Sections

Report – Taiwanese youth dies after gaming marathon

Wednesday, 18th July 2012 01:22 GMT By Brenna Hillier

An 18 year old has died after a marathon gaming session, according to a report in the Taiwanese United Daily News, via AAP. The young man apparently booked a private room at an Internet cafe, fired up Diablo III, and spent 40 hours sitting almost perfectly still. An attendant found him unconscious and called an ambulance, but he was pronounced dead on arrival; autopsy is pending but doctors speculate cardiovascular issues related to not moving for nearly two days. Friends, do you need reminding that there is not a single activity you should indulge in for 40 hours straight? Not one.

Thanks, Gamespot. [image]

Breaking news

81 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. ejams

    Wuuuut. I’ve heard of marathons like this before, but they usually entail small breaks for at least the bathroom or just a stretch and a period to rest your eyes. Sitting perfectly still for that long?? Wow.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. LuLshuck

    Jesus christ

    #2 2 years ago
  3. HauntaVirus

    @2 You forgot to capitalize Christ, reason I’m trolling is because it’s the name of an actual person. Thererfore, first and last name should be capitalized ;) No prob buddy, you’re welcome.

    Oh ya, back to the article…

    #3 2 years ago
  4. GrimRita

    He wont be doing that again in a hurry!

    #4 2 years ago
  5. NocturnalB

    D.B.G. – Death By Gaming.

    Damn that’s harsh.

    D.B.M.G. if you want to be super technical. (marathon)

    #5 2 years ago
  6. stretch215

    The lack of movement most likely caused the blood in his lower extremities to clot. Upon standing, the clot would have released, ending up in his heart and killing him. Damn, what a shame.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. ManuOtaku

    #6 agree, the clot could travel to the lungs, heart or brain and cause an stroke, i do suffer from some clots in my legs veins, and it is a pretty serious issue for those who sit for long periods of time, my blood have the tendence to create clots on ciclical basis,my red blood cells are bigger compare to normal ones and had the tendence on conglomerate and make clots easily, i have to constantly take medications and use special socks(pressured ones).

    #7 2 years ago
  8. OrbitMonkey

    Well it’s hardly a loss to the gene pool. Darwinism at work.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. KingAnon

    @ 3

    You keep telling yourself imaginary characters are actual people.

    Still believe in the Easter Bunny too I bet, hide the eggs Jebus is coming!! religion is stupid & so are the morons that believe in it.

    As for the dude that died, he lacked common sense.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. OrbitMonkey

    ^ Religion is a perfectly acceptable life philosophy, it’s the morons who use it as a tool to Lord it over others, that fuck it up.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. ManuOtaku

    #9 “religion is stupid & so are the morons that believe in it”
    Like orbit brigthly put it Religion is an acceptable philosophy of seeing things, just like science, the thing is that religion always see the hand of God on everything, while science, only goes to God when it can´t find the answers to certain things, like the 21 grams all humans lost when they die, or what did spark the big bam, or better yet were the elements that were involve on the big bam came from, therefore religion is not stupid or the people that believe in it are morons, that is a pretty narrow view of things IMHO.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. The_Red

    @11

    Um, no. Science never goes to god, whether it can or can’t find the answers. Even for something like 21 grams there are many theories and even without one, most scientists will never go that way. When you don’t have answer for something, you don’t go to some unseen imaginary character. You try harder to find the answer within realm of reason and logic.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. ManuOtaku

    #12 I saw many scientists, saying there has to be a creator or a higher designer for things they cannot find the proper answer,thats why i say science goes to God, when they dont have the proper answers, and most of the time they dont want to talk about a beginning of things, because that involve a creator, it might be in a sarcastic tone, granted, but they are admiting the possibilty, as a science evaluetes multiples possibilities and science in a way they are trying to find if theres is a creator or not, even if they dont see it that way or even if they dont want to admit it.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. Gheritt White

    Um… you do know that the human *doesn’t* actually lose 21 grams on death? That’s just an urban legend.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. ManuOtaku

    #14 i was talking more about the experiments of Duncan MacDougall in 1907, than the film or urban legend.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. G1GAHURTZ

    “You keep telling yourself imaginary characters are actual people”

    Statements like this just go to prove the child like naIvety and ignorance of some people when it comes to the real world.

    There is an overwhelming amount of documented evidence to prove the existence of Jesus. Whether you believe in his message or not, or the details of his life is another matter entirely.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. OrbitMonkey

    Science and Religion are just schools of thought trying to find the same answers. It’s no surprise they cross paths.

