RicOlie_2

That would probably make sense, because it's also the only (or one of two) shots in that movie with a CG Yoda.

That toy makes it much better. Hopefully it does something like that in the movie too.

Even better. Parts of the parade from TPM could work as well.

That would be good!

I seem to have lost my desktop icons with some recent updates of Windows 10. Instead of those (which I can still access, but only through file explorer), I see what used to only show up when I clicked my start button.

If I can't fix that within the next day or so, I'm going back to Windows 7.

DuracellEnergizer said:

A transient saber that was sacrificed to demonstate the cutting power of assembly line machinery.

 Right. Been a while since I've seen that movie. And then of course, he ended up with someone else's saber.

Then what lightsaber was Anakin using in that movie?

Possessed said:

RicOlie_2 said:

I'm a super funny guy, despite Possessed thinking that I'm only funny half the time. 

 I never said that!  I said there were two versions of you, the one who is funny and the one who tries to be funny.   I never gave a ratio of how much each of them posts.  :)

 Oh, good. As long as you don't find my serious posts funny, you're in the clear.

^That's because the real you has absolutely no personality. ;)

I'm a super funny guy, despite Possessed thinking that I'm only funny half the time. Everybody always laughs at my jokes.

Also, I'm a fantastic big brother. My siblings always know they can count on me for help.

I also always finish everything I start, unlike the stupid real me who never finishes any of his projects (brilliant as they are).

LOL...jerk. ;)

Totally agreed on that one. That's part of what makes Star Wars fun to watch, and Guardians of the Galaxy just wouldn't be the same with no humour. A healthy combination of action, humour, adventure, and story is what I want to see.

Possessed said:

Indeed!  Rics and Mr. Shotfirst were both interesting.  More!!!

 Pardon me, I seem to have neglected to mention that there is actually only one of my real-life selves, despite my username claiming there are two of us.

SilverWook said:

Anybody else getting their script/pop up blocker acting up with the site today?

This has never happened to me before. I've had the site totally whitelisted for years.

 This is the second weird thing I've seen you mention. Are you on the new host or software (or whatever Jay has some users testing)?

Leonardo said:

What, you don't remember this news story from 3 years ago?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129971/Titanic-100th-anniversary-Twitter-users-just-Titanic-really-happened.html

 I had no computer, and therefore no Internet access, back then. That's pretty bad, though...I've known about the Titanic since I was about six.

The Titanic one has to be a joke....

In real life, I am much the same, but better. ;)

I'm very much an introvert in real life, and not usually quick to speak up. I nearly always prefer to listen than to talk, and think about what I say before saying it (which usually leads to deciding that what I had to say wasn't worth opening my mouth for) and I have a reputation at school for being very silent.

Thanks to being an introvert, living in a tiny village, and homeschooling during my younger years, I was socially awkward when I began going to school, but I can interact normally with other people now.  I still usually take a little while to warm up in a social setting though. I also prefer having few good friends to many acquaintances.

I have also always been terrible at explaining things when speaking (my very monotonous voice doesn't help) and am much more comfortable communicating in writing.

I get consistently good grades at school, with my worst subject usually being phys. ed. I work hard (but don't study for half my tests), and often make extra homework for myself (not based on the school curriculum, which I usually dislike), mostly studying languages and linguistics (I recite lists of literally thousands of words in other languages). I'm most interested in the arts, rather than the sciences, though I don't enjoy the way the former are taught in school.

I have always been a huge reader (not weightwise) and at one point was reading over sixty books, magazines, etc. of various genres at the same time. I've slowed down somewhat, devoting more of my time to, well, reading other things (like this forum and Wikipedia articles).

I also have a very active church life and go to most weekday Masses when I don't have school. I'm fairly popular amongst the elderly people there, and I'm sure many of them expect me to become a priest.

I'm a typical bossy big brother much of the time, though I like to think I'm not as critical of my siblings as I used to be. Speaking of which, I used to be very judgemental and full of myself. I think I'm a humbler person than I once was, but it's hard for someone like me to have much humility. ;P (I am a bit of a tease in real life as well as on the Internet.)

I could ramble on and on about myself, I'm sure, but I should stop somewhere. I think I've represented myself fairly, but if not, when my dad reads this thread, he can remind me of all the negative things I've passed over. ;)

One of my friends lived in Italy for a year, and some of his classmates were under the impression that he had lived in an igloo back home, and had never seen advanced technology like computers.

I think it's a question that cannot logically be answered because it is based on a contradiction of logic, but I'll ramble on about nothing anyway:

Can a circle be a square at the same time it's a circle? Perhaps God could do it. He could certainly make one look like the other. But to make a circle that was actually square, however, seems a logical impossibility (and if there was a shape that one couldn't identify as being either a circle or a square, it would be called something else).

By definition, a square has four equal sides which meet at four right angles. A circle has no corners. A square circle is therefore self-contradictory (duh). God cannot theoretically make something with two contradictory natures. It's possible, however, that there could be another reality in the same space as ours, in which circles in our reality correspond to squares in the other one, but that's something entirely different.

Now, I guess I can't really provide an answer to your question, other than claiming that God cannot do the logically impossible, which cannot be proven thanks to our limited ability to reason.

As for the rock that God himself couldn't move: it's the same as asking why an omnipotent God couldn't deprive himself of his omnipotency (or change his intrinsic nature in any other way). The only answer is somewhat (read: completely) circular, and that is that he cannot do so because it is part of his intrinsic nature.

tl;dr: As above, beats me!

AntcuFaalb said:

FWIW: I'm still waiting for religious folk to propose a solution to the Omnipotence Paradox.

Can God create a stone He cannot lift?

 Why must there be a solution? It's a logical impossibility. God couldn't do that any more than he could make a square circle. It doesn't make him less omnipotent.

EDIT: I suppose that itself could be considered a solution.

Exactly. Some atheists seem to think of atheism as a religion. Look at Richard Dawkins, who is a militant atheist and is the head of an organization that advertises on buses against religion, just like many evangelical groups do.

That doesn't make atheism universally a religion, it just means that some atheists make their own brand of atheism into one.

The mornings are getting cool now...every day begins in the single digits. Fall is on its way.

Some desert...you can grow anything there, it seems.

In fairness to Duracell, Canada has to deal with a lot of variation in temperature, which requires a bit of adjustment throughout the year. Where I live, we usually have at least one day of -40°C in a year, and we often have a few days of about 35°C in the summer.

Except I'm forgetting that Duracell lives in the tropical Okanagan Valley....

That is correct. I can read it with ease now.... :)

Given the size of Canada, I think it more fair to say Alaska is Canada's hat, with the rest of the US being its rather large bottom.