RicOlie_2

Wait, what have I done?! Now I'm going to lose my free king...

FK-11h

That wouldn't be a "fan" edit though. To be a fan edit, it has to be edited by a fan, not a creator or owner of a work.

R-8h

Last move, as I really should be in bed now.

R-8j

I'm sure I mustn't be the only one around here who watches these things, so for those of you who do so, care to share your favourite debates (with a Youtube link if available) and debaters, with some reasons for liking and disliking them?

I like Richard Dawkins a lot as a debater, as he seems to have a fairly good grasp of most religious concepts that other atheists seem to have trouble with. He can be quite condescending at times, however, which is a point against him, but other times he is quite polite and far less condescending.

Christopher Hitchens was not as great as many say he was, in my humble opinion. He had a good sense of humour, but his habit to repeat the same old things over and over makes him tiring to listen to after a while (I don't mean within debates). He also tended to have terrible arguments against the existence of God, and a poor ability to refute arguments for God's existence. Christopher chased a lot of red herrings around and made many ad hominem attacks (not against those he debated, but against members of Christianity, as their behaviour apparently largely discredits the religion) He did make a lot of good points though. I think he was quite arrogant and judgmental, but he was a great guy notmuchtheless. ;)

Sam Harris is a quite articulate debater, but he also chases red herrings around all over the place. I haven't seen many of his debates, so I can't say much more about him or tell if the red herring thing is universal to his argumentation.

William Lane Craig is a decent debater on the other side, but from what I've seen of him, his arguments and rebuttals aren't great. I think his reputation is better than it ought to be, but maybe I've just seen the wrong side of him.

Dinesh D'Souza is a decent debater with some good arguments. Some arguments he makes aren't that great though, so he isn't one of my favourites.

John Lennox is one of my favourite debaters on the Christian side with one major flaw: his argument that the existence of morals depends on the existence of God. That in itself could be a viable argument, IMO, but he uses it poorly and can't seem to see the other side. I enjoy listening to him though, and since he seems to have a personal relationship with God as well as an intellectual one, so much the better.

John Carroll is another atheist debater I really enjoy. He has very good arguments and isn't arrogant and condescending like so many others. He's also interesting to listen to, as he has a sense of humour and is quite articulate.

There are others, but their names escape my memory and I don't have much time to write more at the moment.

OK. I would probably play it that way too, despite the fact that I've been advised not to do that (in a different situation, I'm sure), but I was curious since you made an earlier suggestion to use each and every turn to your advantage (my paraphrasing, of course) and this seemed to go against that advice.

Alright, if you insist. :)

FK-11e

I really hope I didn't miss something because I don't want to lose that piece, especially with my lion already gone.

Is there any real advantage to mirroring so many of each other's moves? Wouldn't it be more advantageous to make a unique move, ender, and gain the upper hand a bit?

Thanks, I see that I didn't mean "regardless," as I moved the other dragon king which would have made me safe. However, since I should have been paying more attention, I'll let you have it and continue on with the move P-3g.

^I love the contrast.

Porn site--File from Church...

:P

Warbler said:

RicOlie_2 said:

February 5:

A.D. 1649: Charles II inherits the throne of England.

 curious,  wikipedia has the date as February 6, 1649 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_England

Interesting. According to that, then, both he and his brother inherited the throne on the same day of the year.

The date(either February 5 or February 6) marks the date when the Parliament of Scotland proclaimed him kind.  It is arguable that he was King since the time his father's head was cut off on January 30, 1649.   It is also arguable his was king since the English Parliament voted unanimous to recognize Charles II as King on May 2, 1660.   May 8, 1660 is yet another date that could be argued as that was when was proclaimed King in London.  Moreover, he arrived in London on May 29, 1660 and that is the day that marks the first assembly of King and Parliament together since the abolition of the English monarchy in 1649 and it is also the day that Wiki marks as the start of his reign(and consequently the date I put in my list of the Monarchs of England  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Random-Thoughts/post/467230/#TopicPost467230 ).   Finally, his coronation took place on April 23, 1661.

 All those different dates... It's no wonder history is such a mess to sort out with everyone dating things differently and disagreeing on when certain things began (i.e. dating a reign from the date one's predecessor died instead of from the person's coronation or dating the end of a war from the end of fighting instead of from an official armistice).

