warri0r45

READY TO POUNCE AT THE TOUCH OF A BUTTON... Man dude, you rock. My system's locked in on military gluttons. ;P Dude. Steve Vai's awesome. Satriani's better. Problem with all the virtuousos is that they kinda lack "soul" as opposed to other artists. Except Michael Angelo Batio - he's incredibly technical, but he really manages to do halfway decent instrumental covers of good classic songs and write a few good ones as well. I'd prefer Vai to Batio any day. But that's just me.

If they don't like bush, then they have every right to stay and vote him out. Just as much right as those who voted him in. Anyway on the topic of a possible Iran invasion, I couldn't see it happening somehow. I think it's all just media hype.

Ehhhh..... there's a whole globe full of water. That's drinkable and won't have acute side-effects? Recycled water is drinkable and does not have acute side affects. It's been done in Singapore with no apparant ill affects whatsoever and the science behind it is sound.

I just thought i'd clear this up assassin. Hydrogen gas could only (on an industrial level) be derived from water. So if you get it from water and it ends up recombining with O2 to form water, there is no net increase. The sky also has a limit to how much water it can hold, if there is too much, it condenses and rains. In other words, it's not only incredibly clean, but the balance is kept intact, unlike the balance I referred to above. I'd always understood it could be derived from methane on an industrial level. My bad, you're correct, although it would also produce carbon dioxide which kind of defeats the purpose of a 'zero emissions technology.'

Bad. This is almost as good as your post in the marijuana thread...

Uhhh. Sigh. Youv'e made my brain hurt. 1) You can't put wells everywhere and they are completely useless to water a city. 2) No they're not. 3) At least other people on this topic and others in the world have an interest to help find suitable drinking water sources. 4) Yeah.. Why don't you come to my country, the driest one on the planet and see what our dam levels are at. In 73 years, if current trends continue, we will run dry. 5) Yes, good idea. Lets wait untill 4 million in Sydney, 3 million in Melbourne, 2 million in Brisbane and 1 million in Adelaide have had to move to north western WA and resettle where they have been having record rainfalls i.e. wait untill our countries economy, inferstructure and way of life completely die. Yeah, but what if the current trends in Australia don't continue? What if the rate it's going at now changes? What if? Scientists said at the rate it's going now, not if the rate changes. Anything could happen. The water nuke could be dropped on Australia. Maybe the dams would come back. Maybe the whole world will be destroyed by then. Who knows? Noone. Scientists still claim they are predictions. Unless you have a time machine and have gone to the future you can't actually claim that it's true. So you're basically saying that we should sit around on our hands, with the possibility that things will not change and when the outcomes I proposed do happen, we just say "but there was a chance it wouldn't have turned out like this, we were just hangin out for the rain!" Give me a break mate. Prevention is needed if we want to survive a catastrophe.

Afl is fer loosers mate. :lol: :P Just joking incase you cant tell. Premiers FTW, unlike your so close yet so far Swannies. :P

I get a great thrill from writing and playing my music. I hope you do too. Good luck with that. :thumbsup:

I'll give you a free science lesson. Firstly, scientists don't merely 'guess' what happened in the past. They hypothesise what could have happened, based on techniques that are tried and proven. For example: geological rock layers, rings of growth in trees, radioactive dating, air trapped in ice samples etc, etc. In other words, we don't just guess, we provide the best postulation possible which is subject to accountability, which unfortunately religion is not. The accountability of science means that (due to the fact that a conclusion is formed after evidence is presented, not evidence formed to support a conclusion) when any theory, guess or hypothesis is shown to be wrong, it can change and will change according to any new evidence presented. Catch my drift? So you see, we don't have faith in science whatsoever. Faith is believing in something that won't change and basically can not be proven. Scientific facts, theories, hypothesis, whatever can change and can be proven. Just as a side note, your theory that dinosaur bones were spread around the planet via the flood that covered every piece of land on earth is not scientifically sound. Why? Because there is not possibly enough water on earth to cover up past the tip of mount everest. Unless you say god did it, which is fine but it makes your theory basically null and void because it is based on the belief in god, which itself is based on faith alone. As a side side note, water does not form mountains.

I suppose I shouldn't knock it until I try it, right? :P

We'll get radioactive water and get super cool powers! But yeah, the only thing wrong with recycled water is peoples perception of it. Including all state premiers apart from ours. Other state premiers are hesitating and as a result, putting thier states in danger of drying up quicker.

As it is found naturally, it shouldn't be bad for you, but excessive amounts could be. Use it in moderation and you should be fine. (If you choose to take this information you wave any legal liabilities I might me liable for. :uhh: :lol: :P ) Did you know your brain, every night, releases a chemical called DMT that is like taking acid, only a bagillion times worse? It induces REM sleep. Taking DMT (you can extract it from pretty much everything, like grass...Yea, lawn clippings...) while awake makes you see some crazy insane stuff. Not everything natural is good. :P Edit: Apparently Adam007 already mentioned DMT...I didn't read it at the time. :P I already corrected myself by stating something along the lines of 'if something is natural and has no apparant detrimental affects, it shouldn't be too bad for you (in moderation of course)' Obviously you shouldn't go outside and kiss snakes assuming everything in nature is good for you, thus why I corrected myself.

