Jump to content


Dagobahn Eagle

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dagobahn Eagle

  1. Fantastic video, except from the fact that his face was an inch from the camera at the end.
  2. Asking how a 'just, loving god' can be cruel, manipulative, neglecting, jealous, pro-slavery, and inconsistent is equal to wanting immortality and a perfect life? I don't think so. And the 'this life vs. Heaven' argument doesn't cut it either. It's just an excuse to justify your alleged God letting all this horrific stuff happen. Allowing starvation, rape, and other horrors to go on is atrocious, no matter how good a future He has planned for you. And I think you've misunderstood the purpose of the 10 questions. My interpretation: This one addresses the statement of many Christians that miraculous healing does occur, and asks why it only occurs for people with ailments that might have gotten better anyhow, for example cancer, and never with ailments such as lost limbs, blindness, people paralyzed from the waist down, etc. In my eyes, it's a very good way to shoot the 'God does miracles' belief down. This one addresses the belief that God answers prayers and loves human beings. If He answers your prayer for an easy math test or a convenient parking spot, then why does He care so little for those in need of real help? This one addresses the notion from God-knows-where that Yahweh is somehow a 'just' deity. Anyone who's read the Old Testament knows this is not true. So in other words, He's a genocidal racist. And this excuses Him how? What about the ones He kills who are Israelites? This one addresses the belief that the Bible, with its nonsense about a flat Earth and other impossibilities, is actually 'divinely inspired'. Can I be 100% certain that the old Hebrew conception of a flat Earth with a dome over it is scientific nonsense? Er... yes? But why? Why does He go to such great lengths to describe how He wants His burnt offerings, instead of teaching us how to treat wounds effectively, cure diseases, keep your hands clean when operating, making pollution-free energy, etc.? He's God. He allegedly knows everything there is to know. See #3. Another example of a God that's millenniums behind modern Western moral standards. See #3. It'd be easy for an almighty God to cancel out earthquakes, fires, premature births, getting hit by drunk drivers, etc., but no, He prefers, according to believers, to sit back and watch them happen, for some 'higher purpose' we can't understand. The Red Cross or police departments or Amnesty would be chastised if they tried anything like that. 'Er, yessir, we let that girl who frantically called 911 get raped and tortured with a cigarette, but c'mon, you can't call that unloving, can you?! For real, have some faith in our secret Higher Plan, willya? Oh, and by the way, if we interfered with peoples' lives, no one would be free! [goes off to fetch donut]'. It's overly generous and naive to take an oppressing power and just go, 'oh, He must have a higher plan', without any evidence whatsoever of the existence of such a plan, or whether or not the plan is even a good one. At the very least, I'd demand to hear what the plan was, instead of just letting yourself be told off with a patronizing 'you wouldn't understand', which is no better than an adult going 'because I said so'. Reminds you that there's no evidence whatsoever of any Jesus performing any miracles. See #8. Because He was a sick ole ****. Seriously, though, I think this one is explained in the Bible, so I'll skip it. This one reminds you that even though the Bible says that a relationship involving God will be stronger than one without, divorce rates are actually higher among Christians.
  3. I'm with Chase here. If someone starts a thread because something's bothered them and they need to talk about it, you don't laugh in their face. It's the same as in real life. It's simply not polite, nor helpful. No, you don't have to care, or be serious about it, but Heck, you don't have to ruin an 'I need to talk about this' thread, either.
  4. Thanks for the answers, MJ, but I think you may be slightly outside the target audience. I think you should watch the video. The point was that humans like to attribute 'miracolous' healing to God, yet the only 'miracolous' healing that happens is of ailments that might or would have gotten better anyhow, such as cancer. Many Christians like to think that prayer helps heal ailments, but in such a case, shouldn't it also help heal ailments that won't get better by themselves? Yes, but it's still well within God's ability to help these people. Many Christians like to think their prayers for things such as easy tests, convenient parking spaces, healing of ailments, etc. help, and these questions are meant for that kind of people If God answers prayers, God answers prayers, period. It doesn't make sense to give Person A in the States a miracle when Person B in Darfur doesn't. I don't understand your stance. If you acknowledge that the Bible is written by men who say they got their ideas from God, why do you believe in God in the first place? You haven't thought this through. 'Bad things' isn't only rape, murder, kidnappings and school shootings. It's also the Christmas tsunami, the Kobe Earthquakes, Hurricane Kathrina, the Black Death, and other natural non-human-made catastrophes. God, had He existed, would be quite capable of preventing these catastrophes, but He is apparently content to watch His creation die by the hundreds of thousands annually from famines, floods, earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, pestilence, plague, and other horrors. And even if only 'bad people happened', it'd still be well within God's right to intervene. We'd still have plenty of free will without our ability to rape and murder and ruin peoples lives in various other horrific ways. Actually, the Bible does say that a Christian marriage is stronger than a non-Christian one.
