Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jodie.Lynne

Beliefs... everyone has them

271 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Desertrat56
12 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Desertrat

I see Rashore has given a good response but will add that where I grew up smaller ponds would appear and disappear depending on conditions usually because the were not very deep and would evaporate during dry times when there was no water nobody really seemed to care when there was water it was a pond and when there wasn't water there was no point in making note of it.

jmccr8

Ah we have a lot of those places too because it is desert.  Ponds are usually formed around springs here, and at one time there were streams and rivers that are now dry and we call them arroyos because the spaniards were here a couple hundred years before the english speaking colonists.  As for beliefs, to get back on topic, it does include beliefs in the meaning of words. For example where I grew up Honkey meant 'wannabe racist cowboy'  No one would think of calling someone that who was not wearing cowboy boots, or who knew how to ride a horse.  When I joined the army and went to basic training I learned it meant something else.  My belief was shattered and reformed. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xeno-Fish
2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Sigh.  Please list the subjects that require 'elegance' when discussing.  Is this a requirement you hold yourself to?  Ah no, definitely not on things you disagree with.  You'll forgive if I don't exactly trust your idea of etiquette, there are very good reasons why neither you nor I should be moderators here.

Who said they 'matter so much'?  You're reading a lot into the mere fact that people have discussions.  In this particular case I thought it clear that the issue being countered is not the harmless beliefs, it's the projecting of their experience onto other people ("idiot" I think was the term, speaking of 'elegance').  

There are two types of discussions around here. The first being an actual discussion. Person A has a belief, Person B ask them a question. They converse about it. You know, the kind of discussion most of us want to have.

On the other had Person A has a belief and Person B proceeds to bash them for it. Insults and all. Trying to hammer in to Person A how stupid they are for believing what they believe. 

I feel most thing can be discussed. Yet sometime it gets very messy and I have been in the center of it. 

Maybe I am projecting, I don't feel like arguing with people. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
3 hours ago, XenoFish said:

On the other had Person A has a belief and Person B proceeds to bash them for it. Insults and all. Trying to hammer in to Person A how stupid they are for believing what they believe. 

I feel most thing can be discussed. Yet sometime it gets very messy and I have been in the center of it. 

Maybe I am projecting, I don't feel like arguing with people. 

To be clear I don't think you are projecting, Sakari was.  "Trying to hammer in to Person A how stupid they are" is an interpretation you have of Person B's intention, who knows what ultimate purpose someone has for disagreeing, it's not usually actually stated.  I definitely agree that things can get very messy, but I think the moderators do a good job of keeping that mess to a minimum here.

If I can turn around your interpretation/question 'why do people bash harmless beliefs?', why are you so concerned that this might be happening here?  I mean your example is backwards in this case, it was the 'Person A who has a belief' who whipped out how others are idiots/stupid.  Why do you pretty consistently call out the non-believers instead of believers on their 'insults'? 

I'd argue that the messiness on SvS (where "debates are to be expected") is less in general than the political forums here, and because of the excellent moderation here all of UM is Romper Room compared to most other forums/comment sections on the internet as far as messes and insults.  I think the problem is more that people don't actually read the 'guidelines' for this board, anybody who does should know not to bring ideas that are sacred to them in some way to this board with the expectation that others will also treat them as sacred.  We're probably going to discuss it like we'd discuss "greater Trek captain:  Kirk vs Picard", which some people may not be comfortable with.  That's understandable, but that's not on us.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xeno-Fish
1 minute ago, Liquid Gardens said:

To be clear I don't think you are projecting, Sakari was.  "Trying to hammer in to Person A how stupid they are" is an interpretation you have of Person B's intention, who knows what ultimate purpose someone has for disagreeing, it's not usually actually stated.  I definitely agree that things can get very messy, but I think the moderators do a good job of keeping that mess to a minimum here.

