Curse

Sagius Truthbarron · Sep 05, 2005, 01:23 PM // 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by zehly

Do you guys think that vampires even exist?

Where do the ideas of Necromancers come from?

There is a book I know of, that if you don't know of, you should seek out yourself, called "Necronomicon." There is a nice connection between this book, and the Book of Satan. (read: Satanic Bible).

The tide of the discussion now turns towards the more occult, than that which is common.

*evil grin*

People who try to mess with dead bodies and "conjure spirits" do exist, not in a form of making undead minions.

Really, Necromancers do exist to an extent (Most Phychics also claim or would appear to be Necromancers; that they are communitcating with the dead to learn information).

There have also been claims in Hati of people being "ressurected" or brought back to life by voodo, there is actually a good hand full of people who actually claim this, a few of which appear to have reportedly died at one time or another (?).

I'm no authority on the occult. I see no value in investing time in learning about what is largely superstition.

Divinitys Creature · Sep 05, 2005, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

This is what I was getting at. Faith does indeed fill the gaps. Not just on a scientific level but on many other levels too. Without faith we wouldn't be able to function properly, we would constantly question everything and never a reach a single conclusion. Faith permeates our lives. Thus to say that Atheism does not involve any form of faith is sheer folly.

Agreed

Quote:

Originally Posted by zehly

Do you guys think that vampires even exist?

Where do the ideas of Necromancers come from?

There is a book I know of, that if you don't know of, you should seek out yourself, called "Necronomicon." There is a nice connection between this book, and the Book of Satan. (read: Satanic Bible).

The tide of the discussion now turns towards the more occult, than that which is common.

*evil grin*

Hmmm. You have such a cutesy avatar but such a dark side. You mentioned wanting to be a vampire in another thread

. I would not search for the n-word book. Rumor has it that people who read it get bad luck or something. ***Oh my goodness*** zehly has appeared in my room, oh noez

not my neck, I need my blood NooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

*heh heh heh* little did she know it was all an act I have bigger fangs than her MWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH *evil laugh*.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Eyahl

Ooooh, vampires. Good subject.

*cracks knuckles*

The thing with vampires is, they totally make sence. I have every reason to believe that many many years ago before David Attenborough and TV explained everything to us, that there could have been a sickness which had symptoms very much like the symptoms we write that Vampires have. Lets look at the really cool evidence.
List of things we think are connected with being a vampire:

Pale Skin
See in the Dark
Hear extraordinarily well
Very strong
Never gets ill
Never dies or ages really slowly
Has to drink blood every day from a mortal
Hates Daylight
Hates crosses
Hates Garlick
Hates Holy Water

Funnily enough, 90% of those can be explianed.

My theory is this. If you take a person and look at his blood, you'll see it's made up of platelets, red blood cells and white blood cells. I think most of us won't need an explanation of what these parts all do so lets imagine someone who developed an unatural high count of white blood cells and a low count of red blood cells. You have most of your explanations for vampires right there. I'll use the bullet points to explain it better.

Pale Skin - With a low red blood cell count, they would of course appear to have pale skin
See in the Dark - Vitamin A helps us to see. It's found most commonly in meats and it also works to help our immune system. The massive intake of meat/blood would boost this.
Hear extraordinarily well - Bear with me lol, I aint that smart

Very strong - This can be connected with Vitamin A. It helps bone growth, and cell reproduction in places like the lungs.
Never gets ill - This is related to the high count of white blood cells. Vitamin A also regulates the immune system to keep us healthy.
Never dies or ages really slowly - Believe me on this. Scientists know that it is actually oxygen which degenerates cells. It's actually oxygen that makes our organs age including our skin. The very thing which keeps us alive, prevents us from everlasting life. Now, someone who has a very very low count of red blood cells, won't have oxygen travelling through their body all the time, and therefore their body will not degenerate as fast.
Has to drink blood every day from a mortal - Most people who are into vampires know that when a vampire needs to drink blood it's not because he is thirsty. It's because he's suffocating. Their own blood can't carry enough oxygen so they supplement themselves once a day with someone elses. This also explains why vampires who might feed a lot, will feel more empowered. More oxygen to the muscles will put them on a strength high.
Hates Daylight - This could be many things. An increase in Vitamin A equels an increase in sight so the harsh light of daylight might have been too much and sufferes would have prefered dusk or dawn. Also the lack of red blood cells leaves people anemic and weak which might have left them feeling vunerable to the harshness of daylight or just daylight activites.
Hates crosses
Hates Garlick
Hates Holy Water - These three I think, are to do with what happened in the past to people who might have developed an illness like this. Basically, these were the methods used to purge these people either from the town or village, or methods people and priests used to try and cure them.