  5. Oh yes, they do. Such as 'but God invented morals, and thus morals don't apply to him!', and similar garbage.
  6. I've got some answers to some of these, but I'll let our resident believers have a shot at it first.
  7. Is the Lion King one supposed to look pornographic, or it just me?
  8. [Drop-kicks Achilles] I was gonna post that! But yeah, that's one peculiar story. Wonder if he's just plain lazy or if he's in trouble.
  9. But even then, slalom and downhill are two different sports. Calling a game 'Downhill slalom' is like calling it 'American Football soccer'. Heh, maybe that's their next title. ...the ****? And what the **** are Kangaroos doing in a game about countryside bears? OMG, u, liek, have to check out the 1337 flash animation on there site, d00dz!1 I loved how it said 'Skip Intro' after the Flash animation had finished playing:D. This one's the best by far, though: To the u-boats!
  10. So could gangs. So could American terrorists (abortion clinic bombers, PETA fanatics who put animal testing sites on fire, etc.). Yup. The Russians fight the Chechnyans (with brutal, horrific methods) because they're dead set against the Chechen ethnic group getting their own homeland the way Israel did. The Middle Easterners fight the Kurds (likewise with inhuman means) for the same reason - that they don't want to - God forbid - give Kurdish land back to the Kurds. The US occupies Iraq (detaining and torturing people without trial) because Iraq has oil they didn't want to give to the US. Wonderful causes, those, and wonderful ways to carry them out. Truly. Where do I sign up to become a War on Terror stormtrooper? All the terrorists, eh? I've never heard a single Chechen rebel, Kurd, PETA member, IRA member, or for that matter Middle Eastern terrorist, to say he's doing what he's doing because he hates America and wants the world to be Muslim. Look, it's starting to really get on my nerves how the GOP has made it so that oppressive regimes are able to just slap the label 'terrorist' on the opposition and have people like you automatically support them. It's an incredibly naïve stance of you to take. I don't like the terrorist tactics (which is one of the reasons I dislike Gitmo), but to just classify them as evil because of their methods, or, even worse, because of a name they've been given by the people fighting them, is absurd to the extreme. In short, you can dislike taking hostages, torturing, and killing civilians all you want. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't support the idea of Chechen and Kurdish homelands. But is it a good one? No. Strawman argument. We look at it as belief because you can't produce evidence otherwise. Just like you would take it as belief if I said there's no info coming out of Gitmo, but that I couldn't prove and had no way to know. You know what compromises national security? Your blind trust of your leaders. Your support of something as barbaric as torture. Nice try. Again, what do you work as? Can you prove you have this employment? Can you prove you have security clearance? Listen closely now. Of course the people who created and support the torture at Gitmo will say it works fine. This goes without saying. Any politician who supports something will advocate it. Especially when he or she is a known liar. Do you take Communists on their word when they say Communism is the best thing since sliced bread? Do you blindly accept statements from Chinese mining corporations that their mines are safe? Do you take Putin at his word when he says Russian elections are not rigged? Let's shut down the Red Cross, Amnesty, and the UN election inspectors worldwide, then, and just ask the politicians how they're behaving. Would save a lot of people a lot of money, that's for sure:). Like they backed up their claims on WMDs in Iraq (I assume you've never read the Downing Street Memo)? Got'cha. Sadly. I, for one, have the statements made by the Red Cross inspectors visiting the facility. I have statements from former Gitmo guards and detainees, such as those depicted in The Road to Guantanamo. I have Amnesty reports. I have studies and reports on the inefficiency of torture, and its psychological effect on the torturer - I can refer you to the Stanford Prison Experiment as but one example. These sources tell me torture is going on at Gitmo, and that torture does not work.
