Curse

Spartan2 · Aug 31, 2005, 04:07 AM // 04:07

I hate people that are ranked higher in your class that cheat off of you.
I hate people that make important decisions about my life for me without my consent.
I hate it when people do not do their job and offer you lame excuses as to why they fail at life.
I hate how people gravitate towards polarities in arguments when it is unusual for anything to be absolutely a black and white issue one hundred percent of the time.
I hate showing my work in most classes.
I hate elitists that are the "upper tier" of vanity.

Although I hate these people, which is a great deal of beings said to exist on Earth, I wouldn't want them to be gone, because without them, I would not have anyone to make fun of. Without them, life would be uneventful and dull. I wouldn't want that.

Thanas · Aug 31, 2005, 11:42 AM // 11:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Guns don't perpetuate violence, they just lie there until someone picks it up and perpetuates violence with it.

But agreed, some degree of gun controls are required.

I have two points to make.

Firstly take a bananna for example, it just lies there. It however does not have the potential to kill as easily as a gun. Try killing somone with a bananna. I expect it would be a little more difficult.

Secondly a guns primary function is to kill. Therefore its purpose is to kill. If it never kills or injures another it has not served its purpose. Thus its purpose promotes killing and violence against others. By promoting killing a gun preseves the notion of the act of killing another in our minds. Thus it perpetuates violence.

(see definition of perpetuate)

Thanas · Aug 31, 2005, 11:44 AM // 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spartan2

I hate people that are ranked higher in your class that cheat off of you.
I hate people that make important decisions about my life for me without my consent.
I hate it when people do not do their job and offer you lame excuses as to why they fail at life.
I hate how people gravitate towards polarities in arguments when it is unusual for anything to be absolutely a black and white issue one hundred percent of the time.
I hate showing my work in most classes.
I hate elitists that are the "upper tier" of vanity.

Although I hate these people, which is a great deal of beings said to exist on Earth, I wouldn't want them to be gone, because without them, I would not have anyone to make fun of. Without them, life would be uneventful and dull. I wouldn't want that.

Elitists annoy me also.

Thanas · Aug 31, 2005, 11:54 AM // 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crimson_1190

not as much as you think....aside for aluminum, it requires several processes to "renew" resources. by the time it is done, you have had to say for paper, shred it bleach it and transport it....by the end you have created waste in an attempt to uncreate waste. In theory, the process is a nice idea but not effecient enough, nor really can be to be useful. there is a great show and a relatively decent book about the fact people are mislead about it "Penn and teller's BULLSH*T" has the name of the book... as for gun control people perpetuate violence... they would use rocks if they wished, if you take away guns they would just use knives. i like guns

. but this is not a forum for a debate on this i think....i was more putting it up as a joke about the comment that it was becoming flame bait. I agree with the pet peeves as i put them, i just think i will be less subtile next time in my humour.

Sorry, just have strong feelings about lax gun laws. It takes little to no effort to kill someone with a gun. To kill someone with rocks/knives requires you to examine what you are doing. With a gun its click, pull the trigger, dead.

I sorta see where you are coming from on the recycling front. However I do believe a lot of recycling processes would be very concious of efficiency, since creating more waste negates their function.

D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E · Aug 31, 2005, 12:09 PM // 12:09

when other people keep try'n to buy the same thing you are; in game and multiple forums...

c h a v e z · Aug 31, 2005, 12:25 PM // 12:25

People who think that there is just NOOOO way that their build could POSSIBLY be bad and they flame anyone who tells them that it is. Anyone who trys to comment on this persons build saying it is bad is a noob. And anyone from a top 20 guild who tries to comment on their build is immediately labeled as an elitist, even though that person has been playing they for a much longer time and has already tested the same build and many variations of it too.

I also hate people that think all good players are elitists simply because they are good and has not even met the person.