    Lemaitre was a Belgian priest who just so happened to come up with the Big Bang theory.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. YoungZer0

    Yeah, lets take a topic that has nothing to do with Jesus Christ and Religion and make it about that!

    And people wonder why most people dislike Religious folks?

    Take your bullshit somewhere else.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. The_Red

    @13
    I don’t know what scientists are you are talking about. Don’t have the link at the moment but according to a report from 2008 (or 09 don’t remember exactly), more than 80 percent of the academics in US are atheists who don’t don’t believe in the need for higher power one bit. That’s just the US, a rather religious country. In most European countries, even non academics have started to realize that there is no need for such higher power. Pretty much every modern scientist I’ve checked doesn’t believe that one bit (The need for god or creator).

    Heck, even stuff like “God particle” that seem Atheist-ishare actually made by tabloids and most of scientific community hates. Why? Because the term “god” is a myth to them. I respect believes of those that have faith in god but that doesn’t mean they can say science needs or uses god because that’s actually the opposite of what logical and scientific thinking means.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. G1GAHURTZ

    @18:

    “most people”?

    You should think again… Actually, you atheists are in a tiny minority. Fact is, the vast majority of people alive today, and throughout history are “religious”.

    So if you want to use numbers as any sort of reference point, you’re fighting a losing battle.

    #20 2 years ago
  21. DrDamn

    Bigger picture – if he’s real or a character you should still capitalise his name :).

    #21 2 years ago
  22. G1GAHURTZ

    ^ This is indeed one of the most basic rules of the language…

    #22 2 years ago
  23. ManuOtaku

    #19 “I respect believes of those that have faith in god but that doesn’t mean they can say science needs or uses god because that’s actually the opposite of what logical and scientific thinking mean”

    In a way science tries to prove there is no creator or not a God, or maybe they will find there is one, like i said many scientists like Einstein and the likes dont want to talk about a beginning because that will imply a creator, because science cannot explain a beginning without a creator right now, when they can explain a beginning they will be proving there is a not a God, and in the opposite site of the expectrum, if they cannot decirn a beginning, well there will say in an ironic way is problably a God, but with that irony they are establishing a possibility, therefore the logical and thinking man, like you put it, are trying in a way to deny or accept the fact there is a God, saying otherwise is lying oneself or themselves, because science does not believe in God, but their search is to rule out there is a God, or to prove there is a God, in a very inderect way, but in the end God rules their logical and thinking time, at least when trying to explain the beggining of things, and time.

    I dont want to search all the scientists that when they are trying to explain something like the beginning of the Big Bang, or something like where the elements that were involve in the Big Bang did come from?, or what did spark the bing bang?, allude , maybe in a sarcastic tone, to God, but they are a few of them, belive me, iam not making this up.

    p.s i was born a Catholic, but iam not a Religious person, i dont go to Church, etc,etc, but i do think there is a creator, whatever you want to call it, with all his/her/its many names, because at the moment there is not a scientific theory that proves otherwise, i mean that the creator does not exist, and also because there is a lot of inconsistencies in a lot of theories, which might imply the possibility of a creator, and the more sciencie discovers the less the know about the beggining, dark matter, dark force, etc, etc.

    #23 2 years ago
  24. YoungZer0

    @20: Smart people have always been in the minority. I’m agnostic btw.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. G1GAHURTZ

    Actually, it’s more to do with wealth than intelligance.

    The more wealth people amass, the more self sufficient they feel, and the stronger the desire to reject accountability for enjoying their wealth.

    Besides, believing that the multitude who disagree with you are low in intelligence is a sign of arrogance.

    #25 2 years ago
  26. YoungZer0

    @25: Look, if you call yourself an intelligent human being and yet believe in an old guy living on a cloud, and you talk with Jesus at night, or you believe that we’re alien souls or whatever, i think it’s fair to say that you’re either insane or stupid.

    Religion is for people who are afraid of dying. Who are unable to develop proper morals and need the fear for hell to actually not kill someone.

    And it has nothing to do with wealth. If you expect me to pull some numbers, why don’t you provide some, that support your ‘theory’.

    #26 2 years ago
  27. Da Man

    ^You really are an idiot. Fitting name, that.

