so it's a combination of auto and half not. I think tikay would approve of the second half of the book as, unlike Chris Evan's books, the chapters are rather long... I say chapters but it's actually just one (as far as I can tell) for a few hundred pages.

The same author wrote black hawk down......I recommend

Read and listen to the argument from both sides - and make your mind up then.  Not sure what to recommend on the pro-religion side (I haven't read anything particularly convincing at all), but in the other corner there's the work of quite a few, especially these four: Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens - as well as the bible of course . 

If it makes you feel any better (or worse), I was brought up as a catholic, went to a catholic school, etc.

I mean,I know I'm going to finish the book..possibly this week....n absorb it and probably,inevitably swing completely away from my faith upbringing....which it itself us sad,n also a bloody waste of time....

The pro argument usually boils down to....you just have to believe and have faith,n it will all work out. ..end of..     .