If I can turn around your interpretation/question 'why do people bash harmless beliefs?', why are you so concerned that this might be happening here?  I mean your example is backwards in this case, it was the 'Person A who has a belief' who whipped out how others are idiots/stupid.  Why do you pretty consistently call out the non-believers instead of believers on their 'insults'? 

I'd argue that the messiness on SvS (where "debates are to be expected") is less in general than the political forums here, and because of the excellent moderation here all of UM is Romper Room compared to most other forums/comment sections on the internet as far as messes and insults.  I think the problem is more that people don't actually read the 'guidelines' for this board, anybody who does should know not to bring ideas that are sacred to them in some way to this board with the expectation that others will also treat them as sacred.  We're probably going to discuss it like we'd discuss "greater Trek captain:  Kirk vs Picard", which some people may not be comfortable with.  That's understandable, but that's not on us.

I did use two different scenarios. Person A and Person B discuss or Person A and Person B argue. Of course we don't have the exact belief in question. It was more a general observation. Going from personal experience on here. I've had a good discussion about EVP's with a new member it was very nice. We both discussed what we discussed and ended it quite well. I've also had arguments (which I do often fuel:P) with members about the validity of EVP's. Which typically revolve around me stating an opinion + supporting links and being told I'm closed minded (seems more of an insult) because I didn't agree. So it can go both ways. The difference in my opinion is once the primary disagreement is over, whichever party tries to hammer into the others head how right/wrong they are. That leads to the train wrecks we often get. 

Telling someone to get a psychic instead of seeking proper medical care for their elderly mother is wrong. No matter how sure the person is in their belief that a psychic could help, it's still a terrible idea. We can even look at the belief in the afterlife as a comforting lie that people use to help cope with our finite existence. On the other side of that coin we have those who are rigidly adamant that if you don't do X, Y, and Z you'll burn forever and ever. They start preaching that. 

S vs S is nothing like the mess that the political section is, I won't go there. If you want to see pure dogmatic thinking take a peak in. Which goes on here isn't the worst I've seen. Even now we are not arguing. We are discussing. 

The only think that I can really think of being a harmless belief is if someone saw or had a dream about a dead relative they loved a lot. And they got a bit of closer from it. Personally I'd handle that we caution. Telling them to remember their loved one and move forward. Not tell them that ghost aren't real. Kind of defeats the closure effect. 

Just my 2 cents.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
20 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Personally I'd handle that we caution. Telling them to remember their loved one and move forward. Not tell them that ghost aren't real. Kind of defeats the closure effect. 

Agreed to an extent, but that's my point - people shouldn't be coming to a debate forum for closure.  I'm kinda uncomfortable even telling people to remember their loved one and move forward, I just try to express my sympathies.  Despite that sympathy though they still have to accept some of the responsibility for themselves.  If we can't debate something because there may be a chance someone may get hurt inadvertently then we can't debate much. Except that, although Picard is great, Kirk > Picard. ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xeno-Fish
Just now, Liquid Gardens said:

Agreed to an extent, but that's my point - people shouldn't be coming to a debate forum for closure.  I'm kinda uncomfortable even telling people to remember their loved one and move forward, I just try to express my sympathies.  Despite that sympathy though they still have to accept some of the responsibility for themselves.  If we can't debate something because there may be a chance someone may get hurt inadvertently then we can't debate much. Except that, although Picard is great, Kirk > Picard. ;)

The way I handle so situation is more of a defusing type of maneuver. Just me trying to say "accept the loss, be grateful for the time you had, and move forward." without trying to be a turd about it. If the subject is brought to S vs S then it's definitely up for debate. Though I question if such things should leave this section. 

As for Kirk/Picard, honestly don't know. Never was much of a star trek fan. Not my thing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
14 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

WTF are you smoking dude?

EDIT: Obligatory gif.

troll trolling GIF

You came in late., 

One dictionary definition (the most common) is that a pond is a body of water 

BUT the original word ( and still used as such)   is a pond as an enclosure for HOLDING water (it comes from the word pound, as used in animal pounds )

Of course a pond is a body of water.

