Home
Top.Mail.Ru Yandeks.Metrika
Forum: "Other";
Current archive: 2017.01.15;
Download: [xml.tar.bz2];

Down

Sometimes again I will get into harmony, I will pour over the fiction of tears ... Find similar branches


Копир ©   (2016-02-24 16:13) [0]

Let this couplet become an epigraph to the topic,
which was affected in the previous "How to distinguish?"

Emotion.

What's this?
What it is?

Reflected to the topic of "happiness", but happiness -
it is not an emotion, but a state.
And there was no answer. And no.

In my opinion, a very suitable topic for the forum of programmers.

The study of AI is somehow confronted with the study of this.
manifestations of consciousness.

Even the etymology of English. words and asks to write
about computers: e-motion :-)

The electronic movement of the soul!
Not just like that, it seems, the computer was invented by English-speaking specialists :)

Summarizing my meager summary of the knowledge of the phenomenon,
I remember again the definition of Ashby
(Emotion occurs when the body fails.
with the flow of incoming information) and about own
fantasy (computer restarts when crying or laughing).

And what will the experts say?

I especially hope for promising comments.
SW. gentlemen:

rational Sergei Surovtsev,
here is the only poet programmer inovet,
energetic "who would doubt"
and broadband MsGuns.

Everyone, I will be grateful for the cooperation.

Only, here, it seems to me, it is not necessary to drag a "love" to emotions.
To avoid confusion.

Love, of course, is a very emotive experience.
But its cause is largely so-called. sex appeal, natural
an instinct that is not directly related to consciousness.

Thank you :)



pavelnk ©   (2016-02-24 16:28) [1]

Happiness consists of 4 parameters, only: well paid work + home + relationship with the opposite sex + machine. Everything..



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 16:35) [2]

> pavelnk © (24.02.16 16: 28) [1]:

It is possible that your "happiness" is so limited by these 4 parameters.

But, I did not ask about happiness, about emotions ...

How and why they arise.

Here are the perfect, intelligent, modern Japanese robots:
You look and you wonder!
And that can, and this.

Caring for old women, for children, and others (female)
may even ...

But do ONET (female, that is, gender) show emotions?



Kerk ©   (2016-02-24 16:42) [3]


> Copier © (24.02.16 16: 35) [2]
> But do ONET (female, that is, gender) show emotions?

And how to find out if the interlocutor shows emotions or imitates them?



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 16:50) [4]

> Kerk © (24.02.16 16: 42) [3]:

It’s my fault that I didn’t mention you as a wish
commentator because your question is of course very relevant.

And really!

How easy it is for these quick Japanese to create
robot girl, which will be in the provision of services and groan, and gasp? :)

But, after all, do not create.

Also think, probably, and what is emotion?

And how not to imitate it, but to create it?



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-24 17:14) [5]


> Kerk © (24.02.16 16: 42) [3]

> And how to find out whether the interlocutor shows emotions or imitates them?


there is no unequivocal answer, because it depends on the circumstances: if before that you moved the interlocutor into the eye, then it manifests.



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 17:14) [6]

All-knowing Wikipedia issues:

Emotion (from the Latin. Emoveo - shake, worry) - the mental process
average duration, reflecting the subjective estimated ratio
to existing or possible situations ...

I was alerted by the words "average duration."

And they will call a short surge “hysteria”?
And long - "stress"?

No, Wikipedia doesn't know what emotion is.
Even at the level of definition.



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 17:25) [7]

> Kilkennycat © (24.02.16 17: 14) [5]:
> if before that you moved the interlocutor into the eye, it manifests.

Also an interesting assessment.
Sincerity, as a criterion.

Researchers from the United States, Masters and Johnson is not something that proved
but stressed that "it is impossible to imitate orgasm."

But what are we all about love, and about love.
I called, do not confuse body and soul :)

Emotion is the departure of consciousness.



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 17:41) [8]

However, there is a mystery.

Where the body is only muscle with the brain, and when it goes
in the skeleton with a soul?

The materialists who taught me, and many of
local veterans, at school, shyly bypassed
question about the soul.

Then it was possible for him to lose the job of a “teacher”.

Books, these pre-Internet treasures of knowledge saved us
from ignorance.

Ornithologists, cynologists and others, there, materialists biologists
reluctantly recognized that birds, dogs and even lizards
possess such a kind of "soul" ...

Dogs wag their tails or whine when not cured
with the flow of incoming information :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-24 17:50) [9]


> Copier © (24.02.16 16: 50) [4]
> And how not to imitate it, but to create it?

To create, you first need to understand who creates it in us. And How. And for what.

Here you can also recall the Chinese room :)
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-24 17:51) [10]


> Copier ©

Is it possible a little offtop?
I have been interested in such an emotion for a very long time: Copier, but are you the same “live”? :)
Nothing personal, just curious, so if someone asks you on the street what time it is, what will be your answer? just “half past two”, or minutes on 15 of clarifications, reflections, doubts and experiences? :)



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 17:56) [11]

> Kerk © (24.02.16 17: 50) [9]:

Thank you!

I read something, once but did not pay attention.
Carefully study.
There, it seems, "in the case."



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 17:59) [12]

> Kilkennycat © (24.02.16 17: 51) [10]:

It is, looking who will ask.
If a passerby on the street is one thing.

And if the respondent from the delphimaster.ru konfy is another.

But who on the street will introduce such a respondent? :)



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-24 18:02) [13]


> Copier © (24.02.16 17: 59) [12]

This is also a good experiment on emotions: approach a person on the street and ask a question about time like this: "Hello, I’m delfimaster point ru, do not tell me what time it is?"



Копир ©   (2016-02-24 18:05) [14]

> Kilkennycat © (24.02.16 17: 51) [10]:
> or minutes on 15 for clarifications, reflections, doubts and experiences? :)

I had a live meeting with Ashot (aka Kaif), in 2008
You remember him, of course.

There are no 15 minutes.
There 4's hours were few!

It's a pity that Kaif "is not with us now ...



картман ©   (2016-02-24 18:41) [15]


> Copier © (24.02.16 17: 14) [6]

in terms of biology, any emotion is stress. Stress can be positive and negative. More details here: http://www.ozon.ru/context/detail/id/23892822/ - of course, if there is no traction that is permanent for this and not just the forum, endlessly give birth to truisms - delusional and not.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-24 23:02) [16]

> pavelnk © (24.02.16 16: 28) [1]
> Happiness consists of 4 parameters, only: well paid work + home + relationship with the opposite sex + machine. Everything..

When none of the above is there, then all of this can really seem like happiness :)

But for tortured pains of pain true happiness is pain medicine.

Happiness is for the most part the imagination of the owner of that which you do not have. Although this has already been written in detail in the well-known branch :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-24 23:41) [17]

Emotion is the essence of the irrational thing. It is not due to external action or influence, and perception thereof. Moreover, this is usually a spontaneous reaction that is hypertrophied over a short time. Not from rational consciousness. From the perception of something new, at the very early stage of receiving information about this new. Not thought out. Not weighted. Reaction at a subconscious level.

> Emotion occurs when the body fails.
with the flow of incoming information

This is not entirely true, only as a special case. Often, emotion needs very little information.

For example, a hammer on the finger. 0.001 information. And the sea of ​​emotions!
Or from "my uncle's most honest rules." For one, the news of the demise of a rich uncle will cause joy, for an inheritance, for another, sadness, for the beloved uncle was. What is important, both will receive their share of the inheritance, both will accompany him on his last journey. But the first reaction - the emotion - is different. For the perception of the uncle and the whole situation is different.

AI is unlikely to acquire emotions. To imitate, yes, it is possible and easy. But no more than that. For emotions are irrational. They are not from the field of algorithms. They contradict them. Emotionality means unpredictability. And for AI it is incompetent.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-25 00:13) [18]


> For emotions are irrational. They are not from the field of algorithms.
> They contradict them. Emotionality means unpredictability.

From the fact that we do not know how to predict them, in fact it does not in any way follow that they are irrational and there is no algorithm.



Германн ©   (2016-02-25 00:44) [19]


>
> Copier © (24.02.16 16: 13)
> Emotion.
>
> What is it?

Neurochemical reaction in a living organism to "secondary" external stimuli. :)
To recreate the same reaction in an artificial organism - like two fingers on asphalt. But why do they need AI?



Германн ©   (2016-02-25 00:53) [20]

Well, yes.
Dogs wag their tails because they have nothing else to "wave". More precisely, there is more than "waving" (ie, expressing emotions). But the language they can not always reach. :)



Германн ©   (2016-02-25 01:00) [21]

In Sience Fiction, by the way, many wondered what emotions are and why they are needed? Or what they interfere with?
Moreover, some authors even invented a special variant of telepathy, the so-called. "empathy" when the recipient receives not the thoughts of another subject, but his emotions.



NoUser ©   (2016-02-25 01:05) [22]

> Was ist das?
So Castaneda seems to have explained.
Or more prosaic - Gurdjieff and his "car".

> But why do they need AI?
Well, how, how, - so that you can be with people;)



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 02:00) [23]

> Kerk © (24.02.16 17: 50) [9]:

I have read the information given in your link.
Something that did not understand.
How, for example, will this system respond to a favorite color,
if you do not understand the question?
At random?

But it's not that.

The fact is that the "passing" of the Turing test
speaks not about the intelligence of the system
but only about her ability to follow the rules.
Call this ability rationality, does it matter?

And where does the "intellect"?

Turing test does not take into account, just, emotions.
The formal "computer" never laughs when you hear a joke.
If you try to "direct" him, he simply will not understand what is funny about it.

So what? - someone will say.
There are people who do not understand jokes.
But aren't they reasonable?

It was here that the "dog rummaged," as MS said. Gorbachev :)

The creators of AI, in fact, do not create human intelligence.
And just a system that can make decisions.
"Right" from the point of view of man.

Emotions are in human intelligence that cannot be attributed
neither to the correct nor to erroneous manifestations.

However, they (emotions) often influence a person’s decisions.
This is not (ir) rationality of emotions, they are often very predictable,
but not necessary for the mind (decision maker).

But mandatory for intelligence.

Artificial intelligence may even be able to create programs.
for computers.
Or beautifully rhymed lines.

But who would call them poems?



virex(home) ©   (2016-02-25 04:22) [24]


> It's a pity that Kaif "is not with us now ...


what happened to him?



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-25 10:21) [25]


> do not tell me what time it is? "


Divorced artists, nowhere to spit, any artist hurt. And in a country with methane difficulties ...



virex(home) ©   (2016-02-25 10:34) [26]

Deleted by moderator



Труп Васи Доброго ©   (2016-02-25 11:42) [27]


> Neurochemical reaction in a living organism to "secondary"
> external stimuli.

Nothing like this. An external stimulus is absolutely not required for emotion. It can also occur as a reaction to the memory, and even as a reaction to fantasy. Here I have presented now what I have ... a big salary and the emotions went the most positive, but when I remember where I live, everything immediately rolls into the denial.



Empleado ©   (2016-02-25 11:47) [28]

> And in a country with methane difficulties ...
Do cows become more? :)



Труп Васи Доброго ©   (2016-02-25 11:48) [29]

And why did you decide that AI needs emotions?
IMHO will never appear AI just because it has no purpose of "existence". After all, all people do something just to achieve a certain goal. Starting from organic needs (eating, drinking, dressing) to all sorts of "higher" goals like "planting democracy" or "world revolution."
And what purpose can the AI ​​have ??? Why would he have to do something? From the desire of what ??? Get salary? Achieve recognition? Self development? If this is his goal, it is so close to Skynet, which has become smarter than people and has realized that they don’t need them.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 13:45) [30]

> Now I have presented what I have ... a big salary

The key word is "salary." As an indispensable component of "modern" happiness. Her “rise” as a step to “happiness” is the expectation that you will be given more for the same work.
Thousands of years on earth did not know this word, and in the holy books there is no mention of anything like that. And it was just the opposite. People worked and gave part of how to file, tax, rent, etc. If you want to have more, work harder and better and no "uncle" has regulated your "salary".
The current era of "monetary relations" is a dead end, at the end of which the death of this civilization. And, as events of the last decades show, this “end” is rapidly approaching.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 13:50) [31]

In order to prevent an excessive discussion about the "salary" I will say that the "patch" should not be confused with the "salary", which was called by different words depending on time and geography and had a completely different meaning.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 16:56) [32]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (24.02.16 23: 41) [17]:
> Emotion is the essence of the irrational thing.
It is not due to external action or influence, and perception thereof.

Of course, but, here, sometimes in the streets I see cats that
do nothing, just sit, squint ...

And I think - Why are they not bored?
Would you do some useless business?

Paw, there, would draw a mouse, a fish?

But no!
They are not bored!

They simply "in idle", stand idle, as a computer to which the task is not set.

And how is a person different?
He can miss!

And out of boredom, to invent yourself completely useless (in terms of
cats) classes.

I will now explain in more detail.

NB:> Emotion is the essence of the irrational thing.

I am.
He, she, it is.
They are the essence.

Do not think only that I decided to teach you.
Simply, it will be useful to you :)



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 17:24) [33]

So how is intelligence different from reason?

A very important feature - the inclination and ability to GAME.

Well, that’s something you won’t find in intelligent creatures like ants or
lizards.

A game, like no other occupation, excites emotions that are unnecessary and useless.
(from the point of view of the formal computer) manifestations of the mind.

Firstly, to play you need free time in a state of satiety.
Secondly, the game takes away the resources necessary for useful things, for survival,
somehow: getting food, procreation, defense, etc.

The games of intelligence are inaccessible to the mind, but it is they (this is a paradox!)
caused the power of the intellect in its manifestations of "utility".

Games are varied:

From boredom "Tetris", to the fact that the bourgeoisie called "to make love".
Only intelligent animals (man and dolphins) "make love"
for pleasure, not like cats, during heat.

Anthropologists in Neanderthal rock carvings made out
giant phalluses are definitely fantastic examples of quenching boredom.
And the game.

Cupid, not Chronos, seems to have struck our primitive ancestors before it was invented :)



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 17:32) [34]

> The corpse of Vasi the Good © (25.02.16 11: 48) [29]

And why did you decide that AI needs emotions?
IMHO will never appear AI just because it has no purpose of "existence". After all, all people do something just to achieve a certain goal.

If this is a question for me, here is the answer for you :)

Artificial intelligence capable of gearing
on the conveyor emotions are not needed.

And artificial intelligence, inventing fairy tales and poems -
are needed.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 17:51) [35]

> Hermann © (25.02.16 00: 44) [19]:
> Neurochemical reaction in a living organism to "secondary" external stimuli. :)
To recreate the same reaction in an artificial body - like two fingers on asphalt.