    Truly anything can be art for people like those.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. ManuOtaku

    #26 “Religion is for people who are afraid of dying. Who are unable to develop proper morals and need the fear for hell to actually not kill someone”

    The existence of Jesus Christ proves that what you think is quite the opposite, he wanst afraid of dying for his believes in God, and he died an horrible death, he could give up, but he didnt, he wanst afraid of dying, and for all that, also the cristians that died afterwards for believing in him and God,they were hunted like animals during the Roman Empire, they could just easily forgot about God if they were so affraid of dying, but no they choose to die.

    “fear for hell to actually not kill someone”

    I think the message is more of love the other human beings as much as you love yourself, therefore feel empathy for the other person, than fear of hell, because they do also believe, religous people, that in the moment of your death you can ask for forgiveness, all your sins are erase, so no harm done, no reason to fear Hell in the eyes of true religous people, so again no fear for hell if you trully believe in God and ask for forgiveness.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. Gekidami

    @25
    I’d love to see you back that crock up.

    #29 2 years ago
  30. KingAnon

    @28

    Jesus never exsited, in fact a few years back the Romans admitted to making Jebus up for political purposes.

    Say hi to the Easter Bunny & the rest of the imaginary characters you blindly believed in your whole life when you get to imagination land (heaven)

    I said it before & I’ll say it again, religious people are complete idiots.

    #30 2 years ago
  31. YoungZer0

    @28: Let’s stop talking about the past for once. Because then we’d also have to talk about the Crusades and that wouldn’t be to your benefit. What Christianity was back then it simply isn’t now and that’s what matters.

    Today matters. And today we see a trend of Christians going back to the basics. Going back to hatred and ignorance. People who start to question gravity and evolution. They haven’t read anything about those theories, mind you. They just question them. Most of them never read the bible either, but that doesn’t seem to matter.

    We see people yelling “God hates Fags!” while holding signs up that say “Thank god for 9/11!” at a funeral. A fucking funeral.

    We see people gathering at Planned Parenthood, spitting at women who choose to aport a child, they do not want to receive. Those women might be rape-victims, but that doesn’t matter.

    They are Pro-Life, they say. The same people are also Pro-Death Sentence and Pro-Assassinating-Doctors-who-might-do-an-abortion.

    If the people really believed in the words of Hippy Jesus, why can’t they follow his words? If they really read the bible do you think they would behave this way? Or did they only read the Old Testament that only talks about a god who kills and punishes those who deny him and his rules?

    #31 2 years ago
  32. G1GAHURTZ

    “if you call yourself an intelligent human being and yet believe in an old guy living on a cloud, and you talk with Jesus at night”

    Who believes that?

    An old guy living on a cloud?

    This is a caricature created by staunch atheists in order to throw ridicule on believers. It’s the type of thing you see on The Simpsons, or some other openly anti-faith production.

    Sure, there are people who believe that they talk with Jesus on a regular basis, but these people belong to a minority group among Christians. (‘Born again’ Christians)

    Religion is clearly not for people who are afraid of dying. It’s this king of naive, sweeping generalisation that just goes to show your, for want of a better word, ignorance on the subject.

    And as for the issue of wealth and it’s leading people away from faith, well I’m kind of shocked that any atheist, such as yourself would disagree, since the claim after ‘afraid of dying’ is usually along the lines of ‘the poor people and the insecure’.

    #32 2 years ago
  33. OlderGamer

    Not touching this one with a ten foot pole.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. ManuOtaku

    #30 I think you are confusing The First Council of Nicaea, were Constantine the Roman emperor, turned the Roman empire into a Christianic Religion, and then they created the Bible as we know it in that process, selecting some old scripts from the old and new testaments, they adpoted it, it was a political move from constatine part in order to not loose power, and in order to be re-elected as Roman Emperor, but prior to that they hunted cristians, and they persecuted all things Jesus Christ Concerned and related, that doesnt ruled out the Jesus Christ Existence per-se, they just adopted over there pagan religion, hence the political move and idea.

    #34 2 years ago
  35. OrbitMonkey

    When science proves the existence of God, what will the atheist say then?

    #35 2 years ago
  36. ManuOtaku

    #31 in that i agree with you, but thats why i do believe in a creator and not in a religion per se,and for me religions are a good thing, like most of the time is the people that create the problems to pretty good ideas and or theories in all fronts in science, religion, politics, you name it, the examples you put are the extremist religious people, which i really dont agree, but that doesnt stop me to believe in the creator theory either, mainly because the bible was done by mans, and by the people that killed Jesus, the romans, they decide it which scripts will form part of the bible and which one doesnt, therefore i dont trust the bible or the various religous rulings for that matter, because they were done by man, but i do believe in a creator whatever its/his/her name is.
    p.s also keep in mind pretty much the description of God, pretty much resembles what Einstein think the human person will be when he uses 100% of their brain, i mean a uniform mass of energy without a body only light, pretty much a coincidence right.

