logo Sign In

Starboy

User Group
Members
Join date
31-Aug-2004
Last activity
4-Dec-2019
Posts
421

Post History

Post
#80152
Topic
Riddles
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/80152/action/topic#80152
Time
Well, either a cow or pig would work, I guess. Cow's don't smell so hot, but in death we get burgers and steak. Pigs smell like a cow plus mud minus the sweat, and in death they smell like sausage and bacon and ham. And pork. Gotta love the pig.

I guess a pig smells better than a cow in death, so I'll go with pig.
Post
#80151
Topic
Myths
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/80151/action/topic#80151
Time
The one I'm talking about was published in National Geographic about 10 years ago. It was a dinosaur skeleton with a bird's tail glued on. Nat Geo retracted everything later. edit: do a quick search for Archaeoraptor. You'll see the fervor and then retraction by Nat Geo.

I'll admit I'm not an expert on the subject, so please do keep me accountable. I'm relating information from sources who know more than I do, who I do trust. While I know about the archeopteryx, I don't know about the others. I know they couldn't fly. I believe they don't constitute a link between the two species.

If I got the details wrong, forgive me. The point is, evolution states that everything has evolved from something else. With the plethora of species today and all of the fossil record that has been uncovered, not a single transition of one species to another can be documented. That silence speaks pretty loudly.

Add to that the nature of just the human body. We have something like 3,000 enzymes, all essential to survival. Did we evolve a new enzyme and keep it around for a couple thousand years and then develop the need for it? Or did we develop the need for the enzyme and fortunately evolve the enzyme in the same body at the same time? The latter scenario doesn't work. For the former scenario, the human body would have to be full of useless enzymes right now. Med students correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been told that we have no superfluity of useless enzymes.
Post
#80096
Topic
Myths
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/80096/action/topic#80096
Time
Here's one that's on my mind recently because Time magazine is pissing me off.

Darwin, in his "origin of the species", stated his theory of evolution. As for macro-evolution, he pretty much disproved it in his book. His reasoning is that if species evolved from other species by a series of mutations, there should be species halfway between other species everywhere. They should exist in the world today, but even if not, the fossil record should be FULL of these "transitional species."

In truth, there isn't a single one, anywhere in existence or in the fossil record. The closest they got was a half dinosaur/half bird that turned out to be the product of two skeletons and some glue. Now Time is justifying it by saying that dinosaurs had feathers and slept in the same position as birds, which is terribly interesting but doesn't solve the problem of transitional species. Time states it as fact.

So, the conspiracy, or lie, is that not only does scientific evidence not support evolution, it actually points toward disproving the theory. Meanwhile it is being taught as a law around the world.

I think the motivation is that it gives a scientific basis for discrediting creationism.
Post
#80094
Topic
Beautiful Women
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/80094/action/topic#80094
Time
We always say, "there is no gatekeeper." Also known as the gatekeeper phenomenon. That is to say, anything that gets mentioned can be (or for some people, must be) visualized. Sometimes you just don't get the picture, but that's random luck, because there is no gatekeeper on the imagination.

After explaining the gatekeeper phenomenon, we usually drive our point home by saying:

Your mother in leather.
Post
#80064
Topic
Myths
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/80064/action/topic#80064
Time
Yeah, that's one thing I only heard about recently, but was surprised. I don't know what to think about it. I don't want to think they were faked, and in general I don't, but I just don't know what to think about it.

And as a pet peeve of mine, the word Myth is tragically misused these days. It is supposed to stand for a story or account where the facts are false but they point to an even greater truth. A myth is the only way to convey truths in their pure form that don't exist perfectly in the world. For instance, the myth of Perseus never happened, and maybe there was never a Perseus at all. But the story illustrates things like courage better than any real story could.

These days myth is often used to mean "falsehood" or "lie", which is a shame because a) we already have those words, we don't need another, and b) when people encounter a real "myth", they approach it differently because of the word's new connotation.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand; I don't know of any good conspiracies. Milli Vanilli was lip-synching.
Post
#79940
Topic
Happy Thanksgiving!!!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/79940/action/topic#79940
Time
Was that just a Friday morning deal? Dang. I checked and bestbuy.com has it for 80 now. I would have loved that deal.

I was actually there, I just didn't browse the whole store or the whole mailed advertisement. That's what I get for not doing my research.

Not to say I'm mad. I bough two spider-man 2's for 20 and sold one back on ebay for 30. Little arbitrage...
Post
#79884
Topic
Riddles
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/79884/action/topic#79884
Time
Hey, anyone got any good riddles out there?

Rules: if you've answered it or heard it in the past, you can say so but don't answer. If no one answers, the asker can either open it up to anyone or give clues. Whoever gets it can ask another one or open it up for whoever asks one first.
Post
#78081
Topic
Hypocrisy of us at OT fans wanting preservations - but also editing the PT
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/78081/action/topic#78081
Time
Yeah, everyone loves that one

But the idea a lot of people have that it's wrong to change the OT. Then we don't mind changes to the PT. Is there an objective distinction, or is it just because we like one and not the other?

If you don't think it's wrong or stupid to mess with the OT, you just want all copies available, then there's no opening hypocrisy. But many people think it's stupid to mess with them. So what's the distinction?

If it's just because we like one and not the other, then I for one need to shut up about some things

And I'm not attacking the site or anything. You all know I live here during the week. I'm just posing a question for us and myself to mull over. Not about our goals or community, but about how to approach certain things.
Post
#78070
Topic
Hypocrisy of us at OT fans wanting preservations - but also editing the PT
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/78070/action/topic#78070
Time

Is there anything hypocritical about those of us on this site? We denounce Lucas for making changes to the OT, but (most of us) champion people like MagnoliaFan who make changes we see as beneficial to the PT.

There are a couple of possible distinctions.

  1. the OT is on most “best films of all time” lists. To change that is foolish because it is a part of history and it is quality. The PT is not nearly as popular so there is nothing “hallowed” about the movies.
  2. The original PT is available so with the changes everyone is free to choose; we’re just championing the principle of availability of everything. When we get to what we like and don’t like, it’s no longer principle, so it’s just opinion that leads us to praise or denounce those things.

Or are we just saying “it’s cool if we like it, but if we don’t then it should be changed.”

?