You're wrong.
Or rather, you are a materialist.

And, like any materialist, you think that 100 grams of vodka can replace inspiration :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-25 17:55) [36]

> Copier © (25.02.16 16: 56) [32]
> Of course, but, behold, sometimes on the streets I see cats that do nothing, just sit, squint ...

And where did you get the idea that they are not doing anything? This is so from our level of understanding. And with them, perhaps, everything is exactly the opposite. ))



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 18:09) [37]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 17: 55) [36]:
> And where did you get the idea that they are not doing anything?

Of course, maybe they think that I, a slacker on the street.
And not an attentive observer :)

But there are objective factors: cats did not leave behind
not a single monument of their culture.

And because they have no culture, and because they do not know how.

Of course, cats (especially kittens) are also prone to play.
And even show a well-fed, bored cat a mouse -
there will be no trace of boredom!

She will be playing, not hunting.

But, this is only for a certain material stimulus.
Cat does not know how to create its own irritants.

A man knows how :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-25 18:13) [38]

> Copier © (25.02.16 17: 32) [34]
> And artificial intelligence, inventing fairy tales and poems are necessary.

Intellect, anyone, does not need emotions. Even partially harmful, because interfere with the smooth process of analyzing information and making decisions. Tales and poems are a work of imagination. Emotion is a product of feeling.
Such a bell. Touch the feeling - it will ring. Laughter - a sense of humor, fear - a sense of fear, joy and sadness - a lot of different feelings, etc. In order to feel one must be alive.

> MsGuns © (25.02.16 13: 50) [31]
> In order to prevent excessive discussion about the "salary" I will say that you should not confuse the "patch" with the "zhalovaneymi"

And what is the fundamental difference? This is livelihood. For centuries, some of the people have been looking for places with a big salary and less work. Others did a huge amount of work, getting a minimum, but were happy creating something. It is in human nature - one thing is important, the other is another.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-25 18:24) [39]

> Copier © (25.02.16 18: 09) [37]
> A man can :)

Well ... not everyone ...

> But there are objective factors: cats have not left behind a single monument of their culture.

Quite the contrary, subjective factors. This WE believe that once the monuments are set up, then we are the pinnacle of evolution. But only we think so. Just as Europeans thought of Indians, no, not savages, soulless animals. Not figuratively, but in the literal sense, they denied that they had a soul as such. And thus, they appropriated the moral right to their expulsion and destruction. Like moles on the lawn - interfere with life.
And on the other hand, have cats killed their own kind all the time of their existence? Hundreds of millions? Did they threaten the destruction of life on the planet? Perhaps this is just a fundamentally different philosophy of existence?
And in the end - who feeds whom, we them or they us? We are them. It means that they are the peak of evolution. And so we are, the service staff. )))



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 18:26) [40]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 18: 13) [38]

> Copier © (25.02.16 17: 32) [34]
> And artificial intelligence, inventing fairy tales and poems are necessary.
> Intellect, anyone, emotions are not needed.
> Even partly harmful, because interfere with the smooth process of analyzing information and making decisions.
> Tales and poems-this is the work of the imagination.
> Emotion is a product of feeling.

And you, unfortunately, a materialist ...

Isn't imagination a product of emotions?

You equate feelings and reflexes.

How easy it is for you!

> Such a bell.
> Touch the feeling - it will ring.
> Laughter is a sense of humor
> scare - a feeling of fear
> joy and sadness-a lot of different feelings, etc.

Give you free rein, you will describe a person like a robot.
But it will not be a man.

It will be a material Golem created by a Jewish alchemist.
from clay and ivory.

And the same monstrous :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-25 18:35) [41]

> Copier © (25.02.16 18: 26) [40]
> And you, unfortunately, a materialist ...

Why "Unfortunately?

> And what, is not imagination a product of emotions?

Rather, the opposite - emotion - a product of imagination. In children, it can be seen especially well.

> You equate feelings and reflexes.
Where did you find this?

> Give you free rein, you will describe a person like a robot.
On the contrary, neither feelings nor emotions can be thrust into a robot. Maximum imitation.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 18:48) [42]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 18: 24) [39]:
> Just as the Europeans believed the Indians, no, not savages, soulless animals.
> Not figuratively, but in the literal sense, they denied the presence of a soul as such.

You vainly screw up the conquistors' predatory policy
to the topic "about emotions".

Incidentally, at the end of the 16th century, it was the Spanish Jesuits who arrived
in the territory of modern Peru to convert the Indians there
in the catholic faith.

And they founded the Latin Empire there (not to be confused with the Crusaders with Constantinople,
1204 year. It was also called.).

Since then, South America has often been called "Latin."

Jesuit expedition meant God's word was accessible
for the Indians there.
And nobody considered them heartless ...



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 18:58) [43]

> And what is the fundamental difference?

Sereg, do you need to explain?
Carefully read:
- wage. Those. you pay for the work. In other words, they give back the DEBT that arose from the employer to the employee for the work performed.
- salary. You are pitying, i.e. GIVING IMMEDIATELY some benefits in recognition of your efforts in something. At the same time, WORKS in general may not be as such. The simplest example is salaries to serving people in PEACE time.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 19:00) [44]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 18: 35) [41]:
> Why unfortunately?

But because materialism is a flawed teaching.
Its damage lies in a one-sided understanding of development.
only from material reasons.
And the material consequences.

Materialists, of course, have come up with many useful concepts.

But these concepts are limited in scope.
Creativity, art, the same emotions are described by materialists in the same way
how you do it - at the level of reflexes necessary for survival.

It’s as if a person just did that he survived :)



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-25 19:26) [45]


> -Wage.
> -the salary.

there are still enrichment options. They also cause emotions. the rest.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 19:27) [46]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 18: 35) [41]:
> Rather, the opposite-emotion-a product of imagination. In children, this can be seen especially well.

No, I insist - the imagination is primary, and your conditioned reflex, which you
call "emotion," secondary.

Primitive animals lack imagination and therefore you consider emotions reflexes.

And on children it is especially clearly visible how they imagine an unknown creature,
lurking in a dark room :)

After an inexplicable feeling of fear. From this room :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-25 19:29) [47]

> Copier © (25.02.16 18: 48) [42]
> Jesuit expedition meant that the word of God was available to the Indians there.
> And no one considered them soulless ...

It's about North America and the Anglo-Saxons. But this is so, by the way, without changing the subject.

> MsGuns © (25.02.16 18: 58) [43]
> Read carefully:

The fact is that before 1917 almost everything was called the Salary. Then the term Salary took root, for everyone had to Work, even the article for parasitism was. That is, in essence, this is only terminology.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 19:34) [48]

> And on children it is especially clearly visible how they imagine an unknown creature hiding in a dark room :)

Invalid conclusion. The fact that they (children) can imagine quite clearly for themselves is not too scary. Fear causes UNKNOWN. My eldest granddaughter has just such a fear - they have repeatedly led to a child psychologist, so far without success.
Granddaughter 9 years will be in a couple of months. Her sister, who is younger than her by 2, has no such fears, although they watch the same cartoons :)

Imagination and impressionability are not at all the same thing. Impressive people are primarily afraid.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 19:36) [49]

> The fact is that before 1917 almost everything was called the Salary. Then the term Salary took root, for everyone had to Work, even the article for parasitism was. That is, in essence, this is only terminology.

Not at all. Since ancient times, Russia has existed in a row. The cooperatives that took up it received the PAY, not the salary.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 19:44) [50]

Another topic.
Fear arises in a person (and not only) not at all from the imagination. No one is afraid to stand in centimeters from the highway calmly watching trucks rushing past. At the same time, anyone can easily imagine what will happen to him if this community hits him at a speed of 60 km and higher. Likewise, people calmly stand at the cages with lions or tigers in the zoo.

But as soon as many end up in the forest at night, fear arises. From what ? From imagination?
By no means.
The highway or the zoo has NO UNKNOWN. A person KNOWS that the car will not turn sharply on the sidelines, and the lion will not break through the bars. The night forest is full of UNKNOWN. Any rustle is fraught with fear precisely because it is completely unknown what is hidden behind it.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 19:49) [51]

> MsGuns © (25.02.16 19: 34) [48]:
> Wrong conclusion. The fact that they (children) can imagine quite clearly for themselves is not too scary. Fear causes UNKNOWN.

Ah, Sergey!
Both.

Most likely, as it usually turns out to be right, and the one
who considers imagination to be the cause of emotion, and who, on the contrary,
considers emotion a cause of imagination.

Evolution rarely places emphasis.
She ironically allows us to do this :)

One thing is clear: an intelligent amplifier, or whatever it is
programmers call? not a robot, and not possible without
unnecessary emotions to the robot.

How an amoeba cannot give birth to a human sperm (albeit
the material level is the same), and the computer will not be able to give birth
human emotion.

Can imitate.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-25 19:51) [52]


> MsGuns ©

There is also “compensation” and “fee”. The fee was invented specifically for the intelligentsia. Conventional terminology might suggest that they are no better than ordinary workers.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 19:52) [53]

As a person, a little dedicated :) I can give another example, when fear is not a cause of imagination, but rather quite the opposite.

Disease.

A healthy person is not afraid of disease for an understandable reason. But something wrong is done with him, and he does not know WHAT exactly. Moreover, he has no idea what it can be. It is this that becomes the cause of the FEAR itself. Moreover, the more his body becomes more naughty to him, the more unexplained feelings (painful) he experiences, the greater the fear.
Toothache, cut wound, throat, etc. they do not cause a feeling of fear, but rather annoyance - you will have to go to the doctor (especially to the dentist!).
But (God forbid) something completely inexplicable and INCOMABLE happens to a person. For example, the first attack (ulcer, appendicitis, heart is not important), and the feeling is not fear, no, but HORROR, covers us, makes us sweat.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 19:55) [54]

> MsGuns © (25.02.16 19: 44) [50]:
> Fear arises in a person (and not only) not at all from imagination.

But the bourgeois idealist Sigmund Freud believed, for example,
that people who fear heights are not afraid of physical distance.

They are afraid of their desire to throw themselves down.

I myself know.
I, damn it, even dreams sometimes dream about height.

I wake up and remember Freud :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-25 19:57) [55]


> Copier © (25.02.16 19: 55) [54]

I would summarize it to the fear of something irreversible.



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-25 20:08) [56]

> 100 grams of vodka can replace inspiration

Definitely can not.
: O)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 20:08) [57]

> Kerk © (25.02.16 19: 51) [52]
> There is still "compensation" and "fee".

Compensation is not a fee, but REDRESS. In the Famous "Russian Truth" of Yaroslav the Great, you can find the definition of "satisfaction", "payment for loss to the plaintiff" and so on. As you can see, the word "work", "labor" is in no way out of place here.
The fee is generally a rich word and also not quite “pay for work”, but rather REMUNERATION, REWARD. Previously used with respect to people of art. This is how V. Dahl describes this word.

MONEY

REPORT m. Lat. payment for literary work; payment to the doctor from patients, etc. Honor answers this word well. What do you have on the list? This magazine pays homage more than others.


We are discussing Wages :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 20:13) [58]

Here I still remember, if I am not mistaken, Leskov read:
"Buy off a contract" - pay for the work performed by the artel on a contract.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-25 20:17) [59]


> Yuri Zotov © (25.02.16 20: 08) [56]

200? :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-25 20:17) [60]


> MsGuns © (25.02.16 20: 08) [57]
>
>> Kerk © (25.02.16 19: 51) [52]
Quoted1>> It happens still "compensation" and "fee".
>
> Compensation is not a fee, but REDRESS.

Not. Compensation is including salary. Used in this sense not often, but used. It most likely came to us from English.

Financial compensation refers to their goods, labor, or to provide for the costs of injuries that they have incurred.


> The fee is generally a rich word and also not quite "fee for
> labor ", but rather a REWARD, REWARD. Previously used
> regarding art people. Here is how V. Dahl describes it
> word

Well, doctors are hardly people of art. We will not be cunning :)
Salary is the reward of the worker. Fees are people of free professions.

Here is what Brockhaus and Efron wrote about:

In Rome, as in Greece, at first only physical labor, as visual-productive, was paid for in cash; mental work and non-material services were considered not valuable for money - a view common to all nations at the lowest stage of development. Physical labor was predominantly slave labor and therefore was in contempt, which later fell to the share of free artisans who worked for a piece of bread. Mental labor was the lot of free citizens who lived at the expense of others and did not need wages. As a result of this, and generally receiving a payment for mental labor was considered shameful, bringing the person who received such a payment closer to artisans. Officials did not receive a salary, persons in the liberal professions did not receive any payment for their work. Their reward was G. - an honorary gift, a gift (from honor, honor; in Greek G. was called & # 964; & # 953; & # 956; & # 942;), which usually consisted in presenting various products, wines and t dd and later in money.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 20:17) [61]

> Kerk © (25.02.16 19: 57) [55]:
> I would summarize it to the fear of something irreversible.

No.
I do not know ...

Freud believed that people from a very early age
directs the suicidal death instinct.

The desire to commit suicide.

This striving, Freud thought, is completely absent in animals because
that they do not possess the property of the human ego.
And only Id have creatures.

Synthesis of Id and Ego gives rise to guilt in a person, Super-Ego,
which is the cause of his creative abilities.

So, for example, (simply, in parallel) Russian people
for some reason considered themselves guilty before the men and came up with
compensation: revolution :)

People’s Volunteers, they, like Sergei Surovtsev, were materialists.
And "point blank" the creative intelligentsia of the "Silver Age"
in Russia.

They thought everyone was trying to survive :)



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-25 20:19) [62]

> Kilkennycat © (25.02.16 20: 17) [59]

Partially.



Копир ©   (2016-02-25 20:28) [63]

> Yuri Zotov © (25.02.16 20: 08) [56]
> 100 grams of vodka can replace inspiration
Definitely can not.
: O)

> Kilkennycat © (25.02.16 20: 17) [59]
200? :)

Well, who will be surprised now, for what I love
this forum :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 20:32) [64]

> Kerk © (25.02.16 20: 17) [60]

The word "salary" has been used as an analogue of modern "salary" relatively recently, although the etymology of this word is clearly not related to "work", "pay", "work", but rather to "pity", "sympathy", "generosity"

But thanks for the link. Informative in any case :)



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-25 21:05) [65]

"Lazy man loves to talk about flowers and spring dawns, because about this no one will raise a furious dispute, during which you have to get up, rummage in the encyclopedic dictionary at once into several letters, humiliating yourself and the encyclopedic dictionary, to maintain someone else’s ignorance and stupidity. In general, you should never argue. Especially on difficult issues that you need to think about. If the interlocutor is a smart and respected person, it’s even inconvenient to think that he will change his whole worldview "screaming after your fifth sentence. If it’s a young man who argues simply because his body requires it, it’s funny and humiliating to pretend to be a colony for juvenile delinquents and correct young characters."

