Oh if you just meant to put that opinion out there, then sure, it' s totally fair game. I would have mentionned we don' t know for sure yet to clarify but meh, now it' s done. I' d nitpick what you just added too but I think I' ll take a hint, pack my inner biology nazi and take it elsewhere. No, not outside.
I have no clue how valid it is or isn' t, I don' t know and won' t pretend to. I was just underlining the fallacy. Oh and just so you know I translated "gender" as "personality". If you want to be called a *insert arbitrary pronoun* regardless of your birth sex by all means knock yourself out.
Whether you like it or not has absolutely no bearing on its validity.
I have zero control over what does or doesn' t turn me on, I don' t feel any guilt whatsoever about my fantasies (which yes, involve a fair amount of objectification). The idea of actually acting out some of them out is repulsive to me though. Wait what ? Which planet do you live on ? XD From an evolutionary standpoint, unfit = anyone who died without reproducing. Pretty sure we still have those around. We' re just as much submitted to natural selection as we ever were, and just as much as any other species. Yes, the rules have changed. Always have, always will. So ? A new virus or a giant ass meteor might pop up tomorrow and wipe us all out.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstadter's_law Personally I wouldn' t bet on it. XD I sure would like them to crack that nut though, I find that topic fascinating.
I' m pretty sure the theory of evolution has already met its burden of proof. When I said creationists haven' t met theirs what I had in mind wasn' t you, me and casual conversations. What I had in mind was peer reviewed studies and the people pushing to teach the "controversy" in schools. As for your own position on the matter I can spot quite a few unbacked assertions that would need to be demonstrated first, one claim at a time my friend. And I missed the "X + Y therefore design" part. I don' t want to leave you completely hanging though, so here' a site listing the most frequently refuted creationist claims and their typical rebutal. Maybe you' ll spot a few claims you subscribe to in there : http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html[DOUBLEPOST=1400095566][/DOUBLEPOST] A guiding hand doesn' t have to be divine.
There' s no word to describe people not believing in creationism. You can be an atheist and believe in intelligent design, and my grandma is catholic but believes in evolution. Most catholics do (here), the Vatican even officially accepts evolution. That' s why I was puzzled by your way to put it, but thankfully I don' t think labelling each side is required to go on. It is shared, but the more extraordinary the claim the more extraordinary evidence you' ll need. If you were to tell me that you have a dog I' d be willing to take it on you word alone. However if you were to tell me that you have a dragon ... Ugh, damn PS3 and its silly low characters cap, be right back in a double post.
I' m not sure what atheists have to do with it. Well anyway, if you were to claim that metaphysical blinvisible thingies exist, no, we wouldn' t be in agreement and the burden of proof would be on you. I wouldn' t positively assert that there' s no such thing as metaphysical blinvisible thingies, lack of evidence is not evidence of absence, but I sure as hell would say that so far I' ve found zero good reasons to believe they exist. I' m pretty sure scientists know the difference between an hypothesis and a theory. In the case of theist creationists the more of their specific god they insert into their intelligent design equations the easier it gets to not only reject but actually refute their claims.
I often wonder what they base those assertions on. I mean last time I checked it wasn' t a question of lacking the ressources, it was a question of lacking the know how period. We' re getting better at emulating consciences, but we' re nowhere near actually making one. Not even close. Unless I missed a major breakthrough ? Yes ? It' d still remain to be proven though. I mean, we recognize design by comparing it to nature, its biggest giveaway is its simplicity. So far creationists have failed to satisfyingly demonstrate that humans were designed. I guess if we could actually make a designed conscience we' d finally have something to compare ours to.
Idk, eating is considered perfectly normal. Did people stop eating ? Seems to me Homer and Marge were bored by their routine rather than tired of being vanilla in and of itself. Braving taboos is but one of the many ways to spice things up.
You guys are freaking me out, the very second I posted my previous comment the site warned me it was already quoted twice. Are you both the Flash hidden sons or something ? XD Over 50% isn' t exactly neglectible if you ask me. I' m not saying it will suddenly cease to receive any love, just that the Xbone can' t be the Kinnect centric experience they claimed to want it to be anymore. Which if memory serves is also what PaW wanted it to be (much like the WiiU is with its ... whatever it' s called).
I think he meant you were required to buy it, therefore to own it. Now that owning one is not a given the devs will be much more reluctant to implement it, or even bother with it at all. Just compare how many PS games are Move compatible and how many Wii games are Wiimote compatible. Or just look how many Wii/WiiU games are actually compatible with the classic pad. Can' t get more true and tested than a good ol' fashioned classic pad right ? Yet of all the Wii games I' ve had only a couple were actually compatible. Now that the Kinnect is optional it will probably be treated as such. Unless the number of people not buying one remains neglectible, which seems doubtful.
I swear his musics are the only reason I still have left to keep popping up Vagrant Story every once in a while. His work on FF Tactics was killer too. I' m not as sold on whatever else I heard from him (that' s be Odin Sphere, FF XII and a couple Ogre), but even those have a bunch of awesome tracks. Let' s just say seeing his name somewhere always grabs my attention.
At least that' s what its creator trumpet every now and and then, but I don' t see it. I mean sure, it' s not as static as DQ (which waited eight games to update its utterly obsolete menus for the sake of nostalgia), but up until IX the jump from one FF to the next wasn' t nearly as big of a change as, say, going from Castelvania to Castelvania 2. I don' t know about you, but I' d say the drop of the world map (X) and the paradigm shift actionny frenzy (XIII) are the only massive change the main series has known. Funnily enough even SE organizes brainstorming to decide what does or doesn' t a FF make. God only knows if they ever reached a consensus. XD Personally I' d rather have a rather conservative main series and more experimental spin-offs.
And the secret ingredient is ... shellfish ! ALLEZ CUISINE !!!
I' m told the original material is a neverending remake of itself anyway, it' s the "somehow still around comics farts" raison d' être. It so happens that the first Doc Oc story is one of the very few comics I' ve read. That, and the Dark Phoenix arc from X-Men. Let' s just say in both cases "true to the original material" would mean "corny as hell" so I' m not exactly mad at the movies for blowing all the dust away. Mind the cobwebs though, they' re intentional. How bad are the movies faithfulness-wise anyway ? Surely they' re nowhere near DBZ The Movie levels of bad, are they ? I' ve only watched the first asm so far, I' ll stick with Raimi for now. I suppose I would have enjoyed it much more had it not come both second and too soon.
Just say "un poquiriquitin", cracks them up everytime. ^^
Those points aren' t mutually exclusive. Unless you' re in awful company that kind of jokes only work when they' re based on the mutual understanding that you don' t mean a word of them. So yeah, in that case I don' t mind them. I' m pretty sure blithering idiots don' t need any "validation" from me or anyone else to remain blithering idiots.
Didn' t hate it, didn' t think it was awesome either. Trunks was weird though. How the hell did that snappy kid, whose short-tempered parents are Bulma and ****ing Vegeta, turn into such a sissy boy ? The guy even manages to forget he can turn supa sayan in a pinch. No seriously, what happened ?
