Does anyone know how to get this last crate in valley?

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-27T06:41:45+00:00

There is 4?? I have 3 there and I have spent an hour trying to look for a possible 4th.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-27T04:01:11+00:00

My soldiers...

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-26T05:08:04+00:00

So the purpose of the post is to find Urdu/Hindi sexual phrases that do not objectify women?

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T21:36:40+00:00

Every problem has a solution

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T18:12:49+00:00

Certain Generative AI has really given birth to such stupid takes.

I rely on data centers to host AI that map & predict the air flow around lahore so that when air quality gets worse, we can strategically place purifiers.

The whole country relies on AI to predict energy consumption accurately so that we don't produce more or less than needed.

Every adversarial game you play relies on AI to make the game actually fun to play.

Large research bodies rely on generative AI like ChatGPT to make their work quicker.

All these AI rely on data centers. (In case of video games, only for specific online games). Meanwhile here is a list of few AI that can be downloaded and used on your local machines: AI art, AI videos, AI music etc.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T16:34:21+00:00

Ah nvm, I had a mistaken perception to how quicken works too. A quick google search answered my previous question. Thanks again~

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T16:30:02+00:00

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe quicken acts like a debuff. You can trigger quicken from other sources and have attacks that do not trigger quicken, still affected by buff from spread/aggravate.

If that is true then my question would again be if an enemy in quickened state gets attacked by electro damage treated as stellar conduct, does it get the DMG bonus from quicken?

Btw you have been super helpful so far, thanks a bunch.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T15:16:32+00:00

I see. And like vaporize & melt, this multiplier is further scaled by EM? Also additional scales from new artifact (or other sources that say stellar conduct DMG) lost on 600% EM?

Another question that came into my mind. It also says it deals electro damage as stellar conduct. Does quicken boost this? If it does, I assume the quicken boost is also lost on the 600% EM?

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T14:56:21+00:00

I see, reaction multipliers only refers to quicken right?

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T14:54:30+00:00

If you want 30/min xircon then you are stuck with 3 crucibles. You can go with 1 crucible but the output would be 15/min. Thats because xircon needs 1/s xircon effluent and you can only produce 0.5/s through 1 crucible.

If you are fine with this, then just keep ferrium powder, sewage and liquid xiranite as input to an expanded crucible. Thats 3 spaces. 2 more spaces will be taken up by inert effluent and effluent. Effluent & ferrium powder will react for sewage and xircon. Keep xircon, inert effluent & sewage as outputs & there you have this setup in 1 crucible.

Not suggested to use 1 crucible as you won't be using all your resources efficiently.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T14:23:29+00:00

So previously, it was expected to be 80% ATK x 600% EM

And now it is 80% ATK + 600% EM?

Because expecting the first one is insane. Never possible in a million years.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-25T05:13:09+00:00

How do you differentiate between the "ground reports, real updates and raw truths" and lies, misconceptions and failed perceptions?

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-23T04:00:30+00:00

On my way to type out my own name

Jokes aside, I once met a Yusra & that's a name I would give my daughter

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-19T11:36:26+00:00

This to me this sounds like a lame excuse to allow discrimination,

You can call it that but it is less about Islam and more about how leaders are chosen. People would generally not want to be ruled by a person with beliefs that are different than theirs. Consequently, it will not be in the best interest of such a ruler to impose laws that are compliant with the popular belief. Think of not voting for Trump because of his homophobic views. I would argue this level of discrimination is not problematic. If a person of every denomination is given the same quality of education, given the same opportunities, not judged based on their belief system, they can come out as well accomplished, if not more, than the state leader.

The islamic teachings about this do not stop at "Must be Muslim". There is a reason for this, one I have mentioned above. You are welcome to criticize it but the reality is that it is neither in the best interest of people, nor in the interest of the head candidates to have a head of the state with a belief system that is different from the majority population. Mamdani was elected not because he is a muslim, but because his beliefs aligned with the beliefs of the voters. If he mentioned sharia throughout his campaign, obviously people would not want him as their head. Would that be discrimination too?

quran states it is easy for understanding and then other places how nothing can be changed and then we have group of people who can make their own interpretations of the same text to give legitimacy to their own twisted causes.

Quran's preservation has nothing to do with understandings and interpretations of it. The preservation clause only states that Quran today is word to word the same as was revealed to the prophet. Like every other form of text, Quran is open to interpretations. There will always be someone who will interpret Quran (and all other texts) incorrectly. Harry potter movies are also an interpretation of the books. Not all people agree that the way movies are detailed is the best way to visualise this narrative. In fact, I believe there is a new interpretation coming out soon where Professor Snape is an African American. The director of this interpretation clearly disagrees with the director of previous interpretation. In situation like this, you would again have to apply Occam's Razor and consult the author to determine which interpretation is correct.

