logo Sign In

Regicidal_Maniac

User Group
Members
Join date
29-Jul-2004
Last activity
3-Oct-2005
Posts
345

Post History

Post
#71813
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71813/action/topic#71813
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: motti_soL
the USA would not dare go into North Korea, coz now they have nukes, haha... not so funny when the playing field is level, is it?


The current administration can be sure of North Korea's nuclear capabilities as it was one of Rumsfeld's companies that was responsible for selling light water nuclear reactors to North Korea.

It's a win win situation. He makes money from the sale of nukes to a corrupt dictator and creates enough fear to keep the public in line while the situation escalates to the point where Cheney can soon make money from his companies defence contracts. Plus Bush gets to look like a born again morals crusader with perpetual villains to create and then fight.

"Oceania was at war with Eurasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia."

Interesting times indeed.
Post
#71780
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71780/action/topic#71780
Time
Jimbo you don't know anything.

"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites." - Thomas Jefferson, (1743-1826) American president, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat. Deist, avid separationist.

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." ... "In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people." ... "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise." - James Madison, (1751-1836) American president and political theorist. Popularly known as the "Father of the Constitution." More than any other framer he is responsible for the content and form of the First Amendment.

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."... Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and dogmatism cannot confine it." ... "But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed." ... "The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles." - John Adams (1735-1826), 2nd President of the United States.

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, & the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people." - Karl Marx, German political philosopher and economist (1818-1883).

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true." ... "Religion consists in a set of things which the average man thinks he believes and wishes he was certain of." ... "There is no other life; life itself is only a vision and a dream for nothing exists but space and you. If there was an all-powerful God, he would have made all good, and no bad." - Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist (1835-1910).

"I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious ideas of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal God." ... "So far as religion of the day is concerned, it is a damned fake... Religion is all bunk." - Thomas Edison, American inventor (1847-1931).

"In the long run, nothing can withstand reason and experience, and the contradiction religion offers to both is palpable." ... "The whole thing is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life." - Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Austrian physician and pioneer psychoanalyst.

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950), Irish-born English playwright.

"Thus I came...to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true....Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience...an attitude which has never left me." ... "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein (1879-1955), German born American threoretical physicist.

"All thinking men are atheists." - Ernest Hemingway (1899-1961), American author.

"I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say that one is an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow it was better to say one was a humanist or agnostic. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time." - Isaac Asimov (1920-1992), Russian-born American author.

"In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point." ... "I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough - I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race." ... "Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's?" - Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), German philosopher.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." ... "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." - Benjamin Franklin, (1706-1790), American public official, writer, scientist, and printer who played a major part in the American Revolution.

"No man who ever lived knows any more about the hereafter ... than you and I; and all religion ... is simply evolved out of chicanery, fear, greed, imagination and poetry." - Edgar Allan Poe (1809-1849), American writer.

"Of all religions the Christian is without doubt the one which should inspire tolerance most, although up to now the Christians have been the most intolerant of all men."... "Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world." ... "Men who believe absurdities will commit atrocities." - Voltaire [François Marie Arouet] (1694-1778), French philosopher and writer whose works epitomize the Age of Enlightenment.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus (341–270 B.C.), Greek philosopher.

"Secularism is a 'religion', a religion that is understood. It has no mysteries, no mumblings, no priests, no ceremonies, no falsehoods, no miracles, and no persecutions. It considers the lilies of the field, and takes thought for the morrow. It says to the whole world, Work that you may eat, drink, and be clothed; work that you may enjoy; work that you may not want; work that you may give and never need." ... "As people become more intelligent they care less for preaches
and more for teachers" ... "Why should I allow that same God to tell me how to raise my kids, who had to drown His own?" ... "Few nations have been so poor as to have but one god. Gods were made so easily, and the raw material cost so little, that generally the god market was fairly glutted and heaven crammed with these phantoms." - Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899), Well known post civil war American political speechmaker and Secular-Humanist.

"Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your troubles and disputes. Fear is the basis of the whole thing -- fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand." ... "And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have suc
Post
#71758
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71758/action/topic#71758
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
If "religion"has no basis in fact then how do you explain miraculous healing? Demon posssesion? The miracles and Ressurection of the Lord?


To answer this I will directly quote The Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) in his essay On Miracles.

