Sign In

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
20-Sep-2006
Last activity
19-Jul-2019
Posts
3,152
Web Site
http://www.hardbat.com/puggo

Post History

Post
#1287523
Topic
Help Me Understand Empire Strikes Back?
Time

Of the three, I still think that the original '77 is the best. In fact, I always considered TESB as a much weaker movie, and largely still do. SW is almost a perfect movie, with a great pacing and cohesion, and every scene being important to the plot development. By contrast, TESB to me always seemed like a series of imaginative scenes, rather than a single movie, and some of the scenes are largely irrelevant - the asteroid cave scene to me always seemed silly and extremely unrealistic (gravity, for starters). However, it has two very strong elements - (1) Yoda and the deeper exploration of the spiritual elements, and (2) the climactic scene when Vader puts Han in the freezer. The timing in the latter is really excellent, and everyone’s acting (particularly Carrie and Harrison’s) is top notch. It’s also surprisingly realistic - pretty much how a cruel tyrant and an arrogant victim would likely interact. Vader wastes no time (unlike the emperor in ROTJ where the interaction drags on and becomes unbelievable). So lately I have come to appreciate TESB much more than I did when I was younger. But SW is still my favorite.

Post
#1280785
Topic
<strong>Moon</strong> - an appreciation thread : (2009 film by Duncan Jones) (<strong>NEWS</strong>)
Time

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Just watched it, as a result of reading this thread.
Pretty intense movie. Almost disturbing.

But did you like it?

I was impressed by it. The plot construction, and gradual reveal of what was going on, was really ingenious. Did I enjoy it? Hmmm, most of the movie was depressing. The ending was very satisfying, though. And I really liked how the computer’s character arc changed over the course of the movie.

There is one particular brief exchange between the computer and Sam that at the end of the movie turned out to be very prophetic in retrospect. But I think saying it here would be a spoiler.

Post
#1278990
Topic
Crime in your life
Time

When I was in my 20’s, my apartment was broken into and I was cleaned out. That is the only significant crime that happened directly to me.

However, my 75 year old aunt was a very recent victim of a more serious crime. She was a victim of one of those telephone kidnapping scams. The perpetrators convinced her that her daughter was kidnapped, and had her running around the state for over 30 hours, extorting her for $8000 over that period. Although she eventually learned that it was a hoax, and that her daughter was fine, the experience was extremely traumatizing. It happened about a month ago, and she is still suffering from PTSD symptoms.

Everyone needs to be made aware of this scam. If you get a phone call saying that a loved one has been kidnapped, it is useful to know the typical specifics of the scam: (1) they impersonate your loved one with screaming sounds in the background, (2) they insist that you stay on the phone and NEVER hang up, (3) they keep you moving non-stop, (4) they may spoof your loved-one’s phone so you think that they have his/her cell phone, (5) they claim that actually they are hitmen and that your loved-one was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, witnessing their hit (this latter is to convince you that they have no problem killing him/her).

Post
#1262962
Topic
What has kept me so busy the past couple of years...
Time

The two books I’ve been working on are finally finished and on the market. 2nd edition of my previous book (major revisions), and 1st edition of a new one:
https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Graphics-Programming-OpenGL-JAVA/dp/1683922190
https://www.amazon.com/COMPUTER-GRAPHICS-PROGRAMMING-OPENGL-C-ebook/dp/B07MHD8TKB

Some light bedtime reading…

Post
#1258434
Topic
Religion
Time

RicOlie_2 said:
… ultimately, in order to enter into a loving relationship with him, we have to have faith. If God is God, and he gave us empirical evidence directly demonstrating his existence, we would not have faith and would simply know in a more absolute sense that God will always keep his promises. But that’s not how human relationships work. Because we are not gods, we can fail to keep our promises, and every human relationship therefore requires trust and faith that the other person will not turn their backs on us. God wants us to have that same trust and faith, otherwise there will be a certain coercion involved in following him.

Right, but again, that’s what pretty much every religion says. How do I pick? How do I know which one is right?

