logo Sign In

Duke's alter ego

User Group
Members
Join date
30-Sep-2004
Last activity
24-Feb-2007
Posts
197

Post History

Post
#273691
Topic
the beatles
Time
Album: Revolver

Song: "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"

I just got into The Beatles about a month ago, and I already have EVERY SINGLE SONG of theirs on my computer from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road (with the exception of "Wild Honey Pie" and "Revolution 9"... but one could debate whether or not they ARE even songs). Their body of work is so great and varied. They were ahead of their time in every way. And their music was revolutionary, profound, and enduring. I'm still collecting their albums; the only compilation I have is 1, and next I'm probably gonna go out and get Let It Be... the only thing hindering me is what the great distinction is between the 1970 version and Let It Be Naked.
Post
#268875
Topic
SoundTrack to your life
Time
Opening Credits: Dear God - XTC
Waking Up: Saturn, The Bringer of Old Age - Gustav Holst
First Day At School: I'm Looking Through You - The Beatles
Falling In Love: I Can See for Miles - The Who
Fight Song: The A-Team Theme - Clarence Carptenter
Life: Starman - David Bowie
Mental Breakdown: Behind Blue Eyes - The Who
Driving: Only the Good Die Young - Billy Joel
Flashback: Give Up the Toad Now - Family Guy
Getting back together: Julia - The Beatles
Wedding: Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime - The Dream Academy
Death of a loved one: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (Reprise) - The Beatles
Final Battle: With a Little Help from My Friends - The Beatles
Death Scene: Santeria - Sublime
Funeral Song: The Word - The Beatles
End Credits: Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite! - The Beatles
Post
#264485
Topic
Global Warming
Time
Atheist. Libertarian. Conservative in some areas of economics and environmentalism, but not on global warming.

My thoughts: It's extremely pathetic that global warming is even considered a "controversial issue" by the general public, even when the long-term habitability of our planet is both a moral and ethical issue, and the evidence is so extremely clear that we are having a deleterious impact on the global environment that sustains us all. Our global civilzation has been pumping obscence amounts CO2 into the atmosphere since the first coal was burned, into an atmosphere thinner than a layer of paint on a ten meter by ten meter wall. The planet cannot naturally balance the levels in the atmosphere to their "safe" range of normal greenhouse effect; the kind that traps just enough solar energy and prevents our planet from freezing. Not a single atmospheric scientist or scientific publication doubts the existence of advanced global warming because of human factors (just as no biologists doubt the validity of evolution). If the public were simply less ignorant of the science and evidence for the issue in question, there would be absolutely no debate on whether global warming was taking place. Why is the public being kept ignorant or being sent mixed messages about global warming? Power, money, and the fear of disquieting facts. Let's not make the ultimate mistake and give the burden to our children of coping with the devastating and long-term ramifications of our behaviors when we neglected to act during a time when catastrophe was preventable.

My take on the ethical aspect: you cannot plan for a sustainable future when you have people in power (like Bush) who believe that the world is doomed for a bible-style apocalypse where a sky-god will come down and save us from ourselves at the darkest hour. Humans are alone, and it is we that are accountable for our own actions, something that many religious persons like to pretend isn't true. It's up to us; we have the ultimate power to prosper as a species or let our global civilization fail.

If we don't act drastically now, it will be too late. A broad understanding and recognition of global warming has to happen first. And it has taken some important steps toward global acceptance. Except, however, in the U.S., where these steps are far to small and far too slow to work toward an ultimate solution.

As Carl Sagan said, "Anything else you're interested in is not going to happen if you can't breathe the air and drink the water. Do not sit this one out. Do something."
Post
#253666
Topic
The Space Program
Time
I don't think we should halt our exploration of the worlds in our solar system and space in general just because there are unmet issues down on earth. As another poster said, it takes more than money to solve the world's problems. Moreover, the expenditures of the space program are trivial compared to military and defense budgets -- over one trillion dollars per year worldwide. Maybe we need changes in policy or action rather than just allocating money that would otherwise go to the cause of science and furthering human knowledge.
Post
#250878
Topic
MOVED THREAD
Time
Originally posted by: Trooperman
Just want to add my two cents to this.

As has been said, Christianity (and believe in God) is not something that can be proved. It is a matter of faith. What has also been brought up is that it takes even more faith to believe that we came to be on this Earth by a series of coincidences, and that life on Earth began with a lightning bolt hitting the “primordial soup of life.” This is simply not any more plausible than the existence of God, even less so. I’m sure there’s a good chance there are historical inaccuracies in the Bible. Even the four Gospels contradict themselves in the details. To draw the conclusion that this means there is no God is ludicrous. And I do believe that Genesis is more symbolic in the 6 day creation than factual.

For me, being a Christian is pretty much summed up by the fact that life has a purpose, it has a meaning. I know God, he guides me. A series of personal situations I went through only strengthened my faith. On the occasions I had the humility to realize that I need God’s help, it was amazing to me how quickly things unraveled themselves. The difference between asking for help and not asking for help was actually really hilarious. This is not something that can be proved, and people may laugh, but it can only be know from personal experience.

Another thing to keep in mind:

1. What do the Christians lose if God doesn’t exist? Nothing.
2. What do the atheists lose if God does exist?

Everything.