Quote
Originally written by David Hume:
[ON MIRACLES - HUME - FROM ESSAYS, MORAL AND POLITICAL]
A WISE man proportions his belief to the evidence. In such conclusions as are founded on an infallible experience he expects the event with the last degree of assurance, and regards his past experience as a full proof of the future existence of that event.

In other cases he proceeds with more caution. He weighs the opposite experiments. He considers which side is supported by the greatest number of experiments; to that side he inclines with doubt and hesitation, and when at last he fixes his judgement, the evidence exceeds not what we properly call probability. All probability, then, supposes an opposition of experiments and observations, where the one side is found to over-balance the other and to produce a degree of evidence proportioned to the superiority.

When the fact attested is such a one as has seldom fallen under our observation, there is a contest of two possible experiences, of which the one destroys the other as far as its force goes, and the superior can only operate on the mind by the force which remains. The very same principle of experience which gives us a certain degree of assurance in the testimony of witnesses gives us also, in this case, another degree of assurance against the fact which they endeavour to establish, from which consideration there necessarily arises a counterpoise, and mutual destruction of belief and authority.

But in order to increase the probability against the testimony of witnesses, let us suppose that the fact which they affirm, instead of being only marvellous, is really miraculous; and suppose also that the testimony, considered apart and in itself, amounts to an entire proof, of which the strongest must prevail, but still with a diminution of its force in proportion to that of its antagonist.

A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable that all men must die; that lead cannot of itself remain suspended in the air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is required a violation of these laws, or, in other words, a miracle, to prevent them?
Nothing is esteemed a miracle if it ever happen in the common course of nature. It is no miracle that a man seemingly in good health should die on a sudden, because such a kind of death, though more unusual than any other, has yet been frequently observed to happen. But it is a miracle that a dead man should come to life, because that has never been observed in any age or country.

There must, therefore, be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appellation. And as a uniform experience amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any miracle; nor can such a proof be destroyed, or the miracle rendered credible, but by an opposite proof which is superior.

The plain consequence is (and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention) 'that no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish; and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the superior only gives us an assurance suitable to that degree of force which remains after deducting the inferior.'
THERE surely never was a greater number of miracles ascribed to one person than those which were lately said to have been wrought in France upon the tomb of Abbe Paris, the famous Jansenist, with whose sanctity the people were so long deluded. The curing of the sick, giving hearing to the deaf and sight to the blind, were everywhere talked of as the usual effects of that holy sepulchre. But, what is more extraordinary, many of the miracles were immediately proved upon the spot before judges of unquestioned integrity, attested by witnesses of credit and distinction, in a learned age, and in the most eminent theatre that is now in the world.

Nor is this all; a relation of them was published and dispersed everywhere; nor were the Jesuits, though a learned body, supported by the civil magistrate and determined enemies to those opinions in whose favour the miracles were said to have been wrought, ever able distinctly to refute or detect them. Where shall we find such a number of circumstances agreeing to the corroboration of one fact? And what have we to oppose to such a cloud of witnesses but the absolute impossibility or miraculous nature of the events which they relate? And this surely, in the eyes of all reasonable people, will alone be regarded as a sufficient refutation.

Suppose that all the historians who treat of England should agree that on January 1, 1600, Queen Elizabeth died; that both before and after her death she was seen by her physicians and the whole court, as is usual with persons of her rank; that her successor was acknowledged and proclaimed by the Parliament; and that, after being interred a month, she again appeared, resumed the throne, and governed England for three years; I must confess that I should be surprised at the concurrence of so many odd circumstances, but should not have the least inclination to believe so miraculous an event. I should not doubt of her pretended death, and of those other public circumstances that followed it; I should only assert it to have been pretended, and that it neither was, nor possibly could be, real.
You would in vain object to me the difficulty and almost impossibility of deceiving the world in an affair of such consequence; the wisdom and solid judgement of that renowned queen; with the little or no advantage which she could reap from so poor an artifice. All this might astonish me; but I would still reply that the knavery and folly of men are such common phenomena that I should rather believe the most extraordinary events to arise from their concurrence than admit of so signal a violation of the laws of nature.

OUR most holy religion is founded on faith, not on reason; and it is a sure method of exposing it to put it to such a trial as it is by no means fitted to endure. To make this more evident, let us examine those miracles related in the Pentateuch, which we shall examine as the production of a mere human writer and historian. Here, then, we are first to consider a book, presented to us by a barbarous and ignorant people, written in an age when they were still more barbarous, and in all probability long after the facts which it relates, corroborated by no concurring testimony, and resembling those fabulous accounts which every nation gives of its origin.

