Jump to content

Muloghonto

Members
  • Content count

    6,204
  • Runs

    79,780 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4
  • Time Online

    50d 16h 17m 3s

Everything posted by Muloghonto

  1. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    That is because secularism, according to Indian constitution, is equal pandering to all religion, not removal of religion from government workings. hence the meddling.
  2. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    But none of that, is affecting me in public life. By affecting, i mean rights to religious time, religious meddling in workplace practices, etc etc. A secular government should be separating itself from religion. Ie, religion wields zero influence in state policy that directly affects citizens.
  3. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Wearing clothing, is not the same as affecting me with your religion. As i said, open your eyes and see how secularism works outside India- we don't pander to all religions, we cut them off of government interference.
  4. Reasons are not data, kiddo. you said you can show empiricism for your ethics. So show us data. Not propaganda. You have presented zero amount of data. Thus proving my point, that ethics is not about empiricism. You made the claim that ethics is about data. When i made a statement relating to ethics, you wanted objective, empirical proof. So show us your objective, empirical proof for not feeding 80+ people to the pigs. Still waiting for your data-driven conclusion. Talk about being cream of the crop or bottom of the barrel when you've paid off your 20 years of debt to human society. Till then, you are less important and less consequential than even a drug dealer. So piss off, kid. Again, all talk of a kid who is still to pay back the basic social debt of being supported by society. hey fool, you are the one batting at a negative social capital. Not people like me, who's taxes go to educating morons like you. no amount of sophistry will change the fact that it is the person making an existential claim, who has to provide evidence for it. I didn't claim there is a God. You did. So show us evidence or be on equal footing as dhokla planet around dandia-shaped sun. Ergo, you are a self-contradictory fool to believe in a religion and the concept of Gods or such. Thank you for proving my point. Only kids like yourself lacking basic education think that the burden of proof does not rest on someone making a claim.
  5. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    1. No, my initial comment is, the government should kick all religions out of public life. Which is consistent with separation of church and state. 2. Protection, is an issue of security. Government is obligated to protect any property/person- whether its the mall or the church, a stripper or a priest, makes no difference. 3. Citizens in most secular nations cannot have their religion influence the public domain. Ie, you cannot bring your religion into work, into school, etc. nor can you ask for any special dispensation due to religion.
  6. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Bolded part- not in many secular countries. You think you are getting a government loan in Canada to build a temple ?! sorry, not happening. Secular government means separation of church and state. Which means no influence of religion on the state process. Ie, no extra consideration given for any religious rituals,process, etc. The only realistic compromise is public holidays.
  7. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    How is it Saudi version, when no religion gets any public space or time ?? Secular governments remove public support of any religion,except for declaring certain religious days as public holidays. You have full freedom to do what you want with religion in Canada - in your free time, in your home. You cant bring your religious preaching to work,to office, to school, to public domain.
  8. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Err, don't most hindus cremate in furnaces anyways ?! The last time i saw a standard 'chita' was when i was a kid....every other death i've known for the last 20 years in India amongst hindus - friends, family, etc- all of them went the 'electric chula' way...
  9. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    In many secular countries, government literally does not pander to ANY religion, except for 2-3 days of the year being public holidays. All 'religious acts' are out of public space & public time. That is true secularism. India's version is demented.
  10. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    I don't think that will ever happen. Supreme court will be very hard pressed to argue against ground pollution created by stuffing dead bodies underground for burial, for 1 billion Hindus. Compared to that level of pollution (which is also far more persistent), cremation is far more eco-friendly.
  11. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Indeed, but through mechanisms put in place. Not rebellion. Rebellion, by default, is anti-statist and therefore, anti-national. But yes, i've been going hoarse for years now, asking Indians to demand more $$ and investment in the judiciary and police system.
  12. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Why not ask for equal laws that removes ANY old, inferior ideology from public space/life ? If someone wants to worship a rock, moon, star, blow up firecrackers, sacrifice a goat etc- do it inside your own home.
  13. You have shown no data on WHY it is preferable to not turn our 80+ grandparents into manure. Facts and figures kiddo. You have presented nada. Just your propaganda. When you have data, which are facts and figures, come back. Till then your squirming means zilch. You have said multiple times i am on your ignore list. Auto-proven that you don't keep your word. Kin selection, inclusive fitness - show us the facts. Show us the precise data on feeding/not feeding your kin to wild animals. Not propaganda words, facts, figures, numbers. Show us. It equals de-facto Indian for people born as Indian, because we have the option to re-claim the citizenship status ANYTIME WE WANT. I never said I am Indian citizen, retard. I said that I am an Indian by birth. Which, no matter how many citizenships i take, won't become false. I also said that by Hinduvta definition itself, i am a 'Hindu', even though *I* personally don't use that label. So GTFO with your nonsense. I said the British were better rulers than the Marathas. Race is your invented crap in this