    #36 2 years ago
  37. G1GAHURTZ

    “in fact a few years back the Romans admitted to…”

    What kind of gibberish is this?

    “the Romans”!??

    Really??

    Wow, and they accuse the religious of stupidity…

    #37 2 years ago
  38. Giskard

    How the hell did this grow into a discussion over religion? Just keep it in your pants guys, and preferably to yourselves.

    OT: If you’re stupid enough to do anything for 40 hours straight without sleep, food or breaks, you’re bound to at least get injured. I’d hardly blame games for his death.

    #38 2 years ago
  39. G1GAHURTZ

    “Today matters. And today we see a trend of Christians going back to the basics. Going back to hatred and ignorance.”

    No, that’s what you see on the news. Does it represent the majority? I highly doubt it.

    I’m not here to defend Christianity by any means. In fact, I’m a Muslim convert who was born into a Christian family and converted at the age of 18.

    But I find it silly that people who claim to be reasonable and logical fall into making such naive generalisations.

    Do they realise that they live in a society where the government, education system and media all support and propogate atheism?

    They need to wake up and start thinking for themselves.

    I’m off to play CoD…

    #39 2 years ago
  40. Ireland Michael

    What the hell is wrong with you people?

    #40 2 years ago
  41. OrbitMonkey

    @38 Believe it or not in started with a word and the word was God…

    Only kidding ;-) This started with bad grammar…

    #41 2 years ago
  42. Gekidami

    @37
    About an equal amount of gibberish as this:

    “There is an overwhelming amount of documented evidence to prove the existence of Jesus.”.

    Even Theologians admit that outside of the NT, there is no other evidence for the existence of Jesus.

    #42 2 years ago
  43. OrbitMonkey

    Look if you still doubt that Jesus exists, I suggest checking out a Mexican phonebook. Thousands of them in there :-)

    #43 2 years ago
  44. YoungZer0

    @40: *ba dum tsh*

    #44 2 years ago
  45. fearmonkey

    I’m a christian (though I’m not atypical in my personal beliefs) and I’m always amazed how arrogant and condescending atheists and non believers can be.

    But to be fair, I can be surprised how judgmental and opinionated Christians can be as well.

    If you don’t believe in God, Jesus, Allah, etc then that is your prerogative and I won’t condemn you for it, so neither should you condemn people that believe in a higher power or question their intelligence.

    #45 2 years ago
  46. YoungZer0

    @45: So if believe in a pink invisible unicorn, you wouldn’t judge me?

    #46 2 years ago
  47. G1GAHURTZ

    “Even Theologians admit that outside of the NT, there is no other evidence for the existence of Jesus.”

    Nonsense statement.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

    The idea that a small group of people would invent a person so that they could be killed and persecuted for hundreds of years is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

    #47 2 years ago
  48. fearmonkey

    @46 – No, I actually wouldn’t, too each his own, not my place to judge.
    You on the other hand, seem ready to judge and condemn someone that doesn’t share your mindset.

    #48 2 years ago
  49. ManuOtaku

    #46 you are putting myths here, and let me tell you all this characters or myths like unicorn, dragons, cyclops, centaur, etc are observations of old people that must of the time they related to the everyday life, but could very well existed, for example in the Maharabapta (Indu Bible of sort), they put the Gods arrived in big flying birds that spitted fire, making strong big nosises ,and with metal wings, they put those birds a name, a ferocious creature i dont recall the name, but the thing is we dont know what they saw, but they related that to a bird,becuase thats what they were used to things that fly, a bird, that could be very well an spaceship in acient times, but they called birds, the same with unicorns, dragons, cyclops, etc, not long ago some scientists discovered a tomb with people of 2.50 meters tall, thats pretty much a giant, dont rule out the possibility entirely, i mean unicorns, and old myths, because most of the time they have a portion of true on them.

    #49 2 years ago
  50. YoungZer0

    @48: But you should, because it’s crazy. Problem is, people who believe in the pink invisible unicorn are probably going to end up in an insane asylum. But believing in an old guy who sits on a cloud and tells people to kill their son is normal (I’m talking about Abraham, in case you don’t know) and perfectly acceptable? That’s bullshit and you know it.