Arkady Bukhov



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-25 22:03) [66]

In this context, you need to write "during" (separately).
However, I will not "pretend to be a colony for juvenile delinquents and engage in the correction of young characters."
:)



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-25 22:31) [67]

> Copier © (24.02.16 18: 05) [14]
> There 4's hours were few!


14 was not enough for me. An interesting person.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-26 00:08) [68]

Yes. I still remember the conversation with Ashot, although I’ve only met a couple of times, and almost ten years have passed ... And his financial accounting program is exactly the program I dreamed of.



Германн ©   (2016-02-26 01:44) [69]


> Copier © (25.02.16 17: 51) [35]
>
>> Hermann © (25.02.16 00: 44) [19]:
Quoted1>> Neurochemical reaction in a living organism to "secondary"
> external stimuli. :)
> Recreate the same reaction in an artificial body -
> like two fingers on the asphalt.
>
> You are mistaken.
> Or rather, you are a materialist.
>
> And, like any materialist, you think that 100 gram of vodka
> can replace inspiration :)

100 grams of vodka can only wake up an appetite suppressed in the process of long, and hard work.
Real inspiration can replace at least half a liter. And better not vodka, but cognac! :)
And la. I am one hundred percent materialist. Even when it comes to the paranormal type of telepathy.



virex(home) ©   (2016-02-26 10:50) [70]

Deleted by moderator



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-26 12:58) [71]

MsGuns © (25.02.16 22: 03) [66]

By the way, yes :) That once again suggests that even among typesetters of electronic books illiterate people come across.
I honestly copied the quote from here: http://libbabr.com/?book=2707



Kerk ©   (2016-02-26 14:30) [72]


> Kilkennycat © (26.02.16 00: 08) [68]
>
> Yes. I still remember talking with Ashot, although I saw everything
> a couple of times, and almost ten years have passed ... And his program
> financial accounting is exactly the program I dreamed of.

Also used the program. But then I was not very organized and quickly dropped. The only negative that I remember is the lack of shared postings. I did not yet know what split wiring was, but the function itself was not enough. Is the program still alive?



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-26 15:42) [73]

> Kerk © (26.02.16 14: 30) [72]

Let us formulate more fully - what about Ashot and what about his program? !!
(in order to be in the context of the topic - pronounced emotionally)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-26 15:46) [74]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (26.02.16 15: 42) [73]

Join now. Ashot is being discussed as if something bad had happened to him.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-26 17:39) [75]


> Is the program still alive?

Yes. at least the site is live. IP Tovmasyan is also in the registry.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-26 17:41) [76]

http://www.lclassic.ru/



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-26 22:27) [77]

> Copier © (25.02.16 19: 00) [44]
> Because materialism is a defective teaching. His damage is
one-sided understanding
> development only from material causes. And the material consequences.

The main task of materialism in this direction and worldview is to counter idealism. That is, the statement that the physical principle is primary, and the spiritual is the product of the physical. If you remove the gigabytes of the derivative, the essence is in one simple statement: "There is no God." This is the fundamental difference between materialism and idealism, which, in front of the spiritual component, theoretically allows the presence of God.
Otherwise, there are few contradictions.
Here, for example, the Chinese, with their transmigration of souls. It seems idealists. But what a materialistic progamist!
And yet I do not accept the denial in the field of the unknown. If we have not measured it yet, it means it is not. Perhaps for the soul someday they will find quite a material embodiment and a way to fix it. As was the case with electricity, magnetism, genetics, etc. No need to deny - need to study.
I cannot attribute myself to 100% materialists, and the longer I live, the more.

> Sergey Surovtsev © (25.02.16 18: 35) [41]:
> Rather, the opposite-emotion-a product of imagination. In children, this can be seen especially well.
> Copier © (25.02.16 19: 27) [46]
No, I insist - imagination is primary, and your conditioned reflex, which you call "emotion," is secondary.

I reread 5 times. I did not find a contradiction.

> And on children it is especially clearly visible how they imagine themselves unknown
> creature lurking in a dark room :) After an inexplicable feeling
> fear. From this room :)

MsGuns © correctly formulated - fear is generated by the unknown. Fear is not from the room. From the dark. Darkness gives rise to uncertainty, unknown stimulates the imagination, imagination draws danger, danger causes fear, fear gives rise to fear (emotion), fear gives rise to cry.
A bright room does not scare anyone.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-26 22:34) [78]

> Р “ермР° РЅРЅ В © (26.02.16 01: 44) [69]
> Real inspiration can replace at least half a liter. And better not vodka, but cognac! :)

Wine cheers, vodka angry. If you recall the classics of inspiration, then half a liter is so, a walk. The main thing here, indeed, is the nobleness of the drink and the regularity of reception. ))

> Igor Shevchenko © (26.02.16 12: 58) [71]
Thanks for the link. Read with great pleasure.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-26 23:45) [79]

> MsGuns © (25.02.16 18: 58) [43]
> -the salary. WELCOME YOU, i.e. GIVING IMMEDIATELY some benefits in recognition of your efforts in something.

By the way, this is really the most correct definition. The word "favor" is the closest to modern "reward". And, of course, with "pity" has nothing to do.

And about the applicability of the terms "salary" and "wages", this is the result of a change in the paradigm of thinking, relations in society.
There used to be a paradigm of Service to society. Service does not mean payment, it is not a work of necessity, it is a privilege. Hence, the Complaint, that is, the remuneration for the ministry (something must be lived for).
Now the paradigm of the Work on society (ideally, of course). Work involves paying for it. Hence the salary, as compensation for this work.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 00:16) [80]

> [77] Sergey Surovtsev © (26.02.16 22: 27)
> Darkness gives rise to suspense

The opposite is also true. From here you can start writing a verse without emotion. You can start with emotions too.

In the first post, Yura (Copier) called me the only programmer here. I would like to clarify without emotion:
1. Not the only
2. So I don't consider myself as I have said many times.
3. Programmer - I agree
Paragraphs 1 and 2 are somewhat contradictory, but we will write this on emotions.

Yes, you can speculate, but at the moment is not the mood. I can only add: there are some poets whose poetry is always present, and one can only guess about the emotional state from their poems. Serving a Woman In White is the first emotion.



Германн ©   (2016-02-27 00:37) [81]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (26.02.16 22: 34) [78]
>
>> Hermann © (26.02.16 01: 44) [69]
Quoted1>> Real inspiration can replace at least half a liter.
> And the best is not vodka, but brandy! :)

It was just a joke. :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-27 01:11) [82]

> Inovet © (27.02.16 00: 16) [80]
>> [77] Sergey Surovtsev © (26.02.16 22: 27)
>> Darkness gives rise to suspense
> The opposite is also true.

Does unknown cause darkness? However ... Poetically direct. ))

> Р “ермР° РЅРЅ В © (27.02.16 00: 37) [81]
> It was just a joke. :)

“They don’t joke with pies” (c) Carlson.



Германн ©   (2016-02-27 01:33) [83]

Deleted by moderator
Note: Offtopic



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-27 14:22) [84]

Materialism, idealism ..
One person believes that the sun revolves around the earth, the other - the opposite. Both are right because both theories reliably fit into what they observe. The first receives from life exactly the same as the second, although his "theory" is objectively (scientifically) incorrect. Moreover, for various reasons, the first may be a happy person, and the second - deeply unhappy.

But at the expense of God, everything is very simple: the one who believes in him has God, the unbeliever does not have God. Everything is extremely simple.

The rest is sophistry.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-27 14:29) [85]

To say that fear is generated by imagination is like saying that cottage cheese is extracted from dumplings. Fear is a natural reaction of a living organism to danger; it is a PHYSICAL reaction, an instinct. A fly takes off as soon as a person brings a fly swatter over it, the cockroach escapes when the lights turn on in the kitchen at night - do they “imagine” the danger?

Although there are diseases when a person imagines danger to himself (claustrophobia for example), it is emotional. The case when the curd is really pulled out of a dumpling :)



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 14:30) [86]

> [84] MsGuns © (27.02.16 14: 22)
> And at the expense of God, everything is very simple: the one who
> he believes, God does not have an unbeliever.

"God is Light, and there is no darkness in it."



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 14:45) [87]

> [86] Inovet © (27.02.16 14: 30)

I saw on YouTube a cut from fragments of one of my favorite songs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzNfBBj9VXA
Can’t video cutters really hear them at all? Emotions they do not have what?



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 14:59) [88]

"Well, here it is again about his", "Who has that, and he has ... a bath", "It's good that I don't like this BG."
And I love, what can I do here, and much more I love very different things, "yes, all about One."



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-27 15:03) [89]

The comb is a monster :)
In the sense of a mighty thought, a tramp :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-27 15:05) [90]

A song is a great answer to what happiness is :)



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 16:50) [91]

> Inovet © (27.02.16 00: 16) [80]:
> 2. So I don't consider myself as I have said many times.
> 3. Programmer - I agree

Andrey, you can be a poet, artist or philosopher,
without writing a single poem, never speaking
on stage or without creating a single philosophical opus.

And the one and the other, and the third is not a profession, but an inclination of the soul :)

This addiction is purely humanitarian.
It won’t come to anyone, because, to my mind, - He’s a locksmith in the soul :)

The programmer "in the soul" is believable, because creative profession.



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-27 17:11) [92]

> MsGuns © (27.02.16 15: 05) [90]

That is, happiness is when the white horse recognizes its girlfriends.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 17:16) [93]

Consider yourself a poet in your soul,
my friend, alas, no wonder
among such - we are all poets
among poets we are shit.

(C)
Oh, how long have I read this
but I remember only one thing:
on the walls of the school closet
shit it is written.

in a slightly different form, but essentially the same thing, you should all remember similar quatrain from similar sources.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-27 17:23) [94]

and in our school the poop walls didn’t get dirty,



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 17:40) [95]

> MsGuns © (27.02.16 14: 22) [84]:
> And at the expense of God, everything is very simple:

I wish that so easy ...

I, as it were, not quite a fool, does not look like a slaughtered and illiterate old woman,
even studied the basics of Marxism-Leninism at school :)

So why am I, already at the age of "for 30", imbued with religion?

I can share.

I hope not to hear the primitive ridicule of the so-called atheists.

Bourgeois say, - Don't laughs best who laughs last ... (He who laughs last laughs).

I'll be the last one anyway.

So, the first reason was a deliberate distrust of the imposed
in the Soviet school of "theory of evolution".

The idea that the monkeys, working little by little, suddenly guessed
use tools, then again, "suddenly" they began to draw,
composing fairy tales and inventing to me, having read many books,
written by far not working monkeys was disgusting.

Of course, evolution plays a role in the development of the body, but
this is a biological evolution (the tail disappears there).

Miraculously, when our primitive ancestor found a language and learned to use
knife, lever and coal (for drawing) was involved in some kind of "jump"
development, quality transition, which by no number of years
you will not call.

Because for some reason not a few monkeys became “suddenly” rational,
and many and "immediately."

And because, for example, after long attempts, William Fernick taught
the monkey meaningfully pronounce the two words "dad" and "cup".

And how many monkeys are fluent in English today? language?
With one closely and long engaged.

What kind of evolution is there?

Materialism, after its nonsense "about evolution", spreads its arms helplessly.

And idealism gives the answer, - God's plan miraculously interfered with the development of primates.

And according to this plan, the whole flock perfectly adapted to life on Earth,
"arm" and not cowardly primates, began to possess the property, which
no animals.

Consciousness.

And this consciousness was the cause and possession of the instruments of labor,
and making fire, and creating a culture, and, most importantly, awareness
of what God is.

Religion is the oldest human, not a monkey, abstraction of thinking.
And not a manifestation of "instinct", as the communists muttered about it :)

(to be continued).



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 17:44) [96]

> [94] Kilkennycat © (27.02.16 17: 23)

I don’t really remember the details of the material used, but just in case I brought the appropriate rhyme (not that one). In the original, it was different.



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 18:03) [97]

The second reason is personal.
Do not underestimate her.

Faith in God is often initiated with a miracle.

I will not talk about "his" miracle.

I will just give an example of Blaise Pascal.
Who knows his biography, remembers that a talented materialist:
a physicist, mechanic and mathematician in one night turned into
deeply believing person.

And, since he was not just a man, but a genal man,
later became famous as a great religious philosopher.

Once I talked to the fr. a tourist.
So, at the mention of Pascal, he immediately remembered, “Ah, a philosopher!”
Did not say - A, physicist!



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 18:22) [98]

The third reason for the amazement about the immortality of the soul.

Those interlocutors on this forum who already know "for 50" probably know!

The body becomes decrepit, and you feel, all the same, as in 25-30 years.
At dawn.

If materialistic "evolution" is so effective, why is it
does not affect the soul?

And who, honestly, believes that after death there will only be
decaying body?

Everyone, even atheists, look at themselves as "dead", as if from the side.
As the mourners at the funeral.

The fourth reason - from tradition.

I do not like the anarchist tread of the Bolsheviks who destroyed
centuries-old culture of the country.

I like to repeat the words that were spoken in the Temple again and again
my grandfathers and great-grandfathers.

The same and the same.

This is a rite. Not the last argument in religion.

And not the Constitution, which is being rewritten as soon as the new Secretary General
sneaks to power :)

PS: If someone noticed spelling errors - sorry.
He wrote and worried.



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-27 19:27) [99]

> Copier © (27.02.16 16: 50) [91]

> The programmer "in the soul" is believable


I had a chance to be a technical director in one office. And we were looking for a programmer, and entrusted it to me. I tell the general:

"Only I will look not so much for a programmer as a philosopher. Because I will do a programmer from a philosopher, but on the contrary - no."

General agreed.



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 19:44) [100]

> Yuri Zotov © (27.02.16 19: 27) [99]:
> Because I will make a programmer out of a philosopher, but on the contrary-no.

You have very truly noticed!
Although to programmers, from my meager experience, I completely give up creativity.

Remember the "How to distinguish?"
There I tried to prove that it is difficult for an electrician to, say, make an engineer.
On the contrary, it’s easy.

I objected, they say, there are talented workers, and engineers are all now, as officials,
hands do not own and finally :)

I wanted and want to emphasize the possibility, the potency.

Slacker-engineer knows, well, heard about hydrodynamics.
The lectures were the same!

Slacker-engineer heard about economics, about philosophy, about sociology.

Finally, a slacker engineer knows more than Ohm’s law.
He handed over electrical engineering with cosine fi!