To sum up, there's no smoke without fire. I think there could have been an illness back whenever, that made people extraordinarily pale, and live an unnatural extra 10 -20 years or so... who seemed strong and never liked to go out in daylight, and who for some strange reason started killing the livestock and drinking it's blood. Who knows.
What I do know though, is this simple equation of high white blood cells, low red blood cells, accounts for the MAJOR things we relate to vampires. Aging, drinking blood, never getting sick etc.

Anyway, you probably think I know far too much about this and you're reaching for your crucifix's, but I enjoy books with vampires in them, and it just suddenly hit me one day that it all seemed to make sence.

So there's a logical explanation after all.

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 05, 2005, 02:55 PM // 14:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Eyahl

To sum up, there's no smoke without fire. I think there could have been an illness back whenever, that made people extraordinarily pale, and live an unnatural extra 10 -20 years or so... who seemed strong and never liked to go out in daylight, and who for some strange reason started killing the livestock and drinking it's blood. Who knows.

I suspect that modern video game addicts come dangerously close to vampirism.

Very little sunlight exposure means they become pale and photosensitive (eyes sensitive to light).

Longevity is a byproduct of not being exposed to community-acquired illnesses such as influenza or pneumonias.

Low vitamin D from malnourishment and low light levels mean they become osteopenic and develop kyphotic posture - i.e. "hunched over."

Because they don't want to leave their computers for long stretches of time they probably don't cook their food as thoroughly as one should - Eventually they develop a taste for raw meat.

Interest in sword & sorcery (when was the last time you heard that term used?) themes provokes an interest in the occult. They end up collecting goth paraphenalia as well as fancy, wavy daggers (made in China) and pet tarantulas.

With a loss of social skills and etiquette they end up mumbling to themselves incoherently in what's often been mistaken as a Romanian accent.

I think the modern vampire is living among us.... just look in the mirror!

bahloney · Sep 05, 2005, 03:42 PM // 15:42

Indeed! Except gamers dont have much trouble with garlic.

EchoSex · Sep 05, 2005, 03:44 PM // 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

I suspect that modern video game addicts come dangerously close to vampirism.

Very little sunlight exposure means they become pale and photosensitive (eyes sensitive to light).

Longevity is a byproduct of not being exposed to community-acquired illnesses such as influenza or pneumonias.

Low vitamin D from malnourishment and low light levels mean they become osteopenic and develop kyphotic posture - i.e. "hunched over."

Because they don't want to leave their computers for long stretches of time they probably don't cook their food as thoroughly as one should - Eventually they develop a taste for raw meat.

Interest in sword & sorcery (when was the last time you heard that term used?) themes provokes an interest in the occult. They end up collecting goth paraphenalia as well as fancy, wavy daggers (made in China) and pet tarantulas.

With a loss of social skills and etiquette they end up mumbling to themselves incoherently in what's often been mistaken as a Romanian accent.

I think the modern vampire is living among us.... just look in the mirror!

Ugh, last thing the gaming socity (if you could call it a socity) needs is more vampires X.X Usualy now it's either vampires or nazis, and at one point it was both. When will developers realize that zombies are cooler

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 05, 2005, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoSex

Ugh, last thing the gaming socity (if you could call it a socity) needs is more vampires X.X Usualy now it's either vampires or nazis, and at one point it was both. When will developers realize that zombies are cooler

I dig zombies, too. But I see a couple of problems with popularizing zombies (IMO) as an alternative persona (compared to vampires).
1. Makeup - not easy or cheap to do convincingly.
2. Vocabulary - the moment you say anything other than "uhhh" or "ruhhh" you've broken any possibility of credibility.
3. Bad posture and limp - tough to sustain over a long period of time without serious orthopedic consultation.
4. Nothing sexual about zombies. Vampires have an erotic lore that appeals to the horror/erotic dichotomy. Zombies are just terrifying.
5. In all the great zombie films I daydream more about being the fella with the tricked-out Remington 870, AR and m-1911a1 .45 and other guns with a warehouse full of ammo, supplies and zombie-traps than being a zombie.

But, I agree, zombies are cooler.