However it remains a pond when it is dry. You can buy concrete, fiberglass, and plastic ponds, from  shops without water in them  Some ponds are used to collect excess runoff and ,unless that runoff occurs they have no water in them

The problem here is a fixation on one true  but incomplete definition of a pond   I think that comes from most peoples knowldge of language being confined to online dictionaries 

Actually the real problem is a clash of personalities rather than the word,

  It is easy to prove  that  ponds include dry ones,  as my sources have done.

To be honest, those gifs suggest it is not I who is High :)    

and, not that it is relevant, but  with  one exception where i didn't want to offend a host,  I haven't  consumed any  alcohol or recreational drugs for about 50 years 

First i don't need them, and second the y never had any effect on me, anyway, except to put me to sleep 

My posts are never influenced by intoxication, which might be why some cant follow them :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
13 hours ago, eight bits said:

Meanwhile, back in the English language, dry pond is an oxymoron - the component words contradict each other, and so the phrase has no inherent meaning.

Like any other noun phrase, an oxymoron as a whole noun phrase can be given a definition.

Thus a dry pond can be either wet or dry. It is only "a kind of pond" when it is wet, otherwise, it is a kind of hole in the ground, not a kind of pond. The properties of the noun phrase as a whole are not applicable to the components: a wet dry pond is a dry pond despite being wet, a dry dry pond is a dry pond despite not being a pond.

Vernal pond is a cousin of oxymoron - rather than a contradicting each other, the component parts appear to be mismatched (Chomsky had a fondness for noun phrases like this, and it's kind of fun: imagine what an intrepid cucumber might be). But like oxymorons, the mismatching noun phrase as a whole can be given a definition.

Sure enough, the properties of the noun phrase as a whole are not applicable to the components: it's easy enough to have a dry vernal pond, even in the spring. Note that dry vernal pond is not an oxymoron, since vernal pond is an indivisible unit of meaning, and as such carries no commitment to wetness.

Run along, grasshopper.

 

In a sense you are correct but basically just wrong :) 

a dry dog remains a dog. dry dog cant be a wet dog. 

A dry pond remains a pond 

It is not an oxymoron, because it remains a pond, whether it contains water or not.

  For it to be an oxymoron, you would have to accept the definition that a pond always contains water or it is not a pond.

The fact that it remains a pond even when dry is correct  in usage, but also from  origin, where pond meant the enclosure which contained  the water.  Perhaps, because in Europe these never/rarely dried out, it came to mean the water itself,  but in countries like Australia our ponds are often dry.  We don't change their name to any thing else, once dry  

This is reflected in modern usage, where an artificial structure for holding water  is a pond before any water is put into it.  You buy a fishpond without ether water or fish, but it is still  called a fishpond, and nothing else. 

 

Despite about 90% of dictionary definitions it is not true that a pond always contains water /must contain water,  or it is not a pond 

Tell me. If you went to buy a small " thingy"  for your garden to put fish, and perhaps water plants into, what would you call it, and what would you search for online ? . 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
9 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Sigh.  Please list the subjects that require 'elegance' when discussing.  Is this a requirement you hold yourself to?  Ah no, definitely not on things you disagree with.  You'll forgive if I don't exactly trust your idea of etiquette, there are very good reasons why neither you nor I should be moderators here.

Who said they 'matter so much'?  You're reading a lot into the mere fact that people have discussions.  In this particular case I thought it clear that the issue being countered is not the harmless beliefs, it's the projecting of their experience onto other people ("idiot" I think was the term, speaking of 'elegance').  

Well said.

Apparently becoming more agrressive about a personal view without discussing it is what they call enlightened these days. 

Who knew.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
8 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

In a sense you are correct but basically just wrong :) 

Really???  what a moronic statement.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
8 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

What is the english word for a dry spot that used to be a pond or a river that no longer has water in it.  Spanish has words for those but I have never heard an english word for either of those.  (and I know it is off topic, but maybe not if there are no english words for those things, then you have a belief about those words that may be others don't share)

it is pond (or it could be a billabong  in Australia)  Originally pond was(or was interchangeable with)  pound  manning an enclosure.