Post
#1258006
Topic
Religion
Time

RicOlie_2 said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Ok, thanks for pointing out the clarification, and sorry for directing my comment specifically to you. I’ll change my “YOU” to point towards a larger swath of zealous missionaries, you specifically not necessarily included. (although some of your other posts do seem to fit the 2nd sentence - that is, being the lucky bearer of ultimate truth).

Thanks, and apologies, as I realize some of my posts were unclear. And I do in fact believe I am the (very) fortunate bearer of ultimate truth…I wouldn’t be Christian if I didn’t.

BTW, this is exactly why science is not a religion. Scientists do not claim to know the truth; they only argue what they believe to be the current best explanations for things, given the limitations of available measurement technology. Being proven wrong is how science advances. By contrast, religion claims absolutely to know the truth (sometimes in spite of measurements and scientific reasoning), and those truths are immutable - like axioms in a mathematical system.

Certainly, but we don’t claim to know the truth about absolutely everything either. Out of curiosity, what scientific reasoning and measurements do you think contradict Christianity (and specifically Catholicism)?

Well, for one, the power of prayer. Scientific studies have repeatedly failed to find any evidence that prayer has any effect whatsoever, while Christianity (and other religions) insist that it does.

I’m curious to know what they looked at specifically in those studies. In Catholicism, we believe a number of things about prayer that may not have been taken into account: (1) prayer is primarily about conforming one’s will to God’s will, not about obtaining favours, (2) intercessory prayer is more effective when one has conformed oneself to God’s will (because one is not praying for something that contradicts God’s will), and (3) that means that if someone decides to pray to God all of a sudden because they need help, God might not answer that prayer because they aren’t really asking because they have faith in a friend, but because they want to avoid pain and suffering.

That being said, I’m not sure I can refute that argument. I will say, however, that if we think of the way a human parent might seem inconsistent to a child, it can be easy to see why God might seem inconsistent from a limited human perspective. For instance, a kid might ask their mom if they can have a friend over on a certain day, and the mother might say no (for example, because she won’t be home and doesn’t feel comfortable leaving another person’s kid with their babysitter), despite having encouraged the kid to be more social and invite friends over more often. It seems inconsistent to the child, but perfectly reasonable from the point of view of the mother.

Regarding your first paragraph, I don’t think that any of that is measurable, so science would have nothing to say about it. That’s convenient – by always couching things in ways that aren’t measurable, religion is thus able to demand faith. And this is why I have a hard time understanding how anyone would go about choosing from amongst the hundreds of religions – all of them require faith, and none of them offer anything tangible on which to give confidence in that faith. Thus most people follow the religion in which their parents raised them, or whichever religion they happen to be exposed to. Isn’t that odd, given that God is supposedly everywhere, one of the religions is supposed to be correct, and yet religions are so localized?

Regarding your second paragraph, I agree with you. However, I don’t think that has anything to do with scientific study of prayer. Studies haven’t shown that the effects of prayer are inconsistent. Rather, science has yet to find any effect whatsoever.

Post
#1257887
Topic
Religion
Time

RicOlie_2 said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Ok, thanks for pointing out the clarification, and sorry for directing my comment specifically to you. I’ll change my “YOU” to point towards a larger swath of zealous missionaries, you specifically not necessarily included. (although some of your other posts do seem to fit the 2nd sentence - that is, being the lucky bearer of ultimate truth).

Thanks, and apologies, as I realize some of my posts were unclear. And I do in fact believe I am the (very) fortunate bearer of ultimate truth…I wouldn’t be Christian if I didn’t.

BTW, this is exactly why science is not a religion. Scientists do not claim to know the truth; they only argue what they believe to be the current best explanations for things, given the limitations of available measurement technology. Being proven wrong is how science advances. By contrast, religion claims absolutely to know the truth (sometimes in spite of measurements and scientific reasoning), and those truths are immutable - like axioms in a mathematical system.

Certainly, but we don’t claim to know the truth about absolutely everything either. Out of curiosity, what scientific reasoning and measurements do you think contradict Christianity (and specifically Catholicism)?

Well, for one, the power of prayer. Scientific studies have repeatedly failed to find any evidence that prayer has any effect whatsoever, while Christianity (and other religions) insist that it does.