Rebdragon

ray, I completely agree with everything you've said. What I'm arguing is that although you are correct about everything considering the fullfillment one feels for himself, one should not only think about that when making life decisions. So again, I have not refuted, have not even attempted to refute, a single one of your claims. I'm simply stating that when one makes decisions, the effect it has on ourselves should not be the only factor we consider.

Than woman it up, and kill a man with your bare teeth.

What the hell?

I must admit, that was a very deep and enlightening post, which was, as far as I can tell, more or less completely correct. There is a problem I found in it though, a problem of gaps; although you addressed the issue of the meaning of life in regards to oneself, you neglected the fact that our meanings and actions effect others. That is, yes, your meaning for yourself, if one has been found, can not be measured to be greater or lesser than anyone elses, but the social effect it has can. [...] I was about to write a gigantic response to continue my point, in which I would reference a certain thread, but now I realize that the thread itself completely expounds on the point I was going to make. Thus, if you wish to know what I was going to say, or just want to read one of the greatest threads this forum has to offer, read a better version of what I was thinking right here. Parts of the Thread I'm Alluding to: [hide]I live on the lake and it was a beautiful day outside with temps in the 80s. It was the 2nd day of summer vacation and as I sat on my patio in the early afternoon, I was studying for the MCAT in August. I finished a tough chapter and I looked around me. Flying across the water in a nice boat was a guy I knew from high school. He wasnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t a very smart guy, all though high school he skipped classes to smoke pot, and he dated a different girl each week. He ended up graduating a pathetic 130th out of 150, but he got into a college (the worst university in the state). He was a communications major at college and from what I gather wants to be a salesman for Nabisco like his dad is. His dad earns a respectable $55,000 a year and his wifeÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s job brings the net total to over $100,000. Now I watch him fly past me, one arm holds a beer, the other is wrapped around the waist of a perky blonde in a bikini. For a moment I grew jealous, than I felt anger. Everyone has always told me ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬Åwork hard and in the end you will get your rewardÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

Amen : ., From what I've seen even today, it's the proper colloquial definition of the word. There is no "noob/newb" dichotomy, simply another word, "newb", used to take place of the word taken over by morons for a lesser degree of cursing- "noob". Noob means new player, or someone new to something in general. To date the word has not been replaced with any kind of technical new definition, and thus I see no grounds for saying that the proper definition has been replaced. Good day.

That was the only flaw I saw in your thought process. Switch that around, especially on the internet, and even moreso on Runescape. Would I have done the same thing in your shoes? Probably not. You chose the kind, selfless path, while I would probably choose the skeptical, immensely annoyed path. Your decision would be better than mine in every way, except for any regret about losing a certain amount of work put into that 1.3M. If you're self-sacrificing enough to do that for any random person, then in your case, you made the right decision, in every way. Karma is a bedtime story for grownups.

You're asking the Tip.it member pool whether Tip.it or a competing fan site is better.... You, sir, are a statistics genius.

Whisked away to my archive of future signatures. :wink: Make sure to quote tag Dr. Cox of course, not me :wink: .

M107 Sniper Rifle. HEADSHOT.

People are bastard coated bastards with bastard filling. Learn to deal with it. Gunna hafta keep saying it, 'cause ya'll don't seem to get it.

Lol. Apparently, you have never met my parents. Oh, let me list the ways: 1. Grounded for 3 months because I didn't have a job the day I turned 15. [...] 9. Need I say more? Now, you don't see me making a post about my parents and I would trade mine for yours any day. Punch them, or give me your address and let me do it for you. Even if only for #8, please.

Because this one was a bumped repeat topic. It's just an attention thing :| .

Are you suggesting that humans completely get rid of cars just because they're "very noisy and their fumes stink" and cause traffic :lol: ? You're not serious, right? Do you even have a license?

warri0r, that was just mean :P . If the damage to the environment is great enough, if it reaches to the extent that it has noticable negative effects on the lifestyles of all, then, and only then, will there be a uniform global reaction to cease the damaging of the environment. People are bastard coated bastards with bastard filling. Simple as that.

