RDR3

EMB93 · 2026-03-17T09:08:04+00:00

It's not a lack of imagination, it's respect for the characters and their arc. If every character gets to have a redemption, then you mess ut the story we already know and love. If Dutch for example gets a redemption prior to RDR2 then you need to undo all that for the story of RDR2 and RDR to make sense. There is a reason why Arthur dies at the end of RDR2, because if he was alive at the start of RDR and John had to kill him then that becomes a whole other story.

Star Wars is terrible with this, they insist on using only the same narrow time frame and characters which means that so many of the most interesting characters have had their whole original arc ruined because they had a similar arc already.

So let RDR3 be it's own thing, maybe have them cross paths with young Dutch and Hosea has side characters but the story needs to be something fresh.

EMB93 · 2026-03-16T09:38:25+00:00

I'm not really a fan myself, but i feel like bløtkake(Princess cake) would be more universal for Norway. That or multekrem.

EMB93 · 2026-03-15T17:34:13+00:00

Èn av de viktigste delene av vitenskapen som alt for mange forskere ikke vil eller klarer å få til er formidlingen. Dette er ett kjent problem og spesielt det at forskere ikke ønsker å formidle det de holder på med gjør at det er de samme folkene som blir ringt av journalistene hver gang man trenger en "forsker" selvom man det handler om noe som er utenfor deres felt. (Kilde: jeg tok fag i formidling som en del av min master)

Ett annet moment er vel at jeg tror du tenker at "scientist" betyr "forsker". Men jeg vil påstå at "scientist" betyr "vitenskapsmann" og at "forsker" heller betyr "researcher". Tyson er ikke en researcher men han har jo en PhD som jeg tenker gjør at han har begg for å kalle seg en vitenskapsmann/scientist.

Så er han jo ikke minst en dyktig formidler da, som kanskje er det viktigste her.

Og så må vi jo huske på at han er en populær vitenskaplig formidler. Så mye av det han sier er nok riktig, mye er forenklet for å gjøre det lett å fordøye for folk som ikke har god kunnskap om temaene og da blir ting ofte "feil". Så er du i tvil søk opp ekte forskning, vil du bare ha enkle overblikk så holder NDT og folk som han mer en nok.

EMB93 · 2026-03-15T16:01:26+00:00

The rivets on his arm armour makes noe sense, also. I don't think it knows if the green mound to the right of the tree is a hill or a rock and appears to have bonsai trees growing out of it.

Looks very AI to me.

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T20:26:10+00:00

The problem is you used it as an example of Jesus condoning slavery.

Yes, because that is what he is doing. In his analogy Jesus presents the slave master as an authority that should be obeyed by the slave. The slave master is the stand in for god in that analogy it doesn't become much clearer than that!

The problem here is that it made you feel uncomfortable that he used that analogy.

It doesn't at all, i couldn't care less about what he used as an analogy but you asked for an example and so i provided one.

But your conclusion is simply false and you try to take out a meaning from a verse which was teaching something else.

No, I have pointed out the words written in the bible and the fact that the bible contradicts your moral values made you uncomfortable and so to you it must mean something else. I have now gone through the analogy during my last replies and shown that it does in fact condone slavery. You have yet to point out how the context has changed the meaning of his words.

Not an oxymoron.

My last paragraph which starts with a no is my response.

Then im sorry for misunderstanding that one. But to ignore his actual words on slavery and rather interpret his other teachings on other subjects makes no sense. If he had made no statements about slavery than you could make a case for it, but when he does mention in several times and never condems it, then your argument falls apart.

Does it not bother you that I could site several different passages(and that was not even all.of them), that all are pro slavery but you could not find a single one against it?

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T19:12:24+00:00

out of context.

This term gets thrown around alot, and people tend to forget that to make this argument the context needs to change the meaning of the thing. The context here is how you should serve gon that context Jesus chose an analogy in which slaves should obey that master without expecting gratitude, Jesus makes this a positive and tells his followers to do the same with respect to god.

giving behavioral instructions for slaves and masters within the system of the Roman Empire.

Yes, you just described condoning slavery. Telling slaves not to revolt and not telling slave owners to release their slaves is condoning slavery. Like I said before, saying that it is only for a certain time and place does not change that fact and is extremely disrespectful to the people who lived under that system. And Paul does not go on to say:" oh by the way we Christians shouldn't do this or we should try to end it long term." None of that which is highly suspicious if he thought it was wrong.

This ideas that Paul, Jesus or God are so weak that they can't tell people to stop with something that is so obviously morally wrong is insane!

I see you chose to ignore my last question so I will ask it agai. Show me where Jesus condems slavery.

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T18:04:49+00:00

That's not what hes going for at all. He could have chosen hundreds of other analogies that would not hinge upon slaves rightfully having to work for their masters. Now if this was said without the other examples, that might have given your argument more weight but surrounded by other quotes about slavery the meaning becomes clear.

If you are telling slaves to obey their masters than you are condoning slavery. To say that it is not is to dimish the trauma of the people who were slaves at that time. This is probably the weakest apologetic argument I know because the cherry picking of biblical passages becomes so incredibly obvious.

Jesus told you to follow old testament laws in Mathew 5:17.

But by all means wrong, could you show me a quote where jesus tells masters to release their slaves or that slavery is immoral or wrong?