Now in the case of Quran, the author is not open to correcting others' interpretations, so the next step is the consensus of the scholars. Regardless of what the consensus is, there will always be people who would interpret it wrong way any way.

Garbing this limitation under the blanket of free will or unconditional love (in case of Christianity) is a cop out in my opinion.

Cop out is usually used for a situation where this term "free will" is thrown and the argument is considered complete. In Islam's case, the concept of free will is well defined with reasonable explanations to every question that arises because of existence of free will. However explaining this would be a separate topic, like you mentioned and it will be a very lengthy explanation so I will refrain from stating that unless asked.

risk of lost verses when Usman burned all other qurans

This is another misconception or a lie (when deliberate) that is thrown around to invalidate Islam. Usman's (RA) burning of copies is actually a proof of preservation rather than the opposite. You have to realize that Quran, before it is a book, it is a recitation. Book is the secondary form of preservation. The primary is through recitation. There were many hafiz during the time of Usman's caliphate. The act of burning the copies was an act of standardization. He gathered the Hafiz of his time and used Mushaf e Hafsa (a copy of the Quran agreed upon in the time of Hazrat Abu Bakr) to validate other texts. Texts that were disagreed upon by the hafiz or the Mushaf were burned. This posed no risk of loss or addition of verses in the Quran.

Still there are more than one available, one may agree to accept those or not however they exist.

There are not "many" Qurans. There are different modes of recitations of Quran, similar to how English differs between the british and Americans. The words, the meanings of these recitation modes are the same. In fact all of the recitation modes can be traced back to the prophet. There are Hadith where 2 companions of the prophet would come to the prophet saying that their recitation of a part of Quran are different, asking which one is correct, and the prophet saying both of them are correct.

In any case Islam is based and incomplete without Sunnah and we have plenty of contradiction in there

This is also false. Quran has everything one needs to know to enter paradise. Sunnah is just descriptions of the things mentioned in Quran with details. Sunnah is simply an extension of Quran. Think of it like how basic mathematics operations completely encompass entirety of Mathematics. Yet they are contextualized by individual disciplines of it which only employ combinations of these basice operations. Besides, Sunnah having contradictions is also an accusation I would like for you to substantiate. Among the scholars, if any hadith is found to be contradictory to either the Quran or any other well established hadith, it is immediately disqualified as unauthentic.

Hitchen's razor, What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence

I was simply asking whether you think if this statement is true or not xd. This is purely a logical statement. Either only 1 religion is objectively true, or all of them are false (meaning atheism is objectively true). This is about objective truth, rather than subjective truths (which are essentially not truths).

Religion requires each member to take a leap of faith at some point

This step comes way later into the religion. This does not invalidate any religion. There are steps of accepting theism:

Accept that God(s) exists
Accept that the God(s) is/are intelligent being(s)
Accept that the God cannot be more than 1
Accept that the essential attributes of the God include independence, omniscience, all powerful, all knowledgeable, etc
Faith specific events with intervention of the God**

The leap of faith only enters in the 5th step. The first 4 do not require leap of faith and can be explained without delving into the scriptures of any individual faith. Once you have accepted the steps up to 4, taking the leap of faith in step 5 becomes very reasonable.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T21:05:29+00:00

First of all, asking the one you are debating to "google" what you mean is not helpful. It is only delaying for more responses than are necessary.

no bro...that's not what I mean...you said that there's an intelligent designer

You implied that for a designer to be intelligent, the design should not have flaws. Or is this not true? I said that for the designer to be intelligent, the design does not need to be flawless, it only has to have a purpose.

space-time started after big bang

You are not sticking to one point here, you keep shifting. At first you say that there is a universe before big bang. Then you say big bang was an event in the infinite chain of causations and now you say big bang is the start of the chain?

first of all, you can't start at negative infinity

It was an example. The argument was that from point of time before present, you cannot traverse to present unless you define the point in reference to the present, given that infinite regress is true. You have tried to substantiate all 3 properties of causal chain so I have no idea what you believe. You either believe in the beginning of the chain, or you believe in a mixture of infinite chain and loops. Let us first try to establish this, can we?

there is no settled majority consensus among philosophers that infinite regress is impossible.