Divinitys Creature · Aug 31, 2005, 01:11 PM // 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by c h a v e z

People who think that there is just NOOOO way that their build could POSSIBLY be bad and they flame anyone who tells them that it is. Anyone who trys to comment on this persons build saying it is bad is a noob. And anyone from a top 20 guild who tries to comment on their build is immediately labeled as an elitist, even though that person has been playing they for a much longer time and has already tested the same build and many variations of it too.

I also hate people that think all good players are elitists simply because they are good and has not even met the person.

ditto.

Xue Yi Liang · Aug 31, 2005, 02:59 PM // 14:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

People who think atheists "hate" or "deny" their particular god without realizing that you can't hate/deny something that doesn't exist.

For the record, not all "religious" people think that way. Some may have an issue with the way some athiests/agnostics look down on them, though. It goes both ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

People arguing against teaching real science in schools that have no idea of the science they're arguing against.

I agree with you. Fortunately it's only a tiny vocal minority of "religious" folks who think this way. In fact, the vast majority of practicing Christians aren't creationists (for the record).

I'm Roman Catholic but I used to be a physics researcher. Now I'm a practicing physician - my belief in science isn't at odds with my faith.

MSecorsky · Aug 31, 2005, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

I have two points to make.

Firstly take a bananna for example, it just lies there. It however does not have the potential to kill as easily as a gun. Try killing somone with a bananna. I expect it would be a little more difficult.

Secondly a guns primary function is to kill. Therefore its purpose is to kill. If it never kills or injures another it has not served its purpose. Thus its purpose promotes killing and violence against others. By promoting killing a gun preseves the notion of the act of killing another in our minds. Thus it perpetuates violence.

(see definition of perpetuate)

Banana... difficult, not impossible. Choking kills as permanently as a bullet.

A guns primary function is indeed to kill, but so are many implements. Guns happen to be much more common than spears, bows, etc. and easier to use, however it takes a certain mindset to kill another human being. Someone determined to kill another, in a world without guns, would still manage to succeed (although the percentage would possibly be lower? Hard to say)

The biggest factor guns themselves contribute (aside from their primary function) is the mental sense of invincibility and power many people get honding them. Ever fire a 44 mag at the shooting range? Oh mama. Sweet.

Still, don't blame the guns, blame the people firing them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xue li yiang

For the record, not all "religious" people think that way. Some may have an issue with the way some athiests/agnostics look down on them, though. It goes both ways.

Oh, most definitely true. Just as true as it is that not all atheists "look down on" the religious folk as well. I respect your right to your beliefs, it's not unjust to expect the same in return.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xue li yiang

I agree with you. Fortunately it's only a tiny vocal minority of "religious" folks who think this way. In fact, the vast majority of practicing Christians aren't creationists (for the record).

I'm Roman Catholic but I used to be a physics researcher. Now I'm a practicing physician - my belief in science isn't at odds with my faith.

The part that ruffles my rump feathers is that the vocal minority are getting into school boards and manipulating the criteria of science classes. When a school board member claims that evolution is only a theory, for example, it demonstrates that they are far too clueless to be making those decisions.

Alura Pyro · Aug 31, 2005, 03:53 PM // 15:53

safety first then pull the trigger
Treat every hunter as if he is loaded
gun control means using both hands

Calnaion Blackhawk · Aug 31, 2005, 04:23 PM // 16:23

i hate it when rank6's think they own the gw servers

Thanas · Aug 31, 2005, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Banana... difficult, not impossible. Choking kills as permanently as a bullet.

A guns primary function is indeed to kill, but so are many implements. Guns happen to be much more common than spears, bows, etc. and easier to use, however it takes a certain mindset to kill another human being. Someone determined to kill another, in a world without guns, would still manage to succeed (although the percentage would possibly be lower? Hard to say)

The biggest factor guns themselves contribute (aside from their primary function) is the mental sense of invincibility and power many people get honding them. Ever fire a 44 mag at the shooting range? Oh mama. Sweet.

Still, don't blame the guns, blame the people firing them.