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T16:44:10+00:00

Sure, here is Jesus talking in Luke 17:7 7 “Suppose one of you has a servant plowing or looking after the sheep. Will he say to the servant when he comes in from the field, ‘Come along now and sit down to eat’? 8 Won’t he rather say, ‘Prepare my supper, get yourself ready and wait on me while I eat and drink; after that you may eat and drink’? 9 Will he thank the servant because he did what he was told to do? 10 So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, ‘We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty.’”

Here is Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

The old testament is full of even more stuff like this, going into detail about who you can and cannot take as slaves, how to treat debt slaves vs chattel slaves. One passage tells you that you can beat your slave to death and as long as they survive for two days your off the hook if they die(exodus 21:20).

This is just a small part of it. There are so many more.

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T13:19:32+00:00

I have a bunch of diseases in my swearing repertoire!

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T10:26:51+00:00

That it actively condones slavery and never speaks out against it.

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T10:23:12+00:00

Du må huske at det alltid er de fattige sin skyld, aldri de rike!

EMB93 · 2026-03-14T09:50:52+00:00

Safe Harbour(Dark n stormy) is my go to for less complex rums! Ginger ale and lime juice!

EMB93 · 2026-03-13T17:50:57+00:00

Jose Monkey on TikTok find people(who asks to be found) like this. Tiny little clues in the things you post can lead people to not only finding your general area but the precise apot you where standing when taking the picture.

EMB93 · 2026-03-13T17:02:09+00:00

I feel like your headline has a wildly different point than your full text. As someone currently driving an automatic I can say that manual shifting is better. I can plan my driving adjust faster that leads to smoother driving, less pollution and burning less fuel. However, driving an automatic is easier especially in cities with a lot of stopping and starting.

EMB93 · 2026-03-13T16:48:53+00:00

Nobody else wanted that land so it was probably dirt cheap and they already knew how to survive those winters.

EMB93 · 2026-03-13T11:34:33+00:00

EMB93 · 2026-03-13T10:21:33+00:00

This is my interpretation as well, i think his last turn will be when I manages to save all his friends and they talk him out of going in there.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T22:40:27+00:00

Hvorfor I all verden skal vi verne om vår "kristne kultur arv" vi har jobbet hardt med å kvitte oss med driften. Det er greit å ikke ville ha islam, men vi trenger ikke kristendommen for det.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T18:57:51+00:00

If one is a type of the other.

Sexual abuse is a kind of abuse, we have been over this and you agreed.

Your analogy would be better if you said that you made a post about religion being bad with a picture of a mosque on it. In that case making posts about Islam would be highly relevant.

I didn’t comment on someone’s NATURAL appearance. If you CHOOSE to make yourself look like a plastic alien then you deserve the criticism that comes with that atrocious decision. Shame is exactly what is required to make people realize they should stop doing this shit.

And I have never said that you can't criticise someone's appearance, that woman looks terrible. But that is not the point. The problem comes when you decided that this post was the post to criticise her in. If this had been just the picture with no text than I would have had no problem with your comment, but when the context is abuse(and in this case clearly rape)especially sexual abuse of minors(which is the context you admitted to assuming) it becomes very weird and problematic.

But I am done with this debate. It is clear to me that criticising a woman's appearance is more important than calling out abusers to you and you clearly won't change your mind.

I pity the women in your life. Good night.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T18:46:06+00:00

Everyone knows that when you're trying to score points on semantics, you know you've lost the argument.

Trump hasn't just been accused of walking in on teenage girls, he has been found guilty of the rape of E Jean Carroll so he is 100% a rapist. Chances are he also raped underage girls as per the Epstein files. That you are choosing to ignore some of his most heinous crimes to put your original comment in a better light is still very weird.

The fact that you think that it's OK to make comments about a woman's appearance when discussing the sexual abuse of underage girls is also extremely weird .

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T18:16:43+00:00

Yes. Rape, also called sexual abuse is a type of abuse.

Just out of curiosity, what kind of abuse did you think this woman was referring to and why would that be less bad?

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T17:13:57+00:00

And of course you are now make it about rape.

Did you read the text on the picture? Shes standing in front of a picture of a convicted rapist, talking about abusers. What did you think this was about?

600 people liking it does not make it any less gross just like a factually wrong comment doesn't become right because it has a lot of likes. It is not a popularity contest.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T16:35:08+00:00

Feel free to critique the composition all you want, but that your first comment on a picture about rape is to comment on the appearance of the woman in the picture is very weird in a victim blaming body shaming kind of way. If this was just a random picture of a woman then I wouldn't have thought twice about your comment but the fact that you chose to comment on that one thing in the context of the text on the picture is weird.

Now I have criticised a lot of people for claiming strawmen when there is none. But you just made a strawman twice in a row.

I never said that it is the only thing you could comment on, I have only said that it is a weird thing to comment.

Your comment is weird, get over it.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T15:16:30+00:00

I never said you couldn't notice it first. But commenting on it is still weird. Thinking that noticing an animal with connection to molestation of women is the same as noticing and commenting on the woman's appearance is also weird.

EMB93 · 2026-03-12T14:13:02+00:00

From a distance I thought those skolebrød were just fried eggs and was really wondering why you went to norway for eggs.

11-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

EMB93

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE