1
The Lounge / Hey can anyone tell me?
« on: December 14, 2006, 09:10:46 AM »
most likely, it was called Beast Wars
xD I remember that show
xD I remember that show
Show Posts
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.
2
The Lounge / I'm putting my soul up for download
« on: December 14, 2006, 08:56:23 AM »
The spork is quite a much dangerous weapon, most inductive to the fact that the physical impossibility of said object is due to cause the harmed user's head to explode whilst being stabbed with said weapon.
3
The Lounge / Spam: Getting out of hand.
« on: December 06, 2006, 09:29:07 PM »Quote from: "Ubuntu"
Agreed. I think we need to ban everyone as well.
Edit: in order to not be a douche:
Have about 25 questions or so.
Randomly generate 5 for the quiz.
I don't have the programming skills nor have I read the thread, but there is a way to do it
4
The Lounge / Tom Moore aka Sara H B Ranson
« on: December 06, 2006, 09:27:01 PM »
There's also something called "making everything up".
5
The Lounge / WIRED: The Crusade Against Religion
« on: November 30, 2006, 06:22:27 PM »
He means you didn't have to put it in bold...but in a very...obscure way.
imho, religion is BS. Completely.
Knight, what do you define as proof that matter/energy exists? Energy is in...everything. If you deny that exists, I don't know what you've been doing your entire life. Read the side of an energy bar, mayhaps.
If you deny that matter exists, then what is an atom?
Unless I'm reading the question wrong, in which case I refute my argument.
imho, religion is BS. Completely.
Knight, what do you define as proof that matter/energy exists? Energy is in...everything. If you deny that exists, I don't know what you've been doing your entire life. Read the side of an energy bar, mayhaps.
If you deny that matter exists, then what is an atom?
Unless I'm reading the question wrong, in which case I refute my argument.
6
The Lounge / Sugar
« on: November 30, 2006, 02:24:46 PM »Quote from: "thedigitalnomad"
Quote from: "mattz1010"(although, alcoholism isn't a disease, it's bullshit, as been proven by the show)
I love Pen & Teller, but TV shows can't prove everything. Why don't they tell my dead grandfather that he did not have a disease? The man drank himself to death.
Anyway. Everyone else here is right, "Sara". Sugar is an essential need, and artificial sweeteners are even more dangerous. At the cell level, Glucose (which other sugars are transformed into during digestion) is needed for respiration. No sugar, cells die--you die.
Not to mention, a large portion of the population is allergic to artificial sweeteners (my ex included--she's even allergic to Splenda), and they all taste like shit anyway.
It's an addiction, if anything.
By "drank to death", you could either mean, he died of alcohol posioning, or was drinking close to when he died "of old age"
7
Flat Earth Q&A / lolproof
« on: November 28, 2006, 06:00:29 AM »
How many of us feel like it? 
This argument has been used over and over again, without people searching first, and just instincively creating topics.
1) Add this to the FAQ, as "Void 'evidence'"
2) Add a part to the rules that says if there is a similar topic less than 2 weeks old, your topic gets locked.
Edit: that's actually a really nice lake.
This argument has been used over and over again, without people searching first, and just instincively creating topics.
1) Add this to the FAQ, as "Void 'evidence'"
2) Add a part to the rules that says if there is a similar topic less than 2 weeks old, your topic gets locked.
Edit: that's actually a really nice lake.
8
The Lounge / Sugar
« on: November 28, 2006, 05:53:57 AM »
Well being drunk is better than an alcoholic (although, alcoholism isn't a disease, it's bullshit, as been proven by the show )
An alcoholic is a drunk in denial xD
)An alcoholic is a drunk in denial xD
9
The Lounge / Sugar
« on: November 28, 2006, 05:34:14 AM »
beast, that was confusing. You hate someone for having pulp out, but then choose to hate everyone else with?
XD
Anyways, it's a biologically proven fact that sugar is required for the human body to function.
Therefore, this argument = fail.
XD
Anyways, it's a biologically proven fact that sugar is required for the human body to function.
Therefore, this argument = fail.
10
The Lounge / Tom Moore aka Sara H B Ranson
« on: November 28, 2006, 05:26:20 AM »
xD
I am implying, therefore, that there is no such thing as proof online (Well...not really. There are exceptions).
Basically it means what Beast has said is unprovable. Therefore, there is no reason to have this thread.
