NSFW Best Thread Ever [No SJW-related posts allowed]

[Data4]

Okay, one last thing and then I'm out.

Re-primordial soup of atoms, molecules, etc. is definitly someting not nothing.

Where'd the soup come from?

-D4

 

[Kraszu]

Data4 my point is that evolution doesn't cover it. Ther are theoryes that covers it but they are not connected whit evolution they just don't contest it. Like that it is cyclic big bang>universe expand>universe collaps>big bang.

 

[Twinfalls]

Creationists just want Intelligent design presented as another possibility along with evolution. That's it.

Well they need to do some fucking work for it then, rather than just lobbying, bullying, and assuming. Work like actually getting something published in a peer-reviewed journal (so far it is the only 'science' which has failed to do so).

I'd like "Twinfalls Design" to be taught in schools - the theory that all creatures great and small achieved their present shape not by evolving, but by realising in three dimensions the complex harmonies generated by my nipples when they twang a tuning fork held by grinning one-eyed farmer from the Transvaal.

Unlike Creationists, however, I accept that I must first go through all them hard steps, like empirical research, evidence-gathering, open scrutiny and sufficient peer acceptance by qualified scientists, which a theory must traverse before it is taught at schools.

 

[Calis]

I stand corrected. I went into a philosophical discussion on what science is and isn't, while the easy way out would be to call creationists lazy bitches.

Nice job. :D

 

[Bluebottle]

Where'd the soup come from?

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast20dec_1.htm
This discovery (among other meteorites found containing the basic building blocks of life) have caused scientists to re-evaluate just how common these building blocks are. Also there was a discovery, last year, of massive amounts of sugar (a relatively complex bio-molecule) close to the centre of our Galaxy.

 

[Sentenza]

Creationists just want Intelligent design presented as another possibility along with evolution.

I don't give a fuck of what 'they' WANT
If they have a better theory, they should PROOVE it, or fuck themselves up; there's no place in the science for unproved theories, no matter how 'good' they seems to be

 

[Blahblah Talks]

I accept that I must first go through all them hard steps, like empirical research, evidence-gathering,

Can I be your lab assistant? I'd love to twang your nipples with a tuning fork.

Also there was a discovery, last year, of massive amounts of sugar (a relatively complex bio-molecule) close to the centre of our Galaxy.

Yes, but that is only because a Starbucks was recently opened there.

@ Data4: I found this on the website you linked to:

The subject of origins is important because "how we got here" is the most fundamental question that can be asked. "Why we are here" is a question science cannot answer, but which is just as important. How we answer these questions for ourselves provides the basis for how we think about the world - it defines our "world-view". The belief that people were created by God, in the "image of God", is at the heart of "creationism". The belief that people now exist because of a long string of random chance events is one of the tenets of "naturalism", of which "evolution" is a part. Naturalism is the idea that "nature" is "all there is", there is no supernatural. Even though some evolutionary scientists profess belief in God, evolution has no need of Him. It is obvious that these two ideas are opposed to each other, and that only one can be true - either God exists and He created us, or we are a product of time and chance.

Some people say that God used the mechanisms of evolution to produce people. This is known as "theistic evolution". However, when it is understood that mutation and natural selection, the driving forces behind evolution, are totally incapable of producing large-scale change, it is seen that this compromise position does not make sense. The people who hold to this view have been led to believe that science has "proven" evolution, but such is not the case. Finally, it should bother us that the truth is not being taught. At a minimum, special creation should be acknowledged as a viable possibility. Evolutionary training leads to an atheistic way of thinking.

I'm not sure exactly why you find this site "fascinating." You seem to me reasonably level headed and fair, yet I find this authors words to be quite one-sided - he seems not open to alternate possibilities. He says that creation science is "the truth", and evolution is not, while at the same time lamenting the fact that the establishment is not acknowledging Creationism as a viable alternative. He then proceeds to imply that "atheistic thinking" is objectively wrong and should be avoided.

He also misrepresents the theory of evolution. He says, "These two world-views of creation and evolution say very different things about who we are, why we are here, and who is ultimately in control." As Calis pointed out (excellent post, btw), evolution says nothing about those three issues. It merely describes the how. I don't know, maybe I need to delve further into the site to see what you are talking about, but so far I see the same old rhetoric.

Earlier you said, "Did you know that many creationists accept the concepts of evolution with the sole exception being disagreement with the idea that matter evolves from nothing?" I have a question regarding this. It was my understanding that the main tenet of Creationism (which is different from Itelligent Design) was that God created the Universe and all the Plants and Animals in their final forms (i.e. the way we see them today). One of the erroneous conclusions this leads to is that humans and dinosaurs existed together; scientists generally believe, in the face of a large set of evidence, that our species first appeared X years ago, while other species first appeared Y years ago (with Y much, much larger than X). So, did God create us all at the same time? Or did he create all of the major phlya (or classes) at the same time, which evolved into the various individual species? Or did he create a less specific group (e.g. Kingdom)? What is your personal belief, and what is the "mainstream Creationist" belief? And finally, how different is this from ID?

