I'll second, third......20th that. Best platformer I've played in a while. The game was original with truly interesting levels designs, creative ideas, and polished gameplay. Just all around well done.psychonauts
iwilson1296
elemental_drago's forum posts
[QUOTE="elemental_drago"]
Let's just start here and say that no, I did not read all 15 pages of arguements (so if i repeat someone else's statement I apologize). But, to answer the first question, well, simply put yes, it should be taught. To only teach one idea and skip others is misleading. It doesn't do justice to the human intellect.
To be more complicated, well, I feel that the theory of evolution (not to be confused with evolution in general), is something of a sore subject in general. Schools only teach the one idea, a theory (it's in the title for gods sake!) and are too scared to tough on the other. Children should be exposed to both and allowed to make their own choice. To expose them to one, under the title of science ( a moniker that carries the ideal of pure fact) and then separate the other idea into some other category subliminally defines one over the other, let alone when it is skipped over entirely. This doesn't seem to allow them (the children of today) to make their own educated choice. It should be taught that "here's the theory of evolution......and now here's the theory of creationism". Taught with fair time spent to both, and personal feelings set aside, children (future "people" of the world) can make their own decision which jives with them better. It's really only fair.
One can argue which one os fact, but, truly neither is. Neither is perfect, and neither is proven. Against the evolution side, we have the missing link. Basically, we evolved many times into thing s we have found, and then into something no one can find or prove the existence of, then into us. That middle part kind of screws it up. We haven't really proven (truly) anything. We're missing an entire step!
On the creationism side, well, we were humans all this time......even though we have other beings that show we are the products of many generations of evolution (evolution being something we've measured and watched over many years. It's a proven fact that thing s evolve. It's why we have to take medications even after we feel as though the virus is gone. Said virus will mutate and evolve to become immune to the meds if we don't).
Both sides have good arguments. The children of today need to be aware of both, period. And they need to be made aware of these in a neutral, or at least equal scenario. That way they can make their own, unbiased, decision.
GabuEx
First, please don't misuse the word "theory" like that, although you can be forgiven for doing so considering that everyone else under the sun does. A "theory" in science does not refer to just one idea of many. That is a "hypothesis". A "theory" in science has a very specific definition: it is a broad, unifying explanation that accounts for a large number of observations, which makes predictions that are testable, and whose predictions have been tested and have been failed to be falsified. For something in science to become a "theory" it must endure an extremely rigorous process, a veritable trial by fire, and make it out unscathed. A theory is in many ways even greater than a fact, as it ties together and explains many facts all at once.
On the topic of the missing link, there really does not exist a meaningful missing link anymore. I mean no offense, but I don't think people who invoke the so-called "missing link" really even understand what that would be if it were found. The concept of a species is really rather nebulous to begin with, and evolution is a continuous process. There do not exist "transitional" species as people understand the term, because in truth basically every species is a transitional species, in that they are all part of the continuous progression of life.
Furthermore, creationism is not science. It just isn't. Why? Simple: it does not conform to the scientific method. It makes no predictions of any kind, and as such, cannot even theoretically be falsified or investigated. There is quite literally nothing that can be said about creationism. Alternatively, if you take a specific form of creationism, such as the one found in a literal reading of the Bible, then it does make predictions - and they have all been crushed to pieces under the overwhelming weight of contradicting evidence, so, again, adhering to such a broken and discredited idea is still not science.
If it were the case that creationism and evolution were on equal footings, then I would agree with you, that they should be given equal time. But they're not. Evolution has mountains of evidence in its favor and has stood for over a century and a half with scientists beating on it constantly and has only dug in deeper. Conversely, creationism is either fully falsified or unfalsifiable, depending on which version one adheres to. There is no reason to give creationism equal time any more than there is to give geocentrism or flat-earth hypotheses equal time. All of those are in the same boat.