discussion, because of your inferiority complex ridden chip on your shoulder. Your entire POV against the British is because they are foreigners. That is, by default, a racist position. You cannot justify why the British were bad rulers, because you are afraid, using same benchmark,we can demonstrate the Marathas to be even more inferior rulers. As soon as you show data for your morality belief systems. All NRIs/PIOs who send money back to India are cream of the crop compared to mamma's boy like you who is yet to pay off the debt to society, kiddo. I support better people. Doesn't matter if they are invaders, not invaders, white, black or blue. Brits did far more for India than the rotten, jaahil Marathas. There is no burden of proof being shifted, moron. The entire point is, in the scale of universal existence, you either prove a claim of existence to be true, or accept any random claim to be true, because you do not have access to the entirety of the super-set data. Ergo, if you don't want proof of God to believe in God, you should not require proof of Dhokla planet around Dandia sun- just believe it! The burden of proof on any existential claim, is on the person claiming existence, in the first place. Only religious morons with rotting brains, listening to half-wit fools who wrote those half-witted books thousands of years ago, would shift the burden of proof on those who are not making any claim- atheism rests on not making the claim God doesnt exist, it rests on the principle that nobody has proven a claim of God in the first place and its as silly as believing in Superman claim. You have no idea on existential logic, which is why you defend your inferior way of thinking, made by inferior men (religion), by shifting the burden of proof to those who are waiting evidence of your existential claim. All the squirming cannot erase the fact that its religious morons who are making a claim of existence with zero proof and the ones who are waiting for proof to accept an existential claim, do not have the burden of proof on them. Because you silly, silly kiddo, the entire universe is the super-set of any conceivable existential claim IN THE UNIVERSE!
  14. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    Lara did not have a high back-lift after 1998. Infact, his famous 1999 series against Australia is noted because he came out of his 3-4 year long slump of inconsistency by consulting Garry Sobers, who asked him to reduce his back-lift.
  15. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    You know what an optical illusion looks like, nothing more. What you are doing, is akin to a guy yelling at the top of his lungs that there is water at the horizon in a desert. Because he can 'see it'. Look, your claim that you can tell what 145kph looks like on tv, is demonstrably false. I can use Physics to show, how you are incorrect. And what is laughable, is a guy who is seeing a 2d projection of a 3d image from a vantage point in the stands, thinks he knows better than professionals who are dealing with the 3d image in real time. That is laughably conceited.
  16. That is not data, kiddo. You said, morality can be empirically supported. So show us this so-called data of altruism. Game, set, match kiddo. I used your own field to demonstrate the idiocy of your position that morality has 'data'. So us this data or STFU. The mods/admin are irrelevant when YOU yourself are a liar and won't keep your word. Constitutionally, i am a PIO, kiddo. a PIO is a former Indian, with an option to become Indian again. Thats exactly what i claimed to be. Food,clothing and music. thats what makes me culturally hindu. No matter how much racism you display, you won't be able to re-write history that the British were better rulers of India than the Maratha jaahils. And what is sad, is your typical 'he left the country, he is no true Indian' type of jahilliyat that your type of people propagate. Same jaahils who made Srinivas Ramanujan an outcast for daring to go to England, because no indian alive could even understand his math. Now, learn from the Chinese - they WORSHIP their overseas Chinese folks. Why ? Because they see the Overseas Chinese as a 'fifth column' and a servant of mother China. Instead, we get jaahil Indians who denigrate the cream of the crop of India. Is it any wonder that morons like you go whine 'oh why oh why does XYZ country not be nice to India, despite Indian population there?' I have already proven my claim, kiddo. With basic logic, which is why you keep running away from it. Existential claim, needs positive evidence to substantiate itself. Because by your crooked logic of 'if no falsifiable evidence is present, it could be true' can be taken and made into any number of absurdities of existence. As i said, there is a Dhokla planet, with a dandia wobble, around a Kofta star. Prove it doesn't exist, fool. This is the logic you run the heck away from and can't live up to, because it exposes your belief system for what it is: a faulty, moronic belief system, written by inferior men who are not fit to tie the shoe-laces of a middle schooler. That is the status of your authors of Ramayana/Gita/Mahabharata/Vedas/Upanishads. PS: Fool, existential claim means a claim of existence. which means whether it exists in this universe or not. In any uncatalouged super-set (universe), a negative proof requirement, implies any number of absurdities are possible. This is the fundamental illogic of religious morons and demonstrated, why so.
  17. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Ok. Then i'd make a case for momentum & petition to ban Bakri eid. But this whole ' muslims get to do something silly, so we should also be allowed to something silly, pointless and hazardous' is a flawed logic. And i doubt SurajMal would've resisted making this thread if the muslim stuff was banned as well- his post makes it very clear, he wants hindu nonsense to propagate, period.
  18. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    Quote yours. you are the one making a claim that he did it at will. I have only seen or heard of maybe half a dozen balls bowled by Srinath at >150kph in his entire career. That does not qualify as 'bowling 97mph at will'. Show me atleast 50 data-points or you have zero claim.
  19. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    their aukaad, is their legal mandate - they are the overlord of applied law, period. I hope SC and the police teach a sharp lesson to any criminal who breaks law trying to show the highest court its 'place'.
  20. Supreme Court Bans Diwali. Rofl Hindus, go fly a kite.