Therefore, even a talented worker for an engineer will not pull.
Although the worker is “with experience,” it will practically dangle many.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-27 20:26) [101]

Copier © (27.02.16 17: 40) [95]

http://www.follow.ru/article/271



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 20:47) [102]

> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 20: 26) [101]:

Igor, thanks, I already read it.
Long.

And I know you as an atheist.
A long time ago. Years 15, right?

I'm not interested in materialistic, as in this article,
and the moral arguments of atheists.

Not because material is more scarce.
No.

Because it is not matter that leads to faith, but consciousness.



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 20:58) [103]

> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 20: 26) [101]:

Questions like "And who created the one who created everything" are meaningless.

Atheists love to indulge in such rhetoric.

Instead of answering :)



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 21:05) [104]

> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 20: 26) [101]:

I will not and do not want to give here theological dogmas
that God was "always."

For materialists, this is a comparison with the universe, but who
do they know that the singularity originated a finite number of years ago?

Of course, it would be easier for me to add definitions, such as, -
God is the singularity, and the cause of the first explosion,
and the Creator of the Universe ...

But I will not curry words.

Because it is not.



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 21:24) [105]

The Americans, who care about everything, created the film
with actress Jodie Foster, starring.

According to the scenario of Karl Sagan, the most famous "seeker"
extraterrestrial civilizations, and practically the initiator of the SETI program.

The film is called "Contact."

The heroine of the film works in the framework of the SETI program and finds it!
Finds an extraterrestrial civilization.
Establishes contact with her, prepares to fly there,
the ship is already being prepared ...

But the US Congress makes a decision: -
You, - the Congress tells the heroine, an atheist.
You do not reflect the opinion of 90% of people living on our planet.

You will not fly.

How do you think the US Congress was right?



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-27 21:47) [106]

Copier © (27.02.16 20: 47) [102]


> Once upon a time. Years 15, right?


Somewhere, 14 to be exact. The worldview during this time has not changed and is unlikely to change.


> Because it is not matter that leads to faith, but consciousness.


Yes, believe in anything, I do not seem to impose anything on you. But you, too, to me. Agreed?



Копир ©   (2016-02-27 21:50) [107]

> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 21: 47) [106]:

Approx :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-27 22:48) [108]

> Copier © (27.02.16 17: 40) [95]

Materialism ... And what is materialism? Well, essentially? How is it radically different from idealism? But it’s no different. In essence, they are identical. Neither one nor the other gives a general understanding of the picture of the world. Does not explain all the phenomena of the world. There is a clear boundary, and almost common, beyond which all explanations end. And here begins the "difference". Idealists explain the "Divine Providence" and "God's Purpose." Materialists - "Nature" and "Accident". Nature is clever, Nature is prudent, etc. The word "God" is replaced by "Nature." But everything else is just a carbon copy. True, materialism came up with its own know-how. This is ignoring, the conclusion of the question beyond the permissible, if there is no answer.
Where did the man come from? And: "God created," M: "Nature created." How did the universe come about? And: "God created", M: "There was a Big Bang. But before it? There was nothing."
I can understand the intractability of Materialism Copier ©. Materialism is aggressive by nature. He crushes. He pushes himself as an infallible and uncontested teaching. Although in the same way it rests against the same walls as idealism, it pretends that there are no walls, that questions cannot be raised in such a way that the substitution of concepts from “God” to “Nature” fundamentally changes the whole picture, everything becomes immediately explained, and how by itself, there is no need, and it’s even incorrect to go into details: “Is it not clear that this is Nature, it can Everything, it’s just inconvenient to even say this, even children understand it.”
Therefore, the teaching of Materialism is always carried out in a dogmatic form. He must not Understand, but Learn. No questions. Without a doubt. And asking questions on this subject especially do not like.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 22:52) [109]

> [108] Sergey Surovtsev © (27.02.16 22: 48)
> M: "There was a Big Bang. But before it? There was nothing

This is where you found it? I always thought - it is unknown what was, while it is unknown.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-27 22:53) [110]

Sergey Surovtsev © (27.02.16 22: 48) [108]

But the idealist has a crutch for all occasions.

“Here is an excellent example of a phrase from the Soviet period:“ Man descended from a monkey. ”A post-Soviet individual would never express it. He would say:“ Man descended from a monkey. ”That is, the speaker is not sure if he is from the monkey. Maybe, after all, "like God created"?



Inovet ©   (2016-02-27 22:56) [111]

> [110] Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 22: 53)
> type of monkey

If this is not an oscillation between a god and a monkey, then there may be doubt about the name of a common ancestor.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-27 23:02) [112]

As an example, the placebo effect is great.
Let me remind you that this is the effect of healing (namely physical healing, and not just improvement of moral well-being) by believing that the medicine being taken will cure, although they give a pacifier instead of medicine.

The idealist will simply say "Faith has healed." The materialist will also say simply, "Well, this is a placebo effect. Banal auto-suggestion." And like M. explained everything. Like, even a fool is understood. But he, M., forgets that his explanation must begin with the following point: How self-suggestion, that is, the work of Consciousness (or Subconsciousness) in its pure form, without medication support, can actually affect the work of the physical body, make it eliminate the disease. What and how is included inside? How does it work? There are no answers to these questions. But the word "Self-hypnosis" is pronounced as if it alone already explains everything, and going into details is below dignity.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-27 23:37) [113]

To argue about things that have no specific definition is pointless.
Glory to ignosticism!
(And also glory to robots of all kinds, bipedal and crustaceans!)



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-27 23:40) [114]


> as if it alone explains everything

Oh, I saw a similar one in the video, where the scientist explained the effect of Janibekov.
I do not remember literally, but something like this: "The effect of a nut overturn is easily explained - here it rotates, but here it is upside down. You see, everything is elementary."



Германн ©   (2016-02-28 00:31) [115]


> Kilkennycat © (27.02.16 23: 37) [113]
>
> To argue about things that do not have a specific definition-is meaningless.
>
> Glory to ignorance!

Generally АGnosticism.
But I also liked your tumor. :)



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-28 00:36) [116]


> Actually Agnosticism.

Неа, я не опечатался. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%B3%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC



Германн ©   (2016-02-28 00:46) [117]


> Kilkennycat © (28.02.16 00: 36) [116]

What they just can’t come up with instead of following the only right path of Mikhail Samuelevich! :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-28 00:59) [118]

> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 22: 53) [110]
> But the idealist has a crutch for all occasions.

Indisputable.
This is the focus.
The idealist honestly uses this crutch for all occasions and calmly says everything "This is God." And lives in peace.
The materialist in theory has no right to blame everything on Nature and Case. He must Explain how and why this happened, why it is arranged this way and not otherwise, etc. But he cannot explain further the limits of current knowledge. But to admit that he does not know Everything does not want. And nervous.



Германн ©   (2016-02-28 01:05) [119]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (28.02.16 00: 59) [118]


> The materialist in theory has no right to blame everything on Nature.
> and Case. He must explain how and why this happened,
> why it is so, and not otherwise, etc.

"Coordinates of Reason" Robert Schackley did not read?



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-28 01:12) [120]

> Р “ермР° РЅРЅ В © (28.02.16 01: 05) [119]
> "The coordinates of the mind" Robert Schackley did not read?

Hopefully, Sheckley read everything, well, from what was translated. Only sooo long ago.



Германн ©   (2016-02-28 01:29) [121]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (28.02.16 01: 12) [120]
>
>> Hermann © (28.02.16 01: 05) [119]
Quoted1>> "Mind coordinates" Robert Schackley did not read?
>
> Hopefully, Sheckley read everything, well, from what was transferred. Only
> sooo long ago.
>

Obviously did not read!
Read at your leisure.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-28 01:42) [122]

> [118] Sergey Surovtsev © (28.02.16 00: 59)
> And recognize that he does not know Everything does not want.

And again, where do you get these delusions from which breeding ground? Just the basic principle - there are limits of applicability, and then it is not known how to explain. Those. exactly the opposite.



Германн ©   (2016-02-28 01:43) [123]

"Coordinates of miracles" of course.
I'm getting old, damn it! Not by the day, but by the hour. :(



Inovet ©   (2016-02-28 01:47) [124]

And here everything suddenly started to melt, the temperature is above 0, and about 10 days ago it was -30. The climate, however, awakens emotions, and not only in humans.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-28 01:47) [125]


> But he cannot explain further the limits of current knowledge. And recognize
> that he does not know Everything does not want. And nervous.

Well, why ... You can say: all this is based on the quantum quasi-boson-singular effect of superposition, which is not yet open, but it is also material.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-28 01:47) [126]

and do not be nervous.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-28 01:49) [127]

> [122] Inovet © (28.02.16 01: 42)
> from which breeding ground?

I know one breeding ground - Ren-TV is called, that's where everything like to show is like that.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-28 10:27) [128]

Sergey Surovtsev © (28.02.16 00: 59) [118]


> And nervous.


Never nervous.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-28 10:29) [129]

Inovet © (28.02.16 01: 49) [127]


> Ren-TV is called, there they just like to show all that


"... Oh, what a glorious you are, a fool! Oh, what a vigorous and healthy you are, a fool! Oh, what an optimistic you are, a fool, and what a fool you are, clever, what a subtle sense of humor you have, and how cleverly you decide crosswords! .. You, the main thing, just do not worry, you fool, everything is so good, everything is so good, and science is at your service, fool, and literature, so that you have fun, you fool, and you don’t have to think about anything ... there you and I’ll be a fool, you and I’ll smash the hooligans and skeptics (with you, don’t smash!) ... "



Kerk ©   (2016-02-28 13:31) [130]


> Igor Shevchenko © (27.02.16 22: 53) [110]
>
> Sergey Surovtsev © (27.02.16 22: 48) [108]
>
> But the idealist has a crutch for all occasions.
>
> "Here is a fine example of a phrase from the Soviet period:" Man
> descended from a monkey. "The post-Soviet individual is not
> why not put it. He will say: "The man is of the type
> from the monkey. "That is, the speaker himself is not yet sure: but exactly
> whether from a monkey.

Even Darwin was not sure, but the Sovietman ™ is not accustomed to doubt :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-28 16:05) [131]

> Even Darwin was not sure, but the Soviet man ™ was not accustomed to doubt :)

Like some idiotic nonsense, then immediately "Sovietman ™"
Any religion is based on this particular postulate.
And the "Soviet way of life", with the goal of "building a communist society", whose leadership was the notorious "code of the builder of communism", was certainly a religion.

As a religion, petty-bourgeois capitalism is beloved by today's joyful and long-legged "effective managers".



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-28 16:10) [132]

I don’t want to slide into a sore point, but I still express deep bewilderment at the enthusiasm for the notorious “scoop” of those who so joyfully use all its achievements: education, science, healthcare, industry and even “housing stock” :)

But among them the mass of intelligent people who can reason quite sensibly.
But as soon as the topic concerns the “grave legacy”, it instantly bridges the brain :)



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-28 16:49) [133]

> Kerk © (28.02.16 13: 31) [130]

> Soviet man ™ is not accustomed to doubt


Roman, from whom, but I did not expect such a blunder from you.

Firstly, you speak from other people's words. Since you were just born in 84 and you simply could not have your own opinion about the "Soviet man" because of your childhood. Maximum, you can have your own opinion only about a few people you know, nothing more.

Secondly, you are far from a fool to cut everyone together and not understand that the “Soviet people” were very different. However, as well as non-Soviet, and any other. People - they are generally different, and then, and now, and at all times.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-28 17:45) [134]


> MsGuns ©
> Yuri Zotov ©

Well, you both really understand that it was such a sarkatisticheskoe remark. Not evil, rather even good. And it is caused precisely by the fact that in the same post to which I answered, they were taken under one comb, that are Soviet, that post-Soviet people. It was hard to pass by and not pin up :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-28 18:15) [135]


> MsGuns © (28.02.16 16: 05) [131]
> Any religion based on this particular postulate.
> A "Soviet way of life", with the goal of "building a communist
> society "whose leadership was the notorious" code
> builder communism ", of course, was a religion.
>
> As religion is beloved by today's joyful ones
> and long-legged "efficient managers" petty-bourgeois
> capitalism.

Yuval Harari has a good book - A Brief History of Humanity.

He writes about history not in the context of the number of what happened, but in a more general description of civilization processes. In some places, a controversial, but interesting outlook on things.

Harari pays a lot of attention in particular to myths. From belief in the existence of animal spirits to our modern belief in the existence of legal entities.

We believe in a certain order of things, not because it objectively exists and is true, but because this faith allows us to effectively interact in large groups of people. When a society grows to such an extent that people can no longer be familiar with anyone they meet, for normal interaction, they have to share some common fundamental uncontested concepts. Well, at least not to kill each other at once :)

In the modern world there are two methods of building a myth.

First, you can take a scientific theory and declare it the ultimate immutable truth. So did the Nazis, who looked at the world through the prism of racial theory. So did the Communists, who were looking for all the answers from Marx and Lenin. Neither one nor the other could not be questioned.

Secondly, you can come up with an initially unscientific myth. For example, liberal humanism, which dogmatically believes in the value of human rights - a theory that has nothing to do with science. In fact, homo sapiens have no rights. Just like spiders, elephants or monkeys.

It is very easy for us to argue that the code of laws of Hammurabi is based on myths, but no one wants to hear that everything else: communism, liberalism, human rights, etc. - this is exactly the same myth on the clay feet.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-28 18:42) [136]

Remembering the book, I allow myself a small offtopic. I was completely impressed by the Gobekli Tepe story. For some reason, I had never heard of him before. This is a temple complex, it is being excavated. in Turkey. He is 12 thousands of years old! He is older than all of your stone hedges and pyramids.

Both its dating and the artifacts found raise a lot of questions before modern science. 12 thousands of years ago is Mesolithic, it is hunters-gatherers of the Stone Age. And the point is not so much in technology, but in the fact that the social organization of large groups of people was not typical for that time. At least it was the custom to think so far.

All in all, it's awesome. When this mess with Turkey ends, I'll go there. At the same time, we still have to look at the remains of Troy there :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-28 20:26) [137]

> Kerk © (28.02.16 18: 15) [135]

Ladushki, drove :)

> All in all, this is awesome. When this mess with Turkey ends, I'll go there. At the same time, you still need to see the remains of Troy there next :)

Rum, you are an optimist. I personally do not believe that this "mess" will end quickly. It seems that the “struggle of thrones” is entering the decisive, final stage.