 

[Wild Slop]

the best thread ever is collapsing into a singularity

 

[Kraszu]

I will leave with this, which is a non preachy look at creationism from a scientific point of view. I just found it a few minutes ago, and so far, I'm finding it fascinating.

-D4

I just wanted to point that on that website there is nothing that support ID, only things that:
1)want to disprove evolution.
2)Are personal beliefs: ID is true because it make sense to me.

To prove since theory you have to give evidence of it, not disprove something else.

 

[Data4]

Eh, okay, so the site wasn't as objective as I first thought. I based my opinion of "fascinating" on the first link in the Topics section, "Evolutionary Theory: the Big Problems!" which was pretty thorough. Yes, it seems he's mostly trying to disprove evolution, but that doesn't totally invalidate the site or the works he cited. It just shows that belief in evolution-- specifically macroevolution-- as the process by which life originated takes a pretty big leap of faith as well. Yes, science backs up some parts of the theory, but archaology backs up some parts of the bible, too.

I do have a problem with his apparantly immobile stance about the earth's age and the 6 day creation cycle. Not to take away from God or anything-- he should be able to do anything he wants how he wants-- but since the question of how long it took and how long ago it was isn't central to the tenets of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ, it's subject to interpretation. I like to think that since a day as we know it is defined by the orbital behavior of the earth, a day in God's terms are relative to him. A passage in the NT says that to God, a day is as a thousand years, so...

Anyway, yeah, creationism, ID, whatever. The point in all of this, I think, is that evolution provides a nice, sterile explanation of things that relies on pure chance rather than an intelligent creator. The lack of transitional forms casts serious doubt on it being THE answer, but that's okay. Transitional forms are to evolution as the Garden of Eden is to creationists.

-D4

 

[John Yossarian]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=564780
This is hilarious. Someone posts a negative review and they all freak out. Funny how the mods haven't closed that one even though it's nothing but bitching and cursing.

 

[Twinfalls]

Just compare this passage from that review:

Also, the sound effects aren't great either. When you put away your sword, you'll hear a metal-against-metal sound. Yet the sheath isn't metal, and some swords aren't even sheathed. When you drop a potion on the ground, you hear a sound that sounds like rock-against-rock, even though the potion is glass. When you hit a tree with your sword, it makes a metallic clanking sound instead of a wood-like sound effect. In real life, if you were in a forest, cut down a tree, and heard it fall but the sound was the sound of rock-on-rock, you would be creeped out and think you were in some kind of Truman Show starring Jim Carrey. You would no longer be engaged in the task of cutting down the tree. The poor sound effects take you out of the game and may as well scream out “THIS ISN'T REAL!” Fun.

With this bit of pre-release PR from Oblivion's Ass-Prod:

Gavin Carter: One of the new features that really improves the game experience is the use of physics-based sound. We associate sound categories with material types on objects and have ways we can mix and match up sounds depending on collisions that occur in the game. So dropping a sword on the stone floor of a cave will sound different then dropping it on the floor of a wooden house. The system is global, so even things like combat sounds get modulated by it. So striking a guy in full armor will give you a nice clang, while smacking a goblin with a warhammer will give you a satisfying flesh impact sound.

 

[hiciacit]

The lack of transitional forms casts serious doubt on it being THE answer, but that's okay. Transitional forms are to evolution as the Garden of Eden is to creationists.

-D4

A slightly misinformed statement. It might be true for the phylogeny of some particular species (e.g. man), but on the whole, that is a flawed statement.

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=564780

That reviewer has a good attention to detail.

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=564780

That reviewer has a good attention to detail.

He said Tony Blair was the Prime Minister of Europe.

 

[Data4]

The lack of transitional forms casts serious doubt on it being THE answer, but that's okay. Transitional forms are to evolution as the Garden of Eden is to creationists.

-D4

A slightly misinformed statement. It might be true for the phylogeny of some particular species (e.g. man), but on the whole, that is a flawed statement.

It was an offhand statement that was incorrect, but hardly misinformed. My analogy skills were on the downswing. Let me rephrase: The discovery of concrete proof of a transitional form that leaves no room for doubt would be proof of macroevolution of the magnitude that the discovery of [stone tablets with the law of Moses, the Ark of the Covenent, remnants of Noah's Ark, etc.] might lend credence to the creation philosophy.