    Good decision by the SC. Diwali, Bakri Eid, all these things need to be banned for common good.
  21. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    No, not at will. That is desi exgaggeration. he was hitting low 150s at his very peak, for few balls here and there.
  22. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    1. I have no reason to believe that legions of professionals are less 'neutral' than a fan. 2. Your opinion or judgement does not rely on whether you are neutral or not. it relies on whether you are expert or not. You are not an expert. Period. 3. Videos you've posted have cleared nothing, as i've said repeatedly, stop spreading nonsense that you can tell how fast someone is bowling from watching tv. that is categorically false, scientifically. 4. You have no credible basis on saying whether Tony Gray was fast or not, from your own observation. You have no ability to assess that is greater than professionals. Get that though your egotistic head. If professional opinions converge on A is faster than B, then they automatically overrule you. I don't care what coaches say, i care about what people who've faced them say. They are professionals and highly skilled at telling if ball A is faster or slower than ball B. they've faced these guys, you have not and your TV analysis only shows how far ignorant you are on optical illusion and trying to tell stuff you cant scientifically back up. I don't care about you believing or not believing. What i care about, is pointing out that they are experts, you are not and if your opinion clashes with expert consensus, you lose. I hold the same standard for myself too. Rest is all just your egotistic bias. And for the last time, videos are not the best evidence for speed. because you say its 2D or not, it clearly shows, you have zero idea of what you are talking about. You are, in short, just stating your optical illusion, nothing more. They tell no such thing, stop dreaming and making things up. Nobody can gauge speed of a ball from a singular 2d angle. Period. And its ironic that you are 'certain' about something that is impossible via physics, but trash expert opinion with first hand experience. Whats laughable, is you can tell whether a bowler is 140kph or not, sitting behind a tv and losing complete 3d perspective, while a professional who's faced a cricket ball thousand times more than you have, in a professional setting, are all wrong. We have two words for it: egotistical nonsense.
  23. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    In terms of his average pace, sure. But he was still hitting 140+ every now and then all the way till the very late 90s/early 2000s when he was clearly a fast-medium bowler. Yes, you do. Because your judgement is entirely based on watching TV from inconsistent camera angles and a 2d projection- i.e., total nonsense, if you can tell from tv, which ball is faster than another. You cannot compare two bowlers on video and say which one is faster. That is, 100% nonsense and i can demonstrate with physics why that is nonsense. Very poor batsmanship or not, they are still thousand times the cricketer you are. I just find it funny that in the same breath you can say expert professionals with 1000x the experience than you are wrong about bowlers they themselves faced, but you give credibility to your own views from watching tv and never being within 20 meters of the said bowlers. Classic example of egotistic nonsense, where you rate your inferior experience at a far higher pedestal than people far, far more qualified than you.
  24. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    Funny how an arm-chair critic who's never been within 20 feet of either of the two, can say that, but people with 1000 times more cricketing experience than you, who've faced bowlers they talk about, are wrong. Given that you have even less idea of comparing Dillon with Gray. So why the hypocrisy/double standards ?
  25. Thommo - how quick was he?'

    I expert experts in their trade to make a rational decision, especially when it converges. Batsmen arnt fools, all of which you say, would be factored in by any credible batsman, let alone elite test-level ones. Still doesnt change the fact that when their opinions converge, weekend warrior non-experts like you or I get overruled.

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×