картман ©   (2016-02-28 20:32) [138]

Deleted by moderator



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-28 20:32) [139]

A little more in the "offtopic", fortunately I did not start :)
Observing the development of events over the past 30 years (starting with the notorious "restructuring", I noticed such a "garbage": it becomes bad somehow quickly, in a year or two. Then you begin to hope that it cannot be worse that it is about to come better. After a couple of years, well, heels. You can suffer :)
But time passes, and not getting any better. The situation stabilizes very slowly, somehow even imperceptibly. Years through 10-20. In general, it’s just like with a house: you can destroy it in a minute, but it can be repaired or rebuilt ..



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-28 20:34) [140]

> Cartman C (28.02.16 20: 32) [138]
> now I believe that you are Russian-not a word about the law, only concepts))

Law as a legal dogma is only an instrument of the state, with the help of which it influences its citizens.



картман ©   (2016-02-28 20:42) [141]

Deleted by moderator



Kerk ©   (2016-02-28 21:20) [142]

Deleted by moderator



Юрий Зотов ©   (2016-02-28 21:34) [143]

About the sameness of the Soviet people in post-Soviet times.

Celebrate the birthday of the club. I must say that in this club a very good company somehow picked up by itself, the atmosphere is the friendliest. Because we were there and pulled.

So, we celebrate the club’s birthday. The man says a toast and says: "We come here all so different ...".

There should be a replica from the spot: "But we are leaving from here all the same ..."

People crawled under the table.



картман ©   (2016-02-28 21:56) [144]

Deleted by moderator



Германн ©   (2016-02-29 00:53) [145]


> Yuri Zotov © (28.02.16 21: 34) [143]
>
> On the identity of Soviet people in post-Soviet times.
>
>
> Celebrate the club’s birthday. I must say that in the club
> this somehow a very good company picked itself up,
> atmosphere is the friendliest. Because we were drawn there.
>
> So, we celebrate the club’s birthday. Man says a toast
> and says: "We come here are all so different ...".
>
> A replica follows: "And we are leaving from here all the same."
> .. "

We Tatars, sorry Russian, that the Soviet that pre-Soviet, that post-Soviet times, one crap! :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 01:40) [146]

Deleted by moderator



картман ©   (2016-02-29 01:48) [147]

Deleted by moderator
Note: Read the rules please



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-29 04:14) [148]

Deleted by moderator



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 09:46) [149]

gebekli is an interesting, albeit quite ordinary thing in a series of countless other artifacts around the world.
dating in 12000 years is most likely academic (official)
It is used everywhere when you can’t just wave it off of an artifact, but you can’t hang it on ancient Rome. Therefore, they put the sacred date of the end of the Mesolithic-beginning of the Neolithic (the glacier has melted).
Later - there was no one to hang on to, but before - there was no one to build, and in the chronology everything just breaks down.

Well, Troy (specifically this Turkish) is the same virtual artifact as the tuten from the crankcase with carnervon. although Carnervon was most likely unaware of the tricks of the crankcase.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 10:03) [150]

there are artifacts much more interesting than gebekis, besides lying literally "under the nose."
this is the story of the construction of peter (granite peter)
if you raise all the historical (academic course) materials on the topic, it turns out that there was literally just one real "contractor" - a certain Samson Sukhanov, who embodied the design ideas of all the Monferans involved in the case.
A careful study of the biography of this "Samson" inevitably suggests that this character is fictional and fabulous. Nevertheless, officially he literally built everything alone (with his artel, of course).
and when after that you take a closer look at what he built, you begin to think about the question, how many years ago Peter was actually built and who did it.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 11:06) [151]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 10: 03) [150]

for a dozen years of living in St. Petersburg, I happened to:
a) to hear a lot of all kinds of "ideas sucked from the finger" of its construction (even by aliens);
b) be present and personally participate in excavation, basement reconstruction and other works directly in the city center;
c) make sure of the richness of the "fountains" of home archaeologists-historians.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 11:27) [152]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 09: 46) [149]
>
> gebekli interesting thing, although quite ordinary in a series
> countless other artifacts around the world.

Just the oldest of the largest megalithic structures in the world. Ordinary thing :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 11:32) [153]


> Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 11: 06) [151]

I read an article by a historian. Of course, like any intelligent person, he is not a supporter of official chronology. So he took the English text of the Bible and found that the word "member" translates as "member" (well, you know which member he was thinking about). It turned everything upside down!



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 11:55) [154]

Just the oldest of the largest megalithic structures in the world. Ordinary thing :)


it is the oldest by academic dating, which simply physically cannot give it more than 12000 years because then the rest of the chronology will collapse. how many millennia are actually there is unknown.

although on the other hand one can always say that baalbek is the work of the Roman legionnaires in Lebanon.
our limited contingent of Soviet troops in Afghanistan planted trees, and Roman soldiers in the outskirts of the empire built the temple of Jupiter.
and when they returned from Lebanon, they were not even forced to build in the capital at least something remotely resembling the scale of the Baalbek.
everyone was very tired.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 12:24) [155]


> Kerk © (29.02.16 11: 32) [153]
> like any reasonable person, he is not a supporter of official chronology

sounds good, you need to remember. Often I want to say this in different variations, for example: "like any rational person, he is not a supporter of official physics."

A friend of mine somewhere found the revelations of an electronics engineer (that same intelligent person) in which he (an electronics engineer) shared his discovery: it turns out that in microcircuits with the same package and the same number of conclusions there can be a completely different "stuffing"!
What this intelligent man thought when looking at the markings is unknown ... one can only hope that he has come across unmarked all his life. However, the marking is academic, you should not believe it.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 12:37) [156]

You better read this bio Sukhanov.
there will be more entertaining than all theories put together from the finger.

and I repeat, all early granite Peter



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 12:43) [157]

or at worst, carefully consider the drawing of Gagarin about installing the column on the palace.

or take an interest in why it was erecting a granite pillar, polishing it, and giving it some taper (so that the visually column does not seem to expand upwards), suddenly after all this, Monpheran is a little bit tired
и
he made the upper box with an angel brickwork, which had to be redone soon after the opening of the column.



El ©   (2016-02-29 12:53) [158]

Emotions refer to the state of mind computers and AI have no relation to the soul. Materialists envy everyone and try to repeat the creation of God - Man. Man is created in the likeness and image of God, and a computer executes a program written by a programmer.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 12:55) [159]

Well, so that it becomes completely clear to me.
There is an official history and chronology.
and there are funny alternatives.

and two things don't follow from here:
- if the alternative people are funny, then the official will not lie to you completely.
- if I don’t believe the official, then I’m a fan of all alternative agents.

Well, in fact, no one knows who and when built the hebecli, saksayuaman, kenko, baalbek, peter, etc.
just like nobody knows who when and how broke Mohenjodar



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 12:58) [160]

Well, there’s Occam’s razor.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:02) [161]

computers and AI have nothing to do with the soul.

as if it’s been proven that a person has a relationship with this.

if humans were created by boch, then why should he endow only the person with the soul, and not all living creatures?

and if a person is the result of evolution, then nothing prevents the soul of cats and dogs.

so that the opinion of the exclusiveness of man by the presence of a soul is the subjective opinion of man himself as a species. And where does the opinion of himself.

and here, too, everything is standard. students of the first "A" believe that they are better than students of the first "B". The 1 department believes that it is better than the 2 department.
A person believes that he is better than a cat.

everything is corny ....

Now, if someone third independent and disinterested and objective came and said that the person is not here for you. he has a soul and emotions and social networks. not khukh-mukhra on a stick.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:04) [162]

Well, there’s Occam’s razor.

There is.
And there are techniques for its application.
One of the methods is this: if the book says so, then do not look for how it really was. No matter what is written, there can be nonsense.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 13:04) [163]


> El © (29.02.16 12: 53) [158]
> Emotions refer to the state of mind computers and AI have no relation to the soul.

Actually, it’s not known. Maybe they have. Animals have emotions, but souls do not. Neither heaven nor hell will fall.

> Materialists are all jealous of God and are trying to repeat the creation of God-Man.

Well yes. Here I am a materialist. I envy every day. And trying to repeat.
But idealists do not try. All idealists received immaculate conception?

> Man is created in the likeness and image of God, and a computer runs a program written by a programmer.

In fact, to consider a person godlike is blasphemy.
Well, what’s the difference?
man does the will of God, for everything is done according to God's will,
and the program fulfills the will of the programmer
?



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 13:05) [164]

El © (29.02.16 12: 53) [158]

Materialists (as well as idealists) very successfully repeat the creation of God throughout the existence of mankind in a natural way.


> Man is created in the likeness and image of God, and the computer performs
> program written by a programmer.


Deep thought.
And horses eat oats and hay.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 13:08) [165]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 13: 04) [162]

So I will show you two planks nailed 100 years ago.
Which option is more logical:
a) the nail was hammered with a heavy object, possibly a hammer.
b) the ancients had the lost skill of throat singing, causing special vibrations, forcing the fibers of the tree to move apart in the right place, so that later a nail could be inserted



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 13:09) [166]

Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 13: 04) [163]


> Animals have emotions


Is it?

"After Charles Darwin created the theory of evolution, scientists had a great temptation to trace the history of the development of human intelligence. One of the first attempts belongs to Romens, the other to Gachet Suple. Now they bring only a smile.
The staircase, built by Romens, is interesting as an attempt to find steps common to animals of different levels of development and children of different ages, that is, to compare the intelligence of a child and an animal. He begins his series with sea urchins, starfish and a child at the age of one week. Their intellect, according to Romance, is exhausted by the ability to enjoy or suffer in the development of memory.
Insects, spiders, and ten-week-old children can be surprised, afraid, and arthropods can also recognize their young. Higher insects and children in the 3,5 month have a mind that can be jealous, angry and play.
Birds and eight-month-old children have pride, appreciation, the ability to create images, see dreams and love aesthetically. Lower monkeys, elephants and one-year-old children acquire vengefulness, are able to observe customs and are capable of oblivion. Finally, great apes, dogs and children who begin to speak are ashamed, remorseful, sense of humor and capable of deception.

We will be indulgent to Romance. He was a pioneer. It is a pity that we will never know (and in the writings of Romens there is nothing said about it) why acquiring the ability to be angry, revenge and deceive testifies to the development of the intellect. It would seem the opposite! Or what is the ability to see dreams talking about? Even more interesting, how did he know that spiders are able to be surprised, and dogs have remorse. "



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 13:16) [167]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 13: 04) [162]
>
> Well, there’s also Occam’s razor.
>
> There is.
> And there are techniques for its application.
> One of the methods is this: if the book says so, then do not
> look for how it really was. No matter what
> written may be nonsense.

It's a simple matter. Neither you nor I have enough qualifications to argue with the conclusions of official historians. It is good to be aware.

There are, of course, people who do not believe the official science so much that instead of the operation recommended by doctors, they prefer to apply wormwood collected on a full moon to a wound, but we will not be like them.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:17) [168]

about the plank is a dishonest example.
Of course there was hammered.

more honest about baalbek.
are trilithons. no one can lift.
and everyone says that they don’t have to lift anything, although in fact they cannot lift.

who did?
- Roman soldiers made standing garrisons in Lebanon in the intervals between service.
- someone else did, and earlier than the ancient Roman empire sent their soldiers there.

use the razor and it turns out:
everything fits with the soldiers, except for the fact that they could not.
and does not agree with anyone else, since according to official chronology the oldest civilization of the old world is the ancient Sumer, but they are not in business.

and then either a revision of the chronology with all the consequences, or the soldiers.

Well, or if you completely fix it, then you can write that it is not known by whom 12000 years ago. (but this is on big holidays only)

earlier it is impossible - later - there is nobody.
that's all ok



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:20) [169]

to argue with the findings of official historians.

but official historians (humanities scholars) are not steamed with the availability of knowledge in materials processing and other engineering problems.

they say well, it was impossible then. just because it's impossible even today.
they answered: kerk said that you do not have enough knowledge of the official history to say so.

hehe



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:24) [170]

that instead of the operation recommended by doctors, they prefer to put wormwood collected on a full moon to a wound, but we will not like them.


Lord, yes and here wormwood and Martians?

I just about the analysis of official versions.
In terms of techie.
Frame-by-frame analysis, if you want engravings of sketches and drawings on the subject, we cut down the granite massif, so we load it onto the barge, so we roll it up on the pedestal through the forests.

There are no alternative versions.
Considered the most that the official history of the building.
And neskladushki are searched in it.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 13:25) [171]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 13: 20) [169]
> they say well, it was impossible then.

About that and speech. How could you possibly know or not? Read on the Internet?



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 13:26) [172]


> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 13: 09) [166]
> Is it?

watching the creature, mistakenly named dog, living in our house, I can absolutely assert the presence of the most base evil spiteful and mean emotions, and so prevailing that it caused the desire to change its name to "Adolfik." Because the younger brother does not allow her to simply nail.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 13:27) [173]


> Kerk © (29.02.16 13: 25) [171]

He tried :)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 13:29) [174]

And why are techies so self-confident often? I'd look at how a historian would take the work of a technician from the perspective of a historian to analyze. It would be funny.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 13:32) [175]

Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 13: 26) [172]

It's instincts



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:33) [176]

About that and speech. How could you possibly know or not? Read on the Internet?

Lifting capacity of modern cranes (not consumer goods, and most-most) is known.
The mass of granite blocks of known dimensions is also not quite the binomial of Newton.

There is also a comparison operation.

So the first is less than the second.
That is impossible today

And this is just a matter of raising - dragging.
But there is still processing.

The statues supporting the portico on the palace.
Measure them for a joke about the identity of the base 3d model.
And try to carve. Not from granite, but from model wax at least. Well, soaring thirty centimeters at least.
You can even buy a CNC router. Preferably not four-axle.

In the times of Peter I do not agree with the four-axle. A maximum of three axes.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:42) [177]

And why are techies so self-confident often? I'd look at how a historian would take the work of a technician from the perspective of a historian to analyze. It would be funny.

funny is not funny - this is a funny argument.

no one laughs, from the fact that trilithons in baalbek weigh 750 tons each (these are those that are packed) and 1200 tons - which stick out of the ground.

today raise them nothing.

therefore, the Roman soldiers were hand-crafted.

and no "historian" laughs.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 13:55) [178]

Imagine that during an Afghan company, Soviet soldiers would build today's Moscow-city complex in the suburbs of Kabul.
Well, in between times. and the ball on the bridge to hang the same.
year so in xnumx.

The only difference with Baalbek’s official history is
that thirty years later such a complex was built in Moscow,
and in Rome, nothing close to the Baalbek was built up to the present day.

I can not hear laughter.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-29 14:19) [179]

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 13: 32) [175]
> These are instincts

We have a cat muzzle. In general, a fairly harmless animal, if not ..
Cats, as you know, love to sharpen their claws. She was given a special device for this in the hallway. All rooms are full of all sorts of chairs, sofas and other "rude" inventory, which can be straightened "instinct."
But more than anything, she likes to scratch chairs, a sofa or an armchair in my room. He was doing an experiment: he put one of the chairs into the corridor - she ignored him.
As a result, he concluded: anticipating (or perhaps anticipating) my violent reaction, it is INTENTIONAL, i.e. not at all instinctive, tearing MY furniture to ANGRY at me.