Of course we should do simple things to help the environment, I never said we shouldn't. But do you think it's realistically possible, or even responsible for that matter, to try and get the masses to get up in arms to fight global warming by making major lifestyle changes, when there isn't even near a guarentee that we're the main cause of all the warming? Again, my argument is about major lifestyle changes to adapt to higher magnitudes of human effect, not simple things that people are supposed to be doing anyways regardless of whether or not the global temperature is going up.

Neither. Though, apparently I do have a facebook account, I've just never seen it before.

Yes, you are correct in saying that this is an argument based on varying magnitudes, but the magnitude with which we are hurting the planet (temperature-wise, anyways) has a direct effect on how much we need to rectify the problem. Basically, if the recent temperature increases are based 99.9% on solar or other non-human effects, any kind of lifestyle change to lower temperatures would be basically as worthless as possibly imaginable. But if humans are the direct cause of anything from, say, 30% or more of the recent temperature increases [just throwing out numbers here], then a change of lifestyle can have a noticable effect on what we're doing to the planet. Although anyone with at least half a brain knows that we're technically effecting temperatures by existing on the planet, so is everything on the planet. Your tree outside, your dog, that fly that's been annoying you for the past fifteen minutes, everything on this planet directly effects the global temperature. But are you going to kill a cow just because it's releasing heat from it's body? Well, I'd certainly hope not. That's why this magnitude argument is so important- to rectify the situation, we first must find what things (volcanoes, the sun, us, Shiva, etc.) are having the greatest effect on the matter at hand, and from there, and only there, can we create a proper course of action to try and fix the problem, if possible. Say we're having a "negligible effect" on the Earth's warming, not "nothing". Your statement is technically incorrect, and you'll get proponents of the opposing side of the argument down your throat before you can take a breath for it :-w .

I don't see a problem with it, as long as it's not taught as some kind of absolute truth or what not. I've also seen the Swindle, and I personally agree with the counterpoints to An Inconvenient Truth that it offers (i.e., the relationship between CO2 and temperature rises), but I don't see either as side absolutely, from a subjective point of view, correct. So unless either has been disproved to the point of not deserving the title "science" (which I do not believe has happened, though from reading posts on this thread it might have...), I don't see a problem with showing either movie in the classroom.

Pretty much any quote from Mark Twain is gold in my eyes :-w . That's flippin' awesome: deep, cynical, and raw, my favorite kind of writing. Do you know who wrote that?

Well, a few things do, but it's up there :-k . Shut up. This is a serious thread. Go take your stupid posts to RSOF or some other forum that's just asking for it. Irrrroooonnny~! This ain't a "serious" thread bub, so stop acting like a wannabe mod where it's not even needed. [insert blatantly pertinent lolcat]

Lovin' the whole holier than thou "I've never whined or complained about an update in my life" attitude stamped all over this frikkin' thread. Yes, all those who desire change should die, right. Good one guys.

Heh, not too long ago, first attempt at pixeling. Dabbled for the hell of it.

:-s . Okay, that was one forced way of turning "I'm ticked about getting flamed on my [millions of] rants" into an interrogative.

The whistle emote isn't that great of an indicator of sarcasm.

For one thing, if your brother is 23, your parents were supposed to give up on him 5 years ago. For another, is a minor restriction on seeing your friends all that you have? Or is there more you're ranting about that I'm missing? As for that matter, try looking up information on the internet about over-protectiveness being an ineffective way to raise a child. If you're parents are the kind to listen to logical, tested information (though that could be iffy from what I've read), you can always try and explain calmly to them that they're not helping you by keeping you on a leash. Calmly being the emphasized term here. Or, you know, go with How2PK's plan. I actually think I like that one better, especially if you're parents are extremely dogmatic :-w .