    #50 2 years ago
  51. OrbitMonkey

    @46, I’d ask how you knew the invisible unicorn was pink…

    #51 2 years ago
  52. ManuOtaku

    #51 the pink colour has that effect at least on males, womens dont look a guys with pink colour on it, it is like they were invisible, the same for unicorns.

    #52 2 years ago
  53. YoungZer0

    @51: Well the invisible pink unicorn wrote a book, in which it said that it is pink and invisible. Who are you to question the word of the pink invisible unicorn?! It’s in the book, so it must be true!

    #53 2 years ago
  54. OrbitMonkey

    @53, And thats when i’d back away ;)

    #54 2 years ago
  55. Gekidami

    @47
    You may want to actually read your own source, everything on there is heavily contested as being vague, misinterpreted, outright altered, and written after Jesus supposedly lived when Christians as a group were already around telling their stories. In fact nearly all of those talk about Christians as a group and their worshipping of “Christ”, clearly just reciting a story they heard from Christians.

    And your notion that people just “wouldnt” come up with the story is stupid. In that regard Greek mythology is true because people wouldnt come up with a story about a man being tortured for eternity for giving man fire. And Scientology is true because people wouldnt come up with a story about aliens dying and having their souls trapped for billions of years. Every religion has its martyrs, if you assume that the mere fact a religion having a martyr story makes it true, you believe everything.

    #55 2 years ago
  56. fearmonkey

    @50 – Again what is crazy to you does not make it factually crazy, and you realize of course that not everyone who believes in God believes in Jesus, or stories from the bible that seem odd like Onan.
    Some people believe in a higher power or creator that isn’t what today’s religions believe.
    Personally, I don’t care if someone believes in Faeries, Unicorns, ghosts, etc, etc, it’s simply not my place to judge.

    What works for you doesn’t necessarily work for someone else, not everyone is spiritual or has an interest in that, and even those that do manifest it in many non-religious ways.

    #56 2 years ago
  57. Gekidami

    I’ve got no issue with what people want to believe in, but if they’re going to push legislation, claim they deserve special treatment, swindle people out of their money and claim that their beliefs are true and everyone else is wrong without any evidence… Then sorry but no.

    #57 2 years ago
  58. ManuOtaku

    #55 i think the Bible consists of old scripts, that even if they were picked by Romans under the council of Nicea, during the Constatine reign, doesnt mean that all the information that posses is all lies, because most of the time that was the way the old people had to let pass for future generations, the vivid tales for their ancestors, now scientists are discovering that Noahs Arc story about the flood of most part of the world, was indeed a truth and/or did happened, becuase they found plenty of houses and civilizations under what is now know as the Dead Sea and the Red Sea, so in the end that story has some true in it, like also the seven plaques of Egypt, etc, therefore theres a lot of storys in the Bible that seem to be accurate, the same can happen with Jesus story,hey they had the shroud of turin, which under scientific tests, is during the same time of Jesus, has the same marks, and here is the most interesting thing, it has a 3D image encrypted in a 2D display, some scientists believe that the body of the person did made an eminition of light, something like an scanner and printed the information on the shroud, like a photon or some sort of energy, therefore the resurrection of Christ, under some scientific test , has some true in it too, therefore one cannot rule out the possibility of its existence either, i mean Christ.

    #58 2 years ago
  59. G1GAHURTZ

    @55:

    Of course it’s contested.

    It’s contested by people whose straw grasping about religion has reached such low depths that their only defence has come to be that it was all made up by people who wanted to be killed and persecuted.

    Contesting something means nothing. The fact is that there are historical references to Jesus and his followers that existed hundreds of years before Christianty was known outside of the Middle East, and that they are passing references with no real meaning other than as a brief commentary.

    If people want to try and throw smoke over these and say that they are all part of some sort of conspiracy to control the world one thousand years later, then it says a lot for their irrational thinking.

    And your analogy doesn’t hold up, because the Christians actually were killed and persecuted for hundreds of years. There’s no disputing that. The examples that you gave are not in any way similar.