EchoSex · Sep 05, 2005, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

I dig zombies, too. But I see a couple of problems with popularizing zombies (IMO) as an alternative persona (compared to vampires).
1. Makeup - not easy or cheap to do convincingly.
2. Vocabulary - the moment you say anything other than "uhhh" or "ruhhh" you've broken any possibility of credibility.
3. Bad posture and limp - tough to sustain over a long period of time without serious orthopedic consultation.
4. Nothing sexual about zombies. Vampires have an erotic lore that appeals to the horror/erotic dichotomy. Zombies are just terrifying.
5. In all the great zombie films I daydream more about being the fella with the tricked-out Remington 870, AR and m-1911a1 .45 and other guns with a warehouse full of ammo, supplies and zombie-traps than being a zombie.

But, I agree, zombies are cooler.

I'd just prefer my HK94 and two twenty six, myself. Speaking of which I'm taking a picture of both for my records that I'll probally put my on website or on here. (I'd recommend any firearm's owner to do that, with close ups of your serial and markings such as scratches so that the weapon can be identified if stolen.)

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 05, 2005, 04:58 PM // 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoSex

I'd just prefer my HK94 and two twenty six, myself. Speaking of which I'm taking a picture of both for my records that I'll probally put my on website or on here. (I'd recommend any firearm's owner to do that, with close ups of your serial and markings such as scratches so that the weapon can be identified if stolen.)

I prefer my FN-FAL to the HK94 (I can't get used to the odd gas system and recoil).
Here's a photo of my FAL, HK USP Compact .45, Benchmade Auto-Presidio folding knife, Cold Steel Tanto and a couple of magazines.
(Sorry about the condom - I took this photo as part of a Freudian gag to post elsewhere.)

a full photo of my FAL with a 3-point SOP sling.

The SIG 226 is nice though I've never used one. I trained with a Glock 23 and the USP Compact.
For the record I've also got a sweet AR shorty, a tuned-up Browning Hi-Power, S&W M-19 4", S&W 4506, Uberti Cattleman ... and maybe a couple of other items lying around.

BTW - my serial numbers aren't blurred - I usually just alter the numbers with photoshop. I don't like blurs.

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 06, 2005, 02:23 PM // 14:23

Here's my AR, Browning Hi-Power and Glock 23 - packed in my travel case. Airport security at JFK or O'Hare often does a double-take when I check this in.

Divinitys Creature · Sep 06, 2005, 04:49 PM // 16:49

You have a lot of gun Xue o_0

zehly · Sep 06, 2005, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Vampires are the ish. I love vampires, cause they hide around and stuff. Things that I share with vampires:

I see better at night than the day,
I'm anemic,
I'm a night-owl

,
For the last week, I've been severely pale

etc, etc.

MSecorsky · Sep 06, 2005, 09:38 PM // 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

This is what I was getting at. Faith does indeed fill the gaps. Not just on a scientific level but on many other levels too. Without faith we wouldn't be able to function properly, we would constantly question everything and never a reach a single conclusion. Faith permeates our lives. Thus to say that Atheism does not involve any form of faith is sheer folly.

Load of guano, IMO.

Atheism is obtained from observing that there's an absence of evidence in god(s). There's no "faith" involved, just simple observation.

As for "faith" filling in the gaps in science, also bunk. It is only the religious that rely on the god of the gaps. The sad thing is, for every bit of knowledge found filling a "gap", you now create possibly two more gaps (albeit smaller) around that bit of knowledge.

"Faith" is not requires to expect the laws of physics to continue to function as they always have since the Bang. Just acceptance of the data and the observations.

Mistress Eyahl · Sep 07, 2005, 02:02 AM // 02:02

Why do you people own machine guns etc? Just asking...

Sagius Truthbarron · Sep 07, 2005, 02:48 AM // 02:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Eyahl

Why do you people own machine guns etc? Just asking...

Becuase they are cool, and if the Russians and the Chinese ever invade we'll be prepared. You'll be sorry when your town is attacked by the undead and you forgot to buy an AN94.

You're really aloud to take that across country? I wonder what those guys who impounded that Medal of Honor winner becuase they thought he had a Shirikin around his neck would do if they scanned a box with a high-powered assualt rifle in it O.O

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 07, 2005, 04:45 AM // 04:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Eyahl

Why do you people own machine guns etc? Just asking...

I grew up with many friends in law enforcement who taught me how to shoot and how to maintain this hobby responsibly. Since then I've studied shooting at various schools for purely academic reasons, and because I find it interesting.

