today is a great day for these forums - Page 4

RosesLove · #46 08-03-2008, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

pretty time consuming research.

It only takes a minute. Just search for threads started by "Devil."

Which, I don't think he did. He would have mentioned it in the thread if so. And there was no mentioning of it in any of his threads so I'm going to assume no.

Rufus · #47 08-03-2008, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RosesLove

It only takes a minute. Just search for threads started by "Devil."

Which, I don't think he did. He would have mentioned it in the thread if so. And there was no mentioning of it in any of his threads so I'm going to assume no.

No no, there's no way as far as I know of telling if he created the (at the time) 66666th thread at this stage really. Like Googi said, the number they were trying to reach decreases with every deleted thread.

Elizabeth · #48 08-03-2008, 01:27 PM

so anyways

isnt the devils number 666, and not 66,666?

Twinny · #49 08-03-2008, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elizabeth

so anyways

isnt the devils number 666, and not 66,666?

Some science dudes found the number of the beast is 616.

DrakilorP2P · #50 08-03-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twinny

Some science dudes found the number of the beast is 616.

I don't care what pseudo-scientists say; only true Christian scientists can do it properly without throwing "scientific laws" around as soon as they notice a coincidence.

RosesLove · #51 08-03-2008, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrakilorP2P

I don't care what pseudo-scientists say; only true Christian scientists can do it properly without throwing "scientific laws" around as soon as they notice a coincidence.

If they aren't going to include scientific laws, they may be true Christians, but definitely not true scientists.

DrakilorP2P · #52 08-03-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RosesLove

If they aren't going to include scientific laws, they may be true Christians, but definitely not true scientists.

What I meant is that they smugly proclaim "law" when they notice a coincidence, which they will assume to be a real pattern. Also, if you're going to use scientific laws to translate something, you're doing it incorrectly.