Very, very well put. Quite impressed indeed, to be honest, and honestly, I can't argue (mostly) with what was said, because, well, I actually do lean towards evolution over anything else. Such is my downfall in this arguement. However, I do attend church on sundays, for a religion that considers the old testament as more of a allegory than fact, so here go: My main problem with skipping over religious beliefs, is that, well, I just referred to it as religious beliefs. During my time in school, no one ever covered religion. Leaving a bit of a gap. I still hold to the idea that it should be taught. I still feel as though they are forcing one idea, even though many, many others believe otherwise. It just doesn't seem fair. Shouldn't a good, responsible science class teach conflicting ideas? If for no other reason than to cover the overlaps? Even my own pastor admits to the contradictions in the new testament, and agrees with facts like "if the whole, world was flooded, their would evidence of this". But none the less, some people choose to believe this. People should, period, be given an equal chance, and an equal environment, to make their own choice. Whichever may be right. I've been given a chance to study the bible a bit, and still choose to believe that some parts are wrong (in my own personal opinion. My ex-girlfriend, on the other hand is a different story), and want others to be given the chance. Problem is, that chance never came in school. I was force fed one idea, and that wasn't fair to me. It isn't fair to the children of today either. In other words, what about the scientific theories that disagree with darwins theory of evolution, or the higgs bosom particle, or any others (such as one mathematician who claims many are wrong)? Where do we draw the line? When you teach one and not another, they're giving off the subliminal idea that one idea is correct and the other is wrong. Period. If it wasn't, it would be worth teaching right? All ideas should be given equal time, and the all kids should have an equal chance to choose. That's all I'm saying.Why do people continually bring up the fact that evolution is a theory? Evolution will always be a theory. A scientific theory. There is no possible way it can ever be anything other than that even if it has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. Creationism is not a scientific theory. It is a religious belief. Not a science. Their in lies the issue though. Theory is just that, theory. It may some science to back up the reason for going down that road, but it's still not a fact on its own. I feel this is the main issue here. You teach one in science (a subject based in fact) and then separate another theory from it, and people get confused. The truth is, once again, the theory of evolution is a theory, not a fact. Yet people treat it as though it is, and look down on those who disagree, even though it hasn't been proven. If it jives with you, well, great. That's fine. But other theories, contradictory as they may be, still need to be brought to the for front. It's only fair. Otherwise we're just programming the youth of today to believe only one thing, and not giing them a chance to believe what they want. What makes the most sense to them, given a fair amount of information on both (or more) sides. It hardly seems fair.[QUOTE="elemental_drago"]
Let's just start here and say that no, I did not read all 15 pages of arguements (so if i repeat someone else's statement I apologize). But, to answer the first question, well, simply put yes, it should be taught. To only teach one idea and skip others is misleading. It doesn't do justice to the human intellect.
To be more complicated, well, I feel that the theory of evolution (not to be confused with evolution in general), is something of a sore subject in general. Schools only teach the one idea, a theory (it's in the title for gods sake!) and are too scared to tough on the other. Children should be exposed to both and allowed to make their own choice. To expose them to one, under the title of science ( a moniker that carries the ideal of pure fact) and then separate the other idea into some other category subliminally defines one over the other, let alone when it is skipped over entirely. This doesn't seem to allow them (the children of today) to make their own educated choice. It should be taught that "here's the theory of evolution......and now here's the theory of creationism". Taught with fair time spent to both, and personal feelings set aside, children (future "people" of the world) can make their own decision which jives with them better. It's really only fair.
One can argue which one os fact, but, truly neither is. Neither is perfect, and neither is proven. Against the evolution side, we have the missing link. Basically, we evolved many times into thing s we have found, and then into something no one can find or prove the existence of, then into us. That middle part kind of screws it up. We haven't really proven (truly) anything. We're missing an entire step!
On the creationism side, well, we were humans all this time......even though we have other beings that show we are the products of many generations of evolution (evolution being something we've measured and watched over many years. It's a proven fact that thing s evolve. It's why we have to take medications even after we feel as though the virus is gone. Said virus will mutate and evolve to become immune to the meds if we don't).
Both sides have good arguments. The children of today need to be aware of both, period. And they need to be made aware of these in a neutral, or at least equal scenario. That way they can make their own, unbiased, decision.