Guns are far easier to use, killing is their primary function. A gun can be used on the spur of the moment, in the heat of an argument. If you want to kill somone with a gun it can be done very quickly. In some sense its a more detatched form of killing. To kill somone with a knife (or a banana) would take far more dedication. You really have to want to kill someone in that situation. This detatchment makes a gun far more dangerous than say a banana.

Yes blame the people firing them, I never said this wasn't the case. However my original point was linked to that fact that someone hinted that they disliked gun laws. My point was such laws are necessary since guns perpetuate violence, thus strict laws are required to ensure guns are used in a controlled manner. My argument that guns perpetuate violence is logically sound.

MSecorsky · Aug 31, 2005, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

Guns are far easier to use, killing is their primary function. You really have to want to kill someone to use a banana. It would take a lot of effort. A gun can be used on the spur of the moment, in the heat of an argument. If you want to kill somone with a gun it can be done very quickly and in some sense its a more detatched form of killing. To kill somone with a knife (or a banana) would take far more dedication. This detatchment makes a gun far more dangerous than say a banana.

Yes blame the people firing them, I never said this wasn't the case. However my original point was linked to that fact that someone hinted that they disliked gun laws. My point was such laws are necessary since guns perpetuate violence, thus strict laws are required to ensure guns are used in a controlled manner. You will see my argument that guns perpetuate violence is logically sound.

I whole-heartedly agree that gun laws are necessary and required. I just semantically can't bring myself to blame the inanimate objects themselves. If there were no guns, they would be replaced imo.

But again, there's no denying the mental effects of carrying a gun. For some people, this is a far greater danger than the gun itself.

John Waffletord · Aug 31, 2005, 04:45 PM // 16:45

There are only a handful of things that ever really piss me off.

1.) Bad Drivers, mainly those who dont use their turn signal when they really should, and those who tailgate and are in a big hurry.

2.) Spoiled people, people that have had money their entire lives, and do nothing but bitch and complain about how their parents wont buy them a car, when their parents have bought them so many other things. I'm not jealous of them, i just cant stand their inability to understand the concept of working for things you want, and saving money.

3.) People who get pissed off for stupid reasons. I say this because of a few people i know.. i dont know how to explain it really, but, i know a guy who will get extremely pissed if someone says something about his girlfriend, but he does it to people all the time. Hypocrits, i guess you could say.

4.) Young people who get caught up in relationships and feel sorry for themselves when it didnt work out. DUH! People dont know what they want when they're young, relationships in high school are completely worthless. I guess ill throw this one in here too.. people who mistake lust for love, or strong feelings for love. I have a friend who when he has issues with his girlfriend i tell him to break up with her, and he says "but i love her dude" Yeah.. thats what he said about the last 3 of them too. I also have another friend who has cheated on his girlfriend and doesnt care at all, and would do it again in a heartbeat, but then still tells her how much he loves her, and stupid stuff like that.

5.) I guess this is the last one.. people who can't be wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, get over yourself, be a man and admit it.

Reaper · Aug 31, 2005, 04:50 PM // 16:50

I hate it when someone uses the following justifications for a reprehensible act:

You're just jealous.
You're mad because I had the opportunity to do X and you didn't.
You would have done the same thing if you'd been there.

Beta Ray Bill · Aug 31, 2005, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

The part that ruffles my rump feathers is that the vocal minority are getting into school boards and manipulating the criteria of science classes. When a school board member claims that evolution is only a theory, for example, it demonstrates that they are far too clueless to be making those decisions.

Every respectable scientist and researcher will state that evolution is a theory. A theory is a supposition given recorded evidence on the validity of something that cannot be proven using the scientific method, that is, show through reproduceable processes that a postulate is fact. Evolution, while seemingly supported by circumstantial evidence, cannot be proven through scientific method. Ergo, it is still (and always will be) a theory.

The same goes with creationism. You cannot quantifiably "prove" there is or is not a God, therefore, you cannot "prove" that he/she/it did or did not make the physical universe. Ergo, it is also a theory.

We can appropriate beliefs for ourselves and have faith that they are true, but unless they can be proven using the scientific method, they are only theories and beliefs, not necessarily facts.