    #59 2 years ago
  60. G1GAHURTZ

    Sorry, btw I’m trying to type and play CoD at the same time…

    #60 2 years ago
  61. OrbitMonkey

    @60, Blaming Religion for your shite KDR? Low mate even for you :)

    #61 2 years ago
  62. Gekidami

    @58
    -There was no global flood, science is clear on that. There were regional floods much like there are regional floors today, the Bible uses real locations and events, but this is like saying Spiderman really exists because New York is a real place.

    -The Shroud of Turin is a proven fake.

    @59
    lol I dont even know what argument you’re trying to make. So proof of Christianity outside of the middle east is evidence that Christians were outside of the middle east …Before Christianity was outside of the middle east? WTF are you talking about? Things like Tacitus are used as proof by historians to show that Christianity spread outside of the middle east by 109CE which was over 70 after Jesus was meant to have died. Thats what it proves; that Christianity spread and told their stories then people wrote about them.

    What does this have to do with historical documentation showing that Jesus was walking around doing the stuff he’s meant to have done in the Bible? Again, everything supposedly mentioning Jesus was written after he’s meant to have died and clearly mentions Christians telling the story, all but one or two dont even mention “Jesus” but talk about the “worshipping of Christ”.

    Jesus H Christ man, read your own links.

    BTW: Falun Gongists, Serers, Baha’i, Pagans, and pretty much every follower of a Polytheist religion have been killed and persecuted for their beliefs, therefore they’re true. Also Jew were persecuted, Jews dont accept Jesus as their saviour, therefore Jesus isnt the saviour of mankind. Also Atheists have been persecuted and in some countries being an Atheist is still punishable by death, therefore Atheism is true.

    See how easy it is?

    #62 2 years ago
  63. Ireland Michael

    This is still going? Yeesh.

    Why is this even being discussed? And what the hell does it have to do with someone’s tragic death? Compassion is not high on people’s agendas, clearly.

    #63 2 years ago
  64. Gekidami

    ^ I know, right?
    ;)

    #64 2 years ago
  65. OrbitMonkey

    @63, Well discussing religion is fun & its hard to feel too sympathetic for a guy who sat himself to death.

    #65 2 years ago
  66. OrbitMonkey

    @64, So posting that is your way of using some poor guys death to promote Atheism? Classy :)

    #66 2 years ago
  67. Ireland Michael

    @65 And that person was someone’s son, and friend, and brother.

    Obviously he had issues. Obviously he wasn’t looking after himself. But that doesn’t make it any less sad.

    #67 2 years ago
  68. absolutezero

    New Testament could have been awesome.

    http://www.cracked.com/article_18948_5-real-deleted-bible-scenes-in-which-jesus-kicks-some-ass.html

    #68 2 years ago
  69. KingAnon

    @ 45

    I personally am making fun of religion in general, I believe in some higher power as I don’t think we came from nothing but religion is for idiots who just want to believe in something.

    No one knows what happens when you die, why spend your life worrying about it or wasting your life having faith & praising someones made up version of a god.

    I make fun of all religions as I do with Greek Mythology, religion is used to control the masses as it was back then & is today.

    Faith is what you have in things that don’t exist.

    #69 2 years ago
  70. OlderGamer

    I don’t know I really enjoyed some of the stories in the Bible…like the Book of Eli. That was great, or was that Denzel? Oh nvm.

    #70 2 years ago
  71. HauntaVirus

    Yikes, didn’t mean to start anything here haha. Stating a simple fact that’s all.

    #71 2 years ago
  72. OrbitMonkey

    @67, To be blunt, is it sad? Would you feel so emphatic if he overdosed on heroin? Just how bad should we all feel when a guy sit’s down & dies doing something he obsessively loved?

    Live & learn, i’ll save my pity for victims of circumstance , not excessive recreation .

    #72 2 years ago
  73. JB

    Science is about measuring, observing and testing things. Religion is about all the things you can`t measure and test. You`re as likely to win religious discussions with scientific evidence as you`re going to win scientific arguments with faith. Different things – different rules.

    @26 People are more than rational thought patterns – don`t expect everybody to be content or satisfied with just being a “temporary DNA delivery vehicle”.

    The problem with religion has more to do with another very basic human conditon – tolerance or lack of it. For some it`s not enough to have faith, everyone else has to have the same faith as them.

    #73 2 years ago
  74. G1GAHURTZ

    “lol I dont even know what argument you’re trying to make.”

    That’s because you’re too busy confusing yourself with irrational ‘logic’. Who said anything about proof of Christianity being based on location?

    Learn to read.

    My mentioning of the Middle East was simply pointing out the fact that there was a ‘new’ religion at the time, with a handful of followers, who were not really significant to those who didn’t want to know about them.

    It’s like if I was a football journalist, and I mention some small band of Greek hooligans and their favourite team in the lowest tier of the Greek leagues, in passing in a story about football in general. Then nearly two thousand years later, some paranoid conspiracy theorist comes along and claims that there’s no proof that their team ever existed in order to suit his own agenda.

    It’s utter nonsense. Your argument is clearly the desperate grasping of straws of the likes of naive X-Files watchers who lack common sense.

    We have a small group of of people who left their well established and thriving religions to preach that the people had distorted their practices and needed to return back to the original teachings. That was all.

    All that they basically did was tell the Jews at the time that they had left the original teachings of Moses, and that they needed to return back to them. Because of this, they were seen as heretics, tortured, persecuted and killed by the Jews and Romans for having that belief.

    What you’re trying to suggest is that these people invented a fictitious character (why would they, when they could just get someone to claim to be that person? Why not just get a David Koresh of their own?) and then taught a fictitious, simple message about an already established, thousands of years old religion (again, why?) at the price of death and persecution.

    Now that’s what I call a paranoid delusion!

    And btw, find me the quote where I said tht persecution = legitimacy.

    My mentioning their persecution is simply to point out the ludicrousness of the idea that people invented this man and this religion in order to get some kind of worldly benefit.

    Where was the benefit?

    Their lives were full of difficulty and struggle.

    #74 2 years ago
  75. Dragon246

    Its difficult to read a multitude a posts to figure out what the discussion is about, but if its science vs religion, then I have to say this-
    There is no versus here, science is reality, religion is a made up which only serves to divide people. Its the worst kind of division that persists in todays society. Its the single largest reason for violence in todays society, and thats not even counting the distrust and enmity it creates in the world. All crusades and jihads somehow use religion as their backbone to entice people to violence.
    Now then , why do people believe in it then? That also has a simple explanation. There is a psychological fact that if many people blabber lies for many generations, somewhere down the line people start to believe its the truth, even though it has no basis whatsoever. If you tell a child growing up that killing is good, he will take that as fact of life and believe it, just like many people believe in gods and religion for the same reason.
    There is also a deeper reason for this, everyone hates end- death and the truth that you have only a 100 years to do something in this world and after that you are no more. Religion offers a convenient solution to this eternal problem which is even more bs- afterlife. Has anyone been there, seen it, any proof that it exists? No. But simply because it puts people minds to rest that end is not near that people believe wholeheartedly in religion.
    Similarly it offers horrendous explanations for universes (or anything for that matter) start and end- god. If it was this simple then great scientists like einstein,hubble etc. would not have spent there entire lives understanding how universe works. Religion allows simple but woefully wrong answers to these ever – lasting questions and people just believe them at face value because they are simple.
    Also humans are social creatures and live together. Being alone is a fear almost all people have. Then what can be better than having the all powerful seeing all god by your side always. Religion provides that and fills people with confidence. Most people lack the ability to stand alone in the world, god provides the crutch for that purpose.
    Sorry if anyones offended by this or if this is going off-topic, just my 2 cents.
    On the topic, wow.

    #75 2 years ago
  76. KingAnon

    @ 71

    Nah I started this by telling you that your “fact” was incorrect. ;-)

    #76 2 years ago
  77. stretch215

    2 discussions to stay out of: religion & politics. Just agree to disagree .

    #77 2 years ago
  78. Gekidami

    @74
    I see that you’ve stealthily shifted your position from “There is proof Jesus existed” to “There is proof Christians existed”. lol Nice try but no ones denying that there were Christians back then nor that it did start with someone, all religions did and they all grew in a similar fashion. But you’re original claim was that there is documented evidence outside of the Bible that a man named Jesus Christ existed. So yet again i await your evidence of this. Though you may want to actually unravel the mess that is the New Testament first, when was Jesus born again? During Herod’s reign or whilst Quirinius was governor of Syria?. Also when did Mary & Joseph live in Nazareth? Before or after Jesus was born?
    Its funny that you say its illogical to not believe in this stuff when the Bible is packed with nonsense, contradictions of what now know about the world and contradicts itself. You think “An old guy living on a cloud” is a caricature to throw ridicule on believers, you should try some of the stuff actually written in religious texts. They make a literal man living on a cloud sound sane. And of course its apparently logical to believe all of this without a shred of evidence. Yeah, nice try.

