Christians are arrogant as ? .
Options
Comments
-
Roots Oceanic wrote: »
You are misunderstanding. I have never made the claim that our universe has no beginning. I have clearly stated that nature has no beginning. Our current universe had a beginning but nature in all of its totality does not have a beginning. On another note, buddhism is not like any other spirituality; if prior understanding is proven wrong, we are encouraged to discard it. But nature in its totality has not been proven to have a beginning.Roots Oceanic wrote: »time is a human concept that was created as an important part of the existence. what you are saying is that there had to be time before there was space which is wrong. even science agree with me here it's called the space-time. space and time are linked no space no time no time no space.
Space time refers to the 3 dimensions of an object existing in space plus time which is movement or a sequence of actual events. Spacetime has nothing important to add to your argument. If you want to argue that there was no time b4 our universe, go ahead but you will have to drop gods omnipotence since he would be limited without creation and restrained by the absense of time
There was no time before space, when ? made space he made time, i am not going to argue that there was no time before this universe with you anymore because science has already proven me right. You are a ? buddist so you have to believe in the universe being an endless cycle even if you have been proven scientifically wrong.
I thought you were a western styled atheist, but no you are just a biased member of another religion
Let me make things simpler for you so that maybe you will understand what I mean by making a difference between nature and the universe.
1. The universe is finite. It has a beginning.
2. Either the universe has a natural cause, a supernatural cause, or it is uncaused.
3. My own common sense by observation of the natural world tells me that everything has a cause. So I do not believe the universe came about without a cause.
4. I do not believe in superstition or the supernatural so I do not believe the cause of the universe is of the supernatural variety.
5. Logically, this only leaves one option: the universe has a natural cause; its cause is natural, hence, the cause of the universe exists in nature.
6. Therefore, nature goes on indefinitely as the supernatural does not exist and nothing exists without a cause.Thinking is a succession of mental event for humans and not for ? . ? is not linear. there is no simple this then that.
@zombie
1. You have yet to tell how thought process without being an actual sequence of mental events is possible. How does that happen?
2. How do you know the process of thought for ? without being ? himself?? Is this arrogance, mere speculation, or does the Bible explain ? 's thought processes?
1. no one can really answer that question for you because like i said at the start of our discussion no man or anything in creation can describe ? (let alone his mind when we can't even decribe our own mind) because we have no frame of reference. but i would guess that ? 's thoughts would be out of sequence or in sequence as he pleases. i would also guess that every thought or possible thought he thought simultainously. and yes ? is omnipotent so he can do that.
2. see question 1 the bible does not explain ? 's thought process in the manner you are looking for.
there is no difference between nature and the universe all nature is the universe, science has already proven that nature all that is had a start. this start began space and time and all the rules that went along with it. science has proven that nature the universe what ever you want to call it does not go on indefinely learn to deal with it. science says the universe started from a singularity we don't under stand what a singularity is. There is no eternally recurring universe. look either the universe has some kind of supernatural cause(? ) or in someway we have not figured out yet it was uncaused. but natural cause has been ruled the ? out.
The problem of relaying on your own observation is that you cannot be sure that it is correct. For all we know this is a huge computer game or dream, everything you can observe is the universe so you cannot divide nature from the universe. ? is not trapped by his creation. If you are a buddist you believe in the supernatural, you just don't want a deity so now you have rebelled and gone over to buddism. if you were a real atheist then i could respect you more but after learning that you are a buddist now i see you are just biased. -
If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
-
Buddhism does not require belief in the supernatural, especially theravada. Maybe you should research things before you speak about them
-
If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
How many times do i have to explain to you the quantum mechanics is mostly theory and that the most reliable and observable theory states that the universe started about 13.5 billion years ago. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang.
You brought ? 's process of thought into the discussion AS A way to prove that time always existed even though science has proven you wrong. Time did not exist before the big bang and ? is not limited by anything. Your logic makes no sense THE ACT OF ? CREATING TIME FOR US WAS AN EXAMPLE OF ? USING HIS FREEWILL. ? chose to make time he did not have to. ? does not need us to define him we need him to define us.
TIME is the passage of movement ? does not need to move to do anything. YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE YOU STILL REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BEING OMNIPOTENT MEANS.
