Posts made by Janus

Ive played DOD Yanny, nowhere near as fun as Halo. for one thing, it says something about a game when you need 63 other people to make it fun (Halo is awesome even with 4 people) with 16 people, the game is insanely beautiful. DoD pales in comparison

well i guess so. on another note, you liked goldeneye correct? well you should get an xbox if you dont already have one, and get Time Splitters 2. the multiplayer is like Goldeneyes multiplayer on steroids. it is insanely intense, frantic, and fast paced. i love it. (oh yea, and the game has a single player too) :)

Is anybody else disgusted with the legal and criminal justice system in this country? to name a few outrages, you have the exclusionary rule, the right to a trial by jury, habeus corpus, and disputed over the death penalty. Im not even going to mention the civil court system, as that will open up a whole big can of worms.

Like ZimZaxZeo said, pure democracy would be direct rule of the people, so every person would have to vote (or abstain) on every issue facing the country. As Bossk then said, it is a thoroughly impractical politcal concept except on a small scale.

ZimZaxZeo said:

By the way, Mr. Janus:

Would you please post a quick working definition of “socialism” and maybe give us an idea of how it would compare & contrast with your global republican empire?

thank you for the polite “Mr.” ZimZax. On to your question.
Socialism, as I have come to understand it (mind you this is my interpretation of it) is basically the middle ground between democracy and communism. Sort of a democratic state, except where the government has more control. If you go here http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=socialism you can see a dictionary definition of it.

“My” global Republican empire, is perhaps something of a misnomer. I haven’t yet been able to truly put a name on my ideal political entity, so that is my “working name” the republican part is perhaps a bit misleading. it means only to suggest a popularly elected senate. Basically, the world would be united as one nation, with a global senate (like a combination of Congress with the U.N.) that would have representatives from all prior nations which would assume roles similar to states in our government today. I recognize that it sounds like a larger-scale version of our current U.S. Government, but that is only because I am not very effective at conveying it as i envision it. This senate will be popularly elected, from their “states”, as representatives, and each “state” will have its own government. again, seems very similar. some key differences however (besides many changes in the actual laws of this new government) include the complete subordination of the “state” governments to the global, that is, the global senate will have absolute authority over any “state government”. There will be an executive power. This is perhaps the most confusing aspect to explain, but it makes perfect sense if you can get past my poor descriptions. The executive will function something like an elected dictator, if that makes any sense at all. If you would like me to explain further, please ask, but for now, let me say that he would basically have unlimited power, within a limit. confusing i know. ponder that for awhile, and if you like, ask me to explain in more detail.

Wow. I have much to reply too, so let me say right now, I am almost surely going to forget to adress something I thought of while reviewing the posts. That said, let’s begin.

First, I would like to commend you Falk, very well argued, you provided excellent points and counter points.

Yanny Said

For example, the most basic rule of modern science, something cannot come from nothing. Well where did the first something come from?

Indeed, where did the first something come from? I have already posed the very same question. God is certainly something, perhaps albeit something on another plane of existence, so where did God come from?

difernT said:

One could reverse the question and ask you: “How can anyone be so foolish as to not believe in a divine being?” To use what I consider a somewhat weak statement that i haven’t found a better way of saying: “If we’re wrong, we lose nothing. If you’re wrong, you lose everything.” If I’m wrong, I still have no afterlife. If you’re wrong, you spend eternity in Hell.

I dont think you should be arguing on the existence of God if you believe in God simply as a way of covering yourself on the chance he exists. unless you are just playing devil’s advocate. in which case, that argument is implying that i should believe in god just to cover my ass.

I forget at this point who said it, and I have no more time left to look through the posts to find who said they would prefer I use quotes then just “making stuff up” as they put it, but i will concede, this comes from Lewis Black, and although it was extremely funny when performed by him, I think on a base level, it contains a cogent argument for atheism.
(this is not exact, ive been unable to find the actual quote from his standup routine) “I have proof that there is no god, really. Do you want to know what it is? I was in Houston, and I came across a Starbucks. And I looked, and right across from that starbucks, in the same building as that starbucks, there was a starbucks. I looked back and forth, thinking the sun was playing tricks on my eyes, how could a starbucks be right across from another starbucks? who needs that much coffee? I look up at the sky, and think there cannot be a just, decent god, that would allow a starbucks, to be right across from ANOTHER FREAKING STARBUCKS!!!” or something like that :)

LXG doesnt come out till july here Falk, so I havent seen it yet, but from the previews ive seen, and the website, it looks very good, i cannot wait to see it. Also, Sean Connery is god (not literally, since god does not exist) :)

oh, there is absolutely no question about goldeneye, the game rules, i wish they would revamp the graphics and bring the game to xbox. but i think youve just hurt your own argument.

and isn’t the point of FPS’s to emulate reality to some degree?

this is a good point, but games like doom emulate nothing remotely realistic (no im not simply referring to the fact that you are fighting demons,etc) the game is far too oversimplified to be realistic in any way. Ive not played metroid prime except at the store, on a demo machine, so my opinion on it does not necessarily carry much sway. but i think i got enough out of it to give an accurate review of the game, and i must say i was unimpressed. it was certainly a good game, but ultimately, id say that game lacks the “personality” that you refer too