In and argue after that whether animals have a soul :)



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-29 14:28) [180]

And about the "emotions in animals." There are more than them.
Our Muzzle likes to pace arching its back and lifting its tail right in front of the beholder’s nose. Female instinct? And figv - we have not been "female" in the true sense of the word for a long time. Moreover, with her cats, her relationship is more than tough. If a male cat (regardless of breed, size or color) begins to “use hands”, she simply pulls it with claws (he saw it himself) and the desire immediately disappears.
And the secret is simple - it just "flaunts", that's supposedly what I am! About expressions of hatred, affection or sympathy in her eyes in response to the action of a person on her, I generally keep silent - this must be seen :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 14:28) [181]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 10: 03) [150]
> this is the story of the construction of peter (granite peter)
> if you raise all the historical (academic course) materials on
> topic, it turns out that there was literally just one real "contractor" -
> some samson sukhanov

Well, judging only by documents, the story of Samson Sukhanov says only that he was subcontracted invented much earlier than the construction of Peter. )))

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 13: 09) [166]
I don’t know about spiders, but dogs and cats definitely have emotions. And feelings. Moreover, there is even a sense of proportion of guilt and punishment. And the desire to make amends for what they did, which people have, is far from everyone.

> Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 13: 04) [163]
> Animals have emotions, but souls do not. Neither into heaven nor hell will not fall.

This is only Christian beasts do not have. And Buddhist beasts have. And she moves from body to body. So what kind of beast is how lucky.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 14:29) [182]

MsGuns © (29.02.16 14: 19) [179]

Ivan Pavlov read?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 14:37) [183]

then the story of Samson Sukhanov speaks only about

associative series is clear.
however, the details say it's a different story.
sawing real faces on real faces.

there is no need for a legend about the past life of the contractor.
only signatures and stamps are needed.

in other words, when the foot and the pacolli restored the Kremlin, no one began to think that the contractor aged 14 years had visited Arkhangelsk and single-handedly overwhelmed the bear. with white. and not the last in my life. plus a bunch of completely mythological details.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 14:48) [184]

> Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 12: 58) [160]
> Well, there’s also Occam’s razor.

Occam's razor is good and can only be used with an honest approach. When ALL facts are taken, ALL artifacts, ALL the results of modern research and then are impartially analyzed, and then any result obtained is received and accepted, no matter how uncomfortable and unexpected it may be.
And when the result is already laid in advance and all the facts, artifacts and research that may contradict it are initially discarded, are beyond the scope of the process, then this is anything - the sword of the forger, Palash retrograde, Machete fitter, Yatagan orthodox, Dagger of the framer, but not the Razor Occam.



MsGuns ©   (2016-02-29 14:59) [185]

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 14: 29) [182]
> Ivan Pavlov read?

And who is it ?



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 15:09) [186]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (29.02.16 14: 48) [184]
>
>> Kilkennycat © (29.02.16 12: 58) [160]
quoted1>> Well, there’s also Occam’s razor.
>
> Occam's razor is good and can only be applied with an honest approach.
> When ALL facts are taken, ALL artifacts, ALL results
> modern research and then impartially analyzed,
> and then any result obtained is issued and accepted,
> whatever ordinary and boring he would not be.

Fixed a typo :)



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 15:49) [187]

> Kerk © (29.02.16 13: 16) [167]
> It's a simple matter. Neither you nor I have enough qualifications to
> argue with the findings of official historians. It is good to be aware.

And who are the official historians? Or what is official history? Take Egyptology. 200 years ago, the British saw the pyramids and began to dig up the pharaohs. For the unity of the place united them. And now this is the official story. It is important to be first and assertive. Stabbed and now this is the official point of view. Correct or not, it does not matter. She is official. And everything that contradicts it has no right to exist. By definition. It is unofficial. It's fu. These are not real historians; their research is pseudoscience.
The same with the general history of human development. Officially, she is no more than 12 thousand years. A study of the Sphinx prove that he was subjected to active rain corrosion. Which could have been no earlier than 14 thousand years ago. This is geology and materials science. But what about historians? And there are thousands of such paradoxes, but what about official history. She is above that. It is inviolable.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 15:58) [188]

> Kerk © (29.02.16 15: 09) [186]

If everything was real as you corrected, Bruno would be alive, we would live on a disk, and the Sun would revolve around us.
Mankind is so arranged that it always builds hypotheses, assumptions. And then raises them to dogma. And new facts are ignored and not perceived (until eliminated) until they accumulate a “critical mass” and tear up the old dogmas, creating a new theory and inserting a dogma instead of the old ones. And so in a circle.

If you want to ride, go here, the benefit is closer:
http://nlo-mir.ru/egipt/5945-bosnijskaja-dolina-piramid-30-foto.html
And here is an alternative view of the same thing:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Боснийские_пирамиды

You'll see with your own eyes, tell me what and how.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 15:59) [189]

To be precise, eptology began a little earlier.
the roots go back to Herodotus, who once went there on a business trip, saw the pyramids and asked the priests and who built them.
the priests told him in Russian that the pyramids were built by the gods who ruled Egypt before the pharaohs.
Herodot said, oh, of course.
and recorded at home: the pyramids of Giza built one of the pharaoh dynasties.

moreover, we know about this not from Herodot himself, but from his reprints by later people.

Well, then everything is simple.
Rome respected Greek scientific thought, and the Middle Ages prayed for the authority of ancient Rome.

Well, then the Englishwoman flooded the frogs and the official Egyptology began.

if you remove Herodotus, it’s not based on anything at all. although already Herodot himself altered the answer of the Egyptian priests about the authorship of the pyramids.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 16:04) [190]

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 13: 32) [175]
> These are instincts

-And how do chatlans differ from patsakov?
- What are you, a violinist, a color blind? Can you tell green from orange?
(c) Kin za za



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 16:04) [191]

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 13: 32) [175]
> These are instincts

-And how do chatlans differ from patsakov?
- What are you, a violinist, a color blind? Can you tell green from orange?
(c) Kin za za



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 16:05) [192]

I apologize for the double. ))



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 16:12) [193]


> Sergey Surovtsev © (29.02.16 15: 58) [188]
>
>> Kerk © (29.02.16 15: 09) [186]
>
> If everything was really the way you corrected, Bruno was
> we would live, we would live on a disk, and the sun would revolve around us.

So about that and speech. Science may well change its idea of ​​things. And that's fine.

Here take the same Gobekli Tepe. In many ways it does not fit into existing views. And they investigate it, understand it. But it is not interesting. Not sensational enough. Now, if there were Romans or even aliens there, that would be a different matter!

In general, how did Ren-TV get to the shooting of the program:
"A conspiracy of silence by historians! Investigations are conducted by TECHNARI! Show everything that is hidden! Next in the program - poltergeist rapes women around the world. Scientists refuse to believe!"



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 16:32) [194]

But why about rent and the plot of historians?
we are civilized (?) and rational (?) people.

let's talk about models of modern lifting mechanisms and their capabilities in the cargo area in the 700 - 1000 ton range.
although why do we need such masses?

in oliantaytambo there are much more modest stones. the truth is on the hill.

which office can be addressed today with the question of being dragged and placed?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 16:44) [195]

Science may well change its idea of ​​things. And that's fine.

Lerigia, too, may have changed its idea of ​​things.
for example, in the canon there was nowhere about the holy trinity.
but the men gathered in the Nicene universal and wrote down such a thing.
Again, corrections in the episode with the spear of fate took place (after the opening of the circulatory system).

and there and there can change the presentation.
if it does not entail a global collapse of the entire system.

for historians, I told you that there is a maximum maximum permissible sacred date
12000 years ago.

they simply cannot date any more or less technological artifact to an earlier date.

not allowed. altogether.
taboo.
anathema.

otherwise everything will break to hell. that's all.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-29 17:24) [196]

> [194] endswot © (29.02.16 16: 32)
> let's talk about the models of modern lifting mechanisms
> and their capabilities in the area of ​​cargo in the 700 - 1000 range
> tons.
> although why do we need such a mass?

And what about the lifting of goods for restrictions? If the aliens could, then why can not we. Either alien anti-gravity is necessary, or, indeed, why do we need to lift such cargoes every day, but we need to, so we will raise it. In my opinion, far more complicated things are done than the stoning of stones.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 17:30) [197]

I again did not understand where the aliens.

it was like this:
I said that today we cannot raise Baalbek trilithons.
today we have nothing to raise even more modest masses.

I objected that they say how do you know that we can not.
and they started talking about renti.

I suggested after this not to talk about Rentivi, but about specific models of cranes that are capable of today.

no one responded, except for the foreign council, which did not say anything about cranes, but began to write something about aliens.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 17:40) [198]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 16: 44) [195]
> for historians, I told you that there is a maximum maximum permissible sacred date 12000 years ago.
> they are not able to date any more or less technological artifact with an earlier date.

It is all about the modern paradigm of the history of mankind. And its division into civilized nations, which have the right to decide everything and uncivilized, which must obey the will of the first. Voluntarily or not, it does not matter, the uncivilized can be forced by definition. For their own good. And the model of society that has taken shape should be indisputable, unique in history, linear and uncontested.
If we accept the logic of what looms on the basis of what is called "alternative history", then there is not even any alternative. There is a cycle. That is, there were highly developed civilizations of a planetary scale, which were obliterated by no one knows what, civilization was thrown into the Stone Age, from which it was revived in its current form.
Forget about the Atlanteans, Hyperboreans, Limurians, let the same intelligent man survived all this. But you can not assume this. Just NOT and that’s it. Let the facts in their hands, with thousands of facts. Get a rogue stamp. For life.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 17:49) [199]

Yes, I also once came to the conclusion that somehow something like this and looms (with cyclical)

pretending even after how many generations will come the "savagery" of survivors of the cataclysm.
the infrastructure is destroyed, there is no electricity.
electronic media is readable only with mobile power,
paper - they are in libraries.
means of production are only manual.
lack of resources, biology takes precedence over sociality.
I think the third generation will perceive the stories of elders about tablets as tales of saucers on which an apple rolls and as a result of this magic something is visible at the bottom.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 17:51) [200]

> Inovet © (29.02.16 17: 24) [196]
> Or, alien anti-gravity is definitely needed, or, really, why do we need to lift such loads every day, but we need to, so we will raise it. To my mind
> where much more complicated things are done than stumbling stones.
> Endoweat © (29.02.16 17: 30) [197]
> I again did not understand where the aliens.

But this is a typical example. Defamation and ridicule. First, instead of an elementary analysis of payload, and there is still MASS of technically unique, state-of-the-art technology details, we write the words Ren-Tv and Aliens. Then we laugh at them, shifting the main emphasis and emphasis on them. Then we say that the rest of the argument is at the same level, summarizing the first part from the second and transferring to the first obviously negative reaction from the second (which we ourselves added). And then we conclude that, in general, the whole statement is not serious, although the first, real part has not been touched by the argument once.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-29 18:12) [201]

> [196] Inovet © (29.02.16 17: 24)
> And what about lifting loads for restrictions?



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 18:15) [202]

> Kerk © (29.02.16 16: 12) [193]

There are also underground cities of Cappadocia. Up to 9 underground levels. Well thought out and executed the ventilation and water supply systems. Cities up to 16 sq. Km. 85 meters deep.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 18:27) [203]

> And what about lifting loads for restrictions?


Yes, in principle, there are no restrictions and there weren’t.
Galileo that generally could raise the earth.

but he simply wasn’t given a foothold.
Well, you do not call a model of a crane that today can lift at least one hundred tons.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 18:27) [204]

Sergey Surovtsev © (29.02.16 17: 40) [198]

No, you Muldasheva read. No need to read it, it carries a blizzard.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 18:31) [205]

about Muldashev is five.

if anything, I have not read it yet, just listened to the pieces on YouTube. literally pieces.

what is five?
in general, this happens in life that I learned the names of alternatives from mostly anti-alternatives.



Копир ©   (2016-02-29 18:36) [206]

> MsGuns © (29.02.16 14: 28) [180]:

You wrote very figuratively!

So much so that I have to somehow even apologize
for his inaccurate presentation of animal psychology.

Thinking, I will add flattering epithets to our smaller brothers :)

Firstly, animals are artistic.
Secondly, animals speak languages.
Third, they even have a feeling reminiscent of religion.

In order:

1. Your cat, like any woman, is flirtatious.
Someone will probably attribute the cause of this coquetry to the smell of male pheromones,
coming from you?

But, let's remember a village rooster that doesn't just crow.
He "throws the banner"!
Welcoming a new day, the rooster actively confirms its cockerel reputation.
To spite neighboring roosters.

Or a nightingale ...
Who doesn’t just sing, then to copulate with the nightingale.
Nightingale revels in his song!
Ornithologists say that the nightingale is not so easy to frighten away:
he simply does not hear extraneous and non-life-threatening sounds.
Is that throw a stone at him?

2. People communicating through facial expressions, gestures, sound
vibrations and descriptive signs, often forget about the language of smells,
which is masterfully owned by dogs and ants, for example.

The smell for them is both a sign and a symbol.
And the organ of smell - the eye and ear.

Try to cross out the path of forest ants with your finger?
You will see how they are "blind"!
They will start poking back and forth until they pave their path of smells again.

City dogs are so fond of being on the street not because they are happy to "relieve themselves."
On urban pavement, they get the same forum!

3. Once upon a time my friend, a student moonlighting as a watchman in
Moscow Zoo, told the story:

There lived some kind of exotic bear, like a panda.
This panda was looked after by an old man whom this bear loved very much.
Not only did not wag his bear tail :)

And now, the old man died.

Since then, my friend told, someone should sing a song
(I don’t remember, like “Steppe, yes steppe around”), which I sang
this old panda is sad, clogs into his nook,
does not communicate with anyone.

And this is not a dog living with a man for centuries.

And, interestingly, the panda distinguishes the song.
Because different artists, different tones, keys,
someone is faking ...

My friend said that there was an impression that this panda
recognized words!

The dense bear mourned the departed friend ...

How favorably different from soulless ravens, ready
peck at least a dead rat, at least his own sister,
dead crow?

And the crows - not the most stupid birds!

Your deeds are wonderful!
Hey, Lord!



