1

Topic: Savelyev about death

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0D37R64_KI is very interesting tells.  it will be useful for some. Though .

2

Re: Savelyev about death

3

Re: Savelyev about death

4

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K> he very often sneers. More similar on nonsense. Certainly it is possible to be engaged  and to tell the professor under primacies understood people and type sneered, but it is all the same not clear that it "forces" it, except how to reconcile to the inevitable.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

5

Re: Savelyev about death

P> it is More similar to nonsense. Certainly it is possible to be engaged  and to tell the professor under primacies understood people and type sneered, but it is all the same not clear that it "forces" it, except how to reconcile to the inevitable. And you do not carry people to primacies?

6

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K> and you do not carry people to primacies? Certainly I carry. But if he tells exceptional about people to what this allegory? Well and the main postulate "if the person will be assured, what lives not infinitely immediately goes to make something great, and here if hopes for afterlife postpones all affairs on then" from a ceiling is taken. Perfect nonsense.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

7

Re: Savelyev about death

P> Certainly I carry. But if he tells exceptional about people to what this allegory? The person is engaged in brain researches. Also underlines that the difference in general is not present. P> Well and the main postulate "if the person will be assured, what lives not infinitely immediately goes to make something great, and here if hopes for afterlife postpones all affairs on then" from a ceiling is taken. Perfect nonsense. Justify. If there is an afterlife of that to be soared?

8

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K> the person is engaged in brain researches. Also underlines that the difference in general is not present. So , those primacies who not the person, under its reasonings approach even less. K> justify. If there is an afterlife of that to be soared? And if there is no that to be soared? Note, religions do not promise in afterlife possibilities to make feats, as a whole to be selected with something among remaining, only a dolce vita, or tortures. Here Napoleon could become Napoleon, and Einstein Ejnshejnom, and there these individuals will simply take pleasure in eternal life, or eternally to suffer.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

9

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: P>> Well and the main postulate "if the person will be assured, what lives not infinitely immediately goes to make something great, and here if hopes for afterlife postpones all affairs on then" from a ceiling is taken. Perfect nonsense. K> justify. If there is an afterlife of that to be soared? At first, the church does not ask anybody to make something . She wants, that you were the slave divine and a creature shivering. Well and from whom, something is required, god can to talk over itself also as once did. Or an angel to send. So a substantiation strange. Secondly, what for to do something  if you all the same die? If paradise is, there will well live, if is not present, especially.

10

Re: Savelyev about death

P> So , those primacies who not the person, under its reasonings approach even less. Why? P> and if there is no that to be soared? P> note, religions do not promise in afterlife possibilities to make feats, as a whole to be selected with something among remaining, only a dolce vita, or tortures. Here Napoleon could become Napoleon, and Einstein Ejnshejnom, and there these individuals will simply take pleasure in eternal life, or eternally to suffer. Here he also speaks. To make though something. To become  for example.

11

Re: Savelyev about death

In my opinion delirium and porridge. To see the professor to the professor . Such people brake civilization and science development. He thinks dogmas and within the limits of the program. If he considers that in a head garbage and shurum-burum it would be desirable for it to set pair of questions. 1. How he can explain, what its chemical table dreamed Mendeleyev in the sleep if no chemical table existed? 2. In 1898 writer Morgan Robertson wrote novel Futility ("the Vanity, or ruin of the Titan") about ruin of the largest at the moment of event in the ship book  Titanium. And in 14 years happened ruin of the largest at that point in time the ship  Titanic. There still it is a lot of coincidence in the book... Let it explains?

12

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, RusDady, you wrote: RD> In my opinion delirium and porridge. To see the professor to the professor . Such people brake civilization and science development. He thinks dogmas and within the limits of the program. RD> if he considers that in a head garbage and shurum-burum it would be desirable for it to set pair of questions. Where to it to you RD> 1. How he can explain, what its chemical table dreamed Mendeleyev in the sleep if no chemical table existed? And what for to explain what was not? http://www.aif.ru/dontknows/eternal/pra … tov_vo_sne RD> 2. In 1898 writer Morgan Robertson wrote novel Futility ("the Vanity, or ruin of the Titan") about ruin of the largest at the moment of event in the ship book  Titanium. RD> and in 14 years happened ruin of the largest at that point in time the ship  Titanic. There still it is a lot of coincidence in the book... Let it explains? Coincidence? - I do not think  as it is possible to trust in such . You still  here drag. And you still can argue on competence of a Dr.Sci.Biol. You can on  esteem that he achieved. And you achieved that??