(not just missions) in which one must solve puzzels to advance.

right there bossk, is where your argument is flawed. a puzzle solver is not the same as an FPS, even if there are FPS elements in the genre. There is nothing wrong with shooting things up, its quite amusing. but it is certainly not a immersive gaming experience. what backstory is there to metroid prime that Halo does not have without picking up a book? Halo gives a basic explanation for the Master Chief (his name is John)'s existence, not as comprehensive as the books obviously, but i should think enough for any gamer. and i know doom has books, but the difference is Halo’s books are good.
oh, and also there is no need for knowledge of infantry tactics in Halo to do well, just FPS skill, the AI is quite advanced, but if you are a veteran FPS gamer, you should still be able to do well at least on Heroic (legendary can be a problem even for the best of us).

ok, now maybe we disagree with the awesomeness of Halo, but if you have seen the E3 preview for Halo 2 you must agree that even at this time, it looks to be the most awesome gaming experience in this genre ever, and certainly one of the best of all time (the video itself is so epic, i was literally getting chills while watching it, I loved everything about it)

bossk wrote: As for political parties in the US, I don’t really want to identify myself with either of them. Politics in the US has degenerated into pandering to the precieved public will and has very little to do with what the actual candidates and parties believe in.

well i will give you that, i suppose i didnt pose the question correctly. let me pose it another way, do you find yourself as more of a liberal or a conservative?

like i said, there are many idiosyncracies seperating the various political ideologies. I seperated democracy on the poll because a pure democracy is in fact seperate and distinct from say, a republic or a socialism, though bastardized forms of it exist combined with both.

Interesting argument CC, except for one thing, there is no god, and you are wrong. :)

seriously though, i object to your claim that atheists have no proof while those who believe in god do. I challange what you consider proof. You are saying that creation surrounds us, experiences, etc. rank as proof. I would say to you that proves nothing.

As i have already stated, scientific evidence is sufficient proof for me disproving a god. (i was not always an atheist, and i did not become one because of a “falling out” with god, i simply realized in the foolishness of a concept such as god.

What form of government would you prefer? there are many idiosyncracies and specifics separating the many politcal ideologies, but there are a few major one, and I would like to hear your opinions on the matter, along with your own political alignment, and what party (democrat or republican) you most closely support

myself? I am a right-wing socialist (oh you heard me). i support the republican party over the democratic party, and given the choice, I would choose an Imperialist Republic, that is a worldwide republican empire

Yanny wrote: Theres a difference between believing something is up there and believing in a specific religion. Call me Agnostic.

That’s not called agnostic Yanny, though you may in fact be Agnostic. Agnosticism (not sure if that is what its called) is basically the religion for wimps. Its the best of both worlds. Its is essentially the atheists that are too scared to admit it, or are worried about the small, minute, miniscule chance that there is a God, and that by not believing, they might piss him off. It just means that you do not believe in, or not believe in God.

Like you said Deviant:scripter, I cannot disprove God, for a number of reasons. not least among them, even if I had some irrefutable proof with which to disprove the existence of God (which I do not) I could not convince almost any church goers, as belief would over ride anything i could provide.

However, I think that it is in face I who should challenge you to prove the existence of God, rather than I disprove the existence. There are rational, scientific explanations for such biblical topics as creation, to anatomy, to the Earth as we know it. While they may in fact be incorrect, they are realistic and logical hypotheses that have thus far appeared to be true. The opposing argument, that God does exist, must rely on much more fantastic explanations, or simply much more conveniant, even lazy ones (God created everything as it is, he created man in his image, etc. etc.) I would then challenge YOU Deviant:Scripter, to prove to me that God does exist, or at least offer convincing arguments.

If you’ll check closely Yanny, you will see I did not say HALO was the greatest game ever made, I said it was the best game of its genre, and is certainly one of the 100 best ever. Bossk, please tell me what you mean by “ultimate gaming experience” if not exactly what HALO is, a completely immersive, theatrical experience. Certainly Asteroids can not meet that, unless your definition is very off. An addictive game yes, but in no way a gaming experience, mearly a time waster. Zelda, yes, a good game, but two differences. First, and RPG, vastly different category from an FPS. Second, many of the Zelda games pale in comparison to HALO, while fun, they are basic hack/slash games with no real excitement, merely fun, addictive, eventually repetitive motions that lose interest after a while. Similarly, it has very little replayability unless you would care to do the same exact thing (which took quite awhile) again. also, i dont recall a difficulty setting (i may be wrong). HALO is so immersive, i have replayed it many times. And the difficulty settings provide a level of replayability and excitement unmatched. I would ask you what exactly makes Dark Forces, Doom, or Wolfenstein the best FPS ever. All I can see are the most basic, simple, scaled down FPSs ever (DOOM didnt even have objectives, just run through killing things) while they are all fun, I would say to you they lack a “personality”. I never got nearly as immersed in them as in HALO. HALO even has books, including a prequel, and i must say, they are actually quite good.