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 18:46) [207]

Copier © (29.02.16 18: 36) [206]


> Secondly, animals speak languages.
> Thirdly, they even have a feeling reminiscent of religion.
>


The further into the forest ... the more we will learn



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 18:47) [208]

> Igor Shevchenko © (29.02.16 18: 27) [204]
> You didn’t miscalculate Muldashev. Do not read it, it carries a blizzard.

Yes, God is with him, with Muldashev. Not a single Muldashev ... There are a lot of artifacts. There is no explanation. They do not fit into the official history. No
Tell me, why did hundreds of people who somehow connected their destiny with history and archeology, professionally connected, put under attack their career, reputation, fall out of the "right scientists", become outcasts in a professional environment? But they are coming, truth-seekers are fools. They cannot reconcile, conscience does not allow. Sleep will be bad. They will live well, and sleep badly.

> Inovet © (29.02.16 18: 12) [201]
> Endoweat © (29.02.16 18: 31) [205]

Now the argument will fly that they say we can raise it. Already we can. 3-4 thousand tons That 30-40 years ago could not yet, when the argument surfaced, but now we can! Hooray! The question is closed.
And how is this, even by officialdom it was done 4000 years ago, so no one will say. What for? This is nonsense. Not significant.
And other technologies will also be ignored, on the sly.



Inovet ©   (2016-02-29 18:48) [209]

> [203] endswot © (29.02.16 18: 27)
> well, and you do not call a model of a crane that can today
> raise at least one hundred tons

Will an excavator fit or a plane?



Копир ©   (2016-02-29 19:27) [210]

> Sergey Surovtsev © (27.02.16 22: 48) [108]:
> Materialism ... How is it radically different from idealism? And no different.

I would like to. To not differ.
And then all people would be united in universal harmony,
it would be good airs, etc.

Nature and God in your very, incidentally, sensible argument, are still different.

God makes development intelligently and purposefully, and Nature, as necessary.

This foolishness of Nature makes the arguments of the materialists unconvincing,
ostensibly for 10 of millions of years, the monkey itself turned into Leonardo da Vinci.

For many years, in itself, something can only collapse.
And not to create.
Or do you not remember the entropy?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 19:55) [211]

Will an excavator fit or a plane?

will do.

Well, how does it fit .....
will drive up, go back and forth. then the excavator will say "Danna, I have lunch"
and move away.

PS
Well, why not immediately say that the legionnaires put those trilitons by pulling the ropes?
it was evening, they had nothing to do ......

besides, the ancient Roman excavators seem to have not yet been dug up.

God makes development intelligently and purposefully, and Nature, as necessary.

More precisely, it is an evolution and not nature.
Makes as it is necessary, and comes out purposefully (of course, according to those who remain neotseyan natural selection of this evolution)

Why is a woman beautiful and beautiful?
Because boh?
Как бы не так.

everything is only a blind evolution and sexual selection.

On the one hand, the men who did not attract the women around them less copulated with them, and left fewer offspring.
And those who liked them, on the contrary - more.

And by virtue of the mechanism of heredity, these “second” men with a certain degree of non-zero probability passed on this quality to their descendants.
As a result, the first after just a few iterations just did not remain.

On the other hand, there is also sexual selection by men. (not all women are equally attractive)

That's the result and turned out an attractive woman.

By the way, I can tell you why in Africa everything is exactly the opposite.
Boh there will also be not in the business.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 20:01) [212]

ostensibly for 10 of millions of years, the monkey itself turned into Leonardo da Vinci.

Well, in general, all it is. with minor amendments.
those monkeys (and not monkeys, too) who could not grow their Leonardo in their herd were simply simply ousted from the historical scene.

only those remained.
and they believe that they have Leonardo (or was I confused with turtles?)



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 20:25) [213]

The pedestal, on which the St. Petersburg Bronze Horseman stands, weighed 1600 tons before processing. Could you? Could. Oh yes, I forgot. The history of St. Petersburg is not as simple as official historians lie.

Heyerdahl with the Indians moved 10 ton statues with primitive tools. But one cannot believe that spending more resources and time, you can move more stones. This is too boring.

People write whole books about the construction equipment of ancient Egypt, experimental evidence is found. But again, this is too boring and ordinary. Without aliens and supercivilizations.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 20:29) [214]

Here in this picture is not true. Because cranes capable of lifting such weight appeared quite recently. 250 years ago it was impossible.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8C#/media/File:Thunder_Stone.jpg



Копир ©   (2016-02-29 20:37) [215]

> Yuri Zotov © (28.02.16 16: 49) [133]:
> People-they are generally different, and then, and now, and at all times.

Let me also?
In defense of the Soviet people?

Although you know me as an active exposer of everything "Soviet".

In total, but not people.
Because the Soviet people are not only Pavlik Morozov, but also Akhmatov.
And besides Stakhanov, Gorky and Sholokhov - Solzhenitsyn, Tarkovsky and Tvardovsky.

The Soviet people, of which, to be honest, lived in a separate, artificial
world of calm and balance.
But for this balance, for this economic carelessness, they paid tribute.

The authorities

The duty of "not sticking out" and "keep quiet".

Surprisingly, the Soviet government often watched
on violation of an agreement.

The flourishing of permissiveness was the time of Leonid Brezhnev, who for some reason
called "stagnation."

On the contrary.

This was communism in all its charms:
On the one hand, no economic problems.
On the other - a leisurely opportunity to write, speak, publish
different bad things about communism!

Even bourgeois never dreamed of such a will.
There, after their crazy descent from political correctness, they will be jailed for
that someone called a negro a negro.

Faina Georgievna Ranevskaya (1896-1984), talented, but always
shocking public Soviet actress
("It is necessary to live so that you are remembered and bastards."), Which was difficult
suspect of love of communism shortly before his death
said -

You will still remember this time with gratitude ...

(I am not quoting literally, but in the sense).



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 20:39) [216]

ostensibly for 10 of millions of years, the monkey itself turned into Leonardo da Vinci.

I remembered something. and so well.

so, ostensibly stupid monkey over 10 of millions of years, by itself, could not in any way dear to Davinchi. there was a creator.

OK, let's say that it was so.
Suppose that in order to make Leonardo you need a perfect external absolute mind (or, according to you)
okay let it be.
perfect leonardo was created.

then who made the giraffe?
Well, in the sense of a giraffe, which is in Africa.

What does a giraffe have to do with it?
Well, in general, there is an opinion (well-founded!) that the ancestor of the giraffe was fish.
a creature without a neck (or with a very short neck).

in short, fish have gills. the gills are innervated (activated) by a special nerve. It leaves the brain, enters the gills. A signal runs through the nerve, gills move, the fish breathe.
since the fish have no neck (or almost none), the topology of laying this nerve was as it should (the brain, heart and gills were very close to each other) and how to build a route to the gills was not so critical.

Let's say that the same grandfather with a gray beard also made the fish.

Now it's time to make a giraffe.
He certainly has no gills, the gills transformed into the larynx.
The nerve has not disappeared, the giraffe needs it to innervate the larynx.

And here’s what kind of thing it turns out.

In a fish, the nerve exits the brain, goes around the artery in the region of the heart, and then approaches the gills. The topology is like that. The design is so fishy.

The giraffe is different. The brain and larynx are high and very close to each other (20 centimeters from strength), and the heart is low (long neck)

So.
The nerve innervating the larynx of a giraffe emerges from the giraffe’s brain,
goes down the neck to the heart
goes around the same artery
and rises back along the neck and enters the muscles of the larynx.

Everything is exactly the same as with fish.

And here the question begs.
If Leonardo certainly requires an external, perfect creator to make it,
then who made the giraffe, if God is he alone?

If the creator is the same, then why is the giraffe so stupidly tailored?
More precisely, not tailored, but stupidly copied from fish?

Maybe the giraffe is an exception to the rule and secretly was born evolving from a fish?

But what if (some horror) and a dumb monkey could evolve from fish to primate.
And then she liked it and she already upgraded to Leonardo?

Or boh?
Come on.
According to the information that I heard about him, he couldn’t fool around like that on a giraffe.
Well, I couldn’t.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 20:49) [217]

Here in this picture depicts a lie.

but on this one?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/GagarinG_StroitAlekKolonGE.jpg

Gagarin, a contemporary of construction.
Drawn from nature.
What do you think?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 20:57) [218]

in case someone suddenly began to calculate the cross section of forests and ran for a sopromat textbook, I’ll say that the joke is not in the forests at all.

just express yourself in the picture.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:21) [219]

Well, just speak out.
you will not be anything for it.
just a picture. from the wikipedia article.



Копир ©   (2016-02-29 21:22) [220]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 20: 39) [216]:

Sorry, but too many words.
It is difficult to grasp the meaning of your question and your conclusion.

An educated person any (any!) Question
can display in 2's, 3's sentences.

And any answer, too.

Countless comments may follow.

I would be grateful for your understanding.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:24) [221]

I would be grateful for your understanding.

Giraffe stupidly copied from fish.
The creator who created Leonardo could not so fool around.
Who made a giraffe if a giraffe from a fish did not make evolution?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:29) [222]

I met in three. I am an educated person.
Now you.
preferably also in three sentences.

who made a giraffe by spending an extra five to six meters of a nerve?



Копир ©   (2016-02-29 21:35) [223]

Thank you!
Simple and clear.

1. From fish, mammals only got digestion systems
and urogenital.
The prototype of the mammal was lizards (dinosaurs), i.e.
fish emerging from the water.

2. The creator is not foolish.
Since then, all of humanity has not found in its
the development of a genius like Leonardo.
An inventor who in his thought was ahead of the technique by HUNDREDS! years old.
And the Great Artist.

3.Giraffe in English. camelopard, something like a cross between a camel and a leopard :)

Well guess!



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-02-29 21:43) [224]


> Copier © (29.02.16 21: 35) [223]

endsovot meant DiCaprio.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:43) [225]

Now, as I understand it, the time has come for countless comments by two educated people who can use any three phrases ....

however, I see that truly educated people can get by not with two or three, but with one phrase.

"The creator did not cheat"

Probably it is.
They told him "today you make a giraffe, here's a fish for you!"
He did.

In fish, the nerve follows the path of the brain-heart-gills (it does not matter since all three are sitting in almost one heap)

And the giraffe’s nerve will go just like a fish’s.
Brain-heart-larynx.

so it’s a bit of a bug that instead of 20, we now have six meters, and this nerve does not need to go to the heart, it needs to be taken to the larynx.

As he was told to do, so boh did.

Strictly on the fish.
What are the claims?
What hack?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:48) [226]

well, it was a trap and generally not so honest.
any answer option suited me.
and that boch is blunt, and that a giraffe is an evolution of fish.

the copier as an educated and educated person understood this and did not begin to answer the question at all.

Let's get back to the picture of Gagarin about the pillar.
The picture is legal, official. Lies on wikipedia.
Why be afraid?

Let's discuss.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 21:52) [227]

1. From fish, mammals only got digestion systems
and urogenital.


a truly educated person, of course, had to guess that it was not a giraffe. in all descendants of fish, the nerve goes exactly the same.
Leonardo, by the way, too.

A giraffe is only a degenerate case, when a non-optimal laying topology simply cries out in a long neck.

genitourinary, genitourinary ....



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:12) [228]

Here in this picture is not true. Because cranes capable of lifting such weight appeared quite recently. 250 years ago it was impossible.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8C#/media/File:Thunder_Stone.jpg


Kirk, if this illustration is true,
maybe Gagarin’s here is also true? True?
Or not?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/GagarinG_StroitAlekKolonGE.jpg

or yes?



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 22:12) [229]


> endowot © (29.02.16 20: 49) [217]
>
> Here in this picture depicts a lie.
>
> but on this one?
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/GagarinG_StroitAlekKolonGE.jpg
>
> Gagarin, a contemporary of construction.
> Drawn from nature.
> What do you think?

This picture shows a temporary technological building. It lasted 2 of the year after the installation of the column trunk while finishing work was going on. Absolutely historical and official. But this is too boring a version, I understand.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:15) [230]

only Engraving on top according to drawings Yuri Felten. 1770 "
and she is true.
could carry without cranes.

and the bottom picture from nature and not according to the drawings.
is it true too? well really?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:18) [231]

but nothing that the "technological" building built after the installation of the column, is it somehow decrepit?
it’s hard for him to come up with exactly the technological functionality.
moreover, no one (except Gagarin) painted it.
including an album of sketches of monferand himself, but not only him?



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 22:18) [232]

> Copier © (29.02.16 19: 27) [210]
> Nature and God in yours are very, yet different.
> God makes development reasonably and purposefully, and Nature, as it should.

But no. In the form in which materialists use the term Nature, it is just "wise and rational." It creates interconnected living species that cannot exist without each other. She leads the development of living beings according to some strict plan known only to her, without trial and error, without intermediate unsuccessful forms. Species either remain unchanged for millions of years, or evolve so quickly that they change significantly over several generations. The ability to mimic is generally difficult to explain. How can I change the shape or color to the surrounding landscape or even a natural enemy? To produce substances that attract other species of insects to a predatory insect? If all this is an accident, then according to probability theory you need to try 50% of the variations. Coloring? Smell?
So Nature works no worse than God, very efficiently.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 22:24) [233]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 22: 18) [231]
>
> but nothing that the "technological" building built after
> column installation

It was built before the installation of the column.

Here is the sketch itself.
http://logistic4you.ru/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/11.jpg
The design of the granite pedestal and scaffolding with a stone base for the installation of the columns. Lithograph Roux by O. Montferrand. 1836

Brickwork is visible at the base.

This is how the column installation process looked
http://logistic4you.ru/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/10.jpg

The entire structure is raised relative to the ground and the column is inserted immediately inside this temporary building.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 22:26) [234]

Color picture
http://s019.radikal.ru/i612/1307/36/ffacaf2ddf2d.jpg



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:27) [235]

why plastered him?
why painted plaster?
why are there vaulted windows?

and why, in the end, it looks so much like a building, God initially standing there knows how long it takes, along with the very column that no Monpheran has ever carved and set up, but merely threw up an angel on top of it, building a small box of primitive brickwork for this?

This is really all that was enough for him.
And that bottle had to be restored three years after the opening of the column.
Just flowed a solution of masonry.

Brick masonry thrown to the top of a granite (!) Polished (!) And profiled (!) Column.

Although at the top, in theory, the most cymes should be.

In the granite burial chamber of the pharaoh, the walls and ceiling are polished, and the sarcophagus stands roughly cut down.

But if it’s worth it, then it means they could, right?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:30) [236]

Color picture
http://s019.radikal.ru/i612/1307/36/ffacaf2ddf2d.jpg


The picture is beautiful.
It’s a pity that without the comments of the builders.
and there are comments on the appropriateness of such "technological" designs - a car.
but they are all kind of boring. not colored.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 22:30) [237]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 19: 55) [211]
> just blind evolution and sexual selection.

