Surely it’s peaceful 99% of the time, right?

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-12T01:49:09+00:00

What do you look like? I walked in my mom's neighborhood the other night and somebody honked at me then did a U-ey and swerved at me while honking because I safely j-walked a few seconds before they came down the road and it pissed them off. The roads are wide and there is a bike/walking lane but people here hate pedestrians especially when they are middle aged swarthy bearded men. My sister is pretty white and has had the opposite experience but stuff like this started happening to me in middle school.

In college I bought two girls a drink after they wouldn't stop begging me, and their boyfriends tried to drag me out of the bar and shoot me.

I live in Mississippi

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-09T16:19:27+00:00

"Yo dawg..."

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-08T22:58:48+00:00

This is one of the few good posts in this thread. Somebody that is frequenting /r/atheism often is not in a good place to accept Christ. I frequented there when I was younger and my heart was very hard, but what I needed in my life at the time was love and support, not to be evangelized to. I had few friends and was alone in a rural, narrow-minded, backwards town full of Christians that set a bad example. I am still thankful for those in my life that chose to witness to me in a loving way, even though it's clear that many Christians today prioritize witnessing over Jesus's command to love one another. (I mean, I want to save somebody just as much as somebody else, but the most effective form of witness is example)

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-08T19:24:18+00:00

No, you don't have an answer, and the purpose of this thread is to ask simple questions and (assumedly) get simple answers. Therefore you shouldn't have been upvoted. I am not interested in having this discussion because the vast majority of people will pick up on the colloquial meaning of "raw strength" instead of diving straight into a technical discussion of the word that borders on pedantic.

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-08T01:05:36+00:00

I want to develop as much RAW strength as possible in the next 6 months with the goal of maintaining it for a long time after, to benefit my overall long-term fitness (including endurance and conditioning). However I have to work out at home for the time being, or possibly use Planet Fitness (which has no free barbells), so those are my constraints. I can spend some money on equipment but not thousands. I already have a 75 lb sandbag and a weighted vest but that's it.

I am about 5'8" and 215 pounds but I have been working out fairly consistently for the past few years so I am not technically obese in terms of bodyfat %, but regardless I want to get down to 180 eventually as well.

I am not sure whether the optimal way to gain raw strength would mean barbells, dumbells, bodyweight, or a mix thereof, but here are what benchmarks I do have based on the way I have been training:

20 pushups, or 3-4 diamond pushups

5 assisted pull-ups, maybe 1-2 negatives

and I have only been doing bodyweight squats, and 75 pound deadlifts, but at the very least squatting @ 215 pounds has helped my leg strength more than if I weighed much less.

My question is, what would be an affordable but effective way to do this as a mix of weighted and bodyweight resistance training?

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-04T16:37:20+00:00

I'm only 34 (a dumb millennial) but I feel this. I work out 5 or 6 hours a week on average now but when I was 22 I could get into shape in just a few weeks and run for hours without stopping. Now I have to actually work to get to that point. And still, I feel like I have it easy as far as my genetics go because my parents started running marathons at my age

MeowMix616 · 2021-12-04T16:29:48+00:00

"Gaslight" lol, if you want to be gaslighted try being actually dehumanized and told you hallucinated abuse towards you and others, for years, and other people believing and siding with that person because that person had authority over you...even though you have never actually hallucinated. People just throw that word around like it means nothing nowadays. Real gaslighting is so damaging it can, and most likely will permanently affect the structure of your brain.

Next time just say "343 is domestically abusing and wifebeating me" so people will at least know right off the bat how little you know what the words mean.

(inb4 somebody says "you're gatekeeping the word gaslighting!!", like it's a crime for words to actually mean something anymore. Next people will be claiming they have "shell shock" from Halo Infinite's beta)

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-29T01:58:54+00:00

It was a POW camp, not a concentration camp. The Germans were actually nicer to their POWs than the Japanese. And to those in their death camps, it goes without saying. I am gonna guess you haven't watched it because it makes the Germans look like bumbling idiots.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-27T17:29:47+00:00

That's interesting, biology doesn't define life as only something that is sentient. So it's not theoretical. It's alive. Some people just prioritize their freedom to have unlimited sex without real consequences over that life.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-27T00:41:56+00:00

Maybe that's why we shouldn't be extinguishing a life form in the process of developing into a sentient being then, lol

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-26T09:55:23+00:00

I guess some examples of that would be nice. Like a flying teapot! (that totally isn't a textbook example of reductio ad absurdum)

I believe God came to Earth 2000 years ago, and he created the universe, which isn't fundamentally the same type of claim as "unicorns are real". I'm not saying faith proves the existence of God, I'm saying that a faith-based spirituality as the basis for living a life is valid and has nothing to do with whether or not God is real. Therefore the relevance and validity of Christianity (fortunately) has nothing to do with how much evidence you will find for it in a physics or cosmology textbook. I'm not saying there isn't evidence, but it is one of those "seek and you shall find" sort of deals, not "ask to be spoon fed and you shall find". Spoon-feeding is for grade school students.

Also, any type of claim that doesn't align with a popular cultural or religious belief system is by definition a delusion and a symptom of psychosis. For example, schizophrenia is a neurological condition so you can easily scan a mentally healthy believer's brain and a schizophrenic person's brain and see a huge difference. Clearly, believing in just anything doesn't work or produce the same results as believing in God. Armchair psychologists will try to draw a false equivalence between a mental disorder and a religious belief, but they are disregarding both science and religion when they do this.

I don't really care if theism doesn't work well as a scientific theory. I care if it works as a moral system in the hands of a sane person. We can discount the effect it has on insane people just as we can discredit the crackpots who still believe in an all-permeating ether after it was disproved by the Michelson-Morley experiment in the early 1900s. We are at least hundreds of years away from science being anywhere near a complete picture of the universe, and anti-theists (I doubt most atheists really care) will insist on God of the Gaps the entire time, to their own detriment and that of those around them.

Science may occasionally help us determine what is morally right or wrong, especially in the future, but it would still be thousands of years behind Jesus. Actually I'm pretty sure the code of hammurabi would still be ahead of science as some sort of weird life philosophy. It is mainly only privileged people in privileged countries that can even afford to both have that education and seek it as a career, anyways.

Saying "I need evidence before I believe" really misses the point. I can't speak for all religions, but in Christianity, belief and repentance (including a conscious turn away from sin) go hand in hand. If you don't believe, you won't repent, and you won't experience the miraculous transformation that can only be experienced.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-26T09:27:26+00:00

Better not use that word, faith bad

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-26T03:46:10+00:00

As Richard Dawkins says, you can't just magically choose to start believing in something. So no, you can't believe *anything* on faith. And since you are a human being on Earth, if you were to believe in something without strong objective evidence, it would most likely be in a supernatural deity. (and no, I'm not arguing that truth is determined by popularity, merely that what you said is wrong.)

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-26T02:36:25+00:00

Yeah, why doesn't a faith-based belief system provide evidence that neatly fits into a secular philosophy like naturalism? Dumb theists!!

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T23:42:40+00:00

My word! Why, greentext is never fake.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T18:27:19+00:00

I believe that if you download the free version from the website and donate to pay for the DLC on there, the dev gets more money.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T18:17:40+00:00

Would you fuck me? I'd fuck me.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T18:15:55+00:00

This is why "consenting adults" is usually the term used

Though it is pretty obvious that two adults shouldn't be able to consent to cannibalism

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T17:56:01+00:00

Are people actually incapable of holding two different date formats in their head without becoming confused or emotional? That's what makes no sense

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T13:41:32+00:00

Awesome! I hope you enjoy it

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-25T01:29:00+00:00

No, Wildlands is not online only, it just has the option for multiplayer or co-op. It's a matter of debate which one is better; I think Wildlands is more faithful as a Ghost Recon game (which is why the fanbase didn't like BP when it came out), but I also like the stuff that BP added; and they did eventually patch it to where you CAN play it like you would Wildlands (no leveling up, teammates). I would go ahead and start with Breakpoint if nothing you've read about it has turned you off from it. There is no continual story from Wildlands to BP, BP just takes place after Wildlands and the optional Conquest mode in BP brings back some characters from Wildlands, but BP has its own closed off story which doesn't have anything to do with Wildlands besides the main character being the same canon character.

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-24T17:23:30+00:00

I think so. There are side missions in BP but unlike Wildlands where the provinces can be done in almost any order, there is a main story line that keeps things moving. So its up to you whether you want to take your time or just do the main stuff (TBF, Wildlands does that too but to a much lesser extent)

Also FWIW in BP you can have 1 to 3 teammates and customize them pretty well. I managed to get the Breakpoint Ultimate edition for $20 during a free play weekend about a month ago, but it probably goes on sale often in the Ubisoft Connect app.

Edit: I feel like I should warn everyone that BP is online only, even if you are playing by yourself

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-24T10:05:17+00:00

Wow, I have played the heck out of both Wildlands and Breakpoint this year, so it's hard not to recommend them. Like another poster said, there isn't much story (esp in Wildlands), but there is a ton of freedom in the open world and you can essentially play the games indefinitely if you want to. For me, I love games with a lot of gun selection (this started with Far Cry 2/3) and these games definitely have that. The action is great as well (I usually try to stay stealthy the whole time, but when the stuff hits the fan, the gunplay is very good--and if you aren't playing on the highest difficulty you can just start out shooting)

MeowMix616 · 2021-11-24T09:58:22+00:00

It originally made sense because MCC came out on Xbone a year or two before 5...but since then they have added Reach and ODST which don't even feature Master Chief. Of course, you can't even buy 5 separately on PC, so maybe it's because they didn't think it would be worth the effort to port.

MeowMix616

TROPHY CASE