First, I would like to apologize. If this thread offends anyone, I am truly sorry. While your belief in God makes you completely wrong, you have a right to wallow in your own ignorance. Second, I have so much to say on the subject, that I am most likely not going to have organized thoughts, and anything I do say will be immensely incomplete. Third, everything I am saying is coming straight from my head. I have no reference material, I am not quoting anything, and I am not being fed lines. Fourth and finally, I will try to pose questions about the very existence of God. I will make efforts not to ask the same, tired questions, (what is the meaning of life, why do bad things happen to good people, etc) I am not trying to win an argument simply by posing rudimentary questions that cannot be cogently answered, and therefore convey a sense of victory upon me, I am posing actual questions I have, which I am curious as to the religious opinion on the subject. If I think the question is not the kind you could realistically answer, I will say so.

How can anyone belief in so foolish a concept as a divine being? The very thought that there could be one omnipotent creature is absurd. Before I challenge the existence though, let me submit two possibilities for the existence of this “God”. First, the Big Bang (prevailing theory about the creation of the Universe) created all that is, and ever was. Our galaxy and everything in it, along with all other cosmic entities. Perhaps “God” is no more than some entity created by the Big Bang, which is greater in some way than we. Either it is much larger, or has superior traits, etc. Surely, to some insect or microorganism, Humans must appear as “gods”, we have the ability to rule their entire lives. Second, “God” is a being more advanced than ourselves in some way, but is then one of a race of “gods” who are the “humans” to an even higher group of “gods”, something like the theory that we are all just part of a much larger universe. These are only two possible theories, and there are many, many more.
The very nature of “god” as it is described seems fundamentally flawed. I doubt highly that anything could just “be”. that is to say, how could there be one omnipotent being that always was, always will be, and that created everything? What created it? or where did it originate from? How could it just exist? and if it created everything, what was there before it created everything? Was it just there? These are some pretty deep questions mind you, I dont expect any real answers, I am simply postulating questions. Mind you, the Big Bang theory postulates a singulartity being present before existence as well, but the idea of energy existing before existence is more agreeable to me than some tangible, omnipotent being.
Religion is where I find the greatest flaws in the belief in a divine being. The plethora of dogmas in existence leave me dumbfounded and sometimes speechless when I really think about them. For example, you have christianity. Within that, there is Catholocism, Orthodox, and Protestant. Under protestant, there are too many denominations to go into. All of these denominations of Christianity all believe in the divinity of Christ, but disagree on the finer points. Some are legitametly different denominations, but others, like Episcopalian to Catholic are basically identical. In cases like these, the difference is more political than over the dogma.
I think almost all of us have heard an argument over religion and the existence of God, where the different religions are brought up, and existence is challenged over differences. Many times, this is counterpointed by a statement something like “God is universal, we believe differently in the same being” or something like that. Now i have a problem with that. That is first of all, too easy. That seems to be oversimplfying things, and is way too conveniant. That would suggest automatically a monotheism. What about polytheistic believers? Does that include them? What about theories of the afterlife? Each religion has its own belief about life (or lackthereof) after death, be it a purgatory-esque existence, heaven, hell, reincarnation, etc. How could it be the same God, if christians believe in Heaven and Hell, and Hindus believe in reincarnation?

Thats all for now, I will post more later

Halo is by far, the greatest game of its genre ever made. And i think it deserves a place in the list of 100 greatest games ever. For those of you who have not played it for whatever reason (no Xbox, dont think it looks good, dont like that kind of game, etc) you are seriously missing out. Find some way to play it, both single player and multiplayer, or you have missed the experience of a lifetime. What is the definition of fun? A 16 player multiplayer game with rockets. You have not lived until you have tried HALO. The only problem I have found with its maker (Bungie) is that HALO 2 is not coming out till next year. Go to www.bungie.net and download the E3 HALO 2 preview. It is a preview of the game, of a person actually playing it. It will blow your mind. Especially if you have experience with the original, GET THIS VIDEO! Everything you could have possibly thought of that you wished was in the first HALO is in this video, and this is only one level.

i disagree with you dasewok. CA will be a terrible movie. the first movie was ridiculously bad, and CA will probably be worse (thus, sequel). it is simply eye candy. its the kind of movie i would watch without any sound on, so i could just see the visuals and not listen to the pathetic dialogue. yanny, you great cow, i object to you altering my post, i would never call you a great guy. <slaps you=“” with=“” a=“” virtual=“” glove=“”>i challenge you to a duel!</slaps>

Is it just me, or is this year an excellent movie year? I mean, there are so many good movies coming out this year, its almost ridiculous. Off the top of my head, the standalones are Tears of the Sun, Anger Management, and Daredevil (not the best, but pretty good I thought). Then you also have the sequels, T3, X2, Matrix Reloaded, Matrix Revolutions, and the god of all movies, Return of the King. Im probably forgetting some, but even just with what I have here, I could not be more satisfied for movies this year.