logo Sign In

twooffour

This user has been banned.

User Group
Banned Members
Join date
8-Jan-2011
Last activity
8-Oct-2011
Posts
1,665

Post History

Post
#541559
Topic
BEAUTIFUL WOMEN NEW RULES IN FIRST POST (NSFW) UPDATED RULES
Time

Marty.McFly said:

Ah, if the chin thing was an inside joke from past posts, I didn't get it...as you can tell lol. i haven't been in off topic long enough to get those.

If it's not, still dont get it but wonder, why the hell are you looking at her chin?! It's like making a comment about the pick-up truck! Yeah there is a pick up truck there somewhere lol

Why, why is this so impossible to get?

If you're gonna claim with certainty that someone has a "natural beauty", you need to know for certain that the beauty has in no way been "helped along" by any artificial means such as facial operations (chin augmentation being a common and less problematic one, in the cases of receding chins - it was just an EXAMPLE).

Otherwise, what's the point in claiming that someone is "naturally" beautiful?

Post
#541555
Topic
'Chemical castration' for pedophiles
Time

Bingowings said:

I'm of the belief that there are no evil people, only evil acts

That's a common cliché, but it isn't accurate - some people's minds ARE wired in a way that drives them to do evil all the time.

They may still be "some good" in them, just as the Hamas do charitable work, but that doesn't change the fact that the "evil" is a fundamental part of their personality.

This is like saying there are no insane people, only cognitive delusions. No talented musicians, just good albums. Makes any sense?

 

What makes people do things defined as evil (and not everyone is agreed on what is evil) are numerous and complex.



Sadism and lack of empathy being two of them.

 

And now you're doing it yourself :DTo struggle to avoid evil, to struggle to do good even at personal cost and even if you fail, that's human.

 

To struggle to avoid evil, to struggle to do good even at personal cost and even if you fail, that's human.

he birds they kill.

 

 

Evil is human nature doing things you and probably others don't like.



So if I don't like you wearing a goatee, does it justify me saying it's evil?

To call that not human is to miss the problem of evil.



Yea, it's a Scotsman fallacy - it doesn't hold up logically, obviously, but I still accept that sentiment as an expression of sane idealism (which is admirable until it gets too wide-eyed and reality-denying).

To struggle to avoid evil, to struggle to do good even at personal cost and even if you fail, that's human.


And now you're doing it :D


Anyways, whatever...

 

 

Post
#541489
Topic
Adventures in Raising the Next Generation of Original Star Wars Fans
Time

I certainly don't want a world for my kids in which the PT is considered Star Wars gospel.

They shouldn't consider ANYTHING as "gospel", including the OT.
That settles it - you're a weirdo.


it's that I think the PT lessens one's ability to enjoy the OT.
For a weak mind, probably.



It's not my business to try to mold them into the type of Star Wars fan I want them to be.  To do so would be a tad insane IMO.

After my little sister and I finish up Episode II this Saturday, I'll never put the PT on for her to watch again.  Episode III was PG-13 anyway.  Nothing but the OOT from now on.


Most awesome sequence of posts EVER.

Post
#540800
Topic
John Williams vs. Prequel Trilogy
Time

On the second link, I guess I still prefer Jar Jar's introduction to be less epic, but it's quite okay :)

Might be an editing issue, but at the beginning of the invasion sequence, I quite like how, in the movie, the ships fly by the camera with nothing but percussion (the combination with the engine glissando doe sit) accompanying the scene, the orchestra joining only after the shot.

Aside from those, can't pinpoint any differences to the original atm... :)

Post
#540733
Topic
Shatner on SW vs. ST
Time

Ok, this is just stupid.

Is he talking about the prequels now or the original movies? HE DOESN'T CONFUSE THE TWO I HOPE??

Yea, where Star Trek had thought experiments and "humanity" (as corny as it sometimes may have gotten - look up TV Tropes "you fail logic forever"), Star Wars mostly had mythical escapism, but calling it "little more than special effects"?
The original movies hinged upon the humanity of their main characters - sorry, that's just silly.

Then he mentions Abrams' movie... okay... that one had cool SEs, but it sacrificed some of the "story" quality, didn't it? It belongs to the same franchise, but was much more like SW except probably more shallow.


The Shat should listen to some Plinkett - his thoughts on this aren't organized at all.