LOOK at the end of the day science has not disproved my ? but it has disproved your eternal universe your hope in quantum theory is shallow because even the people who study it know it's mostly just speculation and by the way there are certain interpretataion of quantum theory that would lead one to believe their is a ? . -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Buddhism does not require belief in the supernatural, especially theravada. Maybe you should research things before you speak about them
buddhism does require belief in the supernatural if you believe in nirvana, karma or that you can somehow be magically enlightened by meditation then you believe in the supernatural if you believe in the soul then you believe in the supernatural. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Buddhism does not require belief in the supernatural, especially theravada. Maybe you should research things before you speak about them
buddhism does require belief in the supernatural if you believe in nirvana, karma or that you can somehow be magically enlightened by meditation then you believe in the supernatural if you believe in the soul then you believe in the supernatural.
1. the Buddha did not teach a soul theory
2. Meditation is not supernatural; it is an exercise in mental discipline
3. Nirvana is the release from craving and desire, sense of self and overcoming of suffering. Neither of these is supernatural.
4. Karma is volitional action. The law of karma is cause and effect; "good" actions create "good" effects, "bad" creates "bad". This is not supernatural.
Buddhism is not about beliefs but action. It is about the 4 truths which is the understanding of suffering and the alleviation of suffering, as well as the eightfold path which is mental and moral discipline. None of this is a supernatural belief system. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
How many times do i have to explain to you the quantum mechanics is mostly theory and that the most reliable and observable theory states that the universe started about 13.5 billion years ago.
Science does not end with the big bang theory. Quantum physics is alive and well. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
How many times do i have to explain to you the quantum mechanics is mostly theory and that the most reliable and observable theory states that the universe started about 13.5 billion years ago.
Science does not end with the big bang theory. Quantum physics is alive and well.
And some people still think the earth is hollow both are theories with little proof compared to others, and by the way which quantum theory are you talking about. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang.
You brought ? 's process of thought into the discussion AS A way to prove that time always existed even though science has proven you wrong. Time did not exist before the big bang and ? is not limited by anything. Your logic makes no sense THE ACT OF ? CREATING TIME FOR US WAS AN EXAMPLE OF ? USING HIS FREEWILL. ? chose to make time he did not have to. ? does not need us to define him we need him to define us.
TIME is the passage of movement ? does not need to move to do anything. YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE YOU STILL REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BEING OMNIPOTENT MEANS.
LOOK at the end of the day science has not disproved my ? but it has disproved your eternal universe your hope in quantum theory is shallow because even the people who study it know it's mostly just speculation and by the way there are certain interpretataion of quantum theory that would lead one to believe their is a ? .
I brought ? 's thought process into the discussion to show you that you believe in time before creation.
Without time, there is no action, mental or physical, point blank.
I do not believe the universe is eternal x100 -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
How many times do i have to explain to you the quantum mechanics is mostly theory and that the most reliable and observable theory states that the universe started about 13.5 billion years ago.
Science does not end with the big bang theory. Quantum physics is alive and well.
And some people still think the earth is hollow both are theories with little proof compared to others, and by the way which quantum theory are you talking about.
I'm talking about quantum physics; quantum mechanics.. I already explained a small bit of it to you earlier and you ignored it. I assume you know nothing about it other than you believe it's pure speculation. But you don't know how or why.
Quantum mechanics (QM – also known as quantum physics, or quantum theory) is a branch of physics dealing with physical phenomena at microscopic scales, where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. Quantum mechanics departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. Quantum mechanics provides a mathematical description of much of the dual particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter.
In advanced topics of quantum mechanics, some of these behaviors are macroscopic and only emerge at extreme (i.e., very low or very high) energies or temperatures. The name quantum mechanics derives from the observation that some physical quantities can change only in discrete amounts (Latin quanta), and not in a continuous (cf. analog) way. For example, the angular momentum of an electron bound to an atom or molecule is quantized.[1] In the context of quantum mechanics, the wave–particle duality of energy and matter and the uncertainty principle provide a unified view of the behavior of photons, electrons, and other atomic-scale objects.
The mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics are abstract. A mathematical function called the wavefunction provides information about the probability amplitude of position, momentum, and other physical properties of a particle. Mathematical manipulations of the wavefunction usually involve the bra-ket notation, which requires an understanding of complex numbers and linear functionals. The wavefunction treats the object as a quantum harmonic oscillator, and the mathematics is akin to that describing acoustic resonance. Many of the results of quantum mechanics are not easily visualized in terms of classical mechanics—for instance, the ground state in a quantum mechanical model is a non-zero energy state that is the lowest permitted energy state of a system, as opposed to a more "traditional" system that is thought of as simply being at rest, with zero kinetic energy. Instead of a traditional static, unchanging zero state, quantum mechanics allows for far more dynamic, chaotic possibilities, according to John Wheeler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »Buddhism does not require belief in the supernatural, especially theravada. Maybe you should research things before you speak about them
buddhism does require belief in the supernatural if you believe in nirvana, karma or that you can somehow be magically enlightened by meditation then you believe in the supernatural if you believe in the soul then you believe in the supernatural.
1. the Buddha did not teach a soul theory
2. Meditation is not supernatural; it is an exercise in mental discipline
3. Nirvana is the release from craving and desire, sense of self and overcoming of suffering. Neither of these is supernatural.
4. Karma is volitional action. The law of karma is cause and effect; "good" actions create "good" effects, "bad" creates "bad". This is not supernatural.
Buddhism is not about beliefs but action. It is about the 4 truths which is the understanding of suffering and the alleviation of suffering, as well as the eightfold path which is mental and moral discipline. None of this is a supernatural belief system.
MAYBE IN YOUR SECT OF BUDDHISM.
-
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang.
You brought ? 's process of thought into the discussion AS A way to prove that time always existed even though science has proven you wrong. Time did not exist before the big bang and ? is not limited by anything. Your logic makes no sense THE ACT OF ? CREATING TIME FOR US WAS AN EXAMPLE OF ? USING HIS FREEWILL. ? chose to make time he did not have to. ? does not need us to define him we need him to define us.
TIME is the passage of movement ? does not need to move to do anything. YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE YOU STILL REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BEING OMNIPOTENT MEANS.
LOOK at the end of the day science has not disproved my ? but it has disproved your eternal universe your hope in quantum theory is shallow because even the people who study it know it's mostly just speculation and by the way there are certain interpretataion of quantum theory that would lead one to believe their is a ? .
I brought ? 's thought process into the discussion to show you that you believe in time before creation.
Without time, there is no action, mental or physical, point blank.
I do not believe the universe is eternal x100
I don't believe in time before creation time itself is a creation of ? like i said ? does not require time but works in it and outside of it and is beyond it. you do believe that the universe is eternal you have said so if you believe in eternal causes you believe the universe is eternal it is the same thing. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If a natural cause had been ruled out, quantum mechanics wouldn't exist.
How many times do i have to explain to you the quantum mechanics is mostly theory and that the most reliable and observable theory states that the universe started about 13.5 billion years ago.
Science does not end with the big bang theory. Quantum physics is alive and well.
And some people still think the earth is hollow both are theories with little proof compared to others, and by the way which quantum theory are you talking about.
I'm talking about quantum physics; quantum mechanics.. I already explained a small bit of it to you earlier and you ignored it. I assume you know nothing about it other than you believe it's pure speculation. But you don't know how or why.
Quantum mechanics (QM – also known as quantum physics, or quantum theory) is a branch of physics dealing with physical phenomena at microscopic scales, where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. Quantum mechanics departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. Quantum mechanics provides a mathematical description of much of the dual particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter.
In advanced topics of quantum mechanics, some of these behaviors are macroscopic and only emerge at extreme (i.e., very low or very high) energies or temperatures. The name quantum mechanics derives from the observation that some physical quantities can change only in discrete amounts (Latin quanta), and not in a continuous (cf. analog) way. For example, the angular momentum of an electron bound to an atom or molecule is quantized.[1] In the context of quantum mechanics, the wave–particle duality of energy and matter and the uncertainty principle provide a unified view of the behavior of photons, electrons, and other atomic-scale objects.
The mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics are abstract. A mathematical function called the wavefunction provides information about the probability amplitude of position, momentum, and other physical properties of a particle. Mathematical manipulations of the wavefunction usually involve the bra-ket notation, which requires an understanding of complex numbers and linear functionals. The wavefunction treats the object as a quantum harmonic oscillator, and the mathematics is akin to that describing acoustic resonance. Many of the results of quantum mechanics are not easily visualized in terms of classical mechanics—for instance, the ground state in a quantum mechanical model is a non-zero energy state that is the lowest permitted energy state of a system, as opposed to a more "traditional" system that is thought of as simply being at rest, with zero kinetic energy. Instead of a traditional static, unchanging zero state, quantum mechanics allows for far more dynamic, chaotic possibilities, according to John Wheeler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
Look you do not have to explain quantum mechanics to me i already know what it is and i know that it is not strong enough to make your argument because there are far to many divergent interpretations of it. -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
You are not teaching me anything,ok. go back a few pages i was the one who brought up quantum theory in the first place. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »Buddhism does not require belief in the supernatural, especially theravada. Maybe you should research things before you speak about them
buddhism does require belief in the supernatural if you believe in nirvana, karma or that you can somehow be magically enlightened by meditation then you believe in the supernatural if you believe in the soul then you believe in the supernatural.
1. the Buddha did not teach a soul theory
2. Meditation is not supernatural; it is an exercise in mental discipline
3. Nirvana is the release from craving and desire, sense of self and overcoming of suffering. Neither of these is supernatural.
4. Karma is volitional action. The law of karma is cause and effect; "good" actions create "good" effects, "bad" creates "bad". This is not supernatural.
Buddhism is not about beliefs but action. It is about the 4 truths which is the understanding of suffering and the alleviation of suffering, as well as the eightfold path which is mental and moral discipline. None of this is a supernatural belief system.
MAYBE IN YOUR SECT OF BUDDHISM.
Yeah, I already told you. Its called Theravada, which is the oldest sect and closest to the historical teachings of buddha. Most supernatural and metaphysical ? was added from preexisting philosophies later and the hindu religion from which ppl confuse concepts with Buddhism, like karma. In hinduism, i.e., karma dealing with reincarnation is transmigration of the soul and the karma of past life leaves imprints on the soul but in Buddhism, there is no soul to reincarnate so karma takes on a different meaning. -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
You are not teaching me anything,ok. go back a few pages i was the one who brought up quantum theory in the first place.
You brought it up to claim that its ? but you did not explain the theories or why you believe them to be b.s.
@zombie
Explain to my why the universe could not begin to exist as a result of a quantum vacuum fluctuation? -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang.
You brought ? 's process of thought into the discussion AS A way to prove that time always existed even though science has proven you wrong. Time did not exist before the big bang and ? is not limited by anything. Your logic makes no sense THE ACT OF ? CREATING TIME FOR US WAS AN EXAMPLE OF ? USING HIS FREEWILL. ? chose to make time he did not have to. ? does not need us to define him we need him to define us.
TIME is the passage of movement ? does not need to move to do anything. YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE YOU STILL REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BEING OMNIPOTENT MEANS.
LOOK at the end of the day science has not disproved my ? but it has disproved your eternal universe your hope in quantum theory is shallow because even the people who study it know it's mostly just speculation and by the way there are certain interpretataion of quantum theory that would lead one to believe their is a ? .
I brought ? 's thought process into the discussion to show you that you believe in time before creation.
Without time, there is no action, mental or physical, point blank.
I do not believe the universe is eternal x100
I don't believe in time before creation time itself is a creation of ? like i said ? does not require time but works in it and outside of it and is beyond it. you do believe that the universe is eternal you have said so if you believe in eternal causes you believe the universe is eternal it is the same thing.
How does ? exist beyond time? Maybe OUR time but then he would have a life in his own time, which nontheless is still time existing before creation of the universe. It's not possible for him to exist outside time:
1. If ? created the universe, he caused it to exist. The universe's existence is the effect. A cause precedes its effect in time.
2. If ? exists outside time, he cannot have thoughts in the sense of a succession of mental events, therefore at most, he would be able to have one thought only, and it wouldn't even be considered a thought to begin with seeing as no will or intention would be able to precede it.. because he's outside time.
I think our present universe had a beginning and I think it had a natural cause. -
@zombie
Matter is built on flaky foundations. Physicists have now confirmed that the apparently substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.
...
The Higgs field is also thought to make a small contribution, giving mass to individual quarks as well as to electrons and some other particles. The Higgs field creates mass out of the quantum vacuum too, in the form of virtual Higgs bosons. So if the LHC confirms that the Higgs exists, it will mean all reality is virtual.
