38431
The Flood / Re: Felicia and Cam Cam Nudes here
« on: May 23, 2015, 07:52:38 PM »
I want a popcorn.
Like, just one, giant piece.
About the size of a fitness ball.
Like, just one, giant piece.
About the size of a fitness ball.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to. 38431
The Flood / Re: Felicia and Cam Cam Nudes here« on: May 23, 2015, 07:52:38 PM »
I want a popcorn.
Like, just one, giant piece. About the size of a fitness ball. 38432
The Flood / Re: That awkward moment at McDonald's...« on: May 23, 2015, 07:50:19 PM »People actually eat at McDonald's?"From that humble start as a small restaurant, we're proud to have become one of the world's leading foodservice retailers in more than 100 countries, with more than 36,000 restaurants serving approximately 69 million people every day." "69 million people" "every day." 38433
The Flood / Re: alright das this is starting to get out of hand« on: May 23, 2015, 07:47:39 PM »
where is she carrying that thing to anyway
38434
Serious / Re: Michael B. Jordan responds to criticism of his casting in Fantastic Four« on: May 23, 2015, 07:30:27 PM »
Maaan, I just could not be fucked about this sort of thing. The fact that it's an issue is just kind of... LOL
38435
Serious / Re: Logical fallacies that are the bane of your existence.« on: May 23, 2015, 07:22:49 PM »
No one knows what ad hominem is, either. A lot of people just think it's a generic insult, but it's not.
38436
The Flood / Re: Do you have sex with your parents?« on: May 23, 2015, 06:14:26 PM »Look how defensive you are. Are you sure you're not a motherfucker? 38437
The Flood / Re: Why do all of you« on: May 23, 2015, 06:12:43 PM »Yeah, somewhat. I didn't care much for Dinosaurs, but Black Gives Way to Blue was awesome.I did indeed order them by descending quality.Do you like post-Layne Alice in Chains? 38438
The Flood / Re: Why do all of you« on: May 23, 2015, 06:08:59 PM »
I did indeed order them by descending quality.
I still love them all, though... 38439
The Flood / Re: Why do all of you« on: May 23, 2015, 06:06:26 PM »
Nine Inch Nails.
Alice in Chains. System of a Down. The Prodigy. Death Grips. 38440
Gaming / Re: Playing Region Locked Gamecube games on the Wii« on: May 23, 2015, 05:21:50 PM »I don't want to play on an emulator though.I like the way you think. 38441
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 05:19:34 PM »
Some transhumanists argue that we're already there anyway. We have prosthetic limbs, spectacles, contact lenses, and, of course, the Internet. Nanotechnology is also a huge prospect of the near future.
38443
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 02:55:35 PM »There exist threats which must be removed, people who must be eliminated or detained, and ideologies that must not be allowed to thrive.sure but i still don't think we should be playing around with words like "better" when it comes to discussing war you used the word "proficient" earlier, and i would probably use that word as well 38444
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 02:53:01 PM »"pretty much always"i would say pretty much alwaysSometimes people deserve to die, though. Such as Hitler, Stalin, Bin Laden, et al. 38445
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 02:47:37 PM »
i would say pretty much always
38446
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 02:37:25 PM »
killing is bad though
if you're better at doing something bad, then that just makes it even worse, doesn't it 38447
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 02:18:07 PM »transcending humanity doesn't necessarily mean transhumanism thoughTotal peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.Hmm, the concept of transhumanism is a good one. I question though if transhumansm will make us better at war or prevent war. i'd love to transcend humanity, but i don't exactly jive with the whole transhumanism thing also, you can't be "better" at war--that's just silly 38449
128 posts per dayNo, that's just because her account was deleted, and then reinstated. So that jacked up her post count Same thing happened to Deci. 38450
Serious / Re: Logical fallacies that are the bane of your existence.« on: May 23, 2015, 01:51:49 PM »Appeal to emotion is a big one, especially in US politics.I have a love/hate relationship with that one. Because sometimes, I think it's a necessary argument to make. If someone doesn't respond with empathy, it's necessary to say stuff like, "How would you feel if it happened to you?" But yeah, never in politics. Fuck that. 38451
Serious / Re: Logical fallacies that are the bane of your existence.« on: May 23, 2015, 01:41:08 PM »
The thing about people who make appeals to moderation is that I think most of them know that they're talking out of their ass. They're the type of person who claim to "hate politics", which is a tacit admission to their own willful ignorance in all things politics, I think...
38452
Serious / Re: Is peace attainable?« on: May 23, 2015, 01:28:59 PM »
Maybe if everyone stopped reproducing...
38453
Serious / Re: Logical fallacies that are the bane of your existence.« on: May 23, 2015, 01:24:28 PM »umI had to deal with that one at the end of my last semester, because one of my professors thought I had plagiarized my research paper. He had no evidence, but he's a Ph.D, and it was my word against his. Luckily, when I fought him, I came out on top, but it was definitely the most obnoxious three days I've had in a long time. Plagiarism is a big accusation. 38454
Serious / Logical fallacies that are the bane of your existence.« on: May 23, 2015, 01:13:45 PM »
When having a debate with someone, your opposition might commit a logical fallacy that is so infuriating, so overused, and so hair-ripped-out-of-your-skull fallacious, that seeing it used by an individual who considers himself intelligent one more time might actually make you go fucking insane.
I can think of two loathsome cunts at the top of my head, but there'll certainly be more as I remember them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature In order to understand how much I hate this fallacy, consider this website. As of posting this, there are 700,000 posts in 35,000 topics in this entire forum. Each post can contain a maximum of 10,000 characters. If I were to replace the text of each and every one of these posts with the word "HATE", I would be able to fit 2500 repeated instances of it in each and every post (if I did not include spaces). So if each post is worth 2500 "hate", and there are 700,000 posts, that would equal 1,750,000,000 "hate". This does not equal one one billionth of the hate that I have for this logical fallacy. People who treat nature like it's the arbiter of reason are no better than religious fanatics. I'm convinced that there are no real atheists, because 99% of atheists (damn near), as soon as they figure out the obvious truth that there is no god, the next thing they do is convert to "Gaiaism". Yeah, that's right--Gaia is their new god. Nature is infallible. Evolution is perfect. Darwinism is intelligent. Everything about nature is perfect and sublime and flawless and we should all strive not to transcend our humanity, but maintain our humanity. Keep being the stupid fucking animal that Gaia "wants" you to be. "Having children is okay, Verb! It's completely natural!" "Eating meat is okay, Verb! It's completely natural!" Murder, anger, rape, torture, pain, suffering. Sadness. Depression. Humanity. You know what these all have in common? They're all NATURAL! And they all fucking suck. Especially that last one. I'm extremely anti-nature, in the sense that I think nature is absolutely fucked. I have no respect for nature's design of sentient life. No intelligent force could ever create life the way it is, and it's the #1 reason why I think the perpetuation of the species is wrong. Everything about us is a fucking burden. We're essentially trapped in a big bubble in space with limited oxygen, limited resources, and limited intelligence. Very limited intelligence. To the extent that so many "intellectuals" who consider themselves "enlightened" can't get over the simple truth that life fucking sucks. Not that life sucks, like, "Oh, wow, life is really unenjoyable." No, not that kind of suck. Life sucks as a function. It functionally... sucks. It's something that it does. It SUCKS. Get it? And we shouldn't fucking embrace it. Everything about the human condition is shit, and we ought to change it. Because luckily, we have enough intelligence to rationally deduct that 90% of the shit we're doing on this rock is for the birds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy I don't hate this one as much, but it is a pretty big pet peeve of mine, simply because nobody knows how to fucking use it. Here's how it happens: I'm having an argument with you, and I notice that you made an appeal to nature fallacy. So I go to yourlogicalfallacyis.com to link you to their page on that particular fallacy. It's a good go-to website to politely notify your opposition of their argumentative ineptitude. And then you respond by posting the link to this page: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy Sigh. No. That's not how the fallacy works. You don't get to tell me that I'm wrong simply for pointing out that a logical fallacy has been made. If you could do that, it would nullify the entire website, wouldn't it? No one would ever be able to point out any logical fallacies, ever, because you can just call fallacy fallacy. The way you're supposed to apply the fallacy is if I say, "You made an appeal to nature; therefore, your argument is false." That would be a fallacy fallacy. Simply pointing out that you made a fallacious argument, however, isn't fallacious in itself. How could it be? All it means is that you argued for your cause poorly. Even if your case happened to be the correct one, do you honestly think the appeal to nature is going to be a good way to convince people? It shouldn't. Your turn. 38455
Gaming / Re: Banned on Showdown« on: May 23, 2015, 11:55:38 AM »
i think he brings up a good point, though
i was always of the belief that if you have a mute feature, then having mods around is kinda redundant 38456
Gaming / Re: Banned on Showdown« on: May 22, 2015, 10:33:18 PM »
okay i'm unbanned lol
luckily the other verbatim is apparently a pretty cool guy he's a fucking weeb, though--isn't that surreal 38457
Gaming / Re: If you like fallout 3 or Skyrim you have shit taste in game« on: May 22, 2015, 10:16:41 PM »
kek, ur obvusly just a casul who needs 2 git gud
38458
Gaming / Re: If you like fallout 3 or Skyrim you have shit taste in game« on: May 22, 2015, 09:56:08 PM »dozens of threads bashing Dark SoulsI fucking wish that's not gonna happen though that would be like if people starting hating TF2 all of a sudden--it ain't happening i know what you mean though 38459
Gaming / Re: Banned on Showdown« on: May 22, 2015, 09:54:04 PM »Why is this in gaming?i don't know maybe because it has something to do with games specifically getting banned during games for silly or unusual reasons yeah that's it |