Was pretty unimpressive, to be honest. Most horror movies nowadays are really not that good at inducing fear from me anymore, the movie wasn't scary. The plot was also kind of weak, I didn't realize the film was actually going to be over so soon, it felt like there should have been more. Also I should probably mention that nobody would give a **** about this movie if Dan Radcliffe wasn't in it.
ur sirry lol
At this point I really don't care. I prefer to just live my life the way I want and hope for the best. If some deity has a beef with that, there's not much I can do about it. I couldn't possibly know what the "right" belief is, and even then I don't think I would change my way of life. I'm really not interested in the idea of living forever with or without God or any such thing, so that promise has no sway over me.
It's a terrible bill and I support any effort dedicated to preventing it from being a reality. I support the government doing things but this is just too much. I like my internet the way it is.
It's really not the fact that the guy implied he believes in zodiac signs that's irritating, it's just that he said something really dumb about science. Even if it's a joke, it's not a very good one. And for what it's worth, opinions are only worth as much as their foundation. If your opinion has no factual basis to it, why should anyone take it seriously? And on that note, yeah, I think Styx has this just about right. I see no reason to give astrology any credibility until I see something that suggests it has any factual connection to people's personalities.
I've seen Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, Princess Mononoke, and Grave of the Fireflies. Spirited Away was good. I don't have too much to say about it other than I don't love it as much as everyone else does. The presentation was stunning, obviously, but other than that everything else was just good. People overhype the hell out of it. Howl's Moving Castle had an equally stunning atmosphere and presentation, but I wouldn't consider it a good movie at all because the narrative was so incredibly weak and disjointed. They don't do a good job of properly introducing and pulling you into the world either. Probably one of Miyazaki's weakest movies, tbh. Princess Mononoke is probably the best of the three Miyazakis that I saw. It's the only environmental film I've ever seen that didn't come off as preachy, obnoxious, and blatantly slanted. The characters are pretty gray, so I like it for that. Plus the soundtrack was amazing. Grave of the Fireflies, despite not being a Miyazaki movie and being a more personal and less grandiose story than all these other movies, is my favorite Ghibli so far because of how emotional and powerful it is. It is one of the most human animated films I have ever seen.
the anime dub was awful i suppose the original groove adventure rave could potentially be a decent shonen but i honestly have no idea
why you wouldn't want to upgrade is beyond me, because vista is terrible.
I've only been using 7 for about a year now. Seriously, Microsoft?
Godzilla movies are great. Very cheesy and unintentionally hilarious. I've only seen Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla and part of Ghidorah the Three Headed Monster though.
This is what I did as well. also lol my compat with all of you blows except for nashida who i am apparently highly compatible with you're a coolbro i guess
http://www.last.fm/user/opticalanomaly do you has, KHV
Cats. Dogs are slobbery and gross and don't seem to like me very much anyway. Cats make for great company.
Tactics Advance was cool. I played it before the first Tactics so I was able to appreciate it for what it was. Not to say the original Tactics isn't way better, of course. Been wanting to play IX for a while, but I probably have enough games i need to finish. I just started Xenogears like a week ago. :x
The idea behind socialism indeed isn't bad, but it doesn't really work well in practice in large places over long periods of time, and it certainly can't work at all anymore. True communism also will probably never happen. In terms of my political beliefs I'm probably a social democrat over anything else, but even I think worshipping Communism/Socialism at this point is kinda faggy. Anyways, I suggest giving her a cockslap to the face. That usually works wonders.
I'm guessing stick with PaleMoon for now if you want a better version of FF.
"You don't know anything about it" wasn't necessarily to be taken literally, but you don't seem to know much about evolution outside of the fact that Charles Darwin had a hand in it. Which would not really present a problem, if you had not proceeded to make statements about it that were false, whatever your intent behind making them was. What you said about the missing link wasn't correct, and I've already pointed that out. Nearly everything else you've said about evolution in this thread was either misleading or downright false. Also, I don't believe you ever accused me of making assumptions about the Bible (that would be Styx). However, you did accuse me of other things at least twice: I don't think you necessarily meant it this way, but I took it as you accusing me of assuming that most of the scientific community shared my opinion. However... ...that is definitely you accusing me of assuming the same thing as before. So yeah. I don't really care if you're a "hardcore creationist", you certainly came off to me that way even if you said otherwise. Even if you were being the devil's advocate or whatever though, what really matters is you posted statements about evolution and I responded to them. That's about it, really.