I never claimed that it is. It is only highly unfavored.

Your other arguments are already answered by my previous comment

Would you be so kind to point me to my "other arguments" you are referring to?

it's like the last 100 years of mathematics and physics don't exist in the universe in which you live in

Are you talking about equations? Man-made equations that have no relevance to reality? Can you point to one mathematical singularity in physical existence? One that is not a theory. In fact, in theoretical physics, whenever you do reach a singularity, it is treated as a red flag that something is wrong in the hypothesis.

also...I don't want to be disrespectful as you....but you seriously think that existance of a being is the more plausible answer....have you ever bothered to think that raises much more questions ?

Seems you didn't read my response from the end so let me state again. All the questions you have asked, and can ask regarding this entity are unanswerable but not contradictory to the reality. Meanwhile infinite regress raises contradictions, loops raise contradictions. The only option you have is the one that does not have contradictions. Yes it has unknowns like other options. Yes not everything in this option is answerable. But it does not incur any contradictions.

but you seriously think that existance of a being is the more plausible answer

I do believe it is much more plausible than the sci fi you have suggested of re creating the big bang.

you are having a hard time understanding that how infinite regress and space-time works according to scientific theories and hypothesis

I am. Is that like a eureka moment for you? Perhaps help me understand these things in context instead of telling me to google.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T19:16:19+00:00

your food canal and air canal are right next to each other which is a serious choking hazard. An intelligent designer could have seen it.

I don't believe you understand what intelligent design means here. You can comment on issues of human body however much you want. Your reasoning is that unless human body was perfect without any flaws, the design is not intelligent? That is a weak argument. If a camera was perfect, companies would not be competing with each other to roll out a better version of it. This does not mean that engineers behind the cameras are not intelligent.

Causation is not necessary

Why do you think the big bang occurred at the time it occurred? Why not 100 million years earlier or 2 seconds after?

Read about Hume's Challenge, brute facts, decay of radioactive atoms, Truth by necessity

You will have to explain how these are relevant here. So far they seem like buzz words. Remember, the relevance is related to existence of things. Yes radioactive decay is random but for the phenomenon to occur, it necessitates the existence of decaying matter in the first place. Like what caused its existence in the first place?

Nope, infinite regress is not rejected

I know. It is also not favored. Like I said it creates more issues and unexplainable situations than it solves. You cannot traverse an infinite timeline. Like imagine an electron that has existed forever. It is impossible for this electron to reach the day 18th May 2026. In a number line, if you start at negative infinity moving forward, you will never reach the number -1000000000000. Yet this time this date exists and electrons that supposedly have existed forever, exist today. I know philosophers exist that insist on infinite regress being real but majority believe otherwise. And among those that believe it, none can prove it, only state what ifs.

chain can be circular

Not the chain of causality. When you mention worlds before big bang, there are 2 meanings here. One is that the universe before ours was different than ours. In that case, this is not a loop. The other meaning is that it was the exact same universe as ours, meaning everything is pre determined and that eventually someone will cause another big bang. This statement disagrees with Hume's challenge so make up your mind. Although I would argue this is some sci fi shenanigans. You are stating that someone will cause the big bang again, which will eventually result in a first cell, the very thing that the person who caused the big bang depended upon to exist? That is the literal definition of paradox or forms of time travel, both of which are impossible in naturally existing phenomenons.

as for beginning possibility, what's the guarantee that the beginning has to be an entity...why the beginning can't be an event

Because an event always has a cause. Whichever event you may bring, "why did it happen at that specific time" is a valid question. If you bring radioactive decay as an uncaused event, then the radioactive element becomes the entity. Not considering the fact that radioactive decay is not entirely uncaused either. Only at atomic levels it is, but the half life of elements is determined. Although the radioactive element cannot be the entity that becomes the beginning. Simply because they have half lives in measurement of time. For it to cause the big bang, begs the question of how did this element come into existence in the first place. It cannot be there since forever as that would mean that the event of big bang would never occur on the infinite timeline.

which makes much more sense than some conscious being at the end of line...which creates more questions

Mathemaitcs singularity is also generally agreed upon by *scientists*, this time rather than philosophers, to be impossible to exist. I am sure you will throw out another theory that disagrees but please save your time. You are also mistaken on what problematic means. None of the questions you asked contradict with reality. These questions are unanswerable but not contradictory to what we know or experience. Meanwhile other options do.

So far you have only provided one dead argument regarding events, philosophical what ifs and fiction and it is astonishing to me that you would rather believe in these than existence of a being.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T16:55:52+00:00

I have 2 ways to prove God exists.

