venomai

This is a given. Those who lack belief in god obviously will not claim to know god. Your claims "Agnostics hold no opinion," and "[in] the context of whether god exists or does not exist, [agnostics] don't choose either one" were incredibly misleading. The surrounding context indicates only that you meant these statements as written. I'm sure I don't need to explain to you how ignorant such claims made you appear. Thank you for clarifying your position, though... It's likely that they were chosen based on how "strong" one's conviction/belief is. Those making the positive assertion obviously have a "stronger" belief than those who lack it altogether. In any case, just because strong atheism uses the word "strong" does not necessarily make it more "true" or more popular than weak atheism. Strong atheists: yes. Weak atheists: not necessarily. Today isn't my day... :lol:

Unwrapped the head today... Wishing Max 7 had an automatic unwrapper rather than having to adjust and map everything by hand. :x Quick texture test... ignore the torso EDIT: finished unwrapping the torso. Quick texture test. You can see the alpha map in effect with the feathers.

Misunderstanding the distinction between atheism and agnosticism is a fundamental error in a debate about god's existence. For the debate to progress at all, it is crucial that the basic definitions of these terms are understood by all parties.

Apologies, I must have misread. Agnostics can and do decide whether they believe god exists or does not exist. As such, an agnostic who believes in god is called an "agnostic theist," and an agnostic who does not believe in god is called an "agnostic atheist." I am indeed set on pointing out the flaws of any opposing arguments -- this is a debate, after all. You're still using "agnostic" as if it were an alternative to weak atheism. All weak atheists are (rationally) agnostic. You cannot rationally claim to have knowledge of an entity which you do not believe exists. The "strong" and "weak" prefixes have nothing to do with which is more "truer" or more prevalent. Both are common forms of atheism. Whether or not you actually understand it all, the manner in which you present your arguments (as in the above quotes) strongly suggests that you do not.

This is completely ridiculous. "Strong atheism" refers to the specific belief in the non-existence of gods. "Weak atheism," on the other hand, is the mere lack of belief in the existence of gods. An Introduction to Atheism Perhaps you mean that all strong atheists are also weak atheists, in that they all lack belief in the existence of gods. Of course, this doesn't mean that the two groups are the same, nor does it mean that all weak atheists are also strong atheists. :lol: From your own source: "... all atheists are weak atheists. The difference, then, between weak and strong atheism is not that some people belong to one instead of the other, but rather that some people belong to one in addition to the other. All atheists are weak atheists because all atheists, by definition, lack belief in the existence of gods. Some atheists, however, are also strong atheists because they take the extra step of denying the existence of at least some gods." Many people are indifferent even after hearing of god. You don't need to form an opinion on something as soon as you hear about it. This is a false representation of agnosticism. Agnosticism isn't a "fence-sitting" or "indifferent" position. Agnosticism and atheism lie in two completely different categories; one deals with knowledge, and the other deals with belief. Here is an excellent description of agnosticism: From: About.com - What is Agnosticism? (Which means that some people are agnostic atheists, while others are agnostic theists.) I'm going to have to agree with warri0r: you don't know what you're talking about, Zierro. :lol: EDIT: While this may be true for strong atheists, who assert that god does not exist, it is not necessarily true for weak atheists. Weak atheism, as we have already established, is the lack of belief. There is no faith involved in weak atheism.

Nearly ready to unwrap UVs...

The site didn't get shut down. Nor have they created any 'software', nor have they hosted any content at all on their site except a search engine plus a tracker. If the case goes to the Eu court they'll win the appeal faster than you can say 'pirate'. Not saying I necessarily defend them, but from a strictly legal view their site has done nothing illegal. The site is not a 'file sharing application' like the judge says. It hosts .torrent files which can't be played or viewed by any application. It's a connecting file that links you to thousands of other users that do have the file, and the file is in no way connected to or associated with the PB server. The site wasn't on trial at all, only the four founders for "assisting making available copyrighted material." http://www.pcworld.com/article/163339/t ... aring.html

I'm using 3ds Max 7. Tris = triangles. The model consists of 374 polygons, but it has a lot of quads. Game engines tend to break each quad into 2 triangles, so it's sometimes better just to count in triangles.

Barcelona is a wonderful place. Here's what I did when I visited Spain, and it was a fantastic month. - See the running of the bulls in Pamplona. The atmosphere is incredible; the entire city (and neighbouring towns) parties for days on end. - If you're a fan of art galleries, I'd recommend the Prado Gallery in Madrid and the Guggenheim in Bilbao. - Take a tour to Cava Winery Codorniu, near Barcelona. Cava is the Catalan version of Champagne, and it tastes great. - In Barcelona: check out the beach, eat tapas outdoors, dance with flamenco girls, see the churches, go to wine bars, visit tourist attractions (like La Rambla or the 'magic' fountain), etc. There was a great wine bar my friends and I stumbled upon, and on certain days an acoustic guitar player would sing English songs (I remember Bob Marley). It's unlikely that he's still there, but it was a great little place to sit and have some wine (which I highly recommend even if you are young, Spain is very lenient with alcohol). I'll try to find the location. As for pickpocketing, it's common on the subways if you're a tourist. Don't wear your wallet in any back pockets, and keep it in a buttoned or zippered pocket if possible. If you're really worried, use a money strap. Keep your eyes peeled and try to stay aware of those around you. PS: In terms of food, I'd recommend tapas, paella, Spanish hot chocolate, sangria, churros (with chocolate dip) and Spanish omelettes. Search online to find the best places for each item -- some restaurants are much better than others.

Thanks. It's taken me about 2 hours, maybe more. Will be my first time modeling a character. :) Almost finished the model... Just needs some details. Currently at 700 tris, I'm aiming for < 1500 for each main character.

This is a WIP, so I'll post updates as they come along. Just trimming away polys now before I begin modeling details (pouch, headband, necklace) and unwrapping UVs.

I doubt I'll get around to actually developing the game -- this is mainly for modeling/animation practice. The design idea is a "cartoonish" but mature-themed action/adventure game in a "tiki island" setting. The player can choose to be a healer, spellcaster or melee fighter. Witchdoctor (Healer) The concept is heavily influenced by this illustration. Here's the modeling WIP... More to come soon!

Great design! :thumbup: I like the idea of a text drop-down. I can see it being really dramatic with an eased tween. To make the JavaScript easier, I'd suggest using something like mootools. http://demos.mootools.net/Fx.Slide Good luck. :) EDIT: If you do end up using mootools, you can then use a mootools-alternative lightbox, like Milkbox or Slimbox.

It's illegal and "wrong" not on the grounds that the "animal did not consent," but on the grounds that you are causing unnecessary pain to an animal. Just as the law sees it. As was the case with homosexuality in the past, the significant harm is created by the intense social stigma and widespread ignorance surrounding the topic. What's your point?

All three should be legal, hands down. "It's gross" is not a good enough reason to keep something illegal. The question of consent is completely irrelevant. We slaughter, skin, eat, mutilate, etc. animals all without their consent. Under no law is "consent" by animals necessary or expected. [NB] Pedophilia is a medical term which describes the primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubsecent children. It describes an individual's feelings, not their behaviour. In fact, most convicted child sex offenders do not appear to be pedophiles (in that they do not have a primary or exclusive attraction to prepubescent children). The legal and laymen usage of 'pedophile' (as a child sex offender) creates an unnecessary social stigma that targets a mostly innocent group of people -- people who suffer from a sexual orientation that they did not choose or want. Furthermore, it is no more a "disease" than any other sexual orientation; be it homosexuality, heterosexuality, or even zoosexuality. See my earlier post for details. We've already discussed this in length. Just because eating meat "has to do with our survival" doesn't mean that the meat we eat at lunch and dinner is needed for our survival. Thousands upon thousands of people, and sometimes entire communities, are able to survive perfectly well without any meat at all in their diet. And, obviously, those "already dead" animals are raised and killed only because they are going to be made into human-consumed meat. It's not as if farmers are turning roadkill into prime quality beef.