-D4

 

[Kraszu]

Data4 founding stone tablet whit ten comandends would not prove much actually. Things that are written in Bible are fiction whit some real events it would not be supposing if people that write bible also made stone tablets, no? Macroevolution on other hand make perfect senseit is logic consequence of microevolution that is proven.

 

[Lumpy]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=564780
This is hilarious. Someone posts a negative review and they all freak out. Funny how the mods haven't closed that one even though it's nothing but bitching and cursing.

That review IS stupid:

You'll want to play your music during the game, but when you play music you can barely hear the characters, so you have to read the subtitles. I don't play games to read. If I wanted to read, I would pick up a book. They didn't balance the sound well at all.

I wonder what he would think about Planescape.

You know that story I talked about? That's almost it. For some reason the emperor is killed, and for some reason that causes portals to Oblivion to open. That makes no sense, though. I mean, if I killed George Bush that wouldn't make portals to Iraq appear in my front yard, it would just get me arrested for murder and terrorism, but that's beside the point. You have to close these portals while getting some other guy on the throne. For some reason, though, he needs an amulet, which you have to track down at the same time. What do amulets have to do with becoming an emperor anyway? Did Tony Blair need to wear a ring to become Prime Minister of Europe? I know it's supposed to be a fantasy, but it still makes no sense.

Prime Minister of Europe?
Which also shows that, in his opinion, reading is teh hard. If he read only one book, "The Amulet of Kings", he would have understood that it made sense. If he read any other books besides that, he would have understood that it was crap, but for a different reason.

Anyway, along the way you can join a bunch of “guilds” that have you do jobs for them, but you don't really get much for doing them, and the quests are all the same. Every Dark Brotherhood (one guild) quest has you kill someone, for example. It's pretty unrealistic how little variety there is. I doubt the only thing a mob member would do is drop people in rivers. They would have variety, something the guild quests for some reason don't have.

Now, the guilds did suck, and the quests were repetitive, but just what the fuck was the Assassins Guild supposed to have you do? Pick flowers? That's the Mages Guild's job.

Also, what exactly ARE the Elder Scrolls? They're mentioned every now and then, but are they really important enough to have a series named after them?

You'd think that, since he is a reviewer, he should either try to find out more about that matter, or shut up. That's the first question in the Lore FAQ on the forums.

Also, the sound effects aren't great either. When you put away your sword, you'll hear a metal-against-metal sound. Yet the sheath isn't metal, and some swords aren't even sheathed. When you drop a potion on the ground, you hear a sound that sounds like rock-against-rock, even though the potion is glass. When you hit a tree with your sword, it makes a metallic clanking sound instead of a wood-like sound effect. In real life, if you were in a forest, cut down a tree, and heard it fall but the sound was the sound of rock-on-rock, you would be creeped out and think you were in some kind of Truman Show starring Jim Carrey. You would no longer be engaged in the task of cutting down the tree. The poor sound effects take you out of the game and may as well scream out “THIS ISN'T REAL!” Fun.

Strange, I never really noticed that the sounds weren't right, much less scream out "OMG TIHS ISNT REEL!!!1". Again, I wonder what he'd think about the games where there is a single sound effect for using objects.

The graphics definitely look nice, but they aren't that realistic. There are all kinds of different races, but none of them look like humans. They don't even seem proportional. When you go to make a character, you can't get them to look real either. Actually, why do you get to craft your character. When you have a baby, you can't just choose how he'll look. You have to get expensive plastic surgery. What happens for most of the game is that the grpaphics look good, but the make no sense. For example, there are nice looking streets, but no cars, carrages, or anything else that would necessitate a street. You can look into the sky and see moons, but they're IN FRONT OF THE CLOUDS. Also, your character is static. He never changes. Dive under water and his hair stays the same. If the YMCA pool didn't affect your hair, you would either be wearing a ton of product or you would sue the Y for putting crazy chemicals in the water. Is the water in this area polluted or something? Also, the towns are nice, but almost all of the wilderness is the same. Hills, trees, dirt, and grass. That's it. And maybe some caves. The point is they didn't put a ton of effort into the outside areas.

The elves and orcs don't look like humans. Right...
As for customizing your character, how on Earth can someone complain about that?
And your hair doesn't get wet after swimming. Yep, that's why Oblivion sucks.

Let's talk about weapons, shall we? You can get things like bows and arrows, swords, short swords, long swords, and axes, but nothing better than that. That means no guns, no missles, etc. Wouldn't the giant, menacing creatures be easier to beat with heat-seeking missles? This game takes place in 4000 something, and they've gone that long without inventing those kind of things? I know it's a fantasy, but civilizations used concrete before the Romans invented it, so why couldn't guns and missles be invented in this realm?

I don't think this requires any comments...

