This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - frezal
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 110
421
« on: June 18, 2011, 02:11:00 PM »
Right because something floating down from the sky and kicking you in the balls is not a reason. Has it ever happened in the past? No. Does it make sense for a physical being to fall from the sky without sustaining any damage? No. Does falling from the sky and kicking somebody in the balls prove divinity? No. At best, it proves the being has technology I don't know of. If I have an experience like that, I will need pretty good evidence to disprove what I see. In this scenario, all you saw was something fall from the sky and suddenly kick you in the balls. That is not proof of divinity, nor does it rule out the possibility of hallucination. If after getting your testicles examined, and a doctor determined that the damage is consistent with being kicked in the balls, that's still not proof of divinity. All you have is an unexplained mystery. If you want to rule out Earthly causes, it could still be an alien, a ghost, a time traveler, etc. The scenario proves nothing. Try dark matter, dark energy, superposition, entanglement, Schrodinger's Cat, emergence of consciousness, complex systems, economics, etc. Yes we know so much that none of us can learn them all in one lifetime, but that does not mean science explain "everything". I didn't claim that we know everything. That's the problem with newagers and the religious. No we don't have all the answers, but history has taught us that the scientific method eventually leads us to said answers. Believing in the supernatural until an answer is found is just intellectually lazy. Also, how is gravity is qualitatively different from mysticism? Yes this is a serious question. Your dogma might immediately reject this because gravity is "so science" today, but when Newton first announce this many scientist attack it as mysticism because it is just some attractive force that exists. Yes we can put equations on it, we know how strong it is, but even now nobody has a clue why gravity, or mass, exist. Nor can we alter/manipulate it in any way. The LHC has yet to find the Higgs Bozon. So it's just some force, that's just how it is, and you just have to live with it. Gravity is internally consistent and works with our current understanding of the universe. One doesn't need to know how it works or why to measure its existence. So if you live in Harry Potters world and you discover magical forces that you can quantify, calculate, put into books, and systematically channel, how is that differ from the 4 fundamental forces of gravity/electromagnetism/strong/weak? We explain off the 4 forces as "property of space", as well as random particles popping in and out of existence in the quantum scale. So why can't we have a 5th force, or 6th force, if by adding them in can quantitatively explain a bunch of unexplainable phenomenon? If we could measure magic, that would be different. Thus far, we haven't found any scenario that requires magic to be explained. (Well, aside from the iPad.) Things we cannot yet explain, such as dark energy, =/= supernatural. Even things that are fundamentally unexplainable, such as the world smaller then Planck size, or the universe beyond the Hubble sphere, also =/= supernatural.
Fortunately some scientists are more open minded. They are willing to accept new forces so long as they can be observed/quantified. They fight powerful social dogmas that used the "we can explain most things" argument to discredit their finding, and through their victory we have stuff like cellphones and GPS. That's my whole point! In the scenario presented, and in every scenario I have thought of, divinity cannot be observed/quantified. Too many variables exist to isolate the cause as being divine. And how many seconds does it take for you to come to this conclusion? Have you any similar experiences in the past in which to draw reliable conclusions on? I am relying entirely on the fact that no sane and honest person has ever claimed to have been kicked in the balls by a god. What experience in the past has led you to the conclusion that a god did it? Given that you don't, what scientific law do you use to calculate the likelihood of hoax, hallucination, or a living monster? Why is an unidentified living organism unlikely given we find new organisms in caves, rivers, and deep sea everyday? Please don't throw probabilities around. Probability testing is a pain staking process that takes time to calculating/plug into excel all those things, follow by statistical analysis. Your gut feeling does not equal logic. It very well could be a "monster." That doesn't make it Jesus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I can safely assume said creature is not made out of spaghetti, though, based on my knowledge of the pasta. Seeing some flashing light and literally seeing a spaghetti monster kicking you in the balls are 2 very different things. When I see flashing light, I assume I see flashing light. Any further assumptions are mere fantasies that can neither be verified by or hold relevant to me. As such I do not care. But how do you know it was a monster composed of spaghetti? You haven't had time to study the thing, so at this point, you're just speculating. (And your speculation is something that isn't consistent with what we know about living beings or spaghetti.) Try having an alien mother ship beaming down green dudes shooting lasers at me. Yes, I will assume they are aliens without considering other explanations. Hey it might be a hoax too, but I think whoever just stands there and hope the laser is fake are retarded. I believe my eyes enough to not take that kind of chances. Regardless of what it really is, the scenario is still scary. Fight-or-Flight kicks in, and I'd probably run. But again, just because I saw green men with laser guns, that doesn't mean aliens. Other earthly explanations (military testing, hoax, hallucination, etc.) and even supernatural explanations (ghosts, god(s), time travelers, vegetable monsters, etc.) exist. I will not respond to the other 2 because you resort to personal attacks, which is a clear sign that you ran out of intelligent things to say.