It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html
In July, physicists were ecstatic in announcing preliminary results pointing to the discovery of the long-sought Higgs boson particle.
http://phys.org/news/2012-09-physicist-significance-higgs-boson-discovery.html -
@Roots Oceanic
whats your thoughts on Information Age (Dead Prez)?
how did you change your name? thx in advance -
The beat selection is weak compared to Let's Get Free and RBG. It's a lot of ? that sounds sort of the same but the rhymes are still on point.
@thatdamnjay changed it in G&S. It's a thread, Yo Name Is Yo Name. Just ask him to change it to whatever you wanna change it to. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »Roots Oceanic wrote: »If you cannot describe gods mind, why are you attempting to discuss his process of thought? In whatever way he thinks or acts, if he is outside time, he had to create time first before he could obtain free will, therefore he is limited without creation thus creation itself really has no purpose other than to allow ? to act freely. I already went over that.
For your bible stories and classical theism to work as written, you have to accept that time existed b4 the big bang.
You brought ? 's process of thought into the discussion AS A way to prove that time always existed even though science has proven you wrong. Time did not exist before the big bang and ? is not limited by anything. Your logic makes no sense THE ACT OF ? CREATING TIME FOR US WAS AN EXAMPLE OF ? USING HIS FREEWILL. ? chose to make time he did not have to. ? does not need us to define him we need him to define us.
TIME is the passage of movement ? does not need to move to do anything. YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE YOU STILL REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BEING OMNIPOTENT MEANS.
LOOK at the end of the day science has not disproved my ? but it has disproved your eternal universe your hope in quantum theory is shallow because even the people who study it know it's mostly just speculation and by the way there are certain interpretataion of quantum theory that would lead one to believe their is a ? .
I brought ? 's thought process into the discussion to show you that you believe in time before creation.
Without time, there is no action, mental or physical, point blank.
I do not believe the universe is eternal x100
I don't believe in time before creation time itself is a creation of ? like i said ? does not require time but works in it and outside of it and is beyond it. you do believe that the universe is eternal you have said so if you believe in eternal causes you believe the universe is eternal it is the same thing.
How does ? exist beyond time? Maybe OUR time but then he would have a life in his own time, which nontheless is still time existing before creation of the universe. It's not possible for him to exist outside time:
1. If ? created the universe, he caused it to exist. The universe's existence is the effect. A cause precedes its effect in time.
2. If ? exists outside time, he cannot have thoughts in the sense of a succession of mental events, therefore at most, he would be able to have one thought only, and it wouldn't even be considered a thought to begin with seeing as no will or intention would be able to precede it.. because he's outside time.
I think our present universe had a beginning and I think it had a natural cause.
1.? is not limited by any kind of time time is the passage of things , movement in sequence is time. but ? does not need to move. he does not need to think he just does and has done. besides ? has no cause nothing preceded him. he was and is.
2. You keep asking the same question and i keep answering them you are not paying attention , i already told you ? 's thoughts if you can call them that are are not locked in sequence. HE CAN HAVE TRILLIONS OF THOUGHTS AT THE SAME TIME. and these only came into what we would call sequence after creation of time for us. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »@zombie
Matter is built on flaky foundations. Physicists have now confirmed that the apparently substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.
...
The Higgs field is also thought to make a small contribution, giving mass to individual quarks as well as to electrons and some other particles. The Higgs field creates mass out of the quantum vacuum too, in the form of virtual Higgs bosons. So if the LHC confirms that the Higgs exists, it will mean all reality is virtual.
It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html
In July, physicists were ecstatic in announcing preliminary results pointing to the discovery of the long-sought Higgs boson particle.
http://phys.org/news/2012-09-physicist-significance-higgs-boson-discovery.html
These articles do not help your argument none of them relate to the creation of the universe. They only describe some of it's rules AND IT SOUNDS A LOT LIKE THIS.
GENESIS : 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of ? was hovering over the waters. -
Roots Oceanic wrote: »The beat selection is weak compared to Let's Get Free and RBG. It's a lot of ? that sounds sort of the same but the rhymes are still on point.
@thatdamnjay changed it in G&S. It's a thread, Yo Name Is Yo Name. Just ask him to change it to whatever you wanna change it to.
i agree about the beats. they are speaking on right knowledge so it gets spins from me.
and thanks, i appreciate it