  People built  po(u)nds to hold water, like the y built pounds to hold sheep or cattle 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
8 hours ago, rashore said:

Basin and bed are the words you are looking for. For example, a dry pond is a dry basin. Sometimes called stormwater basin or extended detention basin. A basin can hold water or be empty and dry. Bed is the same thing for flowing water like rivers and creeks- they are dry beds because there is no water in them. 

I believe that explains the off topic query, lol. 

Correct, but they are also called retention ponds and may, or may not, hold water, while remaining a pond  The y dont become" non-ponds" when the water dries up  

Sorry to be pedantic ,  but the use of language has been important to me all my life  A pond originally was, and often is today, an artificial structure constructed to hold water   The y can be large  landscaped structures, or small plastic ones

Again i think the underlying problem is some people's  need to argue with anything I post :)  (and perhaps my willingness to engage in those arguments)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
10 hours ago, psyche101 said:

- post removed -

strange?

Objectively true, if you  look at the human norm, and describe strange as lying outside it  

Still, strange is not a bad/negative descriptor 

Impressive ?

Entirely subjective. 

ie i dont seek to be impressive, just honest about myself,   and how others perceive me is up to them. 

 I guess using objective, criteria- referenced assessment, my life has been moderately impressive  in some respects, and pretty mundane in others. 

Ive never sought to be impressive, in my life 

I try to be right .

I try to do my best in all things 

I try to make myself the most skilled and empowered person i can be, concentring on areas where i have some skills and abilities  

but, mostly,  I successfully try to be happy and content .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
32 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Really???  what a moronic statement.

read the rest of the post for the explanation

Ie he would be correct, using his  own assumption that  dry pond is an oxymoron, because ponds are never dry.

But he is wrong because a pond can be dry, and remain a pond. (Ponds are structures as well as bodies of water)  (like a dam ) 

eg this is a pond, and is named, sold, and marketed as such

Aquapro 65L Mini Rock Look Pond

 

Aquapro 65L Mini Rock Look Pond

 

https://tinkerscreek.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Dry-Pond-Merged.pdf

(Wouldn't let me quote from  it )

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

Not going to waste more time on this 

The evidences are clear

It has become more of a personal argument than a factual one   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear Wessel
1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

You came in late., 

One dictionary definition (the most common) is that a pond is a body of water 

BUT the original word ( and still used as such)   is a pond as an enclosure for HOLDING water (it comes from the word pound, as used in animal pounds )

Of course a pond is a body of water.

However it remains a pond when it is dry. You can buy concrete, fiberglass, and plastic ponds, from  shops without water in them  Some ponds are used to collect excess runoff and ,unless that runoff occurs they have no water in them

The problem here is a fixation on one true  but incomplete definition of a pond   I think that comes from most peoples knowldge of language being confined to online dictionaries 

Actually the real problem is a clash of personalities rather than the word,

  It is easy to prove  that  ponds include dry ones,  as my sources have done.

To be honest, those gifs suggest it is not I who is High :)    

and, not that it is relevant, but  with  one exception where i didn't want to offend a host,  I haven't  consumed any  alcohol or recreational drugs for about 50 years 

First i don't need them, and second the y never had any effect on me, anyway, except to put me to sleep 

My posts are never influenced by intoxication, which might be why some cant follow them :) 

I expected this kind of reply from you, but that's OK. We all know that you can't admit to being factually incorrect, even though you are. :)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
34 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Not going to waste more time on this 

The evidences are clear

It has become more of a personal argument than a factual one   

Walker facts............