Upon reading this book, we find it full of prodigies and miracles. It gives an account of a state of the world and of human nature entirely different from the present; of our fall from that state; of the age of man extended to near a thousand years; of the destruction of the world by a deluge; of the arbitrary choice of one people as the favourites of Heaven, and that people the countrymen of the author; of their deliverance from bondage by prodigies the most astonishing imaginable. I desire anyone to lay his hand upon his heart and, after a
Post
#71751
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71751/action/topic#71751
Time
Marriage doesn't exist outside of society. There is no objective truth that "marriage must be this and not this".

Marriage is a legal contract binding two people together as a couple and awarding them financial couplehood status. Nothing else. Now wether those two people are of opposite of same gender depends on how much a society will allow it's governing body to discriminate against its fellow citizens.

Marriage means nothing more than what you want it to mean, if you hate "dykes" and "fags" and consider them to be an "abomination against God" then obviously you're going to proclaim the sanctity of the holy unity of marriage between one man and one woman. But guess what, it doesn't mean squat.

I don't really care that you hate gays so much that you feel the need to legislate against them, I'm sure they hate you too or more likely feel pity for your ignorance. I'm not saying homosexuality is natural, you only have to look at how the body works to figure out that it is an abnormal practice, but who cares? Are they hurting you? Are they coming on to you? Were you abused by one? I'm trying to figure out why the hate.

When I was an ignorant little kid I too was hateful towards gays even though some of my family friends were gay but as I grew up I learned that they're just people too and have every right to their non-harmful to others activities as you do to yours. I have learned to accept gays and Christians but I find that the former group do not try to push their views onto society like the latter group do and for this reason I have very few Christian friends.

I can understand why abotion upsets you and others but you're a guy and it's not your fucking decision to make. The way I see it and I know I'll be crucified for this is that the unwanted still dividing zygote in a woman's body is as welcome as a cancerous growth and there aren't too many people who would lobby that a cancerous growth has a right to life. It's a hardline stance to take I know and I concede that it is a decision that should be given proper consideration and not just terminated on a whim but it is a choice that should be allowed legal to be made no matter what the reason, up to a point. Obviously one cannot wait too long or the grwoing mass of sperm and egg will develop organs and a brain and then it will have a right to life.

To say that there has to be something out there or there would be nothing down here is just a refusal to accept the scary possibility of cold and empty universe brought about through chance. But to me that's far more exciting than the rather simplistic "God did it" answer, that's just saying that you're too lazy to look too hard at anything. It may be comforting to you and if it stops you from going postal then great but for me the universe is all numbers and random chance. How much more valuable is this life when you consider that if a string of amino acids hadn't gotten it on with itself some four billion years ago you might not be here arguing the point against today? It's exillerating to me but if you don't think so then I appreciate that but I do feel sorry for you that you've concealed the true majesty of life in the universe in a (well meaning) fable designed to make people pay their taxes and stay in line.

I believe in this life and in nothing else, for anything not of this world should be of no concern to this life for it can have no impact and no value in the world and thus be little more than a distraction from reality.
Post
#71724
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71724/action/topic#71724
Time
Chaltab I rejected religion when I found out it was based on myths and lies and has ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS IN FACT OR IMPACT UPON THE PHYSICAL WORLD.

If something is not of this world it bears no consideration whatsoever.

I went to a Catholic High school and I spent my youth before that in after-school Christian bible study classes. A damned fine waste of time that was. Come on people let's all be happy and praise Him.

Don't presume to tell me what I know and do not know.

I enjoyed reading the bible in the same way I enjoyed reading Aesop's Fables or Hans Christian Anderson or Greek myth or the writings on the origins of religious belief of scholars like Joseph Campbell.

I was an argumentative child and my Priests and Brothers never had the correct answers they'd always falter and stumble under the weight of irrefutable logic. Then just as you do they'd retreat back into the words of their God, who said it so it must be true and we know it's true it is written and it was written by God and that's how we know it. What a circle jerk.

I don't care what you believe Chaltab just know that you're the blind fool and I don't give a shit what your book says about me.

I'm not insulting religious people, who for the most part are pretty pleasant and docile creatures thanks to their beliefs, I am insulting religion at large. The organisation that has surrounded the belief in the supernatural and wormed its way into the highest levels of world government passing moral judgements and laws that are based on a fantasy.