  11. From his home page: So that explains it:). I loved his How to Hail a Bus essay, too. I imagined him saying it out loud, with accompanying funny and absurd pics.
  12. Lots of terrorists act on their own. Was Timothy McVeigh part of a terrorist network? Does that matter? What if all the terrorists were Hell-bent on destroying the States the way Joshua slaughtered Jericho, while huge coast-to-coast gangs 'only' want to strike it rich? The former still does far less damage to the States. And gangs have networks of people working towards a goal of robbing you blind, raping your sister, and enslaving you to monthly 'protection' payments. And even in a high-income neighborhood, I believe you still have a higher chance of a random thief or Bubba's thugs walking into your house to do you ill than of Ali Muhammad Haffa from Afghanistan crawling through your window with his turban and anthrax-laced sabre. As Achilles said, how on Earth do you know how efficient Gitmo is being? Are you privy to this information? I so strongly agree, which is one of the reasons why I argue so strongly for shutting Gitmo the Heck down. You couldn't find a more biased source?
  13. Look, put this into perspective. Even the worst serial murderers and rapists in the States get free trials. There are tens of thousands of murders in the States every year (as opposed to zero deaths from terrorism each year), and yet murderers get free trials, lawyers, and the right to go free if found innocent by the court. Do you support torture for people who are suspected for participation in robbery, murders, serial murders, hostage-taking, etc., too? These people kill far more Americans each year than the terrorists ever can. Yes, a goat-herder from Afghanistan could be a bomb-making terrorist-in-training. Just like a burger-flipper from Bronx could very well be a drug-producing, raping psychopath planning to shoot up the hood with his gang just for the sheer sick pleasure of it. Yet no one's saying that if we arrest a burger-flipper from Bronx because we suspect he knows something about, say, the brutal bank robbery downtown that left seven dead, he should be subjected to torture and indefinite detainment. But after all, how do we know that the gangsta we let go today may not shoot up his high school tomorrow? Or rob a bank? Or go on a rape spree? Or, Heck, blow up a police car with an IED? In your neighborhood? Murderers do not wear uniforms. They hide among their fellow civilians. We can't tell a murderer from a peaceful citizen. We still manage to deal with them just fine without torturing them. Nobody sent Cho's family to Gitmo after he shot up his school, did they? Just like SWAT teams storming a building with a hostage situation risk their lives because they don't just gas the place, like the Russians did when one of their theatres were taken over by Chechen rebels. Just like police in High Schools risk getting shot because they don't just expel all the students with mental problems (any one of them could be planning to shoot up the school, remember?).
  14. I thought it was good, but he sounded pretty tired. Perhaps it was the homosexuality allegations from the Guitar Hero game:p.
  15. I was provoked into posting this thread by this story, in which a man is provoked into committing a crime by a police officer, for then to be arrested: I personally find this disgusting. It's akin to walking into a pub and provoking the resident MC gang members to get them to beat you up, for then to call the cops and cry assault when they finally do. We have no way of knowing that this man was going to expose himself publicly if he had not been lured into this trap. There are also cases in which police leaves things such as X-Boxes, wallets, etc. lying about and arrest people when they pick them up. Jae, be sure to tell your kids that if they find a lost wallet on the street, they must not take it and take it to the police station, the lost-and-found, or to the rightful owner, because doing so is obviously not legal anymore: Is it really that bloody important to the cops the public fears and distrusts them? If people litterally are arrested for picking up a wallet, that effectively means it's illegal to decide to bring a lost wallet to authorities or to the lost-and-found. I remember a story from some time back about a mall leaving some cardboard boxes in gift wrapping around in their building and gave monetary rewards to those who actually brought them to the lost-and-found. Those who didn't discovered that they were full of whatever worthless ballast the mall people had filled them with. I respect such campaigns far better than this practice of making criminals or regular people just to give the impression you're doing something. More on entrapment here.