BumFluff122
Let's just start here and say that no, I did not read all 15 pages of arguements (so if i repeat someone else's statement I apologize). But, to answer the first question, well, simply put yes, it should be taught. To only teach one idea and skip others is misleading. It doesn't do justice to the human intellect.
To be more complicated, well, I feel that the theory of evolution (not to be confused with evolution in general), is something of a sore subject in general. Schools only teach the one idea, a theory (it's in the title for gods sake!) and are too scared to tough on the other. Children should be exposed to both and allowed to make their own choice. To expose them to one, under the title of science ( a moniker that carries the ideal of pure fact) and then separate the other idea into some other category subliminally defines one over the other, let alone when it is skipped over entirely. This doesn't seem to allow them (the children of today) to make their own educated choice. It should be taught that "here's the theory of evolution......and now here's the theory of creationism". Taught with fair time spent to both, and personal feelings set aside, children (future "people" of the world) can make their own decision which jives with them better. It's really only fair.
One can argue which one os fact, but, truly neither is. Neither is perfect, and neither is proven. Against the evolution side, we have the missing link. Basically, we evolved many times into thing s we have found, and then into something no one can find or prove the existence of, then into us. That middle part kind of screws it up. We haven't really proven (truly) anything. We're missing an entire step!
On the creationism side, well, we were humans all this time......even though we have other beings that show we are the products of many generations of evolution (evolution being something we've measured and watched over many years. It's a proven fact that thing s evolve. It's why we have to take medications even after we feel as though the virus is gone. Said virus will mutate and evolve to become immune to the meds if we don't).
Both sides have good arguments. The children of today need to be aware of both, period. And they need to be made aware of these in a neutral, or at least equal scenario. That way they can make their own, unbiased, decision.
I thought they bought the franchise back when Halo(1) was supposed to be a Mac release (totally serious here). My understanding was they bought it, then forced them to make it for the XBOX(1) to push the systems. In other words, I don't see this franchise ever coming to PS3, although I have heard they are starting a new IP that will go multiplatform.not gonna happen as long as ms is making consoles. ms own the halo franchise now! bungie sold halo to ms in order for bungie to go multiplatform.
atc-fanatic
[QUOTE="-Hoax-"]Arctic 5 Thermal Compound, is supposed to be good.JohnF111Tuniq TX1 is supposed to be the best, beats Arctic 5 in a load of tests. I've always been a fan of arctic 5 but, if tests prove otherwise, can't argue with that. As for stores, well, CompUSA used to sell these things, but not sure if they went completely belly up, or just where I live. Personally, though, I prefer NewEgg anyways. Always used them even when CompUSA was around. TigerDirect is pretty good too. I'd recommend using them in general unless time is of the issue.
[QUOTE="Slashkice"]The Summer Sale posted above already ended. You can check the 'Special Offers' tab for deals, but as for the next sale, I don't believe anything has been announced.
Check the Playstation Blog, or watch Pulse for updates.
dk00111
that sale is overevilmaster2424Oh, sorry. It's been a while since I've been on. :? My guess is that there will be a Fall Sale. Followed by a winter sale. Etc, etc, etc. What will be on there is a best guess scenario, but I'm sure they will happen. It's kind og like used cars, one sale ends and the next follows right behind it. Feels like there is always some chunk of games on sale for some hackneyed reason ;)
Not liking what it has to offer right now, so I'll wait.playstation2004That's the same boat I'm in. Love the idea (can't argue with price vs value), but Im waiting to see how it pans out and see if there is more in long run that consistently interests me, personally, in the offers section. High hopes, indeed, for this on my end, but not enough just yet to snag my dollar.
well i can tell you i have had all 3 systems and each has its own style and character, but the ps3 is my favorite. you can expect great exclusives like uncharted 2, heavy rain, god of war 3, gran turismo 5 in a few monthsYankeesNYC4lifesame here. I have truly enjoed my time with my PS3 the most. It's proven reliable with great titles, and the blueray funtcaionality has been great. The one and only thing I wish it had more of was local (varied/easy to get into) multiplayer. But, I don't buy games for my friends, so screw them ;)
edit:and the blueray *functionality (i don't even know how that made it past my spellchecker!)
Log in to comment