danielsangeo

Apologies for the big posting that follows. But that's just your opinion. I know others share it, including me, but others may not. No, it's not an opinion. That's a fact. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Absence of evidence is not evidence of existence. Firstly, no one teaches that rain is "God crying", if you think that over 95% of people in this world are stupid enough to believe that, you're sadly mistaken. You miss my point. Creationism and "God crying" are identical in amount of evidence. If someone believes that "God is crying" when it rains, it's no more "stupid" than a belief in a deity at all, is it? I didn't say that. There's just no evidence of a god. Which ones have evidence for them? Incorrect. There is a theory for the beginning of the universe. It's called "The Big Bang Theory". Surely you've heard of it. So? Just because ultraviolet rays were not visible or in any way felt by humans in their life time 100 years ago, they didn''t exist. Yet you can detect such. For example? I'll stick to the ones that have evidence, thank you. Why not? And they had evidence to back up their assertions. Not quite. The world came into existence long after the Big Bang. I'm sorry, what makes it illogical? But no info is worse.

The Big Bang Theory is the best theory we have to date for the evidence we see. Creationism is not a valid theory at all. In fact, it's not a theory at all. There's absolutely no evidence for it. I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're saying here. Not really. Pick the one that has the preponderance of the evidence. So, because we can't currently explain it, therefore, it has to be a creator deity? C'mon. If you didn't know how rain formed, does that mean that all hypotheses about how it forms are valid including "God crying"? And we should teach our children that thunder is "God bowling" with equal validity as what lightning is? No, if you're going to teach this kind of thing (something other than what is in evidence) in school, do it in a class that it's meant for, such as a "comparative religions" class. Not in science.

Nacho Cheesier.

Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of opinion. It's not an opinion, though. One side uses evidence and there is a lot of it (Big Bang Theory). The other side....well....has a story with no evidence whatsoever (Creationism). One only needs to research both subjects to see that there's absolutely no evidence of creationism and loads of evidence for the Big Bang Theory. There is debate, but it's over whether a camera works by light being exposed on a surface that 'copies' the photo to a negative or to a memory card...............or an imp living in the camera painting the pictures. We have evidence on how a camera works. We don't have evidence of a picture painting imp. We have evidence on how the Big Bang happened. We don't have evidence of a creator deity.

I don't think there is any controversy at all regarding the teaching of the origin of the universe (which has nothing to do with evolution, by the way). Is there a controversy over who built the pyramids? How about a controversy over whether there's four elements (air, water, fire, earth) or over 100 (including gold and mercury)? Or perhaps a controversy over whether the planets and sun revolve around the Earth? Or whether it's turtles all the way down? That's the thing I'm trying to point out here. There is no controversy. There is that which is in evidence and there is that which isn't in evidence. I do not want children being taught that the moon landing may have been faked or that lead can be turned into gold by the process of alchemy. There is no controversy here.

So, hey, found out a new workflow which makes subtitling so much easier (for me)....if you have purchased Sony Vegas. 1. Type up subtitles placing each subtitle in a line. Save as a TXT file. 2. In Sony Vegas, Import > Closed Captioning and select TXT file. 3. Move imported markers to the beginning of each spoken line. 4. If you want the subtitle to disappear (for example, if Gordon is shooting things but not saying anything as he does in 10.5 here), go to the end of the line and press "C" and insert {EDM} as the subtitle. This will tell Vegas to turn off the caption at that point in time. 5. Once all markers are placed (including any {EDM}s), export as a Youtube SRT. 6. In Subtitles Workshop, import the SRT and just clean up the file (Vegas will try to insert line breaks which don't look too pretty for me). Whatever, let's attach this subtitle file. Hoogasaka hoogasaka hoo! ...Oh shit, oh shit, oh shi--!

@Kaweebo: Not everyone here goes to the Black Mesa Forums (though I go to both so you should recognize my name). @Everyone else: Stides is a troll that sometimes posts to the Black Mesa Forums whose only subject wherever he/she posts is that "Black Mesa will not be completed".

There is no such assertion. Actually, check this out (since this is what I was responding to: I can't even tell you how hard I LOL'd at that. I'm not sure why you think that's impossible. The universe creating itself from nothing seems about as likely as god doing the same then creating our universe. I'm always disappointed at the superiority religious and non-religious people feel over each other, as if they've somehow already proved or disproved the existence of god and billions of other people are just ignorant. See, alphabetagamma was musing about how one side (the non-religious "universe creating itself from nothing") has equal likelihood as the other side (the religious "god doing the same then creating our universe"). I was asking where the non-religious "universe creating itself from nothing" came from because I haven't heard that assertion made on the non-religious side.

But that's not what I asked. There is this assertion that science says that the universe came from nothing, not what an alleged "God" allegedly did. I was speaking on the science front, not the religion front.

But that raises the question of what was before the beginning of our universe. The question that you raised is, actually, a gibberish question. I know it sounds reasonable but it really isn't. Think of it this way: What is north of the north pole? How would you answer this question? Also, why is there this assertion that the universe came from "nothing"?