Yes, only with a small nuance. At the dawn of human evolution, and, indeed, later, until the serious socialization of society, such natural selection was to select not the most intelligent, but the most powerful, dexterous and arrogant. And if suddenly clever was born, he received an ax in his hands and was sent to wet the mammoth so that he would not be clever. And if he had planned to actively breed, he would have received horns from not very smart, but strong brothers. )))
Change cannot manifest itself like this, from one to the whole race. Others also change. In such a statement of the problem, there should not be any clearly identical forms at all, everyone would be a little apart, but they would differ in structure.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:33) [238]

Yes, only with a small nuance.

Once I caught the eye of a monograph by Sergey Morozov on this subject.
The name was almost confusing (it was astralopithecus), but after reading the third of the first chapter I forgot about the name and could no longer come off.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 22:37) [239]

> Kerk © (29.02.16 20: 29) [214]
> Here in this picture depicts a lie. Because cranes capable of lifting such a weight have appeared recently. 250 years ago it was impossible.

It’s quite a truth. Books and paintings are devoted to this truth; it stands 250 years in the center of the Empire as a great achievement. One stone. In the 18 century.

And according to the official history of 4000 years ago, 2 500 000 of such stones was stacked in only the Cheops pyramid. And no one wrote anything on this subject. Did not draw. Just folded the hill and left.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 22:41) [240]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 21: 24) [221]
> Giraffe stupidly copied from fish.
> The creator who created Leonardo could not be so foolish.
> Who made the giraffe if the giraffe from the fish did not make evolution?

The creator did not cheat on the giraffe. The creator uses OOP. He is a programmer!



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:46) [241]

The entire structure is raised relative to the ground and the column is inserted immediately inside this temporary building.

what for? what kind of receiver?
when and where does he meet yet?

What is the purpose of the building?

to hold the columns with the walls? why not forests?
to keep it warm inside? to whom? granite? working? in the xnumx century?



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 22:48) [242]


> 3. Giraffe in English camelopard, something like a cross between a camel
> and leopard :)


"Ran outgall broke out in the longest French quote,
the meaning of which was that a certain Arthur loves
morning go to the seashore, after drinking a cup of sho-
colada. "

Inspired :)



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 22:48) [243]

The creator uses OOP. He is a programmer!

not at all.
There is a template and copy-paste.
He is a coder



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 22:51) [244]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 22: 30) [236]
>
> Color picture
> http://s019.radikal.ru/i612/1307/36/ffacaf2ddf2d.jpg
>
> the picture is beautiful.
> it is a pity that without the comments of the builders.
> and there are comments on the appropriateness of such "technological"
> designs - wagon.
> but they are all kind of boring. not colored.

The comments of the builders are very interesting. They all have extensive experience in building unique multi-ton structures in the 19 century. They are builders, right? The cottage was built.

Sergei Surovtsev here said that Occam’s razor works only when all the facts are considered. And here is just a striking example.

There are a huge number of drawings of how the column was taken to the city. There are drawings of how it was installed. There are sketches of the author of the project. All this is interrupted by one watercolor drawing. And the funny thing is that official history does not reject this watercolor painting. And alternatives reject allexcept for this picture. Such a razor.

And after all, you can simply logically assume that if something really were there, then more than one watercolor would have remained from this. This is not the time of the pharaohs. This story would have come down to us both in texts and in paintings, and simply in folk rumor. But all this is nonsense against the background of the fact that builders are not entirely satisfied with one watercolor drawing.

Although we can certainly assume that after the construction was completed, the whole city was burned along with people in order not to leave witnesses, and then it was re-populated. Same version.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 22:52) [245]


> Endoweat © (29.02.16 22: 46) [241]
>
> The whole structure is raised relative to the ground and the column is inserted
> right inside this temporary building.
>
> why? what kind of receiver?
> when and where does he meet yet?
>
> What is the purpose of the building?

Apparently, that the column did not fall, until everyone fixes. But this is my guess. I can admit that you are not a specialist in these matters, but for some reason you are not yourself.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 23:02) [246]

Sergei Surovtsev here said that Occam’s razor works only when all the facts are considered. And here is just a striking example.

I agree.
just raising a heavy column to the priest is another problem.
but for some reason people complicate the task and build a hut, which now needs to be insert column "so that it does not fall until it is fixed"

no one really clarifies how it was fixed, which now stands without forests and without a hut.

and how a brick hut could prevent a fall in the same way that forests could not.

but the razor definitely works. now in the opposite direction.
now you need a hut.
why - no one can clearly say.
cannot remember that somewhere else this was done.
but without a hut in any way.

Of course, without her, there is no way if Gagarin was not caught in time by the arm.
painted, you know, like the Chukchi. what did you see.



Kerk ©   (2016-02-29 23:02) [247]

Here is an engraving depicting the palace square of 1825 of the year. A few years before the construction of the column.
http://www.antiquar.pro/img.php?id=414&pic=1

I would like to see what the official history hides on it or on any other image of the palace square before the construction of the column.



Игорь Шевченко ©   (2016-02-29 23:14) [248]

Kerk © (29.02.16 22: 51) [244]

[65] same! :)



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 23:18) [249]

Screenshot war?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kpY-uzhKA8w/UdgIr48h6cI/AAAAAAAAAy8/HrfoZ9CbHy0/s1600/Parad.jpg

picture of the parade for the opening of the column.

On the left is the one who will be built in a few years.

So it’s not just with huts of a clumsy place.
There, with the very year of the opening of the column, they did not immediately decide.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-02-29 23:24) [250]

> Endoweat © (29.02.16 23: 02) [246]

That’s real, extremely interesting, but what is the theory being defended? What kind of structure? Where does the column come from, if not brought and installed? Did she stand there before Peter? And everything else is built around her? And what is any convincing argument for such a theory?



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 23:33) [251]

yes the fic knows him.
in general there is a bunch of sketches of drawings around the thirties of the eighteenth century.
various authors.

according to the official version, they first set up a convoy, after which the construction of Isakia was completed.

Well, in different figures, since the opening of the column, Isakii, that is, that he is not there.
there are still views of the palace from the nevs. so on some, through the winter roof, the domes of some church are visible, which should stand exactly in the square. but she is not.

why there is no Isakiah, if any, can be explained.
did not draw.

why Isakiy without forests stands in the picture devoted to the parade for the opening of the column to explain more difficult. but also possible.

and was. and it was not built in the 18 century, but restored.
like the column itself.
that is, do not look for a time machine of the 18 century.

moreover, there are not only drawings by Isakia kosyachat.

documents on the wedding of Pushkin in Iskayevsky - they are also some kind of muddy.
if you look "frame by frame".



эндсоувот ©   (2016-02-29 23:45) [252]

But what is the theory advocated?

there is one good theory, and that is conspiracy theory! :)

But seriously, I have no theory.
I look at these events only two to three hundred years ago and understand that official historians cannot give me not only the real date of the opening of the column, but even the year of its opening.
more precisely they can, but several dates at once. gradually clarifying everything and clarifying them.
and it just went completely nothing.
confused.

but about Baalbek, the pyramids and Sacsayhuamans, they certainly do not mess.
It can not be.
it cannot be that they do not have time to coordinate all the dates for these thousand years.

I haven’t had time with Peter yet, and it was almost yesterday.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-03-01 01:56) [253]


> Here in this picture depicts a lie. Because cranes
> able to lift such a weight appeared recently.
> 250 years ago it was impossible.


Learn TRIZ. Science, albeit with a fresh name (relative to the pharaohs), but with old ideas.
The depicted stone in the picture is easy to pick up. Without picking up. Moreover, even by one person. The secret will die with me :) And with a bunch of people who read the right books in childhood.



Kerk ©   (2016-03-01 02:43) [254]


> Kilkennycat © (01.03.16 01: 56) [253]
>
Quoted1>> Here in this picture depicts a lie. Because cranes
quoted1>> able to lift such a weight appeared recently.
Quoted1>> 250 years ago it was impossible.
>
>
> Learn TRIZ. Science, albeit with a fresh name (relatively
> Pharaohs), but with old ideas.

It was sarcasm :)



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-03-01 04:11) [255]

but. Well, do not care :)



Inovet ©   (2016-03-01 04:12) [256]

> [208] Sergey Surovtsev © (29.02.16 18: 47)
> Now the argument will fly that they say we can raise it.

An interesting approach. In several posts, they asked to name modern mechanisms that supposedly still have not been created, capable of raising large stones, now it is no longer necessary to call. Because it turns out they are?



Inovet ©   (2016-03-01 04:20) [257]

> [252] endswot © (29.02.16 23: 45)
> I look at these events only two or three hundred years ago
> and I understand that official historians cannot give me no
> only the actual date of the opening of the column, but even its year
> discoveries.

Most likely, everything is stupid - it was necessary to open it on November 7, they didn’t get it right, here they corrected it and painted on it, somewhere it was forgotten by oversight. Then other accomplishments were required, so they completely forgot about the flaws with the column.

As for the pyramids and other dating, what will change 4000 years or 4500? About those 12000 years - FIG knows, I'm not in the subject.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-03-01 05:11) [258]


> what will change 4000 years or 4500?

everything! this means that we were deceived, that the stones were not squeezed, but cast, not dragged, but forced to float through the air under the blows of tambourines.



Inovet ©   (2016-03-01 06:18) [259]

I would like not 4500 and not 5000, but 50000 or, well, all 500000 years.



Kilkennycat ©   (2016-03-01 06:27) [260]


> all 500000 years.

then there will be a discussion that the academic age of the Earth does not correspond at all to the true (alternative)



virex(home) ©   (2016-03-01 08:32) [261]


> Maybe, after all, "like God created"? "

humanity is such a weak, nonviable form of life that it would hardly exist for any long time since its inception, without the help of others

we are waiting in the 2020-2030-s for an official meeting with our nannies on flying saucers / cigars



Inovet ©   (2016-03-01 10:36) [262]

As always, they started with Pushkin, ended with aliens. Or maybe Alexander Sergeyevich was also an alien? Perhaps he can be called an alternative person.



Kerk ©   (2016-03-01 11:28) [263]

We have built a cool medical center here. But it quickly turned out that they were wise with wiring. When all the equipment is connected. You turn it on in one wing - it turns off in the other wing.

What does this tell us?

The complex of buildings was built by a more technologically advanced culture and was originally intended for other purposes. How else to explain the fact that no one noticed the problems until the doctors drove there? This was probably an abandoned building of the Romans, and modern Petersburgers only tried to remake it for themselves.



эндсоувот ©   (2016-03-01 12:00) [264]

What does this tell us?

this tells us that we don’t have to give drawings of the palace times of the Decembrists on which there is no pillar.

since having received in response a drawing from the parade on the occasion of the opening of a pillar on which Isaac’s in finished form, all of a sudden everyone begins to talk about clinics with imperfections.

let’s then either fight on those two screenshots,
or not argue at all with popular prints of how a stone was pulled by thunder and "it means they could



эндсоувот ©   (2016-03-01 12:15) [265]

for example, it is known for certain that steel in liquid form has become available to humans closer to the 19 century.
it is also known that cast iron is not forged, and iron is useless to temper.
but we still know for sure that at least the Spaniards, at least in a new light, were armed not with cast-iron and iron sabers, but with steel ones.

how so
and so that steel can be obtained not only by converting cast iron, but also by carburizing iron.

in general, these are specific technical details and the subject of analysis.

and historians just draw a stone wrapped in ropes and that's it.
It's enough.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-03-01 13:47) [266]

> Kerk © (01.03.16 11: 28) [263]
> We have built a cool medical center here. But it quickly turned out that they were wise with wiring. When all the equipment is connected. In one
> turn on the wing-off in the other wing.
> What does this tell us?

Well, if there are problems with the spaceport, what kind of clinic to say:
https://news.mail.ru/economics/24994195/?frommail=10



MsGuns ©   (2016-03-01 13:51) [267]

That somehow imperceptibly from the heart
slid to the insensible stone
debate about love and happiness
empty arguments about buildings preferring

Well, what to do - it's just programmers!

:)



MsGuns ©   (2016-03-01 13:56) [268]

Cow in the meadow, grass with dew full
Suddenly she gracefully arched her tail, resembling a swan ..
I’ll go eat meat, so that my stomach subsides



Труп Васи Доброго ©   (2016-03-01 14:08) [269]


> I’m going to eat meat, so that my stomach calms down

There is noise and din in your stomach - take espumisan. :)

Be careful, as shown in the advertisement, from overeating cuckoos it can be very difficult to get out of the nest. It must be diluted with vegetables.



Сергей Суровцев ©   (2016-03-01 14:34) [270]

He added potatoes, salt and put the aquarium on fire (c) Zhvanetsky



MsGuns ©   (2016-03-01 16:29) [271]

> The corpse of Vasi the Good © (01.03.16 14: 08) [269]

In ancient China, there was such torture - the tortured was fed exclusively boiled beef :)



Копир ©   (2016-03-02 12:57) [272]

Deleted by moderator



Труп Васи Доброго ©   (2016-03-02 14:21) [273]

Deleted by moderator



MsGuns ©   (2016-03-02 14:39) [274]

Deleted by moderator



MsGuns ©   (2016-03-02 14:50) [275]

Deleted by moderator



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 whole branch

Forum: "Other";
Current archive: 2017.01.15;
Download: [xml.tar.bz2];

Top





Memory: 2.06 MB
Time: 0.275 c
15-1452147343
pavelnk
2016-01-07 09:15
2017.01.15
Browser virus


2-1421904151
i2e
2015-01-22 08:22
2017.01.15
In an MDI application, you need to make the window programmatically active.


2-1422788793
A1ekceu
2015-02-01 14:06
2017.01.15
Code check


2-1419963322
AlexeyTG
2014-12-30 21:15
2017.01.15
Is reading from HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE properly implemented


15-1452558730
Sergey Surovtsev
2016-01-12 03:32
2017.01.15
Appmethod leaked





afrikaans albanian Arabic armenian azerbaijani basque belarusian bulgarian catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) croatian Czech danish Dutch English estonian filipino finnish French
galician georgian German greek haitian Creole hebrew Hindi hungarian icelandic Indonesian Irish italian Japanese Korean latvian lithuanian macedonian malay maltese norwegian
persian polish portuguese Romanian russian serbian slovak Slovenian Spanish swahili Swedish ภาษาไทย turkish Ukrainian urdu Tiếng Việt welsh yiddish bengali bosnian
cebuano Esperanto gujarati hausa hmong igbo javanese kannada Khmer lao latin maori marathi mongolian nepali punjabi somali tamil telugu yoruba
zulu
English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish