«Home

Why Is Science And Reasoning Such A Bad Thing?

This is how much damage religion/faith has done to the minds of many.

How many times have i been criticised here in Nigeria for being a ''freethinker''? Science is logical reasoning, yet religion demands absolute unquestioning obedience and it seems that the more unreal something is, the more it is worthy of respect and the more people will believe it. How theh ell does that work?

Science encourages people to question and reason, yet many religious crackheads criticise me like ''don't believe in science and logic''? Do they actually realise what they are saying?

Even at the office a few weeks back when they asked me to pray after the meeting (for what?) when i actually wasnt paying attention anyway and as I pretended to pray they laughed at me (cos of my accent I guess) and I just came out and said ''why are you laughing, I'm not the delusional one''.

They asked whether I'm a freethinker and I said I am, straight up and down and they looked at me shocked and I was like ''so what?, like its a bad thing''.

It really is a mental illnes

Avatar
Newbie
45 answers

Matter is the manifestation of energy perceived through our 5 senses.Without conscious beings perceiving energy cannot manifest matter.So,there is no matter as such.

That's quite a definition you've got there. I don't pretend to understand it. Without conscious beings perceiving energy,matter cannot manifest itself? If every human being on earth were to die somehow, the physical universe would vanish, because it's our conscious regard that keeps it in existence, that manifests it? The moment we take our eyes off it, and there's no consciousness to preen for, the moon takes a hike?

The Double String theory and experiments demonstrate that electrons,light and other quantum thingies show particle-wave duality. It says nothing about matter not existing, or it being a function of human or any other consciousness.It does say that the patterns of photons of light are unpredictable,and that nothing is known about photon activity betweeen its emission source, and its receptor: photons from sunlight and our retina. If this could somehow be discovered,interference would change what the receptor,our retina,perceives.

How does this say matter does not exist,how does it originate a spiritual philosophy,or show that science has been investigating things spiritual? If a scientist sets out to demonstrate the dual nature of quantum particles, is he also testing and verifying spiritual things as well, even though the thought did not once enter his mind? How's that? Because you say so?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Science will ultimately come to be reconciled with reasoning as she is still at an infancy. A field that is clueless as to why the cell suddenly stops reproducing, or what triggers the ageing gene, one that is at a loss as to the true relevance of black holes in the multiverse and their significance to galaxy formation and as such potential life. Galileo in his tragic genius, were he to be alive today would have seriously questioned the possibility of a man manned space station. So the science of today would become obsolete with the discoveries of the future. And as each wave of discovery opens the door to man's irresistible quest for knowledge, science would be melted in reason and even religious views would need to be modified as they are both artificial constructions. However, the knowledge inherent in existence await discovery by inquisitive minds, and science at present provides the most empirical avenue for such a quest to be undertaken, the consequence would ultimately play itself out and reason would be called upon to prevail (at least, every one is now talking about the effect of climate change and necessity for clean energy, althought it's been an issue for close to three decades).

0
Avatar
Newbie

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

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

There is as yet no unified field theory that has been discovered or accepted to exist. So to claim that physics has discovered what the hindus were saying all along is erroneous.

But what I find more interesting is the desperate need to make claims of scientific support when one is pushing an agenda. To the extent of twisting the facts about what science is saying or not, and what it has discovered or not. Of course one cannot blame them when we see what the effect of having a veneer of scientific credibility can do to impress the impressionable. This is not a new thing. Quacks have been doing it forever. There is almost no ideology in this world that doesn't try to bolster it's credibility with some sort of quasi-science. Just check out Nairaland's resident Atheists amongst others.

http://worldpeaceendowment.org/invincibility/invincibility6.html

Maharishi is not the only one but he is one of the best at twisting things.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Well, what was the Sanskrit term that we can translate into 'Superstring' today? What is the name that they called the Field and what were the properties that they said that this field had?

Okay you can ignore the fact that the vedas are the authority for the evil caste system that operates in India till this day if that pleases you. Perhaps they discovered the unified field and deduced from that that they must be racist and segregationist.

If we must stay on topic then we should go back to talking about Science and Reasoning and why it is or is not such a bad thing.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Jagunlabi can you please tell me where the vedas mention Superstring theory. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Indian philosophy. Yet I am cautious about anything that uses religion and spirituality in such a political way. It is clear that the Veda is in a large part the sacred text created by a conquering people to subjugate the people they conquered. Hence it is full of such nonsense as the Caste System which is still a source of much inequality and injustice in India today.

That is not to say that there are no elements of spiritual insight in the Vedas, however a blanket statement such as

0
Avatar
Newbie

OK then. I do not think that it is helpful to the discussion to continue to debate whether matter exist or not. The double slit experiment again did not show that matter does not exist, rather it demonstrates particle-wave duality of light and other quantum particles. See below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

See also wave particle duality below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave-particle_duality

Stay blessed.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I think western scientists should just hold up there hands and admit that they've been on a red herring about the material universe and how it came about.

0
Avatar
Newbie

According to the experiment,when particles are not observed,they are waves of possibilities,but when they are observed,they snap into particles of experience.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I earlier cautioned that  it is unscientific to make scientific statements that you have no evidence for. Even in your sentence (underlined) you acknowleged that the guy did not say that matter does not exist. Just accept that you made an initial mistake. Sure they guy simply said that the deeper you go, beyound subatomic particles, the closer you get to "life" and that is correct. He choose to call the nature of being that is closer to "Life" universal consciousness. I dispute that for with more penatration beyound to what he already had, he will come to counsciouness that trancends what he described as universal counsciousness. Your argument is analogous to one who have seen water vapour and then declare that ice does not exist and yet ice, water and water vapour are made of the same elements and it is the change in the vibrational frequencioes of these molecules that determine the form it manifests.

Matter is the lowest manifestation of energy. Cheers.

0
Avatar
Newbie

For me alarm bells first rang when I saw that he was a professor from Maharishi university of management. While that in itself does not nullify what he has to say, one has to be aware that he is coming from an angle, a hindu/vedic angle that he's is trying to promote.

Then I was disappointed to hear him talk about the discovery of the Unified Field. I don't think that any such field has been discovered. It has been postulated in Superstring theory, but then there are many alternative hypotheses. For instance Roger Penrose has a similar hypothesis based on what he calls Twistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twistor_theory

and http://users.ox.ac.uk/~tweb/00004/

These theories have been developed in an attempt to bring about a marriage of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Theory into what is often called a TOE (Theory of Everything). The marriage has not occurred yet and these two great theories continue to contradict each other.

however I do agree with him on a few things. First that the most basic stuff in existence is Consciousness, and everything else in the universe is derived from consciousness. I have made my position on this clear in this thread: http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-137750.64.html

There, I made the statement that:

It actually starts from this post: http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-137750.32.html#msg2312206 where the buffoon I'm speaking with says this:

There are a couple of other things that the videos says that I agree with but I am very cautious about people trying to connect quantum physics with the Hindu Vedas.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I have watched the video clip and there is no where the physicist said that matter does not exist.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Watch the video clip first,then we'll talk.The clip has a quantum physicist talking about the subject.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I did not say that M stands for matter. M stands for mass and mass is an intrinsic property of matter. See the link below for a simplified version of what constitutes our universe.

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

0
Avatar
Newbie

I am aware of all the stuff you are saying. I said that the spiritual interpretation you are giving to it is not what the scientific data says. The Einsteins equation did not say that matter does not exist, it shows that matter can be converted to energy and vice versa, that is equivalence of matter and energy. If matter does not exist, what is M (mass) doing in the equation. Current evidence from astrophysics and cosmology suggests that the universe is 4% matter, 22% dark matter and 74% dark energy.Cheers

0
Avatar
Newbie

. . . yet I wish that quantum mechanics had not been discovered until the Naturalists had defined their positions on what is Naturalism and what is Supernatural.  It is the findings of quantum mechanics that they are aware of that makes it so hard for them to define their position and have to recourse to much cerebral gymnastics.

0
Avatar
Newbie

As a QP enthusiast you should know all this.The Einstein relativity equation(E=MC²) reveals that matter does not exist.That everything we see is made of energy.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Hahhaaaaa jagunlabi,

I seem to understand your sentiments. I am a modern scientist and years of research have taught me not to make statements that cannot be proven. I am a molecular biologist by profession but Quantum Phsics is one of my hobies. I am not aware where Qantum Physics have produced spiritual publications. If you have cite a peer reviewed article in any of the physics journals and I will examine it. It is not scientifically true that matter does not exist. Science have evidence that matter exists and infered evidence that dark matter and dark energy exist too. I hope you are not interpreting findings of Quantum physics for what the experimental data did not say. Cheers.

0
Avatar
Newbie

In my posting lies the answer to your question. Mad_Max have correctly sensed that the aswer to your question already lies in the post itself. To add to what I have written, I will give you two citations on out of body experience and near death experience. One is an article in the medical journal Lancet and the other is a case report by a doctor. Here are the references

1. van Lommel et.al.2001. Near-death experience in survivors of cardiac arrest: a prospective studies in Netherlands. Lancet 358, 2039-2045.

2. Sabom, M. 1998. One doctors facinating account of near death experiences. Grand Rapids. Michigan:Zondervan Publishing House.

Read the scientific article and the book and we take the discussion from there. You may not have access to the scientific article and if that is the problem, say so and I will send you a pdf of the article to your mailbox. Stay blessed.

0
Avatar
Newbie

He's already answered your question,M.

0
Avatar
Newbie

"Whenever God truely manifests in matter or the physical world, then clear cut emperical evidence is left behind."

Can you give me an example of where this has occurred and been independently checked by scientists and verified by their peers, because usually all we get is personal testimonies, which requires faith to be believed.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Science and perception through the brain has its limitations. Science cannot presently investigate spiritual occurences. However science have the tools and can investigate physical manifestations that were triggered by spiritual events. Science can examine those physical manifestations and irrefutably conclude that they occured or did not occure. However it is beyound scientific investigation to pass judjement on the spiritual events that gave rise to the physical manifestation. Thus it is illogical and indeed wrong for religious people to state the occurence of a physical phenomenon and yet refuse to accept the verdict of science on such a physical phenomenon. If religious people say that a disease is healed by the power of God, then the power of God cannot be seen by scientific methods but its effect, that is cure of the diseases can be emperically measured. Thus if religious people say that the sun stood still, that cancer is cured and similar physical claims, science can provide the evidence if such a phenomenon ever occured. Where no evidence is found, then such claims never existed in the first place. Whenever God truely manifests in matter or the physical world, then clear cut emperical evidence is left behind. That simply means that a claim of manifestation of the power of God in matter that provides no material evidence is simply the imagination of the claimaints at best and dowright falsehood at the worst. Cheers.

0
Avatar
Newbie

False dichotomy is right.

But I'm not sure you can argue ,reason,rationalize or explain another person into discovering God. It seems the brain is designed to function solely in this world, and to understand things of this world only. It's ill-equipped for spiritual things and rarely comprehends it.

There are scientists who believed God without being preached at. Scientists who found God in their laboratories, in the sum of discoveries in their field,in the course of research. God has different ways of drawing us to himself.

There are different kinds of knowledge and different organs for apprehending it.

I don't think one believes with one's brain. You have a spirit that's at home with spiritual things and within whom faith resides.

And this spirit discerns spiritual things. How do you share what you know with atheists,whose only repository of knowledge are their senses and their brains?

You can't.

Neither the fact of God nor things of the spirit can be logicked into empirical existence.

Do you realize, if you, an occultist and an atheist were to sit down to breakfast, and God were suddenly to sit in your midst and make His presence known, you would perceive his presence, the occultist might, but the atheist would eat on, utterly oblivious,perceiving nothing at all?

The overwhelming reality of the physical senses, the superiority and spiritual alienation that comes from 'brain' knowledge alone is atheism's great tragedy.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Science and REasoning are not such bad things. Without them we would end up with all sorts of false dichotomies such as Science is the opposite of Religion.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Reasoning is such a bad thing to religion because it is a tool of scrutiny,and we all know what happens to religious dogmas when put under serious scrutiny,don't we?They wobble badly,meaning that religious dogmas are allergic to scrutiny,hence reasoning.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Don't act like you don't know what I meant. Typical Christian naivety.

Well it answers more than religion does. Dogma and blind faith dont answer anything. Science is about proof, if you can see something then it helps the credibility, dont you think. Hold up, why should I even have to explain that? If one cant see that then there's a serious problem

But then again if Christians obey everything the Bible says then they'll be hypocrites anyway.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Science, no it is not a bad thing!

Reasoning, no, it is not a bad thing!

Who told you that is a bad thing? lol

0
Avatar
Newbie

. . . because I did not respond to the topic in the way that would suit your ears does not mean I don't know what you're going on and on about.

One would think science has the answer to all questions.

You would be the first to scream hypocrisy if Christians go against what the bible says.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Are you sure that it is religion that has done the damage? Maybe these people have just been damaged for centuries before they even became christians. How else would you explain the slave trade, for instance.

0
Avatar
Newbie

It bothers me alot that there are over 120 million deluded freaks in this country. Arrrgh, cant wait to get back to the UK

0
Avatar
Newbie

No, dont act like you dont know what I'm on about.

Science among Christians is all good but once people use it to debate against their delusional beliefs then all of a sudden its irrelevant.

Faith and dogma are blind to anything that reason has to say and if you argue with a good point against a religious freak then they always counter claim with the typical ''well, thats all well and good, but its in the Bible so ur wrong, cos the Bible is the word of God, rah rah rah'' comment.

How can people favour eligion over science? Doesnt even make sense. Yet they try and use logic to back up their delusional arguements. How does that work?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Thats what I'm sayin'.

And do they realise how ARROGANT that is? NO!! Because they are mentaly ill.

Faith=Ignorance

Faith-Denial of the obvious

Just like one time I was trying to reason with some prick saying that Chris Benoit killed his wife and kid because of the Devil, malaria and illnesses are from the Devil, and if he were to fall over and hurt himself then its the devil's fault.

But they also claim that God created everything. So who is to blame then?

Its sad, it really is.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@Bloodshed

Imagine this. A group of people are travelling from Abuja to Lagos in a bus somewhere along the road the vehicle has a serious accident and out of lets say 16 passengers only four passengers survive. Now those four survivors will be jumping up and down giving praise to God for sparing their lives.

But what makes them really think that its God that spared their lives? Because if it is really God that spared their life then why did He allow 12 passengers to die in the first place? Why didn't he spare the lives of all 16 of them? Nigerians cannot reason that it was the drivers bad driving that caused the accident, or that the vehicle had a problem, or the bad road, or another driver in another car. They believe thats its the merciful God that spared them.

You can't reason with them.

0
Avatar
Newbie

They aren't bad, and they are no threat to religion, Christianity at least.

When people misunderstand Christianity, and underestimate science they get disappointed in at least one area, and that leads them to loosing faith. They didn't loose faith in what Christianity actually is, they loose faith in what they thought Christianity is.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Because science and reasoning lead to enlightenment, and people start to question religious leaders.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Trust me, it really is a mental illness. Religious people are supposed to be on the higher moral peddlestool but a soon as you say, shoot, that you dont believe then all of a sudden they are more evil that they make everybody else out to be and will even try and kill you.

Why don't they realise they are contradicting themselves so violently? BECAUSE THEY ARE MENTALLY ILL.

And when you try and reason with them in order to show them that they are wrong, they are hopelessly blind and cant see the validity in what you have to say.

I'm not gonna lie, I'm liking my stay out here but after I finish this NYSC stuff I'M GONE!! I'll only come back to Naija to visit, I can never see myself settling out here, people here are too damn primitive. Everyone here always goes on like your private life and beliefs are their business. Even when i was filling in one hospital form, there was a section that asked for your religion, I was about to put ''none or N/A'', but then I remembered that they probably wont treat me, or even spike my needles with something so they can ''kill the demon'' or some silly poo like that.

I cant eventually settle in England though, more opportunity elsewhere, I might look at America or Canada or elsewhere.

When I complained to my uncle in the UK that people in Naija are pissing me off, he was like ''you'll manage, the good thing about Nigeria is they wont judge you about your race or your last name and so on'', but I just told him that I'd rather be a Black man in the UK than a non-believer in Nigeria. And I mean that, even he couldnt say anything after that.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Religion in Nigeria is a mental illness and its part of the reason why Nigeria is not progressing

0
Avatar
Newbie

Thought the article below might be relevant to the discussion here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Soyinka On Adunni Olorisa

By Damola Awoyokun

IN his tribute to the late Susanne Wenger, Wole Soyinka as usual drapes the traditional religion TR in richly embroidered aso oke. He singled out its virtue of tolerance, made an example of it and completed the tribute with an 'irreducible' instruction: "Go to the orisa, learn from the orisa, and be wise." (The Guardian, January 20). Really?

Soyinka zeroed in on the superficial at the expense of the fundamental: that TR is a system of superstition; that like other systems of superstition it not responsible to objective verification and empirical analysis; that it is incompatible with requirements of progress and civilization; that the human mind has a duty to follow what is true and not just what is traditional; that the golden traces of beauty, justice, truth, love, ethical emphasis that it holds up as embroideries for PR are eternal values older than any religion. (All religions appropriate these to look credible and seduce the unwary).

Invention of TR started with anxiety about the unknown. In terms of space, this translated to curiosity about what lay beyond the village and the skies; and in terms of time: wanting to know what the future held. It was believed that there is a master script somewhere, the setting of which is the earth and all human beings are characters in it. To have access to this is the reason for divination, which explains why there are terms like kadara, ipin, ayanmo, akunleyan, akunlegba, akoole. Modern philosophical consensus has established all these are false. There is no destiny; nothing had been predetermined; there is no fate. We are our own meaning. Our current situation or our tomorrow is tabla rasa that is why they are products of our choice. No more. We are responsible for what we do and this determines who we are. There is no ori or chi that had negotiated a good or bad contract for one's destiny. And yet the soft force driving all religions is this concept of predestination, to know what had been written down for one's situation.

Among the Yoruba, the divination is Ifa. Here is a typical verse from Otura meji, a principal Odu: , adia fun Aderomokun omo ooni, ala'na kan esuru, n' ijo ti m' ekun se raun ire gbogbo; bi okan ba yo ninu igbo a ba ona wa, ire, ire gbogbo ma ma wa mi wa o, ire gbogbo, What makes a literary work first rate is embedded in this incantation. Not only its flow of cadence, but each word being an anticipation of the next enacts the yearning for determinism they convey. Prince Aderomokun may never have existed but was invented because its meaning and the music of its syllables props the idea the verse carries. Nevertheless, must we allow this literary beauty to obfuscate the fallacies resident not only in the verse but also in the whole of all divination systems? Who says that every time a quarry emerges from the bush it heads for the village path? (Fallacy of hasty generalization and unwarranted assumption) And since this animal fortune has happened to the village, therefore fortune will come your way too? (Fallacy of false cause)

These fallacies are not unlike the odus of other scriptures. An example: that after suffering family exclusion, deprivation and security threats in the bush, the biblical David rose to the leadership of Israel hence this would happen to you too after you suffer. Or when you suffer and become leader, it is because it had first happened to David or any other biblical persona. Glossing over the superficial but zeroing attention on details and the causal relationship among them is the beginning of thinking, the automatic enemy of divination.

Even with Ifa, mysteries of life persisted unexplained. This made it easy for the foreign religions to sweep TR away. Not that they were essentially different but at some points in their development they rendered themselves open to the current state of thought and scholarship, to findings of reformists like St Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, Omar Khayyam -a philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. Hence, these religions were equipped to offer sophisticated answers to the quest for understanding and attempts to find clarity in the several contradictions of life. Since wisdom is acquired through immersion in the best that has been thought and said, converting to them seemed a wise choice for our ancestors.