    And yet again, just assuming that because people believed something and were willing to die for it makes its true leaves you believing every religious story ever created. I really dont understand why you’re even trying to go down that path, it really is retarded.

    As for “persecution = legitimacy”, thats exactly the message you’ve been trying to pass off since the beginning, like you said:

    “The idea that a small group of people would invent a person so that they could be killed and persecuted for hundreds of years is, quite frankly, ridiculous.”

    You’re clearly trying to pawn this off as a validation that persecution means their belief was true because otherwise they wouldnt have believed it to evade persecution. And again, in that case many other religions are therefore true.

    #78 2 years ago
  79. G1GAHURTZ

    No, the position hasn’t changed. The evidence is there.

    The fact that you stubbornly refuse to accept the evidence, based on your own agenda, is the issue here.

    Even if there was a birth certificate stamped with 10 official seals, people could just as easily raise doubts about it as they do with what’s currently there. It’s called selective blindness.

    For example, we have this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus which is clear proof of the existence of this man for any non believing, impartial observer. First of all, it mentions Jesus as a living, breathing human being, as well as those around him. Secondly, you’re expected claim that this is just a story that he’d heard is easily refuted, since his accounts of other events don’t follow the Christian accounts of what happened, so he’s not just ‘repeating their story’.

    Obviously, having an agenda, you will use your selective blindness to reject this, and raise questions about authenticity. And while I would agree that the details of this piece have been tampered with, you cannot ignore the overwhelming majority of scholars who agree that the basis of the text is authentic.

    That these people existed at this time.

    “Though you may want to actually unravel the mess that is the New Testament first”

    I need to do no such thing, since as I’ve already stated, I am a Muslim, and i have every belief that both the Old and New Testament, while originating from initially authentic sources, are now full of errors, contradictions and inaccuracies.

    And no. I have most certainly not been try to “pass off” persecution = legitimacy by any means.

    Maybe I’m not making myself clear.

    While the fact that people were persecuted for a belief that they had is no means of legitimacy of their religion, what it absolutely does prove is that they legitimately believed in their religion.

    People are always willing to die for what they believe in, but you’d have to be judging people according to a sadistic standard of your own to suggest that a small group of people were willing to leave their own religion and suffer what the Christians did without ever seeing any evidence themselves.

    ‘Yeah, there’s this guy, Jesus, and he lives over there… There isn’t a New Testament for you to read yet, but he lives somewhere over there, and you can’t see him or talk to him… But if you leave your religion and follow him, even though you can never meet him, you’ll be stoned to death or crucified like I hope to be! Now how does that sound? Good deal?’

    Do me a favour!

    #79 2 years ago
  80. Da Man

    Some folks here should start off by reading ‘Nightfall’. A good science fiction story. That’s of course if you ‘re still able to read anything outside of blog comments and text boxes.

    #80 2 years ago
  81. ManuOtaku

    #62, the shroud has not been proven fake or fraud,there were theories in the 2009, that was fake for the carbon dating, but theres new evidence that indicates those carbon dating test were done to samples that were reconstructed over the centuries to repair the shroud,which of course were not accurate to pinpoint an especific date, therefore they did knew datings and it concurs with the Jesus time, and for the picture itself it cannot be recreated to the fullest with actual technology, only a few simple effects, therefore is not proven at this moment that is real or fake, but new evidence is making scientist believe is very real.

    As for the global flood most of all religions do describe a global flood, from the bible, to indian scripts, the sumerians, babylonians, koran, etc, therefore is such old and separeted cultures describe the same event, it has to be something, and theres new scientific geological data that hint a global flood, and also remember that the poles change their position from time to time, due magnetic adjustments to the center of the earth, which cause big masses of water to move, when the poles change position, this event according to scientists did occur a few times in the past, therefore is some evidence that hint that, at least is a possibility, rather than a denial with scientific evidence.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2076443/Turin-Shroud-created-flash-supernatural-light.html
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57410982/controversial-new-theories-on-the-shroud-of-turin/
    http://www.christianpost.com/news/shroud-of-turin-is-authentic-scientists-claim-new-evidence-reignites-debate-video-65284/

    http://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/scientific-geological-evidence-for-deluge-noahs-flood-ark-not-mythology-legends-mount-ararat-flood-basalts-catastrophism-igneous-extrusions-mountain-building-runaway-plate-tectonics-young-earth-crea/

    #81 2 years ago