Internet names are not overvalued, though - as a member becomes more well known and respected (Although do you ever see respect here? I mean other forums.), the internet name is thus not overvalued, it has a use.
It feeds the ego.
I am implying, therefore, that there is no such thing as proof online (Well...not really. There are exceptions).
Basically it means what Beast has said is unprovable. Therefore, there is no reason to have this thread.
Internet names are not overvalued, though - as a member becomes more well known and respected (Although do you ever see respect here? I mean other forums.), the internet name is thus not overvalued, it has a use.
It feeds the ego.
11
The Lounge / Cogito ergo sum: not an absolute truth after all
« on: November 28, 2006, 04:42:32 AM »
he's using illogic to beat our logic down!
shit, run for the hills!
shit, run for the hills!
12
The Lounge / Katrina in retrospect
« on: November 28, 2006, 04:36:17 AM »
It just shows a better understanding of the criminal's thought processes.
Could I not "impersonate" a member of your parliament? (Assuming that I am related to him/her, in order to impersonate to the fullest efficiency)
You should all know by now, a name on the internet means absolutely nothing.
Could I not "impersonate" a member of your parliament? (Assuming that I am related to him/her, in order to impersonate to the fullest efficiency)
You should all know by now, a name on the internet means absolutely nothing.
13
The Lounge / tr00 kvlt
« on: November 28, 2006, 04:32:22 AM »Quote from: "dysfunction"
Quote from: "DragonXero"Now they just need to invent a laser that turns Britney Spears into Arcturus.
That would be hard; perhaps they should set a more manageable goal first, like turning N'Sync into Rhapsody.
With the metaphorical level N'Sync has, they have no chance to match Rhapsody's metaphorical level. There's no way scientists could do it.
14
The Lounge / Tom Moore aka Sara H B Ranson
« on: November 28, 2006, 04:29:36 AM »
Well, oops. I posted in the wrong topic.
My same thoughts as in the last post in the "In retrospect of Katrina" thread, in which you posted your original "sleuthing".
My same thoughts as in the last post in the "In retrospect of Katrina" thread, in which you posted your original "sleuthing".
15
The Lounge / Katrina in retrospect
« on: November 28, 2006, 04:25:03 AM »
There's also simple impersonation. SHBR could have already been doing this so called "sleuthing" work.
by following the same line of "logic":
if I were to sign up as some sort of wanted criminal's name, but change around the name slightly, this would make me the criminal.
I'm not following.
by following the same line of "logic":
if I were to sign up as some sort of wanted criminal's name, but change around the name slightly, this would make me the criminal.
I'm not following.
16
The Lounge / Atheism is not a belief.
« on: November 15, 2006, 02:25:56 AM »
There's the stereotypical view of atheists, who aren't skeptics, but cynics.
There's also atheists who are skeptics.
this is in reference to dysfunction's first post here.
There's also atheists who are skeptics.
this is in reference to dysfunction's first post here.
17
The Lounge / 0.9... = 1
« on: November 07, 2006, 05:05:24 PM »
Simply because you can't understand it doesn't make it retarded.
Besides, the word retarded is a fundamentally wrong insult. Retarded comes from "mentally retarded", which means to be held back mentally.
So, the argument's being held back? Well, stop holding the fucking dam already!
Besides, the word retarded is a fundamentally wrong insult. Retarded comes from "mentally retarded", which means to be held back mentally.
So, the argument's being held back? Well, stop holding the fucking dam already!
18
The Lounge / God does not exist
« on: November 07, 2006, 05:00:24 PM »
You're arguing a moot point that can't be "truely" proven 100%.
Just like BOG not giving evidence and making one post trolls.
Just like BOG not giving evidence and making one post trolls.
19
Flat Earth Q&A / The earth is round (proof)
« on: November 06, 2006, 08:26:38 PM »
Because you're above the cloud line, and of course - the first step into believing is remove all evidence. Like not being able to see, for example
20
Flat Earth Q&A / Does being a FE corilate with being religious?
« on: November 06, 2006, 08:24:33 PM »Quote from: "spludgey"
Quote from: "Erasmus"Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"The poll states that 100% of the people on this forum are non-religious rEarthers. :lol:
It does? I could have sworn this forum had more than five members.
You're site admin here and you didn't vote that you think that the world is flat?
He doesn't have to agree with the site in order to moderate it.
There was already a poll done on who was and who wasn't RE or FE. Half the moderators aren't. They're there to keep the site under control from rampaging idiots about the forum. They're not there to defend the beliefs.