13

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K> where to it to you It that god? It the same person as well as I and you. And it is peculiar to it  and to be mistaken as well as all. Earlier too thought that the Sun rotates round the Earth and who told those differently burned down. RD>> 1. How he can explain, what its chemical table dreamed Mendeleyev in the sleep if no chemical table existed? K> and what for to explain what was not? K> http://www.aif.ru/dontknows/eternal/pra … tov_vo_sne did not understand... You address to the facts from a yellow press? RD>> 2. In 1898 writer Morgan Robertson wrote novel Futility ("the Vanity, or ruin of the Titan") about ruin of the largest at the moment of event in the ship book  Titanium. RD>> and in 14 years happened ruin of the largest at that point in time the ship  Titanic. There still it is a lot of coincidence in the book... Let it explains? K> coincidence? - I do not think  as it is possible to trust in such . You still  here drag. About what to me to you to talk, if you not  to logic and the facts? You do not trust that Titanic  sank? And you do not believe, what the book has been written? And who such ? I suspect, what the follower of sect  Blavatskaya and Roerichs? Not? K> and you still can argue on competence of a Dr.Sci.Biol. You can on  esteem that he achieved. And you achieved that?? The sir, at you ""!) Well, it is not necessary so to be upset. You  exposed it and wanted to hear judgement on it. So, give remain the muzhik and not  as the woman on a market. You want  arguing so be constructive.

14

Re: Savelyev about death

RD> It that god? It the same person as well as I and you. And it is peculiar to it  and to be mistaken as well as all. Earlier too thought that the Sun rotates round the Earth and who told those differently burned down. Apprx. on what your doubts are based? RD> did not understand... You address to the facts from a yellow press? And what facts are at you? I could still  for you if you pay. Basically the bottle of vodka suffices. RD> about what to me to you to talk, if you not  to logic and the facts? You do not trust that Titanic  sank? And you do not believe, what the book has been written? We admit has been written. And? And  you what is the time was under construction? In my opinion quite logical question, and that if suddenly this healthy silly woman sinks. From here idea of the book. Besides it is not eliminated that these facts then for ears attracted. As with . RD> and who such ? I suspect, what the follower of sect  Blavatskaya and Roerichs? Not? Yes basically suitable enough oculist. But was fond of green little men,  and other , started the globe to measure by compasses and appropriate books to write. By the way yes, from  he went. In its books of the link to it that by the way too amused, as well as you. Well there for a heap  fields, an information field etc. and .. But nevertheless the surgeon it talented. Simply something . RD> the Sir, at you ""!) yes I  as herd of boas. It was simply .

15

Re: Savelyev about death

K> is very interesting tells. Correctly I understood that programmers will live till 100 years and to be with a potentiality till 75 years?

16

Re: Savelyev about death

K> and what facts are at you? I could still  for you if you pay. Basically the bottle of vodka suffices. K> yes I  as herd of boas. It was simply . You were drunk, I can argue

17

Re: Savelyev about death

K> is very interesting tells. Again it  and the populist here brought. The brain atheism hinders the world to see multifaced and disconnects logic.

18

Re: Savelyev about death

IM> you were drunk, I can argue on a vodka bottle

19

Re: Savelyev about death

N> Again it  and the populist here brought. It has a doctor's level and enough big row of achievements in scientific operation. You can brag of the same? By the way that bad in populism? Than Hoking for example is bad? N> the brain Atheism hinders the world to see multifaced and disconnects logic. But Orthodoxy allows. Understand, you will die. In what you there would not trust. With this fact too you will argue?

20

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, alzt, you wrote: A> Secondly, what for to do something  if you all the same die? If paradise is, there will well live, if is not present, especially. You and other in this branch are simple . I do not heat for Savelyev, but I specify that video you looked "on a diagonal" At it quite clearly is specified, for what religion. It is a question of aggression of primacies and that there was no excessive struggle for domination, invented religions. Either reconsider video or climb on a palm tree

21

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, Kaifa, you wrote: K> is very interesting tells. And now we listen about  . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLGt1SxDKEY&t=339

22

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, turbocode, you wrote: K>> is very interesting tells. T> correctly I understood that programmers will live till 100 years and to be with a potentiality till 75 years? To age of 75 years or throughout 75 years?

23

Re: Savelyev about death

K>>> is very interesting tells. T>> correctly I understood that programmers will live till 100 years and to be with a potentiality till 75 years? A> to age of 75 years or throughout 75 years? He spoke about age.

24

Re: Savelyev about death

Hello, sharpman, you wrote: A>> Secondly, what for to do something  if you all the same die? If paradise is, there will well live, if is not present, especially. S> you and other in this branch are simple . I do not heat for Savelyev, but I specify that video you looked "on a diagonal" I answered a specific post, videos I did not look at all and there is no desire.