Well actually no it hasn't. In a roundtable Miyamoto said that after Galaxy 2 they "couldn't not do the same for Zelda" in terms of the music, but in a later interview with Aonuma he said they hadn't really decided on anything yet. So it's up in the air at this point.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#proof http://www.skepticfiles.org/evolut/100pcnts.htm http://people.delphiforums.com/lordorman/light.htm http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ http://ncse.com/evolution/education/theory-fact http://www.springerlink.com/content/21p11486w0582205/fulltext.pdf http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#b2 http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13717-evolution-myths-yet-more-misconceptions.html ...and so on and so forth. I could go on all day. Of course, you're not even going to read any of it, but since you asked so nicely... I don't know enough about evolution to answer your question about the evolution of apes specifically, but different species arising in general HAVE been observed. Ever heard of peppered moths? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/23.Cases.HTML Of course I understand why it's a sensitive subject to them, but it doesn't mean we can't talk about it. And the funny thing is I never even said the Bible was a fantasy or a lie anyway. You do realize there are many ways of interpreting it, right? Every scientist who ever made a hypothesis about anything must be insane then. And you rely on constructs based on their findings all the time in your everyday life. Funny how that works, isn't it? Uh, first of all, his name is Lamarck, not Lamarckian. Secondly, you would have a point if they were the only people who ever spoke about evolution. Like I already said, hundreds of scientists have done research and it's been confirmed as an empirical fact. Actually, no, you're wrong. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA042.html http://ncse.com/evolution/why-teach-evolution http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA110.html http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html http://home.entouch.net/dmd/moreandmore.htm http://ncse.com/news/2009/07/views-evolution-among-public-scientists-004904 http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#b2 Wrong again. I'm not "assuming" anything. Here's the thing: not all opinions are valid. You can believe in anything you want, but that doesn't mean what you believe in is true. If an opinion contradicts facts, it's wrong. If you say the sky is green and say it's your opinion, you're still wrong. I don't care that people believe in creationism and in fact I have creationist friends and relatives that I like; the problem is when they spread misconceptions and lies about science and how it works proving that they don't know anything about it and that their rejection of it is ill-founded. Saying "I believe in God and creation" is different than saying "evolution is a lie, there's no evidence, it's just a theory, Darwin was insane, lots of scientists don't believe in it, etc". The first one is fine, the second one is just being dishonest, it's an insult to both science and religion. In your case, you're accusing me of making assumptions over and over again, even when I post (multiple) valid scientific sources for just about everything I say, which you just conveniently ignore, whereas you just seem to say whatever the hell you want about evolution even though you clearly don't know anything about it.
Evolution has already been proven as an empirical fact. You are confusing evolution with common descent. Next. Um, you do know that evolution takes millions of years to produce significant changes right? I should also point out that the theory of evolution doesn't say we evolved from monkeys. Not the monkeys we see today. Rather, we and those monkeys have a common ancestor which branched off into different species at some point. That's a very ignorant assessment of what he did. He studied animal physiology and behavior for YEARS and noticed that there were patterns that pointed to a logical conclusion. Being a scientist and researcher takes a lot of hard work and the fact that you brush off his studies with such irreverence is just insulting. Why the hell would he have been insane? What in fucking hell are you basing that on? Incidentally the idea that animals changed over time was already around before Darwin. Ever heard of Lamarckian evolution? So he wasn't just pulling crap out of his ass. Speaking of which, it is true that not all of Darwin's assessments were correct. However we know this because evolution as it is today isn't based solely on what he said, there has been a lot of research put into studying evolution and genetics and we've found out a lot more about how it works. Like Styx said today there are lots of different authorities on the subject of evolution that aren't Darwin. Finally, you also obviously don't know what a theory even is in this context. Gravity and electromagnetism are theories too. See what I did there? What you are basically saying is "because this makes you happier, you should believe in it, even if it's ridiculous". That's like saying a man who knows his wife is cheating on him should just pretend she isn't. ahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahah Evolution is one of the cornerstones of modern biology. Teaching biology without mentioning evolution is like teaching physics without gravity or teaching chemistry without the periodic table of the elements. There are of course scientists who don't believe in evolution, but most of them aren't even in fields that require much knowledge about biology in the first place. And even then they're an extremely small minority. In fields relevant to biological studies, you'd be very hard pressed to find a scientist who thinks evolution is a flat out lie. There is simply little to no debate within the scientific community that evolution is true. What they do debate about are finer points regarding specific factors and mechanisms of evolution. I could go ahead and reply to the rest of your asinine statements but Styx has mostly done that already. Frankly I suggest you go open a scientific textbook about evolution and READ, because you're very ignorant about the subject.