21
Flat Earth Q&A / FE Conspiercy (all round earthers read...)
« on: November 06, 2006, 04:10:59 PM »
Add a bit of playful hipocrasy and you've got it.
22
Flat Earth Q&A / FE Conspiercy (all round earthers read...)
« on: November 06, 2006, 04:01:15 PM »
Unfortunately, not everybody here knows what 'making fun of yourself' is.
23
The Lounge / 0.9... = 1
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:41:09 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proof
0.9 repeating = 1 is covered on this page
other things covered:
-1 = 1
the above with alternate method
1 < 0
2 = 1
the above with alternate method
xER = 0 (xER = all real numbers)
a = b
0 = 1
the above with alternate method
i^2 = 1 (i is the square root of -1)
4 = 5
Any angle = 0
all triangles = equilateral
infinity = 1/4
0.9 repeating = 1 is covered on this page
other things covered:
-1 = 1
the above with alternate method
1 < 0
2 = 1
the above with alternate method
xER = 0 (xER = all real numbers)
a = b
0 = 1
the above with alternate method
i^2 = 1 (i is the square root of -1)
4 = 5
Any angle = 0
all triangles = equilateral
infinity = 1/4
24
Flat Earth Q&A / FE Conspiercy (all round earthers read...)
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:30:15 PM »
It's also pretty stupid to assume things and to stereotype like that.
But if you wanna be an asshole, by all means go and do it.
Bet you're racist too.
But if you wanna be an asshole, by all means go and do it.
Bet you're racist too.
25
Flat Earth Q&A / Proof of a round earth. SHocking!
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:26:47 PM »
Conclusive proof, brought about by Cheech6! Without ANY supporting evidence whatsoever!
it's like going outside and saying
I AM THE RULER OF THE WORLD BYE
it's like going outside and saying
I AM THE RULER OF THE WORLD BYE
26
Flat Earth Q&A / I feel pity for the FE'ers
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:26:09 PM »Quote from: "Joseph Bloom"
Quote from: "Mephistopheles"Quote from: "Joseph Bloom"
Only if youre retarded.
My mental health has nothing to do with your fallacious diagram of the sun not being a spotlight.
The sun isnt a spotlight fuckwit, it IS a gigantic ball of fire.
Ok? Go the fuck over there you fucking douchebag shithead and fucking take a picture of the fucking sun you fucking asswipe cocksucker.
That's more like flaming, than your lame-ass 'flame'.
Stronzo di merda.
27
Flat Earth Q&A / Proof of a round earth. SHocking!
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:06:13 PM »
1) The site is not owned by you, nor the United States Government
Which, therefore, means:
Your "Freedom of Speech" holds jack shit value here.
2) This site is owned and run by the Administrator. He sets HIS rules, and you follow them
3) You have no right whatsoever to make up rules about being allowed to flame.
It's easy not to flame and troll. But why not do it when you're so obviously an elitist?
Which, therefore, means:
Your "Freedom of Speech" holds jack shit value here.
2) This site is owned and run by the Administrator. He sets HIS rules, and you follow them
3) You have no right whatsoever to make up rules about being allowed to flame.
It's easy not to flame and troll. But why not do it when you're so obviously an elitist?
28
Flat Earth Q&A / quick faq query
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:02:57 PM »
Have they disappeared in the last few years and never come back?
It takes a shrewd amount of logic to deem that you're trying to insinuate something, Cheech.
It takes a shrewd amount of logic to deem that you're trying to insinuate something, Cheech.
29
Flat Earth Q&A / FE Conspiercy (all round earthers read...)
« on: November 06, 2006, 03:01:15 PM »
Now you're just being naive.
30
Flat Earth Q&A / I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« on: November 04, 2006, 12:44:44 AM »Quote from: "TheEngineer"
I fly all the time and have never seen the curvature of the earth.
That's Aristotle-ism. I see, therefore it's real.
In order to understand reality, we must question what we see - our senses decieve us.
if! for example, there were a sphere. and it were to spin along its axis, placed in the middle of this sphere.
BUT! It were to be orbiting around some object, and it would spin while orbiting.
Now, suppose we're far below this 'some object'. It would appear to go back and forth then straight across the sky. IT'd then disappear for a bit then come back :\
Does this mean that the object, from our observations, must have an erratical path? No. It means we first have to attempt to rationalize that what we see may, or may not be true.