I'll take this opportunity to say a few things about my interest in firearms - because it's often misunderstood.
Contrary to the pervasive stereotype of "gun-nuts" I don't walk the streets armed - nor do I consider the use of "deadly force" an option unless my life (or the life of a loved one) was in danger. Professional training taught me the legal, psychosocial and "moral" responsibilities and implications of gun-ownership.

Most people I know don't know about my hobby because I wouldn't broadcast for the sake of machismo.

If I happened to be armed and criminal wanted to take my wallet or my car - I would give them my wallet and my car keys without a fuss. It may surprise you to know I don't believe in brandishing a weapon (even as a threat) in that sort of situation. I can afford to lose my wallet or my car - that's why I have insurance.

My point is only to address the pervasive stereotype most people have about gun-owners. Unfortunately it takes only a couple of newsworthy sociopaths to make us all look bad. I also don't broadcast my hobby because, even good natured people I know, can't look beyond their notion that a gun-owner is, by definition, a dangerous person.

Well, I'm no monster, I can assure you. I'm a normal person who also happens to be a responsible gun-owner. I'm a law-abiding citizen with a friendly association with law-enforcement in the state of California. I'm a practicing physician, and I have a dog that I love dearly.

What can I say? Some people like to tinker with hot-rods but they're not professional racers. I like to learn the mechanics of firearms and learn small-arms tactics - though I'll probably (and hopefully) never have to use them. It's just a mental and physical discipline like no other.

FYI - despite appearances - my firearms aren't "machine guns." Automatic weapons are essentially, for all practical purposes, illegal to own.

Lews · Sep 07, 2005, 04:54 AM // 04:54

You are aloud to bring these to an airport?

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 07, 2005, 04:55 AM // 04:55

Yes, but I have to check it in - there is a protocol for transporting firearms.

Thanas · Sep 07, 2005, 12:50 PM // 12:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Eyahl

Hence the sleeping all day and only venturing out at night. And there's more daylight than 12 hours.
Anyway being strong could have been made up. It's truth to myth, myth to legend.. with a few wives tales thrown in. Besides, it was the increase in Vitamin A that strengthened their bones that interested me.

Feel free to argue with me, I'm not holding a sign saying vampires are real so..

Oh, and being anemic isn't necessarily about having a low red blood count, it's about having a low iron count so consuming red meat would counter attack this problem.

Anemia is linked to a variety of deficiencies. However for the most part its linked to a low red blood cell count i.e. reduced number of properly functioning red blood cells. I very much doubt sleeping alone would counter the anemia induced fatigue. Fatigue is a lack of energy and of motivation and is not the same as drowsiness. Secondly although vitamin A does indeed help bone growth, too much will cause side effects. High doses of vitiman A will cause weakness and vomiting.

Thanas · Sep 07, 2005, 01:23 PM // 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Load of guano, IMO.

Atheism is obtained from observing that there's an absence of evidence in god(s). There's no "faith" involved, just simple observation.

As for "faith" filling in the gaps in science, also bunk. It is only the religious that rely on the god of the gaps. The sad thing is, for every bit of knowledge found filling a "gap", you now create possibly two more gaps (albeit smaller) around that bit of knowledge.

"Faith" is not requires to expect the laws of physics to continue to function as they always have since the Bang. Just acceptance of the data and the observations.

It seems my friend that you have not at all grasped what I have said. It also seems that you do not understand the meaning of faith. So I shall give you one of its defintions, this one being appropriate in this context:

"Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing."

You believe in science and accept that it is a truth. You probably accept that science explains how our universe functions. The fact of the matter is that you cannot possibly know how the universe works. Humans have been around for a very short period of time in comparison to the time span which is the age of the universe. Thus we have made a finite number of observations of this place we live in and those have been limited at best. How can we fully predict the mechanics of the universe. It was not until recently that we even knew it existed (even if it does). Let me give you an anology.

Imagine you are sitting in a booth with a window in it, which only allows you to see directly in front of you. You have never known anything other than the booth and you can not go outside it, yet the booth sustains you. Inside this booth you sleep eat and do whatever else takes your fancy

. Sometimes you just sit however and look outside, where you view is always filled with the ever present movement of some large body. Its huge. The body appears to be that of a snake. Its a long body with no limbs that you are aware of. So you come to the conclusion that the body outside is a snake. However if you were to spend long enough in that booth you would be able to make more observations of that supposed creature and you may find that in fact it has legs or that it isnt even a living creature. The only way you will ever know what it is is by observing it from start to finish (which for convenience would take an infinite amount of time). By simply observing a small section of it, how can you ever be certain what it is. Through naming the said creature as a snake the person in the booth has displayed faith. He was confident in a truth. A truth which he could never truely validate.