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRle-7AotSsaHefPhIg2ZL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
23 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

I expected this kind of reply from you, but that's OK. We all know that you can't admit to being factually incorrect, even though you are. :)

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJ741wvnc1AIf4BYdE7HK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

ie i dont seek to be impressive, just honest about myself,   and how others perceive me is up to them.

you're nothing more than an attention seeker IMO- & I'll be honest:

you're bloody good at it:nw:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
7 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

I expected this kind of reply from you, but that's OK. We all know that you can't admit to being factually incorrect, even though you are. :)

If you think I am "factually incorrect " then explain how 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
6 hours ago, Dejarma said:

you're nothing more than an attention seeker IMO- & I'll be honest:

you're bloody good at it:nw:

Nup  actually don't like attention, (it makes me uncomfortable)  but i do like to educate people :) 

People don't like being corrected or educated and so the y make it about me, rather  than argue the facts  

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
7 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Walker facts............

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRle-7AotSsaHefPhIg2ZL

Prove me wrong 

Dictionary definitions prove you  are correct about a pond being a body of water, but often do not go further, to explain that  a pond can be a structure or a dry pond without any water in it  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saru

Keep it civil please folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakari
On 12/3/2020 at 4:12 AM, XenoFish said:

So if a person believes there is an afterlife. This idea comforts them, maybe gives their life a meaning and purpose, it is just plain wrong for them to have it? To have some form of personal hope. Even if what they belief don't affect you in any capacity it is a bad thing? 

Here I was thinking that we gave our lives meaning. I must be wrong. I guess the only meaning that matters is the scientifically approved one.

You are not wrong at all. I am sure you read my replies. By the way, hope you are well. Going to make this my last reply, as I see this place is no different than other social media when it comes to participants.

I now do not know why anyone argues, or even debates what others believe in, or what makes them happy. My dumb ass used too. Now I wish I had that kind of faith in something. For me, it was not during my lifetime making it happier, because I was complacent to death. I did not think about dying. If I had in my head, what I have now, I would have had some kind of faith for sure.

As I said. It is not such a good feeling, knowing any day you can go, and not truly believe you may have an afterlife. I can not explain the way it feels. Scared for sure, because I would hate to think this is it, and I wasted 30 years of it, to a point. Could have done a lot more than what I did. Still did ok, but made excuses to not do, and experience many things.

Your life is what means everything. And that means making YOU number one, and YOU happy. Stop giving one sh$t about what others think. They do not live your life, and their opinions sure the f' should not control your actions. I 100% guarantee, one day, they will regret not having something to believe in. And I am not saying that as a "told you so", because it is actually sad.

Side note. I am living a Pagan/Heathen path now, and pretty sure it is something I had always done, and not even known. So, I am starting to have more and more of a spirituality, and hopefully one day soon, will "believe" there is more out there than this. This can not be the end.

St\ay well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
14 minutes ago, Sakari said:

You are not wrong at all. I am sure you read my replies. By the way, hope you are well. Going to make this my last reply, as I see this place is no different than other social media when it comes to participants.

I now do not know why anyone argues, or even debates what others believe in, or what makes them happy. My dumb ass used too. Now I wish I had that kind of faith in something. For me, it was not during my lifetime making it happier, because I was complacent to death. I did not think about dying. If I had in my head, what I have now, I would have had some kind of faith for sure.

As I said. It is not such a good feeling, knowing any day you can go, and not truly believe you may have an afterlife. I can not explain the way it feels. Scared for sure, because I would hate to think this is it, and I wasted 30 years of it, to a point. Could have done a lot more than what I did. Still did ok, but made excuses to not do, and experience many things.

Your life is what means everything. And that means making YOU number one, and YOU happy. Stop giving one sh$t about what others think. They do not live your life, and their opinions sure the f' should not control your actions. I 100% guarantee, one day, they will regret not having something to believe in. And I am not saying that as a "told you so", because it is actually sad.

Side note. I am living a Pagan/Heathen path now, and pretty sure it is something I had always done, and not even known. So, I am starting to have more and more of a spirituality, and hopefully one day soon, will "believe" there is more out there than this. This can not be the end.

St\ay well.

 

I wish you all the best and hope you grab hold of the truth that it only takes one brave stretch of faith.

Which it appears, you've already realized.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.