But the atheists are the brilliant, enlightened ones…


I hope you're not implying that one of the reasons that you're a theist/ Christian is to simply be on the safe side. Personally, I don't believe in an undetectable, supernatural condition on the universe. But when I was younger and more succeptible to these ideas, I remember thinking: what about all the people in the world who aren’t Christian? Are their beliefs incorrect? And if they were, it must mean that a great deal of people got sent to hell after they died. But I’m sure that Christianity is incorrect according to most of the other faiths. Of course, I've moved on since then and no longer think or see the world that way. Still, there was an immediate contradiction once I learned of other religions. How would I choose which religion to put my money on, in hopes that I had gotten it right? It would be impossible, seeing as they all share the same flaw: the absence of any hard scientific proof to back up their creeds or dogmas.

"We came to be on this Earth by a series of coincidences." I see this as one of the most grievous misconceptions about the evolution of life. Whenever something reproduces with variations each time, some variations are bound to be better suited to the environment than others, and those varieties preferentially survive and leave more offspring of its kind. Given 3 or 4 billion years, you can see how such finely tuned (but still not perfect) organisms can evolve. In a way, natural selection is the exact opposite of the random process it is often described as, because it only selects those occasional mutations that enhance survival.

Anyway, just had to put my two cents in.
Post
#238139
Topic
Pluto is no longer a planet
Time
And the flat-earthers will try to get their material into the textbooks too. Still, I am satisfied with the decision. Pluto has always been the oddest, most eccentric planet, and several of my friends viewed it as a Kuiper belt object, exactly as everyone viewed Ceres as just another object in the asteroid belt.

But still, the decision must have sent the science textbook companies into a tizzy.
Post
#225082
Topic
WHO LIKES To drink
Time
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Is this the same hicks as Aliens?


I believe Hicks' first name was Dwayne not Bill.

On the subject, I've never had a sip of alcohol in my life. I'm not tempted to either. I don't even think about it. Same w/ drugs.

I am, however, pro-legalization for marijuana. (The "War on Drugs" episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit! really changed my views.)
Post
#220609
Topic
Peter Jackson the new Luca$???
Time
I thought this may be appropriate:



Changes in George Lucas's Lord of the Rings: Special Edition


11. Hobbits' resistance to the ring is caused by the high number of Midichlorians they posess.

10. One hyphenated word: Jar-Jaromir!

9. Gandalf to set off fifteen minute fireworks display every time the party stops to rest.

8. "Help me Tom Bombadil, you are my only hope."

7. All Orcs actually clones of Wormtongue.

6. Extra hobbits added digitally. Like, loads of hobbits. Especially in Mordor. Kids love hobbits, right?

5. Witch King hilariously eaten by Oliphant.

4. "It's about this one guy, Gollum, and how he is redeemed through hard work."

3. Elves have these really cool houses in the trees.

2. All poetry of original restored, complete with musical backing and endless CG dancers.

1. At the battle of Helm's Deep, the Uruk-hai shoot first.
Post
#220597
Topic
Peter Jackson the new Luca$???
Time
Here's some more information on the documentary:
(From Wikipedia) "Costa Botes assembled documentaries about the making of the Lord of the Rings films, as a result of reputedly being a close friend of Jackson. Botes' films, with no narration, no interviews, and no commentary, include behind-the-scenes footage collected over a five year span."

What's interesting is that because New Line Cinema did not authorize his project, Botes could not release the documentaries to the public. So I guess New Line must have authorized it for this release.
Post
#217152
Topic
Favorites of all time
Time
Movie: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Game: Centipede
Beatles Song: In My Life
Song: That's tough... "Kashmir" by Led Zeppelin
TV Show: Current -- Penn & Teller: Bullshit! All-time -- Carl Sagan's Cosmos
Anime: I don't like anime, but if I had to choose, Bleach
Comic Book: Never read comic books
Wrestler: Hell I don't know... Eddie Guerrero
Manga: Never read them
Book: The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan
Post
#212259
Topic
The Da Vinci Code Movie
Time
I saw the movie today. I'd give it a 6.5/10. Of course it wasn't as good as the book (though the changes in the film were minimal), and I thought the actress playing Sophie was kind of weak for the part. Tom hanks did a decent job, and the film moved at a pretty fast pace; and it didn't go into all the detail the book did (for obvious reasons). Also, the locations in the movie were exactly as I'd imagined them while reading the book.

On thing that I absolutely LOVED about the movie was Ian McKellen's performance as Leigh Teabing. I enjoyed his Teabing better than the book's in fact. I often had to remind myself that he was the villian; he completely had me. His balance between humour and obsession is just amazing. My favorite scene had to be where the police were draggin Teabing away and he's raving and screaming at Langdon and you just know that he's gone insane. Anyway he was great.

Not sure if I'd recommend it though, I'd more readily recommend the book over the movie.
Post
#203352
Topic
Jokes thread : Reloaded
Time
This is one my biology teacher told the class a few days ago... as we just finished studying human anatomy:






All the organs of the body were having a meeting, trying to decide who was in charge.

The brain said: "I should be in charge, because I run all the body's systems, so without me nothing would happen."

"I should be in charge," said the heart, "because I pump the blood and circulate oxygen all over the body, so without me you'd all waste away."

"I should be in charge," said the stomach, "because I process food and give all of you energy."

"I should be in charge," said the rectum, "because I'm responsible for waste removal."

All the other body parts laughed at the rectum and insulted him, so in a huff, he shut down tight. Within a few days, the brain had a terrible headache, the stomach was bloated, and the blood was toxic. Eventually the other organs gave in. They all agreed that the rectum should be the boss.

The moral of the story?

You don't have to be smart or important to be in charge... just an asshole.