obfuscator

Link the video card, ram, and mobo. Yeah you have to buy a processor separately.

Buffalo and Florida both have 2 GIH. NJ has one - and I'm worried about them. I wonder if they may even make a push for a playoff spot (getting closer every day). Kaberle imo will only accept a trade to Philly, Tampa, Boston, Pittsburgh, Washington, Montreal, NYR, Carolina, Buffalo or Atlanta. I do believe him when he says he wants to stay in Toronto, and to be honest I wouldn't mind seeing him resigned (as long as it wouldn't be over 4.5mil, 2-3 years). If they get rid of him, they're defensive offence goes down to practically zero when it's low already. That said, if they can get someone really good for him I'd be willing to see him go. Thing is, I don't think they can. I hope they send him, khadri, and philly's first to tampa for stamkos haha.

Well the west is so tight atm LA isn't out of it by any means. I hope CGY makes it, though I'd love for Col to do so as well.

I like it but the focus change is really abrupt (and distracting imo). Not sure if that was your intent or not, but I'd try to get the back of the post a little more in focus.

If you're doing graphics and video editing $1500 is a pretty restrictive budget, especially if you want 12gb+ ram.

Allow me to be brutally honest - if you've got no idea what parts are even necessary for building a pc then it may not be the best idea to do this yourself. That said, you need the following things: Disk drive - self explanatory Hard drive - either one or two depending on the size and specs Processor and heatsink RAM Power supply video card (a good one if you're doing a lot of after effects) Motherboard - connect everything together (must be compatible with the processor depending on whether you prefer amd or intel) What's your budget for all this?

West and east are completely opposite atm. Still, leafs play the sens and the isles next...two games that should be winnable. If win, then we'll be at 60 points, 2 (or maybe 4 by that time) out of 8th :D

Atheism is inherent and necessary to communism. Saying atheism had nothing to do with the atrocities committed by Stalin is ridiculous - as the death camps, the outlawing of religious teaching, the destruction of churches and the killing of religious all serve to show. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because God fulfills the role of the creative force. Of course, but that doesn't stop us from hypothesizing on which of many possible scenarios is the more likely one given the same amount of evidence. Ahh. Well I was referring to media in general, with books being my preference. You're rejecting a claim based on zero evidence. God is not physical (if he exists). That's why philosophy must also be considered. It would be an argument for authority if I was attempting to show it proved a god existed. I'm attempting to persuade you to be a little less aloof about the issue. Certainly I agree that because many intelligent people believe something doesn't make it true. I won't claim (and have never done so) that I am an expert in physics or even math. However, I am an intelligent person, so I believe I can at least hypothesize and attempt to come to a logical conclusion based on what I do know. Forgive me if I sound unlearned in this issue(as I've said before, science is not my area of specialty) but if radioactive decay is truly random, it stands to reason that it would be random across all radioactive atoms. "The number will be cut in half after a certain time". Is this number not standard? Does not the half life of different elements differ? Same thing with light. What makes these photons follow the path that forces them to travel together?

Well, if you'll be so kind as to elaborate I'll be glad to voice my opinion. As far as I've seen, everything that "seems" random is not random at all - atomic radioactive decay was the previous example given. http://www.askamathematician.com/?p=612 Yet the question still arises that, if atomic radioactive decay is truly random, why is it linear and predictable outside of a single molecule? The link I posted has nothing to do with radioactive decay. ??

Well, if you'll be so kind as to elaborate I'll be glad to voice my opinion. As far as I've seen, everything that "seems" random is not random at all - atomic radioactive decay was the previous example given. http://www.askamathematician.com/?p=612 Yet the question still arises that, if atomic radioactive decay is truly random, why is it linear and predictable outside of a single molecule?

Well, if you'll be so kind as to elaborate I'll be glad to voice my opinion. As far as I've seen, everything that "seems" random is not random at all - atomic radioactive decay was the previous example given.

Don't bump old threads. @Giordano: Backups were made of the database - thus the only posts/topics lost in the rollback were those that occurred after the last backup. Since this thread was so old it had existed long before the back up and was therefore restored. I believe there was about a three month window in 2008 that was lost only.

I haven't not disclosed my sources at all. I've repeatedly linked to said sources. What I'm saying is that I have no desire to spend hours typing chapters from books. Nor am I claiming to know the answer to the creation of the universe. I don't understand what you mean by that fallacy - all I can infer by this is that using logical arguments is somehow a fallacy? Ahh ok, so what is the third option, pray tell? Something is random, or not random, or....? Please, enlighten me. As far as I can tell any sort of guidance or causality causes creation to fall into the "not random" category. Is something "partially" random? If so it is not random. I also never claimed my argument was inherently true, I'm trying to demonstrate how I believe my views are more likely to be correct than not.

Moved to H&A.

It is a game after all. :wink: Besides, everyone knows the all sniper strategy offers guaranteed victory. Although, the all medic strategy on defense can negate that.

Yeah hunters are pretty bad in pvp. I don't know what they were like in Wrath, however.

Saru posted yesterday lol. It does appear he's bailed on OT though :(

I have two things to say to this. 1 - Neat idea, but it takes a programmer to do it, and it's quite a bit of work. 2 - Lol'd at the hot picture :D

You misunderstand my basic logic. Nothing can be "too random". It either is random, or it is not. There's no logical fallacy there. If there is no God or creative force, the creation of the universe must have been completely self-initiated, with no outside influence of any kind, and thus, random. Not "too random", not "a bit random", not "realistically random", just random. Since random does not exist in our universe (I've asked you to prove me wrong in this regard which you've failed to do) it stands to reason that the universe could not have been created randomly - therefore some kind of rudimentary causality or creative force is required. Why do you choose to think evolution was unguided, if, in your own words, there is no evidence in either direction? Then how, I wonder, did you learn about evolution? I assume you were taught, or educated yourself in some way. The reason I don't quote these arguments is because, like I've said, it takes a book length dissertation to properly do so. ....why? Because nothing on earth is unguided. We have literally never witnessed anything on our planet without a creator or causality. I think it's an illogical assumption to assume that unguided creation (despite no evidence to prove such) is more logical then what we see in our day to day lives. Absolutely - I personally am incredulous that you're attempting to argue something can come from nothing. The logical assumption, given no evidence, is to assume something has a creator (as per what we see in our lives) rather then an evidence-less straying from the norm. Both these quotes seem to demonstrate you share the belief (with many other atheists) that theism is a character flaw. How is it, I wonder, that so many scientists, with decades of experience and multiple university degrees can believe in God? Are they somehow not real scientists? Are atheists somehow more intelligent then theists? Do you, for example, consider yourself more intelligent then the president, for example? Please note: none of this certainly proves there is a god - but I do think you're being incredibly pretentious about the issue.

Agreed about Kaberle. As far as I can tell, Kaberle would only be willing to waive the ntc for the top 8 in the east.

Hence the arguments I've been making about the supposed randomness of evolutionary creationism. I could certainly accept it if it convinced me. These books contain exactly what any book attempting to argue a topic contains - well thought out, sourced arguments for the existence of God. Fair enough to the second point. Your linguistic embellishments, however, don't help your case, and are unnecessary. Perhaps, yes. But I think it's quite telling that every atheist state in history has failed, and not even that - been a brutal dictatorship. I do wish to reiterate, however, that this certainly isn't any kind of proof for the existence of God. I did watch the one posted on this thread. I'll watch some more. Yes, but that's precisely the argument i'm trying to present to you. If evolution is not unguided, then some kind of creationary force (not necessarily a god as we envision) must have guided it. The idea of God is both comforting and difficult. Comforting, because of the points you made. Difficult, because it dictates you must live your life in a difficult way. You must be selfless, and work towards an ideal greater than oneself. This attitude is very hard to prescribe to - which is precisely why true religion cannot be populist. Has it occurred to you, I wonder, that some theists perhaps wish there is NO God? I don't believe in God because it comforts me, I believe in God because through logic and reason I have come to the conclusion that God must exist. I sometimes think life would be easier if God did not exist. However, just as you are unwilling to take a reassuring path for something you do not believe, I too refuse to take a reassuring path for something I do not believe.

Agreed versteeg didn't fit. I do still think he could have gotten more than the picks though. And man, what a good time for kessel to break out. Great goals by grabo as well, and of course two assists by lupul.

What is with edmonton fans and this "burke fails to understand" attitude? Burke doesn't fail to understand anything - he's always stressed that the rebuild process he wants to go through is not a traditional one. But yeah, ana trade is good. Basically a free player unless they resign and even then a 7th isn't much.

Yes, that seems to be fairly reasonable. What I don't accept was that this was necessarily completely unguided.

My apologies then. What I DO think is that it's a potent example of how an atheist society could be worse than a Christian one.