There's also the issue of the camera. You can play in first or third person, but in third person the camera gets really weird and you can barely move. For some reason, you can only see the back of your character, though considering how horrible they look that's probably a good thing. Still, in

The camera gets really weird? Didn't happen to me, or to 50% of the Oblivion players who play it in third person. And you can see the front of your character, although this requires, OMG, reading the controls page. "Still, in" indeed

I know that may seem shocking, but you really can't replay this much. After you finish all the quests for the guilds and beat the quest, what else is there to do? They say you can play it gain, but that's stupid. If a great band came out with one album, and everyone said they should make another, they wouldn't say “listen to our first one again,” Yet that seems like what Bethesda (the company that made this game) thinks. It took them 5 years to make this game, and all we could do while waiting was replay Morrowind, which had even less replay value to it. Why does it take them so long to make these games anyway? Ratchet and Clank has a new game every year. So does Madden, Burnout, Pokemon, and Mario Party. So why does Bethesda take years and years?

Of course after you do everything in the game, there's no replay value. But the point of replaying is that you do something different each time. "all we could do while waiting was replay Morrowind"? He said he only "knew someone who played Morrowind". And yes, Bethesda should definetly release a game each year.

Everyone claims this game is great, but it isn't. It's repetitive, unrealistic, and poorly balanced. There's no replay value to be found, and too many bad things. The Elder Scrolls 5 might fix this stuff, but it probably won't come out until the Xbox 720 is released. Until then, we're left with something mediocre and lame. The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion gets a 3 out of ten. That score is not an average or anything, but does it need to be? No.

Yes, it isn't great, it is repetitive, unrealistic and poorly balanced. But not why you think it is.

 

[Data4]

Data4 founding stone tablet whit ten comandends would not prove much actually. Things that are written in Bible are fiction whit some real events it would not be supposing if people that write bible also made stone tablets, no? Macroevolution on other hand make perfect senseit is logic consequence of microevolution that is proven.

You totally missed the point. Try taking my post figuratively instead of literally, okay? Take it whit a grain of salt. I'm saying transitional forms, rather, the discovery thereof would pretty much be a clencher for evolution. I then tried to draw a comparison with something that would do it for creationism, which is my own fallacy. Short of God, himself, decending out of the heavens to declare his reality, there is no proof to be had now, or in the future.

I can understand arguing for arguing's sake, but sheesh! This is bringing the obtuse out in some people.

-D4

 

[hiciacit]

Hehe, I understood quite well what you meant. I was under the impression though that that there are plenty of transitional forms known (mostly in plants, but I might be mistaken). Perhaps I have my terminology mixed up, or we are just referring to different things.

 

[Kraszu]

Data4:
Transitional forms

As for the faith if you scratch that term believing in anything is faith, the point is that ID is not science because there is no empiric prof of it. ID is based on:
1)Finding reasons on why we should not agree whit evolution. (basicly that comes down to: we are to complex to be effect of evolution)
2)Bible.

 

[Wild Slop]

basically already asked:
Where does matter and energy come from?

Just what exactly is “science”?

Calis give a good answer in the ""how""

How can a true scientist claim to be able to prove or disprove the existence of God?

As for the faith if you scratch that term believing in anything is faith

Yes
if science can teach us anything it may be that



Data4
I saw you brought up microevolution and denied macroevolution …

How can there be one without the other?

*
(i'll go over that link you put up)

 

[denizsi]

Well they need to do some fucking work for it then, rather than just lobbying, bullying, and assuming. Work like actually getting something published in a peer-reviewed journal (so far it is the only 'science' which has failed to do so).

Islamists are doing a pseudo job of that here to prove intelligent design. They set up these little "educational" stands in public places, like squares, metro stations, shopping malls etc.. There, they exhibit relics from creatures like crocodiles, some birds, insects and what have you, the ones which has been exposed to the least amount of physical evolution.

When you start to read through all the panes, there doesn't seem to be a motivation for such a stand at first. They describe the creatures in question, how they survived with little to no evolution and how they have always been around. In the last humongous pane, they conclude that evolutions is a hoax, that these archeological relics are evidence to that and that's why humans have always been around the way they are, therefore everything including men is a part of god's intelligent design.

 

[John Yossarian]

snip

That's not the point. Plenty of the positive reviews were stupid too, did anyone at the ESF come out against it like that? Also, I think a lot the posters there are idiots, and many of their posts are evidence for that, so can I call them idiots and dickfaces without getting banned or my posts deleted?

Edit: I stand corrected. Tegger finally locked the thread and said she'll be giving out warnings. At least they are somewhat consistent. I just wished all the threads we made lasted this long.

 

[stargelman]

Edit: I stand corrected. Tegger finally locked the thread and said he'll be giving out warnings. At least they are somewhat consistent. I just wished all the threads we made lasted this long.

I guess it does depend on the moderator. Tegger, she's ok.