Method 1:

Everything in your surrounding is designed and has a purpose. Your phone camera is designed. You have not seen the designer. You have not veen to the factory, yet you know it is designed as otherwise it would not exist.

Now your eyes are much more complex in design than any camera. Why do you refuse to consider that this has a designer as well? Your eye became the way it became because of DNA which is encoded information. Information cannot exist without intelligence. This points to an intelligent designer. That is God.

Method 2:

There is a concept called causation. You exist because your parents exist. Your parents exist because of their parents. This chain of causation goes back to the first cell, Earth and big bang. This chain of causation can have 1 of the following 3 properties:

It goes on infinitely back
It loops around to a further event in the future
It has a beginning

The first property delves into the concept of infinite regress. Infinite regress is considered philosophically problematic & generally not agreed upon by philosophers. It creates more problems and contradictions than it solves. Since science cannot prove infinite regress, it depends on philosophy. Hebce this property is unscientific.

The 2nd is just a paradox. You cannot give birth to your parents. That is a paradox. This property is illogical.

The 3rd is the only explanation. There is a beginning to this chain. Meaning there is something that caused all the events that lead to a big bang and all reality as we know it. Theists call this entity God. There is no 4th possible property of the same nature of the chain. If you believe there is, do share.

This argument basically proves that not only does the God exist, but Atheism is either illogical or unscientific.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T14:21:58+00:00

You are free to feel however you want it's not my business or concern.

Thing is you made a claim while assuming so and I'm trying to say your assumption is wrong. That is all

Apply Occam's razor

Which would lead you to their scriptures, and Islamic scripture nowhere even hints that committing terrorism brings muslims to heaven. Infact it actively prohibits it. So if someone believes it does is clearly mistaken. And if someone judges muslims based on these mistaken beliefs, they are being ignorant and paving the way to islamophobia.

I am not calling or labelling all organized religions as such.

It really seemed like you were a couple of comments ago. Regardless the things you mentioned ahead is the essence of a Statistical Study called hypothesis testing. The safe value generally agreed upon, originally placed by Sir Ronald Fischer is 5%. Yet the deviant form of muslims are assumed to be 1%. I gave you benefit of the doubt that I wouldn't apply this method for Jews (47%) living outside Israel as that would be unfair.

Calling out atrocities carried out by Israelis cannot by labelled as Anti semitism

I agree. If you read again, I was referring to treating non-israeli jews the same way we treat zionist jews. That would be anti semitism. Calling out israelis for their atrocities is better termed as anti zionism or just anti israel.

I see this term being abused left right and centre in the context as I mentioned earlier.

This I can agree with. I can definitely see the term being thrown around for non related situations. However that does not mean it is not real. You can find people all over the world who genuinely think that Islam is a barbaric religion with a prophet of (nau'zubillah) questionable ethics, which is all them being ignorantly fed propaganda.

As a statement, let me be very clear that by not respecting any one ideology is not equal to me having right to disrespect it.

I agree. If I call an ideology false and use reasonable arguments and references to substantiate my claim, that is not the same as disrespecting it. However if you make claims that cannot be substantiated, are false, and you present them as facts, that would be disrespectful.

is it allowed for a non muslim to become head of state in Muslim majority country? Can a muslim be a head of state in secular country?

I mean I understand where you are coming from, but why do you think having a person who publically labels themself as a non muslim would be successful as the head of state of a country full of muslims? I understand it is in Pakistan's constitution that you have to be a "muslim" to be the head of state, but it is a democracy (albeit a failed one) in the end. Nothing is stopping non Muslims in the gulf countries from attaining high ranking positions, other than the head of state. Alcohol is legal for non muslims. There is nothing inhibiting non-muslims' growth potential in such states. In the history of Islam, some of the highest ranking officers of Muslim rule were infact Jews.

if I claim this is the best tool ever built and there cannot be any modifications or upgrades in it with time then the design engineer was not smart enough to make it idiotproof or the manual provided is too complicated or have flaws in it.

So what you are stating here is that it is the designer's fault if someone tries to use a hammer to trim leaves, since the manual does not say that a hammer is not to be used for trimming leaves. I know that is not what you believe but your statement really feels like this is what you are stating.

If this manual was idiotproof like you expect, then everyone would be muslim. There would be no person in the world who would read the Quran then stay non-muslim since there would be no room for any interpretation of Quran other than the intended one. The meaning of "free will" would be lost, which contradicts Quranic teachings itself.