Now imagine the body outside the booth to be the universe and the person inside to be humanity and the act of watching to be science making observations and the sleeping, eating etc to be time spent not observing, time where we miss the details that would help us get closer to fully describing our universe and its true nature. The guess at the snake is current science i.e. sciencetific law etc that we have collected thus far as a race. We believe this to be true as the man in the booth belives the body outside to be a snake. His description of the body is a snake, since this is the only information he has to describe what he sees. The snake is his truth. Ours is Physics. However he as us, will never be able to tell what that body is and thus will always have faith in his conclusions, faith that leads him to believe his analysis is correct.

P.S. Please write in full English. Otherwise I find it difficult to understand what you are saying.

Oh one last question. Have you spent an infinite amount time, i.e. past present and future searching for evidence of Gods? If no, then how can you truely come to any conclusion which represents an absolute truth. Only in absolute truth are we truely removed from faith.....

MSecorsky · Sep 07, 2005, 03:05 PM // 15:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

It seems my friend that you have not at all grasped what I have said. It also seems that you do not understand the meaning of faith. So I shall give you a defintion:

Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

Faith is belief without evidence. Atheism is based on a lack of belief without evidence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

You believe in science and accept that it is a truth. You probably accept that science explains how our universe functions. The fact of the matter is that you cannot possibly know how the universe works. Humans have been around for a very short period of time in comparison to the time the universe for. Thus we have made a finite number of observations of this place we live in and those have been limited at best. How can we fully predict the mechanics of the universe. It was not until recently that we even knew it existed (even if it does). Let me give you an anology.

I don't "believe" in science, I accept that the scientific method is by far the best means of determining the "hows" of the universe. Although we cannot know 'how the universe works' (yet) in every intricate detail, the fact is that we know pretty darned well how various aspects of it work. For example stellar life cycles. Through observation, evidence and measurement we know pretty well now how stars do their thing; the relation between mass and lifespan, the elements formed, how the heavier elements (> Fe) of the universe are created... and everywhere we look in the universe (that we can see) it's the same. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable, in light of all the supporting evidence, to make the assumption that the process will hold true in our universe even where we cannot yet see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

Imagine you are sitting in a booth with a window in it, which only allows you to see directly in front of you. You have never known anything other than the booth. Inside this booth you sleep eat and do whatever else takes you fancy. Sometimes you just sit however and look outside at where you view is always the ever present movement of some large body. Its huge. The body appears to be that of a snake. Its a long body with no limbs that you are aware of. So you come to the conclusion that the body outside is a snake. However if you were to spend long enough in that booth you would be able to make more observations of that supposed creature and you may find that in fact it has legs or that it isnt even a creature. The only way you will ever know what it is is by observing it from start to finish (which would take an infinite amount of time). By simply observing a small section of it. How can you ever be certain what it is. Through naming the said creature as a snake you have displayed faith. You were confident in a truth. A truth which you could never validate.

That could be true of someone trapped in your booth, however no scientific method has been used to reach this conclusion. The analogy fails to represent reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

Now imagine the body outside the booth to be the universe and the person inside to be humanity and the watching to be science making observations and the sleeping, eating etc to be time spent not observing, time where we miss the details that would help us get closer to fully describing our universe and its true nature. The guess at the snake is current science i.e. sciencetific law etc that we have collected thus far as a race. We believe this to be true as the man in the booth belives the body outside to be a snake. His description of the body is a snake. Ours is Physics. However he as us, will never be able to tell us what that body is and thus will always have faith in his conclusions, faith that leads him to believe his analysis is correct.

This is a horrible analogy. Absolutely horrible.

Where's the testing? The hard data? The repeatability of the tests by others resulting in the same results? Where's the means for theory to be modified as more data comes in, or to be altoghether discarded if the evidence supports discarding the theory?

You may have studied physics, but you seem to have forgotten science.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thanas

Oh one question. Have you spent an infinite amount of time searching for evidence of Gods? If no, then how can you truely come to any conclusion which represents an absolute truth. Only in absolute truth are we truely removed from faith.....

The obvious answer is of course not. However... science is also based on the work of those before. Not only has no evidence of gods been presented to me in my lifetime, but no hard evidence has been collected from the past either. It is the absence of evidence that equates to an absence of belief.

Do you "believe" in the Invisible Pink Unicorn? No? Using your own logic you should, as well as everything imagined or not yet imagined.