Rarely is suicide the result of an individual losing their job. Suicide comes about because the loss of a job and/or a slew of other stressful events triggers in that person a clinical depression. It depends on a number of factors, such as gender, media exposure and availability to firearms. Canada, 2003[1] Males - 46% use hanging, 20% use firearms, 20% use poisons Females - 42% use poisons, 37% use hanging, 18% use other (including 'slashing' to the wrist) United States, 2004[2] Males - 56.8% use firearms, 23.4% use hanging/suffocation, 12.5% use poisons Females - 32.4% use firearms, 37.8% use poisons, 19.7% use hanging/suffocation The more aggressive and more lethal methods used by males seems to account for the higher rate of suicide among males than females.

You are a youthful and healthy person living in extremely fortunate conditions and a very tolerant society (relatively speaking). The reality of the situation is that there are many good options and many more good reasons for you (and others like you) to continue living. Depression can make it difficult to see this, but it must be understood that you will get over it. How on earth can you know any of that? A few educated guesses... a) He has regular access to the internet (and, at least for a time, Runescape). This implies that he has enough money and freedom to afford such a luxury. B) He is writing on a Runescape fanboard, and he only recently came to understand his own sexuality. It seems very likely that he is under 30. c) He is living in the 21st century, an extremely tolerant period in time compared to recent history. Assuming the above assumptions stand true, then he does indeed have many desirable reasons to continue living. People would kill to be in his place.

You are a youthful and healthy person living in extremely fortunate conditions and a very tolerant society (relatively speaking). The reality of the situation is that there are many good options and many more good reasons for you (and others like you) to continue living. Depression can make it difficult to see this, but it must be understood that you will get over it.

Haven't missed any, but then again, I don't watch them on a television set. :lol: Pretty good series if you're into science fiction. :thumbup: Looking forward to tonight's episode!

Ideally, a sober and rational adult should have the right to commit suicide so long as family and friends are duly notified. It would be far more selfish to force a person to continue a life they do not wish to live. This obviously would not apply to instances of severe stress, depression and drug intoxication. Thích Qu?ng ??c - Wikipedia Chantal Sebire - News.com.au With that said, suicide should always be viewed as a "bad idea" at first for the simple sake that it most likely is (e.g. thinking clouded by depression). Cases like the above are in the vast minority when it comes to suicide.

Medically speaking, homosexuality, zoophilia and even pedophilia are all characterized by an individual's exclusive or preferential sexual attractions rather than the actions they may take to meet these desires. It's unfortunate that society has come to pervasively view zoophiles and pedophiles as sex offenders. In reality, the vast majority of convicted child-sex offenders do not show an exclusive or preferential attraction to prepubescent children. I can see a discussion on pedophilia being a bit too mature-themed for Off-Topic, though...

These are questions that have been debated over for hundreds if not thousands of years. This isn't about to end anytime soon. In my opinion, part of the problem lies in the expectation of objective evidence in almost every Off-Topic debate. Even if we all have vastly different ideologies and beliefs, our responses tend to all be similar in that they provide the same empirically-based arguments. It's rare to see a discussion here on the moral or subjective grounds of a topic. This limitation is, in my opinion, what creates the occasional "discussion droughts" in Off-Topic. And, with the above in mind, most Off-Topic debates (if not online debates in general) are spurred by ignorant posts that can be easily rebutted with a few citations. When these posters are stumped for a response, or are simply shunned by a series of insulting attacks, the debates tend to die down. Some of these posters take it personally, and avoid expressing their opinions out of fear of being "flamed." Some discussion-worthy topics that haven't been covered much, if at all... - The justification of recreational hard drug use (heroin, cocaine) and/or its decriminalization - Zoosexuality and/or pedophilia as a sexual orientation, i.e. no less of a "choice" than heterosexuality/homosexuality - The justification of copyright infringement; e.g. "stealing" copyrighted movies and distributing them en-mass - The prohibition of torture in any situation at all - Eastern religion - etc. I'd be willing to start one of the above if others are interested in debating against my position.

Check out this thread for lots of good "Trip Room" ideas. http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showfla ... art/1/vc/1 [hide=Some inspiration...][/hide] Good luck.

King's Quest V (1990), F-Zero and Super Mario World (1991) were some of my first games. Tennis (1989) God, the game is older than me. Tennis was released in 1985. :o I forgot about Duck Hunt; another '85 classic!

DMT, a highly illegal hallucinogenic drug, is found in trace amounts in the human body. :o