When you insult my principles, I insult you. Sure, you insult with long-winded attempts to assassinate my character, but that doesn't mean you're taking any sort of high road. 
422
« on: June 17, 2011, 10:52:31 PM »
Worst part is that somehow he can holds strong faith in Atheism. It isn't faith. I don't have an active belief in no gods; I have been given no reason to assume one or more gods exist. The same could be said about Sasquatch. These kind of logic only ends in epistemological solipsism. If you cannot be sure what you see ever happen, you cannot know the external world exist with certainty. Whether or not reality is real doesn't matter. Thus far, nothing has happened that cannot be adequately explained by science (even if it takes a while to find an answer that works). Not once has magic been the sole explanation, or the most logical. Some people like to compare God with spaghetti monster. If I saw a spaghetti monster jump down from the sky and kick Frezal in the balls, I will believe it exists. Even though it's far more likely to be a hoax or a hallucination? When you see a strange light in the sky, do you also assume aliens without considering explanations that we know to exist? And I think Frezal will have much less problem accepting a spaghetti monster exist then Jesus.
I can make stupid statements as well: I think 123savethewhales will have much less of a problem licking his mother's cunt than accurately describing my beliefs. Spaghetti monsters have the same inherent problems as Bronze Age zombies. Considering my stances whenever a supernatural subject is approached, why would you assume I would have different standards for different kinds of crazy?
423
« on: June 17, 2011, 08:15:57 PM »
Can ordinary human jump down from the sky? Yeah I thought so. There's nothing ordinary or rational about that.
How can I be sure he jumped down from the sky? How can I be sure the guy doesn't have technology I don't know about? How can I be sure what I saw actually happened?
424
« on: June 17, 2011, 07:36:30 PM »
What if Jesus Christ jumped down from heaven and kicked you in the balls?
I would rationally conclude that it was just an ordinary human who kicked me in the balls.
425
« on: June 16, 2011, 08:40:55 PM »
Anti-theist
Are you also a fan of the Christopher Hitchens? I'm agnostic atheist. I can't believe in something without some sort of evidence. At the same time, I'm not really sure what evidence would convince me that there are one or more gods. If I heard voices, I would assume hallucination. If my reality were distorted, I would assume I've gone crazy.
426
« on: June 14, 2011, 08:03:19 PM »
It's a shame there isn't a "Games" forum on these boards. It truly is upsetting. If there was one, topics about games could go there instead of cluttering up the Chatterbox. It could even have a cool URL like https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php/board,76.0.htmlOh well. A man can dream; a man can dream...
427
« on: June 14, 2011, 03:57:53 AM »
But still, I've never really liked pixar outside of TS.
Too much plot for you to follow?
428
« on: June 12, 2011, 03:03:21 AM »
It's not trolling. It's true. I dont know his real name, but his internet name is Furizu, that's for sure.
That's a little too similar to my short-lived screen name 'furezo'. I should find and destroy this kid.
429
« on: June 11, 2011, 04:50:09 PM »
all of them have made massive profits in both hardware and software sales.
Not quite. For the first few years, Microsoft and Sony were selling their consoles at a loss.