BTG: That's not very helpful. You might not like Macs but there are those here that do and some will want an RSS Mac Widget for Accursed Farms. You might not want one but that doesn't mean others won't. Me, I don't use Macs; "I'm a PC". But I think this widget idea is a neat one. Go for it.

When I first came across this, I couldn't believe how simple yet how beautiful (to me) it was. Maybe it's the window shadows on the floor or whatever, but, man, I still love this area even though I fully acknowledge that it might be dated now in comparison to the screenshots I'm seeing here.

It might be your forum display settings in your User Control Panel. If you can't see the "UCP" button at the top, go to ucp.php (make sure you're logged in). Over in "Options", you should see "Board preferences". Click that to expand it. Then go into "Edit display options". Make sure your "display" things are set to "Yes" (if you want to turn off avatars, signatures, whatevs). Hope that helps.

My suggestions: 7 - No, better not. 8 - Too bad the bodies landed on the other side of the door. 16 - This must be a windspeed of a hundred and fifty miles an hour. 26 - I mean, my God. I'm not even wearing air-resistant clothing. 50 - Actually, what I really want is a re-breather. 55 - Actually, if I had some ninja claws, I could scale the side of the boat... 81 - Man, between suing Black Mesa and being in a key field for a new job, Good job, but my stickler for consistency is that "damnit" should be "dammit" and "OK" should be "okay" but that's how I type so you can change those if you wish.

If I had to stick with Youtube, my two favorite Youtubers (beyond Ross Scott, of course) are Edward Current and Brentalfloss. On other sites, I love Doug "The Nostalgia Critic" Walker and Lindsay "The Nostalgia Chick" Ellis, both from thatguywiththeglasses.com (I also like MarzGurl, Linkara, and FilmBrain).

Um, I know that. But, didn't you say "And that there is peer-reviewed evidence that it's possible humans are not causing it"? You say that there is peer-reviewed evidence. I want to see it.

I posted the subtitles for this episode over in the Subtitles/English section. You can read the exact words there.

Well, that may be what it was designed for but now it's been repurposed... The tripmines are for anyone still alive in the Residue Processing Facility. Just as a precaution. Remember, the HECU was there to "kill anyone associated with the project".

"I'm going to eat your face." Thou shalt not eat my face!

I've always understood that this part of the facility was your first inclination that the aliens that you're attacking might not be 100% bad and that what you're seeing with the conveyor belts, tanks of acid, and so on are actually testing various things such as how Xenian meat ("residue processing") reacts to acid, heat, and pulverization. If the area was populated with workers, the things like what Gordon thinks is a "shrine" that "breaks down forever" would actually make sense. Then, when you get out of the "meat processing ride" area and into "Questionable Ethics", you realize that the aliens you've been fighting might also be victims of scientific experiments (though I love pulling headcrabs out of the cage and then flipping on the electrical table thing and gibbing everything in the room....though to be fair, I also pull HECU into the room, so I guess you could call me sadistic. But, that's not me. That's Gordon! He HAS to blow everything up! It's the only way to prove he's not crazy!). I'm thinking that, once the Xenians are killed by the scientific experiments, their chunks are sent down to the residue processing facility where they're experimented on (heat, crushers, etc). Gordon asks why the pistons would just push everything to the side. Perhaps the wall that the crushers are pushing stuff against is porous and things seep through to a collection bin somewhere.

Just uploaded the subtitles for this episode to the subtitles section. *blatant plug* This was a fun one to subtitle. Poor Gordon. He's having a rough day.

Two teachers to be precise, one to teach evolution and one to teach creationism. It is typically taught in Grade and Middle school so it wouldn't be too hard. Actually, there are so many flavors of creationism, it'd be a full time job for years to teach children them all. You have the Christian creation story, you have the Hindu creation story, you have the Zoroastrian creation story, you have the Roman creation story.......And why stop there? Let's go with the "Tripping the Rift" creation story, or the "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" creation story...and so on. They all are equally valid if you want to put creationism as a science: Not valid science at all. "Creationism" isn't some singular thing you can teach a child. We do it already with electives and it isn't like they can choose neither. You act like kids are complete idiots. By that time they have already probably made decisions about religion and whatnot so it isn't like they can't do it. Yes, but there's only one correct answer a lot of times. We don't let children decide on what the answer should be. The only scientific theory, that is backed up by the testable evidence, is the Big Bang, currently. If you have any other evidence, then you can put it forth. Until that time, however, it remains....well, conjecture.

I like these subtitles! Let's go with these subtitles! Blaaaargh!

Aliens aren't invading, Freeman, you're just being paranoid. The mailman's not spying on you, Freeman, you're just being paranoid. There's no society of anthropomorphic frog people living in the sewer, Freeman, you're just being paranoid. Owls can't read your thoughts, Freeman, you're just being paranoid. Sorry.