February 6:

A.D. 1627: Huguenot rebels sign the Peace of La Rochelle with France.

A.D. 1685: The Duke of York becomes both King James II of England and VII of Scotland upon the death of his brother, Charles II.

A.D. 1911: The first old age home opens in the U.S.

A.D. 1918: Britain grants the right to vote to women over 30.

captainsolo said:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

Finally got around to seeing this. OH MY GOD! Murder, Death, Madness, Obsession, Alcoholism, Alienation, Science, Morbid humor, 50's underwater photography, Technicolor, serious plotting, an actual narrative scope, three of the screen's finest actors and GIANT SQUID.

This is MY kind of Disney film. Wow. Walt's desire to do something serious and dramatic paid off in dividends. They managed to do the novel straight, come up with new effects to do so, photograph in Technicolor Cinemascope in its very early usage with the problematic lenses, and sell it to children!

This is magical! Honest literary adaptations for children? You can do this and provoke actual deep thoughts? And they let you?

Admittedly the opening 15-20 minutes or so is very slow  but as soon as the Nautilus attacks the film just takes off.

4 balls out of 4.

New all time favorite Disney productions ranked:

1. Pinocchio

2. 1950's Zorro series

3. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

4. Everything else.

That was a really good rendition of one of my favourite books! I liked how it was faithful to the story and also thought it had good photography. I also thought Captain Nemo was well cast and played. It had very good special effects for a 50s movie, IMO, and I would probably rate this 4.5/5 for story and 4/5 for overall enjoyment.

Thanks Ryan, both for the help and the compliment. I'll see if I can get those pictures to display properly now.

Which dragon king? You've got one on one on 7d and one on 5e.

Regardless, my move is B-10d+

This thread never really caught my attention before, but I think I'll be brave enough to share some of my artwork (sorry that the pictures aren't showing up. I'm not having any luck making them display properly in the post, so you'll have to right click and select "Open Image in New Tab" if you want to see them).

EDIT: Fixed photos.

^Sorry it's so dark. The pics I took of it with a flash didn't turn out very well and I had bad lighting. I might replace it with a scanned image when I can get a scanner working. This was my first oil painting, and I have since begun a second. This is the incomplete monochromatic:

I also do a lot of drawing. This is a typical drawing of mine. I believe I did this particular one when I was twelve:

I don't usually use a reference when pencil drawing, but draw whatever comes to mind when I'm drawing (well, not whatever, but you get what I'm saying) and incorporate most of my mistakes into it.

I'm also into photography. I'm just beginning to learn specific techniques, but I've taken some decent photos while experimenting. I have a good camera, which helps, since the automatic mode is more advanced than in other cameras. :)

Below is a link to my main Flickr page. I usually focus on fish in my aquariums, other living things, sunsets, and clouds. All my photos are unedited except for cropping (I tend to edit photos far less than my posts here :P). And I know I somewhat blew my anonymity (for most of you) but I'm honestly not too concerned if you know my first name (it really doesn't mean anything anyway, especially since it's so common).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/99262306@N05/

Just to be clear, I'm not ashamed of my large family at all, as I quite enjoy it. I think my life would be far more boring if I didn't have so many siblings. I was more embarrassed about implying that I had a "look over here, I bet your family isn't this big!" attitude in a couple posts I made.

Having read through more of the rules, that might be a good idea. Some parts are good, but others take a bit more work to decipher or could have a couple possible meanings.

DK-6i

I see it now. I'll play your suggested move...

Ln-8k

I've made up my mind to check my continuous revisions to my posts regardless of whether or not I say something embarrassing here. I have the bad habit of trying to erase awkward moments or phrasing from my posts, but I should really be more humble about it. :P

Well...I tried to let it disappear onto other pages, but Frink brought it back. ;)

However, if you don't think there was anything wrong with it, I'll keep it up. Most people decided to be silly and not actually say anything about their families, so I took that to mean people weren't willing to volunteer that information and therefore felt awkward about asking the question...however, maybe I should just be humble about it and not expect people to be serious. I think it's just the mood I'm in today... :P

May I ask why Ln-8k is my only option? I don't want you to give away your strategy, but I can't see what's wrong with S-8k. :S

Yes, Google Translate has improved enormously in the past couple years. It still isn't perfect of course, but it's good enough that you should be able to use it to translate the page with some grammatical corrections.

B-7g