mmmcannibalism

warriors guild sells plain pizzas I think, if you want bases idk

apex? the peak or highpoint.

I don't agree with that. Our whole nature is based on this principle. If we do something that triggers a positive stimulus then we will continue to do it. On the other hand, if we do something to trigger a negative one then we will stop. It's in our nature to seek the positive. ...Which begs the question: Do you think mankind is better off for having left the Garden of Eden? Until they ate of the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, Adam and Eve couldn't be said to have known the difference between the two, could they? What with the Garden of Eden being described as a paradise on Earth and everything, I think it poses an interesting question; are we better off for having become "aware?" I think it ends up being an apple to oranges comparison. Tranquility and knowledge dont compare very well when its an all or nothing trade, many people would take a little of the other for a little of the either way but its hard to say whether a full trade either way will be good. Of course, Adam and Eve didnt really have that choice with full considerations so its hard to say whether they made a good call.

what he said Its almost a guarentee that we are at least part of the global warming situation; but overreaching in our response could cause trouble. doom--I hope you realize red eye is a very satirous show, I cant watch interview(dial up) but even if one scientist is stupid it doesnt mean there isnt a legitimate flaw in global warming theory. Look at Al Gore, Ill wager he isnt an expert scientist yet so many people think he speaks gospel.

I call zombies but yeah this could get fairly bad; as long as the drugs are effective I think we should be able to manage.

Really? I thought my second point was crap compared to the first. :P You do not need to burn someone to know fire is hot, but you do need to experience both hot and cold temperatures to understand temperature in general. If you lived on the Equator all your life and you were sweaty all the time then you wouldn't see that as "hot", you'd see it as normal because it's all you know. However, once you go to Antarctica then you will realize that being sweaty isn't the only thing that can happen to your body - you can also shiver. You realize that being sweaty is not the default so you will then realize the distinction and two new terms will arise for you - cold and hot, instead of just what's normal or default. Here is what I am getting at though; even if we need opposites I think we can agree the world could be much better without us not realizing what good and bad are. Maybe the occasional house fire would teach us a lesson, but if god is trying to teach us a lesson things such as world wars seem like a case of overdoing it. Thats not to say I doubt god exists, but I dislike the notion that everything bad is happening because we are supposed to learn something from it. Paradoxically, I find the main point of history using what we did bad to learn what we should do moving forward.

No, evil is necessary in order for good to exist at all. I see it as nothing more than a reference tool for comparison. To understand the concept of "hot" you must understand "cold" as well. It's all relative, so a reference tool is required. Not sure, but I think it might have to do with our independence. Having your parents do your science project for you is nothing to be proud of. Doing it on your own allows you to experience the feeling of triumph though. second point I totally agree, but you dont need to burn someone for them to know fire is hot.

the problem is not the policy, its not the system, its the people. We could devote a million of the smartest people in the world to studying government for a million years and the system they devised would still be broken by the masses. A capitalist society with light limits should work perfectly, as should a socialist, as should a communist society. Unfortunatly, we get populations that demand changes to the current system and instead of stopping at what they needed to do they over do everything and make it just as bad as it started. And of course there is the classic ignorant voter/citizen; my personal favorites are the girl who said marilon manson would be a better president then obama, and the girl who said obama was the antichrist "because a lot of people said he was".

im 99.9...% percent sure perez is gay, and from what Ive seen of his temperment he shouldnt be judging anything.

Are you saying that you saw proof that God existed? If so, what was this proof? fix quote please, I didnt say that(error in my post caused wrong id I think)

definetely

I dont think she had time to give a lecture on the defense of heterosexual only marriage; I have heard much worse reasoning then what she said. Besides, its a beauty pageant not a philosophical debate lets not expect too much of them :lol:

that rant was pretty funny okay, a ton of it was innacurate/generalized but since like 75% was spot on awesome job (thanks for the un quote) as for the korea thing, I believe we keep troops their to maintain stable airbases for tactical operations; we still have forces in Japan because they dont have an offensive military in event of attack.