But not without a fight. This is why the claim that TR is tolerant is largely imaginary. TR looks tolerant because it is in the minority. When Islam and Christianity were seeping into the villages and TR was the majority, history discloses several instances where churches and mosques were razed down and converts massacred or disowned by their own families for worshipping a white man's God or going to a white man's school. Now being the minority, TR is emasculated of its powers of intolerance. This is not the same as being tolerant. It is just the aftermath of emasculation, the step before extinction. Intolerance is the evangelical zeal to be the sole majority. This is why now the foreign religions are always at loggerheads, striving to outdo each other in mass violence. To buttress TR's capacity for tolerance, its spin-doctors cite: Ogun worshippers do not fight their Sango colleagues. But they are under the same umbrella just like Baptists and Anglicans or Nasfat and Ahmadiyya. It is all the same incestuous tolerance whereas the one of virtue is the ecumenical tolerance.

Conceptually, no religion can tolerate the other. All of them insist: 'I am the truth not you, I have the word of God, it cannot change. It is a dogma. And dogmas like stubbornness demonstrate a lack of curiosity which is the fuel of development. The foreign religions that were brimming with fresh bulletins from truth now resisted new and advanced findings of truth in humanities or sciences. As representatives of outdated knowledge and hoary ideas, they are now like TR: irrational. And a religion can only be intolerant of another religion because it has first become intolerant of rationality. From this, other monsters burst forth, spill over to other aspects of life.

In this age of democracy and suicide bomber, one reads with horror the case of Olunde the eldest son of Eleshin who in Death and the King's Horseman commits suicide so he can serve as the heavenly courier of his dead king. The play tells us he is a medical student; he himself mentions that he is "attached to hospitals all the time." Meaning: he is not simply a medical student; he has enough sophistication of intellect to have passed pre-clinicals. How come such a mind trained to preserve life, flies home and takes his own life because of a religious stipulation? Iyalode snides at his undead father: 'we fed your sweetmeats such as we hoped awaited you on the other side, ' This mindlessness is one with that of 19 young men, some studying elite courses in German universities who on a September 11 hijacked planes, turned them into altars and immolated themselves since they have been promised busty virgins on the other side. Why shed blood? Why get crucified to save one's people? Extremisms own their irrationalities to the superstitious underlay of religions.

Sutekh, Tammuz, Zeus, Manawyddan, Ra, Ubilulu in their days were Almighties with magnificent temples built to them and hundreds of prophets, seers, viziers in the business of interpreting their commandments. Where are they today? But these ex-Almighties should be commended for their precocious wisdom: having realized early the need for a post-religious society, they tore up the scripts and left the stage hence demonstrating to us the true and irreducible instruction.

Awoyokun lives in London.

The Guardian

0
Avatar
Newbie

Yes, there is some openmindedness among Christians these days but at the end of the day it says in the Bible that you shouldn't question and rah rah rah, not to mention the constant threats of damnation and the wrath of God and blah blah.

Obviously people would interpret it differently to suit their beliefs but at the end of the day its in the book

0
Avatar
Newbie

Not all christians are as rigid in their views of heaven/hell, even in Naija. Some believe good muslims or other religions will also enter heaven. Christianity has come a long way from inquisitions to calvinist views of predestination to what it is today. Even the fire and brimstone theology of today is mild by comparison. I'd venture to say views on heaven/hell will be dramatically different 2 generations from now.

Dont let the closemindedness currently infecting some people prevent you from seeing the forest for the trees.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Of course I don't run around preaching or telling people, but once people try preaching their rubbish to me then i cant help but tell it like it is.

And religion DOES demand unquestioning obedience, obviously Christians debate but at the end of the day, if you dont follow, you're going to Hell supposedly. Simple.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Religion does NOT "demands absolute unquestioning obedience". Even within christianity, the concept of God, heaven, hell and justice has changed drastically in the last 2 centuries.

Unfortunately, when religion meets fear, poverty and greed, you have what you obtain in Nigeria (Africa) today. I'd be careful with telling everybody you are "free-thinker" if I were you. Trust me, you dont want to cross the tongue talking born again christians you find everywhere, cuz when they take off their masks, you'll wish there was a God, lol

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.