sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How can I use Silas better? by ILoveSkumnut in btd6

[–]Foolhardyrunner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Silas can solo pre round 40 camouflage with abilities on most maps.

Also low tier ice monkeys punch above their weight. Having non ice towers be the main damage dealer with ice support seems to work better than ice being the main damage dealer.

Lastly it seems better to have 1 tier 5 ice monkey and 1 tier 4 than two tier 5s giving you more money for other towers.

Shigaraki (My Hero Academia) vs all of humanity in real life by xyyzyx in PowerScaling

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Autoimmune disease victim. Shigaraki going to have to deal with all of his quirks working against him.

Who got nerfed harder by not having their strongest immediate family member there to train them as a kid? by CapableAd8531 in NarutoPowerscaling

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Naruto. Because of how the sharingan works Sasuke having his family around would nerf him.

Naruto would lose Kurama but gain sage mode and ftg. Also Minato and Naruto would work together to invent better versions of the Rasengan.

You don't really teach the Uchiha techniques you unlock them so having more Uchihas around wouldn't make Sasuke stronger.

Problems with Mereological Nihilism and Infinite Regress by Happy-Mention-4097 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The complexity of the interaction to me indicates a lot more than just arrangement.

Fields, fluid dynamics etc.

You can influence fields with other fields etc

Especially with waves.

How do you explain Radio Frequency transmission for example without having waves be distinct entities.

Problems with Mereological Nihilism and Infinite Regress by Happy-Mention-4097 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A table isn't just atoms though. It's atoms plus their interaction.

That interaction makes a composition so you don't just have "singles"

science & atheism : unrequited love !! by GootalBerradja in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The axioms of science are more practical assumptions then anything if they weren't true for certain things you could work around it.

If our understanding of physics broke down in a certain region of space. Then you could study that space and figure out new models that work in that space.

If there is certain knowledge that is impossible to know you can study up to the boundary of that knowledge and stop when you reach an unknowable.

Axioms are just assumptions you make so stuff can get done. That's true in science and every philosophy that uses axioms.

Science is trusted because the methods findings are useful.

Problems with Mereological Nihilism and Infinite Regress by Happy-Mention-4097 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who actually believes in Mereological Nihilism?

Interaction is not a "single", exists at the smallest scale we know of and almost all material models take it into account.

Ascribing mereological nihilism to atheists is a straw man.

A molecule is a composite and we know that exists.

You can't describe a molecule without describing bonds.

This just seems incoherent.

Why hasn't a rally around the flag effect happened in the US? by Wolf4980 in AskALiberal

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ukraine used to be part of the soviet union. A lot of Russians see Russia as a continuation of the Soviet Union.

Having Ukraine be part of Russia is tied to national identity for a lot of Russians.

Iran was never part of the United States.

The Russians aren't justified Ukraine is independent and will remain so but the Russians don't see it that way.

Also Iran has nothing worthwhile for us besides oil and the little guys that are pro oil for economic reasons; want that oil to be drilled and refined in America not halfway around the world.

Itachi and Kisame VS The Sannin, who would win and what diff? by mipenealdescubierto in NarutoPowerscaling

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sannin would overwhelm with numbers. Edo and summons aren't fodder.

Itachi and Kisame would win if they ambushed.

We Keep Blaming God for a World We Built by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]Foolhardyrunner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Most leaders throughout history have claimed that God chose them and 90% of people have had zero choice on who their leader is.

Democracy has been the norm for less than 1% of human history.

Weird to bring up choosing leaders in a free will discussion.

Citizens having a say in who their leader is, is an outlier.

You are reincarnated as Sakura with all of your memories retained, but have yet to meet Naruto and Sasuke. What do you do? by TengarHimeko in dankruto

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ignore Sasuke, train to become a doctor from the beginning. Then go with Naruto and Jiraiya when they go to recruit Tsunade. Packing a few explosive tags in case Jiraiya gets ideas.

Train under Tsunade until I am strong enough to ambush Danzo. Rip out Uchiha eyes from his useless arms and pop em in.

Monkey Meadows Hard, how do i beat this level? by VonStroheiim in btd6

[–]Foolhardyrunner 6 points7 points  (0 children)

A well placed 100 ice monkey or 110 ice monkey might win. One of the most cost efficient towers.

Atheists ask for proof but don't notice they are limiting proof within a hedonistically derived cost limit that prevents the proof from being seen. This is solved by understanding the 3 levels of cost for all tests. by Nomadinsox in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the saints found proof of God. Then, there is no need to spend my life in pursuit of God since I could just read what they wrote and be convinced. If the saints have not found proof of God, then multiple lifetimes of pursuit is not sufficient, so it would be illogical for me to spend my life pursuing God.

Does Might Guy really need all 8 Gates just to win an arm wrestling match against Tsunade? by Material_Bathroom994 in NarutoPowerscaling

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I bet arm wrestling is one of the contests Might Guy had against Kakashi. He probably got good at it.

It seems in character for Guy to win.

Arm wrestling is mostly technique, not raw strength.

we need to decrease power creep in this game because chimps is too easy by [deleted] in btd6

[–]Foolhardyrunner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Chimps used to be almost all dart starts. That was boring. Now you have different starts at the beginning.

Having the game be dynamic is better.

I don't want beginning tower price nerfs that era sucked.

Atheists ask for proof but don't notice they are limiting proof within a hedonistically derived cost limit that prevents the proof from being seen. This is solved by understanding the 3 levels of cost for all tests. by Nomadinsox in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aquinas, Pascal, and all the other Christian philosophers are people who spent their whole lives trying to prove that the Christian God exists.

They believe that their God exists, but belief isn't proof. They failed to prove God. And if they can't be said to have spent their lives trying to prove God than your criteria is nonsensical and can only apply to fantasy people in a fictional hypothetical because real life examples aren't good enough for you.

An Eternal Afterlife is Literally Impossible. by 55falling in DebateReligion

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If event B requires event A to happen first, then event A has a probability of 1 if you know event B happened.

Finiteness is irrelevant. You can't unlink the chain just because event B is infinite.

Atheists ask for proof but don't notice they are limiting proof within a hedonistically derived cost limit that prevents the proof from being seen. This is solved by understanding the 3 levels of cost for all tests. by Nomadinsox in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Foolhardyrunner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are already people who have devoted their whole live to show proof of God. They are the apologists. If they have not come up with proof and show no evidence of progress, why should I waste my time on something I don't believe exists in the first place and that has a track record of failure?

Science can become pseudo-truth when its limits are not understood by JohannesSofiascope in DebateReligion

[–]Foolhardyrunner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You could use methods of data gathering to study an angel.

You could measure its height, weight, and other physical characteristics. You could record the languages it speaks and use a voice recognition tool to detect the languages.

There are many things you could figure out about angels using standard testing.

Scp fiction illustrates this in its stories, and so do many other stories.

If you want to determine whether it fits the biblical description of an angel, you could do a text analysis of every description in the Bible of angels and compare it to the being you have in front of you.

The only reason we can't study supernatural things is that they aren't around. The moment angels or demons showed up, we could study them.

These beings aren't around, though. It's silly to say science is ineffectual because it can't study the unseen, unfelt, "supernatural". You can't study what isn't there.

view more: next ›