[hide=] Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't. Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being. I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense. The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing" Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex? It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite. Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion. [/hide] the problem is they sound illogical initially for different reasons the reason behind the big bang sounding unreasonable is a lack of understanding the scientific data that supports it involved. Im sure you dont understand the full proof of gravity/general relativity that doesnt mean its proof doesnt make sense the reason people using god to explain the creation of the universe is partially illogical falls to the razor(forget name). If the universe is too complex to have created itself, and if its not possible for it to have gone back forever(big bang/crunch cycles), why does it make more sense for a being that is beyond observation and somehow existed forever to have created the immensly complex universe. I hate sounding like a devout atheist, that was more of a devil's advocate explanation then anything. Because the being can do anything. I saw proof of God before my eyes once, but afterwards i realised that many christians aren't that way because they had "proof" but because they just know that God exists. Its like how before the law of gravity people already knew that if you threw something in the air it would fall down, or that before the law of motions people already knew things moved without proof. There are many posts before about this, but God *has* to punish us. Although he loves us, he wants Justice and that is why he sent Jesus to sacrifice himself instead of poofing belief into us. He isn't going to make us his puppets to please himself. He gives us a choice. On the other hand, Satan is evil because he has caused Sin to enter the world and without him no one would ever die in the first place which is why he didn't only kill "10" people but every single person to have ever existed really and made our lives worse than they otherwise would have been. [/hide] If its illogical for the universe to have gone backwards forever on its own how is it more logical for a being that somehow has existed forever to have created it?

He doesn't deserve to exist because of insecurities? Jesus Christ I feel like I'm in Sparta. THIS IS CLICHED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! though seriously, while you were plenty justified in being mad about insensitive jokes you lost my sympathy when you flooded the server. dang got beat to joke

[hide=] Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't. Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being. I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense. The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing" Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex? It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite. Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion. [/hide] the problem is they sound illogical initially for different reasons the reason behind the big bang sounding unreasonable is a lack of understanding the scientific data that supports it involved. Im sure you dont understand the full proof of gravity/general relativity that doesnt mean its proof doesnt make sense the reason people using god to explain the creation of the universe is partially illogical falls to the razor(forget name). If the universe is too complex to have created itself, and if its not possible for it to have gone back forever(big bang/crunch cycles), why does it make more sense for a being that is beyond observation and somehow existed forever to have created the immensly complex universe. I hate sounding like a devout atheist, that was more of a devil's advocate explanation then anything.

ive gotten two sword over around 5 tasks, its not a high rate but you will get them occasionally.

raising hunt and farm to about 30 would be very quick and easy.

a god with limited power, a god that discovered the human race after it had naturally evolved and for whatever reason cant influence/wont influence it. A god with limited power... isnt that an oxymoron My definition of god is a being/force that exists beyond reality. Its a human convention that makes people think god would have to be all powerful.

I dont think it really accomplishes anything so there is no need. Some of the kids in my school should have uniforms until they can figure out what dressing decently means though :roll:

No. You do get extras tho. Im pretty sure ring gives xp for the extra runes it makes.

unless were doing something sneaky like going around the back of the paper it isnt possible if the initial angle starts on the baseline and goes 91 degrees (one degree left of vertical) then the second angle must be less then 90 degrees to point the third line back toward the initial point.

I prefer, "how do you seperate iron into its component elements?", that question stumpted so many people back in 9th grade. Uhhh... I've never taken a high school science, class, but I'll hazard a guess that you don't do anything? what grade are you in then if I may ask? well to be blunt, my class isnt exactly amazing in the logical reasoning department and after the top 10-15 or so kids there is a big drop off. We had just gone after a session in honors natural science that involved methods of seperation(evaporation, filter, etc.) and that iron question was on there as a trick question. Most people did fairly well on the standard stuff (explain that filtering is how to remove sand from water) but the logical reasoning question about iron stumpted most of them. to get back on topic paraphrased "the main thing that got in the way of my learning was my education"

I prefer, "how do you seperate iron into its component elements?", that question stumpted so many people back in 9th grade.

a god with limited power, a god that discovered the human race after it had naturally evolved and for whatever reason cant influence/wont influence it.