I don't know if there is a God or not, and neither do you. The point is I don't care either way because it is only through the falsehoods grafted onto ancient historical events and awareded significance by interested parties that you feel some measure of fear of this thing called God. The true God if there is one has no power here on Earth and it meets all who seek to join it in the end.

Just live your live Chaltab, it's likely the ONLY ONE you'll get.
Post
#71667
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71667/action/topic#71667
Time
You dumb cluck jimbo, Kerry read the intelligence that had been mocked up from half-truths and hearsay and made the right decision based on what little evidence the Bush administration made available to him and the media.

However the 'evidence' was at best faulty and at worst outright lies.

Bush's intelligence gathering looked for confirmation of a dogmatic view on WMDs and ignored falsifying evidence which would have proved contradictory to their pre-planned war. They had a pretext and a scapegoat and all further investigations which may have revealed the truth to their lies were deemed unnecessary.

Saddam was a bad guy and I'm glad he's gone. The war was bad too and I am sorry God told Bush to invade Iraq.

Osama's a bad guy too, remember him? Along with the Saudis he, and not Saddam, was responsible for 9/11. And yet... he's still out there. You still feel safe Jimbo? America is still sucking on the Saudis and rolling over for them despite there being much clearer links between their money and 9/11 and Saddam and 9/11. Do you still feel safe Jimbo?

[starkiller, so sorry about the fuckup. I can understand how anyone would be annoyed to be mistaken for such an ignorant one-note parrot as jimbo.]
Post
#71659
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71659/action/topic#71659
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
Quote
Originally posted by: Regicidal_Maniac
Oh an Communism the ultimate evil? Yeah okaaaay. Quick there's a red behind you! No wait it's a witch, no wait it's a terrorist, no wait it's a gay man... Whatever.


I was speaking of the mentality of the time period, not my personal feelings.


Okay I thought you might have been but I still think that the constructedness of the 'Communist threat' is similar to any of today's 'evil enemies'. Fear-mongering and Nationalistic fervor in the name of Patriotism keeps the dissidents in line.

Quote
Originally posted by: jimbo

Something you and John Kerry don't understand is the war on terror is all terrorism.


Snide condescension from Jimbo? Grown a set if not a brain have we?

I understand it ya tool, but I reject it none-the-less. A pre-emptive strike is still an unprovoked attack. Striking fear into the hearts of your 'enemies' could be seen as an act of terror, although the dominant discourse will not allow it to be seen that way and 'the hun' will still be codified and othered as such.

Wave your flag, no wave it harder, like you mean it.

EDIT: Whoops terribly sorry starkiller, it's fixed now.
Post
#71645
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71645/action/topic#71645
Time
I guess I somehow forgot the, quite obvious, association to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei as I was referring only to the association Riech has to a State or Empire but I just plumb forgot about the nazis. Whoops.

While on the topic, the National Socialists Party were themselves a bit of an oxymoron as they used left-wing symbols and ideals to eventually push a fascistic right wing agenda. The nazis were right wing although they stared out as a left wing party they went so far left they actually hit the extreme right. So the connotation in connection to my 'insult' still works but it wasn't intended that way.

As to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" foreign policy, does anyone ever wonder why America has all these enemies in the first place? Hint: it's not because they are jealous of you.

Oh an Communism the ultimate evil? Yeah okaaaay. Quick there's a red behind you! No wait it's a witch, no wait it's a terrorist, no wait it's a gay man... Whatever.
Post
#71641
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71641/action/topic#71641
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Kingsama

Your theory is not even close to what a vast majority of non-christian scholars believe to be the primary influsences of the development of what they would call the "christian myth"


Not even close? Read another book once in a while.

Quote
Humanist my fat rear end, if humanist like you discribed ran the world in the 30's and 40's everyone here not from america would be speacking german...


While I have no doubt your rear end is indeed fat your absurd (and Godwin's Law invoking) accusation speaks to the heart of your fundamental lack of understanding as to where your once great country is headed.

Believe what you like, but you're wrong anyway.
Post
#71629
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71629/action/topic#71629
Time
How quickly the neo-con Right-wing Christian Reich choose to forget the facts of the past in order to continue the lies of the present.