  16. Moot point. You advocate it against others even though you do not want it done unto you. In a totalitarian country, maybe. But 'innocent until proven guilty' is the motto of democratic nations. My point, either way, was that if you advocate torture against suspects, heck, even convicted criminals, you will be torturing people who are as innocent as you, your parents, and your best friends. There are already ample examples of this happening.
  17. You don't honestly believe the only way to interrogate someone is to torture them? So this whole Golden Rule deal of yours wasn't that important to you after all, eh:rolleyes:? Two wrongs don't make a right. And either way, not all armed forces in the world use torture. We'll be in 2008 in a few days, guys. Think a little before you post. Next you'll advocate running planes into buildings. I think it's time for this again. The Ticking Time Bomb fallacy. Reality doesn't work that way. First of all, you never know if the person you're torturing is 'a criminal' or innocent. And secondly, torture is dreadful at finding 'the truth'. Torture just makes the victim tell you what you want to hear, and if you can't tell the difference, I think you need to sit down and ponder it for a few minutes.
  18. Have played Art of Theft extensively now, and really love and recommend it. The idea of a stealth-based platform game is great and well-implemented, and lots of fun. The feeling you get from sneaking around without getting is caught is great, and finding new ways to foil traps while testing out the new abilities you achieve is wonderful. However, it's one of those 'wonderful game with lots of things that tick me off' titles, like Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike was. List of grievances: While this is just a platform game and thus isn't required to make sense, I'd prefer it if the AI had some sort of... AI. You know, reacting to things around it, especially alarms going off. If the rest of the guards actually changed their behaviour when alarms went off or when, for example, someone noticed an unlocked door or a missing painting, it'd be far better in my eyes. Alarms, as said, should be especially deadly to you as they'd greatly up the alert status of guards and perhaps add a timer to police arrival or something. Implementing this through difficulty settings would probably be the best way to handle it. Some key setups and combos are simply weird. In the heat of action, it's all too easy for me to fail to remember that in order to drop down to a lower level rather than up to a higher one, you have to hit Down+Space, not Space+Down. Hitting these two keys in the wrong order means you're going up, often right into the face of a camera, laser, or guard. Except for the cases with the lasers, there's no real penalty for not succeeding at a puzzle. Safes can still be opened after you've foiled an attempt, and you can't foil an attempt at lock-picking at all. The 'cut a wire' puzzle ticks me off as it's often seemingly just a matter of guesswork and trial and error more than an actual puzzle. The various levels of the little mini-games (the safe-cracking, lock-picking, and alarm-foiling) should be a bit more varied, with new levels adding new little challenges. There's untapped potential here. The way some of the missions are made is just strange, and annoying. For example, in one mission you're confronted with three notes with random numbers, and are then told to add them together for a three-digit code. This means that every time you re-do the mission, you have to add together three numbers, and these are sometimes not easily done without writing them down or using a calculator, making the process pretty tedious. Having the numbers be non-random and not telling the player he needed to add them together. Would make for a better puzzle, and a lot less tedious repetition at every mission do-over. It's still a great game that I play every day, though.
  19. Yes you do. Fess up:p. Heh, just downloaded Art of Theft after having put it off for an eternity because the YouTube movies made it look too easy. Turns out it's a lot more challenging than it sounds. Hehe, what with me first reading the Scott Lynch books on Locke Lamora (heartily recommended) and then playing the Chzo mythos and this... can somebody teach me lockpicking:p?
  20. Heh, bought it just for this mod myself. Would never touch it otherwise, what with the data mining and BF2-ish gameplay.
  21. Familiar places: Mos Espa First catch of the day Ruuuuuuun! Bike Patrol Field Repairs Anyone else play this mod? It's a Star Wars total conversion by a team that felt they ought to give BF2142 players an actual reason to buy the game, what with them actually having paid for it and all:p. It currently features five maps - two street combat maps on Tatooine, a forest battle on Endor's Sanctuary Moon, a blockade-running mission above Hoth, and a fleet battle in deep space. Upcoming maps include the Death Star and a combined arms map with tanks, aircraft, and speeders all in one. At least one map depicting the battle of Hoth is planned, too. It could use with a bit more depth and realism, but it's already a pretty good experience and I see great potential. My in-game and forum name is Safe-Keeper.
  • Create New...