And, for the record, atheism is more commonly recognized as secular humanism and is as much a "religion" as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc. though hardly as organized as those.

Xue Yi Liang · Aug 31, 2005, 07:35 PM // 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

The part that ruffles my rump feathers is that the vocal minority are getting into school boards and manipulating the criteria of science classes. When a school board member claims that evolution is only a theory, for example, it demonstrates that they are far too clueless to be making those decisions.

I completely agree. Creationism, or "Intelligent Design" is not science and doesn't belong in a science curriculum. What many folks fail to realize is that the study of science isn't so much about teaching the "facts" of evolution, biology etc. Scientific education is about teaching the method for learning about the physical environment - a way of explaining everything we observe. That's why realms of science can evolve as our theories and observations change - which only argues for the strength of science. You can't put down the discoveries of science without subverting the principles of observation and deduction.

In science there is no final "answer." It is a process of simple inquiry.
Creationism is not about inquiry. It is about "answers." Science and Creationism don't belong in the same forum. Creationism has no business in a science class - and physics has no business in a bible-study group.

MSecorsky · Aug 31, 2005, 07:44 PM // 19:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Ray Bill

Every respectable scientist and researcher will state that evolution is a theory. A theory is a supposition given recorded evidence on the validity of something that cannot be proven using the scientific method, that is, show through reproduceable processes that a postulate is fact. Evolution, while seemingly supported by circumstantial evidence, cannot be proven through scientific method. Ergo, it is still (and always will be) a theory.

Ah ha! This is exactly what I'm talking about. a scientific theory is far different than the laymans definition of theory. In science, a theory is the best possible explanation, based on the data, for an observation... a fact. In science, theories explain facts. Eg, the Theory of Gravity explains the observation of gravity. The theory of flight, quantum theory, germ theory, cell theory... To be considered established theory in science is to have undergone stringent peer-review, verification from multiple sources, etc.

In science, a theory is as good as it gets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Ray Bill

The same goes with creationism. You cannot quantifiably "prove" there is or is not a God, therefore, you cannot "prove" that he/she/it did or did not make the physical universe. Ergo, it is also a theory.

Not a scientific theory. There is no "Scientific Theory of Creationism", and after years of asking, no one has even tried to present one to me to date.

Actually, by definition, when you invoke the supernatural (god, for example), you leave the realm of science altogether.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Ray Bill

We can appropriate beliefs for ourselves and have faith that they are true, but unless they can be proven using the scientific method, they are only theories and beliefs, not necessarily facts.

Evolutionary theory, though modified over time as more data comes in (also a result of the scientific process) is as well supported as any and as heavily based on the facts as any. The theory of human origins and common ancestry with chimpanzee got a tremendous boost recently with the completion of the seqencing of the chimp genome, showing 99% identicality in the common DNA, with chimps having about 1.5% unique and humans having about 1.5% unique (leaving about 96% overall identicality).

This is hard data, fact, supporting theory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Ray Bill

And, for the record, atheism is more commonly recognized as secular humanism and is as much a "religion" as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc. though hardly as organized as those.

Not by atheists. Atheism is simply an absence of belief in gods.

Alura Pyro · Aug 31, 2005, 07:47 PM // 19:47

for you evolutionist can anyone quote the second law of thermodynamics for me.....

things move from more orderly to less orderly
evolution is the opposite of this whice one is right???
the law or the theory ???

Mistress Eyahl · Aug 31, 2005, 07:49 PM // 19:49

I think the whole point of recycling is to limit waste more than prtect the environment etc cos yes, the manufacturing of recycled products uses fuel etc. But I live 10 minutes away from our town's "Dump" and I want it to STAY ten minutes away.. not span itself to my front door. It's about being wastefull.

A pet hate of mine? People who say something that hurts your feelings, and instead of taking responsability and apologising, explain how it's YOUR own fault for letting yourself get upset.

Yeah.. cos we all wanna LET outselves get upset. Believe me, if I had enough control over it I'd use that control.
People who say that.. are just thick. Sorry.