430
« on: June 11, 2011, 04:31:23 PM »
PC gaming is good, but I find that if you don't have a fully optimised PC, it can be slow. Console gaming does not have this issue, as games will play just for the console, without needing '*blank* or better'. I haven't explained it very well, but I'm sure you roughly get what I mean. For example, The Sims 3 is better on console because it will run at a speed that isn't dependent on your PC specs, and so is on average faster. Playing games on the PC is better, but I prefer using consoles. Less hassle, plus none of my PCs have designated graphics cards.
I get what you're saying :P They are at least better than Mac when it comes to gaming. I can't even upgrade my Macbook, so I can't run anything.
If you want a gaming Mac that will last, get a Mac Pro and dual-boot Windows. The hardware is fully upgradable, and the stock specs are fantastic. http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC560LL/A?mco=MTg2OTUwMjQ
431
« on: June 11, 2011, 04:04:59 PM »
Meh, Super 8 is better.
I prefer tiramisu.
432
« on: June 11, 2011, 03:57:00 PM »
There are better Kinect model hacks, there is a bunch of other cool hacks aswell. Odd that you consider hacks for Kinect to be features, but don't count jailbreak apps for iOS whenever ragging on iPhones. Could it be that you're a hack? I was just demonstrating the fact that the Kinect has more uses and power compared to its competitors.
And WiiMotes have been used to perform surgery: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526881,00.htmlIn terms of gaming, the Kinect (in its current form) will never be as good as the PlayStation Move or Wii Motion+. Why is that? The Kinect has no physical inputs, unlike the Wii and PlayStation which both feature nunchuks with analogue sticks. This limits Kinect's motion controls to on-rails "shooting galleries" and minigame collections. Meanwhile, Motion+ has 1:1 Zelda and Move has Socom with good aiming. Anyways who would say what looks better PSVita or 3DS?
Depends on what you're looking for. They offer completely different experiences, so if you can afford it, get both.
433
« on: June 11, 2011, 02:21:34 AM »
I'm in a relationship with cute boy called Furizu. He is 16 and very great person, he is also into same things that I am. Only sad thing is that he lives in america so we may not have much time to talk with eachother. 
Is it really dating if you've had no physical interaction with the person?
434
« on: June 11, 2011, 12:20:13 AM »
that wasn`t meant to sound like whining.
what happend happend and now I can say: F**k it 
I was pointing out the similarities between your story and the plot of The Room.
435
« on: June 10, 2011, 11:14:21 PM »
they can be great but they can suck also.ATM I`m in one that will end in 2 months and we both know it. but we enjoy the time that is left.
I had 2 GFs (no not you GoldenFox :P) before (if you don`t count the other girls...). The first one is still in bad memory cause of the way she broke up. She told me storys about and "good friend" and stuff and in the end she cheated on me with this little... babyfaceguy
436
« on: June 10, 2011, 04:26:56 PM »
Relationships can be a lot of fun. A big problem people have is that they want good things to last forever. Not all relationships need to last forever in order to be a good experience. Not just a faggot crossdresser, GTM's faggot crossdresser. 
What am I, chopped liver?
437
« on: June 10, 2011, 02:32:26 PM »
i.e., REAL hardcore gamers have a Wii.
Real hardcore gamers don't give a sh** about labels and play whatever they think is fun.
438
« on: June 10, 2011, 02:26:22 PM »
I really hate the current trend of color pallets consisting only of brown, gunmetal, and lens flare. Video games are a visual medium. Excite my eyes with some color!
Katamari Damaci
First party Nintendo titles are generally colorful as well. That doesn't mean the bland "mature" trend doesn't exist and isn't annoying.
439
« on: June 10, 2011, 12:40:51 PM »
Jesus Christ RR, why do you think you know everything about electronics?
Because that is what I go to college for.
Then I suggest you pay more attention in class.
440
« on: June 09, 2011, 10:35:29 PM »
I really hate the current trend of color pallets consisting only of brown, gunmetal, and lens flare. Video games are a visual medium. Excite my eyes with some color!
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 110
|
Show Posts