yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Yeah right, there was Ram, talking monkeys, evil demons, spaceships, arrows which could split the Earth open, flying monkeys who could wreck entire countries by lighting them on fire etc. etc. 3000 odd years back. Not only was all that and more there, we also know that Ram was born just where the disputed structure is because guess what we found a birth certificate from the Hospital of Jesus and Mary which used to exist there. Or was that anachronistic? Don't write such garbage and then close the thread. If religious discussions aren't allowed, that's fine. For a mod to spew such garbage against religions and then close the thread is moronic. I suggest you delete your post or reopen the thread and face the music.
Jadoo Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Have already commented about this on the "Mosque near ground zero" thread.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 ^ I see that, this is not to discuss the stupid post, more to do with closing of a thread right after putting up a stupid post. I understand we are supposed to PM mods, so feel free to delete this thread and consider this a PM.
Gunner_Mania Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 ^ In the same thread the Outsider replied that he didnt close it, so I guess it is for whichever mod that close it to respond.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 ^It doesn't matter which person did it. One guy posts a post and another closes it right after is same as the same guy closing it. If it is not Mr Outsider, it must be his side kick hanging on to his dhoti.
The Outsider Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 I did not close that thread and someone else closing it is not the same as me closing it. But, I'll delete that post of mine since that thread was locked and people cannot reply to it. Hope that appeases the sensitivities of people.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 I did not close that thread and someone else closing it is not the same as me closing it. But, I'll delete that post of mine since that thread was locked and people cannot reply to it. Hope that appeases the sensitivities of people. We can agree to disagree, to me it is essentially the same. TIA for deleting the post!
The Outsider Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 We can agree to disagree, to me it is essentially the same. TIA for deleting the post! No it's not. Because as a clear rule I don't moderate or interfere in the moderation of threads I am actively participating in. In fact the two things you are alleging to be the same could not be any more different.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 No it's not. Because as a clear rule I don't moderate or interfere in the moderation of threads I am actively participating in. In fact the two things you are alleging to be the same could not be any more different. Well your fellow mod should have had the common sense to not close the thread right after your post. The fact that he did it implies that he wanted that to be the final say in the matter effectively denying people a chance to respond to that post. So end result is the same despite your good intentions.
The Outsider Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Well your fellow mod should have had the common sense to not close the thread right after your post. The fact that he did it implies that he wanted that to be the final say in the matter effectively denying people a chance to respond to that post. So end result is the same despite your good intentions. These kind of posts belong across the border where there is a grand conspiracy theory behind every action. I am sorry to have wasted your time. People with victim mentalities can't be reasoned with.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 These kind of posts belong across the border where there is a grand conspiracy theory behind every action. I am sorry to have wasted your time. People with victim mentalities can't be reasoned with. There is no grand conspiracy here, just some plain stupidity which is plenty on this side of the border as well.
punjabi_khota Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Outsider was responding to the ****er who claimed "there is consensus among all of us that Ram existed" That is one of the most outrageously retarded claim I have ever seen on this board. :dontknow:
seedhi Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Outsider was responding to the ****er who claimed "there is consensus among all of us that Ram existed" That is one of the most outrageously retarded claim I have ever seen on this board. :dontknow:Well, he could have replied with a simple "No", instead of crapping his pants as if someone personally abused him.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 Outsider was responding to the ****er who claimed "there is consensus among all of us that Ram existed" That is one of the most outrageously retarded claim I have ever seen on this board. :dontknow: Yes, as retarded as claiming that there is consensus that Jesus existed or Guru Nanak existed or Krishna existed or Muhammad existed. I guess no one existed, or for that matter may be even we all also don't exist except inside a Matrix! Anyways, this thread is not about that post, more about closing a thread right after that post.
kumble_rocks Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Yes, as retarded as claiming that there is consensus that Jesus existed or Guru Nanak existed or Krishna existed or Muhammad existed. I guess no one existed, or for that matter may be even we all also don't exist except inside a Matrix! Anyways, this thread is not about that post, more about closing a thread right after that post. I don't think anybody can dispute on the existance of Muhammed or Guru Nanak or Jesus . It's a different matter whether they are god's messengers. That can be disputed. No offense ,but in the case Rama or Krishna , their is a school of thought that they were merely mythological characters and that they never existed.
yoda Posted September 9, 2010 Author Posted September 9, 2010 I don't think anybody can dispute on the existance of Muhammed or Guru Nanak or Jesus . It's a different matter whether they are god's messengers. That can be disputed. No offense ' date='but in the case Rama or Krishna , their is a school of thought that they were merely mythological characters and that they never existed.[/quote'] Sure, if you say so. :bow:
King Tendulkar Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 I don't think anybody can dispute on the existance of Muhammed or Guru Nanak or Jesus . It's a different matter whether they are god's messengers. That can be disputed. No offense ' date=but in the case Rama or Krishna , their is a school of thought that they were merely mythological characters and that they never existed. Some say Jesus did not exist, many say that. Also what evidence mohammed existed, can you prove it, can be easily challenged that he existed if following your logoc with ram and krishna. Many believe Shakespere did not exist and everyting was wriiten by unkown person.
Manny_Pacquiao Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 I don't think anybody can dispute on the existance of Muhammed or Guru Nanak or Jesus .. really? why not?
kumble_rocks Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 Some say Jesus did not exist, many say that. Also what evidence mohammed existed, can you prove it, can be easily challenged that he existed if following your logoc with ram and krishna. Many believe Shakespere did not exist and everyting was wriiten by unkown person. No saar, I cannot prove whether Mohammed existed. I will leave it to historians, archealogists and other scholars who have clearly traced our history to Indus valley civilizatiions. But , in the same token , I don't see anything wrong in the belief that Ram /Krishna existed. But , I contend that it may be easier for historians to prove the existance of Jesus versus Rama/Krishna.
punjabi_khota Posted September 9, 2010 Posted September 9, 2010 No saar' date=' I cannot prove whether Mohammed existed. I will leave it to historians, archealogists and other scholars who have clearly traced our history to Indus valley civilizatiions. But , in the same token , I don't see anything wrong in the belief that Ram /Krishna existed.[b'] But , I contend that it may be easier for historians to prove the existance of Jesus versus Rama/Krishna. Has any historian proved the existence of ram/krishna ? :nervous:
Recommended Posts