Jump to content

BTGBullseye

Member
  • Posts

    19,552
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BTGBullseye

  1. *Theological riddle* IF God was the first being to make something from nothing... where was He standing when He did it? ;)

    Right outside of existence... Who needs to exist when you're God?

     

    Well, GOD would need to exist. And for a thing to exist, it needs, at the very least, somewhere and something to be. Otherwise it doesn't exist. You can't exist outside of existing. Unless you don't exist. But if you don't exist, you can't do things like, oh, create the universe.

     

    Before you can DO, you have to BE. ;)

    That's what would seem to be from our limited understanding of existence, but that's the problem... Everyone seems to think they know everything.

  2. *Theological riddle* IF God was the first being to make something from nothing... where was He standing when He did it? ;)

    Right outside of existence... Who needs to exist when you're God?

  3. That is one badass machine 8-)

    Areen't they just? especially sconsidering that their original middsion lifetime was set at 30 days... now Opportunity is closing in on 3000 days.

    I saw them while they were still being built... They intentionally underestimate the capabilities just like all good engineers.

  4. This thread makes me sad; both sides, make me sad.

     

    Bullseye and the rest of the creationists make me said for proposing arbitrary, metaphysically impossible, and epistemological invalid claims. The other side makes me sad for entertaining such claims. I shall now attempt to end this thread; I do not expect to succeed.

     

    Bullseye, your claims that there is a supernatural creator is arbitrary i.e. the claim has no evidence provided and is not a result of a direct observation. The theory is neither right nor is it wrong: it's simply arbitrary and has no epistemological status or place in human cognition. Evolution is supported by many facts, observations, physical evidence and research; evolution has no theory opposing it. Something is considered "knowledge" when all facts point to it and there is are no theories or evidence opposing it (arbitrary theories don't count). If you're not satisfied with the theory of evolution: propose your own theory, do your own research and come up with a better model that's supported with better evidence. Knowledge is contextual and in this context, evolution is a fact.

     

    To the rest of you: next time you're presented with an arbitrary claim, don't try to consider whether it's right or wrong: simply identify it as arbitrary, dismiss it, and continue talking as though it's never come up.

    You're just showing how little you want to find any truth, and how much you just want to be right.

     

    Just because something is arbitrary doesn't automatically make it wrong. Just because something isn't opposed by the people you trust doesn't make it true.

     

    I have enough personal experience with God to convince me of his existence, not necessarily evidence you will ever accept since most of it is not physical evidence reviewed by your idea of what constitutes 'peers'.

     

    knowl·edge/ˈnälij/Noun

    1. Information and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject

    2. What is known in a particular field or in total; facts and information

    3. True, justified belief; certain understanding, as opposed to opinion

    4. Awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation

    That doesn't look anything like your definition of the word...

     

    Since you don't know that definition, maybe you're confused by this one too...

    ar·bi·trar·y/ˈärbiˌtrerē/Adjective

    1. Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

    2. (of power or a ruling body) Unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority.

    3. (of a constant or other quantity) Of unspecified value

    My beliefs are not just some personal whim, nor does any other part of that definition relate to my beliefs.

  5. Dont have much of an idea to reply to that action with....sorry, but Blue makes an excellent parser.

    Well, you have to have played many text based adventure games to come up with responses to actions. You should try the old Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy one...

  6. Here is the most interesting part, nothing probably doesn't exist. There is always something.

     

    Nothing can only be used in Math and in a scenario with certain objects in certain places or ownerships for example but in reality when there is 3 apples and I eat them there's not 0 apples left but 3 apples which are now decomposed.

     

    So, I don't know, nothing seems to not work with our world. If something is anything in this world then nothing must be something not in this world. In this way there is no nothing in our world :)

    Which is why we can never make something with nothing.

  7. And? Doesn't mean that with a few console commands, patches, and HD updates that the game can't be fun on the PC

    Never said it couldn't, I don't dislike it because I've never played it. However PC fanboys are always raging about DX:IW.

    Like IW it was more or less dumbed down for Xbox and is more linear than the other games. But it isn't a bad game, it just doesn't stand up well next to its more competent brothers.

    I have yet to see a game series that didn't have a 'worst of the series'. It's a good game IMO, and I've done some fairly freaky stuff with it. Had fun, and that's all that really matters.

×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.