For real. Which is why I'm a Taoist. Us Taoists have it good. Religion, without stupidity. Nature makes more sense than humans anyway. Intresting.. I thought humans were apart of nature? Evidence please. Do you believe what you just presented is 100% fall-less. If i'm not mistaken, you better quickly put on your robes with your sage gear and go hunt some goblins cuz you must have posted a World of Warcraft Quote or something :mrgreen: :XD: ~Defender~ Evidence of what? Religions such as Taoism and Buddhism don't require evidence. They are more about spiritual and moral focus. Or, if your not a monk or anything, they can be philosophies to live your life by.

No one has gotten sick from bottled water either, lol. Basically i'm curious if its worth it to buy the bottled water since its mineral free. The water in my sink does just fine.. ~Defender~ You'd have to do chemical analyses or find references on the net to see which is better. I just prefer tap though.

Just drink tap water. I have never heard of anyone getting sick by drinking it (at least in Brisbane, Australia anyway).

Absolutely. Not in the submissive sense though; more like me and god would be mates and go out to the pub on fridays and I could say 'god's a top bloke, lets have him over for a barbie on the weekend.' Don't know what I'm talking about? Niether do I because I would have no idea what I'd do if I saw god. I'll always go with the evidence. I'm not even an atheist becuase I won't openly deny anything. I will remain accountable for my beliefs in the possible existance of a god and they will change with science and evidence presented (provided it's compelling and shows an obvious revelation, unlike all of the 'evidence' some creationists try to give as infallible).

It's not just about 'some Americans,' the Twin Towers are landmarks to the only superpower in the world. You've always been a moron, so I don't really expect you to understand Do you understand what he was trying to say?

It's sad how the overwhelming minority of any group of people can ruin the view of that group for the overwhelming majority. My greatest fear is the influence radicalism has on young minds and the trend may be towards a greater number of radicals, sadly. This is where muslim leaders must stand up and be counted. They must strictly frown upon any violent act carried out in the name of Islam, as violence and Islam is basically a contradiction in terms.

What light would that be? Sorry to say this but you are exactly the kind of person who makes athiests and whoever else persecute Christians - if, actually, they're unfairly persecuted at all. The kind of religious person (and I have nothing against religious people per se) who tries to get others to believe things they don't want to believe. In that process you and the others who argue against you create a tense and negative atmosphere. You have no proof for God's existence, and we have no proof for God's unexistence. (sp lol?) You have no grounds for attempting to force us to believe in your religion. As far as I'm concerned that's extremely immature and you can't see past the end of your own nose. No offence. im only doing it for ur own good since the way ur all headed is straight to hell. besides, we are so complex its clear we were designed. i did not evolve from a monkey. Give me solid concrete proof, and I'll start going to church. I'll pray every day, call myself a Christians, and not eat fish on Fridays. I second that. I dare say Carlin does not have the capacity to do so. Prove me wrong mate, prove me wrong.

Uhhh. Sigh. Youv'e made my brain hurt. 1) You can't put wells everywhere and they are completely useless to water a city. 2) No they're not. 3) At least other people on this topic and others in the world have an interest to help find suitable drinking water sources. 4) Yeah.. Why don't you come to my country, the driest one on the planet and see what our dam levels are at. In 73 years, if current trends continue, we will run dry. 5) Yes, good idea. Lets wait untill 4 million in Sydney, 3 million in Melbourne, 2 million in Brisbane and 1 million in Adelaide have had to move to north western WA and resettle where they have been having record rainfalls i.e. wait untill our countries economy, inferstructure and way of life completely die.

Wrong. Debate is what it is. Bickering is a word people use for a debate they don't want to be involved in. The problem in this thread is that people are repeating facts which aren't true, ideas which are founded upon these facts, and concluding falsely that those who do not agree are not aware of the facts. Those who have life experience of the subject matter at hand or post sources indicating that the government sponsored "Facts" are propaganda, are mostly ignored. Pot is basically safe. It can be used irresponsibly, like caffeine, sugar, cigarettes, or alcohol, but the substance itself is rather benign. In fact, it's safer than caffeine, sugar, cigarettes, or alcohol. "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man." Francis L. Young Administrative Law Judge of the US drug police DEA Safer than sugar? Perhaps some people have a sweet tooth, but sugar (more broadly carbohydrates) are essential for your continued survival. Your brain uses carbs on a constant basis. Beside that point, I can agree that some people will abuse sugar, much the same way people can abuse marijuana, but I know a hell of alot more people who have been harmed by marijuana than sugar.

This is a picture of the album cover of 'Big Picture Lies' by Sunk Loto, an Aussie band. It sums me up in a few ways - This is one of my fav. albums of all time. There is one of if not my favourite song of all time on this album. This album drew me to it for the guitar work among other reasons, I play the guitar and write music in a similar style. The picture shows a dude who is like me in many ways, in space, shut off from the world. I'd like to travel to space one day and concider myself a pretty introverted person. Anyway I think thats it.

In my opinion, that's just what we need my friend, the old one aint' workin'. Now I'm not saying make an army to be a protagonist in world war 3, but merely as a global security force. Anyways, just my humble ideas.

Now I'm no expert on the UN, but if they call on a country, you could assume the could say no, correct? In other words I think the UN would be the last people to demonstrate forceful tactics. My point here is that they need a purely UN force (I'm talking like around 100,000 troops) that can deal with problems such as these with military dominance over whatever insurgencies they face.

In my opinion, the UN don't have NEARLY enough firepower, manpower or legal power to deal with probles such as these. Seriously, they should get real about expanding thier organisation into a real world force. Don't get me wrong, it's great that have been around to help in places like Rwanda, but it just seems the problems elsewhere are too big for them.