Pretty lucky that Saddam Hussein, an absolute cock don't get me wrong, had that 'stroke' recently before he was due to be turned over to officials for questioning and trial. Too bad I'd have liked to hear his thoughts as, yet another, US propped up despot I think he might have had some interesting insights, being an insider an all.



Osama bin Laden, ('who? OH him... right, I think I remember him') was trained by the CIA in Afghanistan to fight the 'evil' Russians but this too eventually went pear-shaped as most American interventionism in the Middle East tends to do. (Can you even tell me why you tyhink the US is SO involved in that particular part of the world?)

Israel is a nation of terrorists, not that Palestine isn't, yet the US is sides with Israel, proveds them with weapons, excuses and cover-ups all because of the worlds of one dusty old book.

Osama's damned lucky that everyone's been brainwashed into forgetting about him. Maybe he'll come good again one day. I guess it all depends how useful he is in the region.

Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
What infuriates me the most is that people who call themselves humanists are against this war. How can you be a humanist if you don't think we should do anything to help the humans in distress in Iraq.


What infuriates me most is people who use the fairytales of the ancient Greek myth of Herakles Romanised as Hercules and grafted onto the life of Yoshua-Ben-Yosef generations after the fact to claim moral and ethical superiority over those they decree to be heathens just because we value human life more than constructed ideology.

Humanists see all loss of life to be a tragic waste, not just those on 'our side'. Helping humans in distress is exactly what was NOT done in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are many people in distress in your own country, why aren't those military monies being spent to feed clothe and shelter those poor wretches?

If you choose to believe the lies then do so but don't think for one second that you can claim the high ground when you have no clue why the US really went after Saddam.

"Let's not forget, this is a man who tried to kill my dad at one point." George W Bush 43* (*not).
Post
#71263
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71263/action/topic#71263
Time
Excellent post Warbler.

I sincerely hope that the neo-cons in the US don't manage to dupe the public into voted them back in with dirt-slinging, lies about inflation and obfuscation about a war for profit like the conservatives here in Oz managed to do again last weekend.

The last thing America needs, or the world for that matter not the we get a say, is for Cheney and Rumsfeld to complete their 8 year plan.
Post
#71262
Topic
Thoughts of Han and R2D2
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71262/action/topic#71262
Time
True.

No matter how long the very talented CGI artists spend on rendering, shading, lighting, texture-mapping, articulation and so on the best it can look like is good CGI.

The best CGI is no match for a real prop, set, model, costume or puppet.

CGI when used to replicate things that can be done using traditional methods always jars the eye and the film suffers for it. Good CGI should be invisible, like the augmentation of an explosion, or a liquid metal creature (which I still believe could be achieved similarly by Rob Bottin using practical effects and editing).

Good quote re Jaws. There's another quote I read in a book on Jaws and cinema theory and it goes something like; If Jaws had been made today modern writers and film makers would have felt compelled to put a fiesty female reporter on the boat to aid exposition for today's audiences and to break up the three guys on a boat dynamic. Something like that.
Post
#71243
Topic
Question about PT to OT continuity
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71243/action/topic#71243
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: jimbo
I think the midichlorians are a good explaination. It also explains why droids can't use the force. Also the midicholorians are not the force.


Obi-Wan Kenobi:
* "The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy  field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together."

Yoda:
* "Concentrate. Feel the Force flow. Not outside or inside, but part of all it is. Through the Force, things you will see. Reaches across time and space it does. Other places. The future... the past. Old friends long gone. Always in motion is the future."

* "Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? And well you should not. For my ally is the Force. And a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we... not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you. Here, between you... me... the tree... the rock... everywhere!"

* "In balance is the Force. The Dark and the Light. With out one, there is no other. The Dark Side, tempting it is. Quick, easy at first, but a trap is the Dark Side. Corrupting, evil. Once you start down  the Dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. For the Light Side, patience you need. Control. Peace and harmony it is."

These were not good enough explanations for you?

Quote
They are simply how living creatures communicate with the force. The force is still a mysterious energy field not a collection of microorganisms.


And on this we agree.

Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I hate the word "mystical" I have an aversion to mysticicsm....


You have 'an aversion to mysticism' and yet you believe there is a God?
Post
#71239
Topic
Revenge of the Sith Trailer description!!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71239/action/topic#71239
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: The Bizzle

This is the mindset Reg was saying he'll subscribe to. It's willful dismissal of the movie before he's seen it, regardless of it's quality.


Putting words into my mouth, how nice.

I was saying (and I know because I said it and you misread it or just plain could not understand the words on the screen) that EVEN IF ROTS sucks my dick, which I fully doubt considering what I've seen and heard so far, and even if I LOVE EVERY FRAME I may very well buy the film and consider it Star Wars-worthy but I will also be justified in wondering why the previous two films failed to measure up.

I too have the ability to discern the difference between a single film in a series and the series itself.
Examples: Back to The Future - I like the first one but I'm not too fond of the sequels.
I like the first three Superman films, III being my favourite and I don't like IV Quest for peace.
I like the first two Jaws films but not 4 The Revenge and I find Jaws 3D to be utterly hilarious in a so bad it's almost good kind of way.
I consider myself an A Nightmare on Elm St fan even though I only like the first one and the third one.

Your posts are dripping with condescension and as much antagonism as you claim to be railing against, just look at how threads turn into wars when you pop your head up. It's almost like you have your responses written before you read posts you respond to, do you? Are you just saying the same well thought out and coherent yet priggish and uppity drivel ad nauseum?

If that's true then you're the most erudite troll I've ever encountered and it's a pleasure to float your boat.

At the same time as enjoying a single Star Wars film for the two whatever hours we sit in the cinema trying to unstick our feet from the floor is there some reason why we cannot hold it up to the standards set by the rest of the series (OT vs PT)?

I know that the common retort is that "we cannot hold Star Wars up to the lofty standards of 'real' films becaus ethese are big dumb space opera kid's films filled with Ewoks and whatnot" and I'll ignore that for the moment but ask again why Star Wars cannot be compared to Star Wars?
Post
#71095
Topic
Revenge of the Sith Trailer description!!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71095/action/topic#71095
Time
Too true.

But with today's much lowered standards of acceptable entertainment and the sheep-like mentality of audiences these days why bother to spend money or time on a good script and so on when a sufficient marketing budget will do the same job that quality product could do but for far less effort and risk?

It's all about expenditure and returns. There is no love.
Post
#71084
Topic
Revenge of the Sith Trailer description!!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71084/action/topic#71084
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: R2
I just hope this one lives up to the hype.


It can't.

It'll be meh at best. It MAY have a few cool scenes which no doubt will be mishandled.

Even if it's balls out fantastic we'll be sitting there thinking 'now why weren't the other two this good?'

Likely it'll be horrendously marred by something incredibly inexcusable and my money is on that godawful sounding General Grevious CGI robot villain character.

I can smell the stink on that turd already.
Post
#71068
Topic
Thoughts of Han and R2D2
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71068/action/topic#71068
Time
Interesting thoughts.

Most definitely agree on the Han/Lucas thing even though GL has always publicly stated that Luke is the character most based on himself.

R2 made another mistake in one of the films when he put his jack into an electrical socket, admittedly it was at C-3PO's behest.

Actually he made a mistake when he tried to navigate the swamp on Dagobah and got swallowed and spat out by the big swamp-creature. Does anyone know why R2 didn't just use his jets that he now apparently has?

Come to think of it on Endor R2 uses his saw to free them from the Ewok-made Wookie-trap and the group all fall to the ground, again including R2 who could have just flown to the ground.

Silly little droid forgot that one day the Master would make it so that he always had booster jets in his legs.

Also doesn't R2 keep bumping into walls throughout the OT films?
Post
#71067
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/71067/action/topic#71067
Time
Gah!

He wasn't joking about marrying into money he was poking fun at himself for not being the world's best catch. Have you seen the guy? He knows what he looks like.

He's longfaced, drab-looking and not the world's most scintillating conversationalist (although he does have a grasp on the English language which even Bush admits he does not.)
Post
#70909
Topic
Anakin's ghost?!?!?!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/70909/action/topic#70909
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Simon
Wow, Jimbo did you read anything i wrote?


Yeah that's Jimbo for ya. I'm beginning to wonder if the little fella even CAN read, because he certainly never seems to have read anything he's responding to.

Quote
Lucas is contradicting himself and the original movies by trying to explain his changes away as his original intention or as to keep continuity. First off if he wanted to keep continuity he should have written the prequals to fit in better with what already existed.


Amen. Lucas had the chance to make the PT films fit the existing OT films but he's too lazy to bother with anything such as series continuity and narrative logic.

So he messed up the OT to fit the PT and that's why this board exists.

Welcome Darth Simon.