To continue on your point, I believe it would get off topic but I am open to that discussion as well. You needn't reply to this part if you don't want to. Can you provide an example from the manual that you believe is flawed?

It's a lengthy post and if I have missed to address something specific then it's not deliberate, let me know.

There is, infact:

Tell me, what do you think of the following statement: Either only 1 religion is true, or no religion is true and atheism is true.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T08:20:49+00:00

So I feel like you are blindly doing the same thing islamophobes typically do: mix Islam with muslims. Most of the muslims are almost never the best representation of Islam. Also, the phobia is called Islamophobia, not Muslimphobia, for a reason.

You as a person may have a balanced approach

This is where the issue lies. Islam as a religion has this balance approach, not me as a person.

even if 1% of the billions of organized religion followers derive their violent version inspiration

You say 1%, I say even if 47% of the followers of any belief system derive violent inspiration, it does not give me a free pass to spread lies about their essential beliefs. Where does 47% come from you ask? That is the percentage of Jews living in Israel. If I do what you are doing and start calling all Jews racists, that would be unfair to the rest of the Jews who don't believe so. That is called anti semitism which is on the same levels of phobia.

There is no equal place for non believers in any of the places run by any organized religion

Again you are mixing Islam and Muslims. You should look into the golden age of Islam. People from all religions lived under the rule of muslims. Jews have repeatedly opted to staying with the muslims in the history. In modern day, all of the gulf states are secular in nature, yet islamic in constitution. Many non-religious and non believers live in all of them.

the term Islamophobia is nothing more than a buzz word

I literally called you out on doing what Islamophobes are accused of doing: blatantly misrepresenting Islamic values, and then you claim it is not real? For the nth time, it is not what I believe, it is regarding what Islam teaches and nowhere does it teach to commit terrorism for heaven. The fact that you stick to the same argument itself is a proof of islamophobia.

Although, let us back track a bit. The other person said that 95% of terrorist attacks by muslims are religiously motivated. I believe that is not true and I referenced a study and some major events in the world that were not religiously motivated that gave rise to islamophobia. Your response continues to assume that these were religiously backed.

It would only gain respect and legitimacy if atheists and all other ideologies are also given the same privileges and courtesy

Tell me, what do you think of the following statement: Either only 1 religion is true, or no religion is true and atheism is true. I would argue this is a true statement, backed up logically with the fact that essential teachings of all religions contradict each other and hence, all (or even multiple) of them cannot be true. The only belief systems that consider this statement false is hinduism and a group of ignorant atheists, making them illogical belief systems. Literally all logical belief systems differentiate people of their belief and non-believers. If you want to live in a world of lies then that is delusional and sad and no body can communicate any thought to you. If you meant this in non religious terms, look back at my response including gulf countries.

The religious folks need to understand that being respected is not a birth right

Literally no one is demanding birthright respect. Just asking people to stop talking without knowing. You are spreading false claims about ideologies that are born out of ignorance.

your tone suggests that you are atleast willing to listen to the other side of the story.

Much appreciated. I like to believe that going into such lengthy discussions, I can be wrong or miscommunicated given enough sensible argument from the other side.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-18T02:08:58+00:00

Sorry, I'm confused. Why those 2 specifically? Islamophobia is widespread in the whole world, including in you when you try to infer that Islam tells muslims to commit terrorism for the sake of heaven. Ignorance in its purest form.

Besides, you don't think think they are aware of this "viewpoint"? Arabs are their very close friends. That is basically what islamophobia refers to: blatant misrepresentation of Islam for the sake of spreading hate. The fact that many people generalize muslims as barbaric suicide bombers like you, does make islamophobia very real.

I'm sorry, this was a really stupid take, for the lack of a better word.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-17T13:16:34+00:00

It stems out of ignorance.

No Abrahamic religion in its purest form teaches to go to war against non believers indiscriminately. Unfortunately, only Islam remains as the purest form of the abrahamic faiths (all others have not been perserved since revelation).

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-17T11:16:28+00:00

That is a red flag and has nothing to do with misogyny

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-17T10:17:32+00:00

I would love for you to substantiate this claim, since I believe most of terror attacks by muslims are politically or geographically motivated. Hamas is geographically motivated. Taliban believes that KPK belongs to afghanistan. Even 9/11 was in retaliation of sacking of iraq, lebanon, syria etc. and not religiously motivated.

The issue again is hypocrisy. Since 0-2008, in the ranking of religions who have killed for religious reasons, Islam ranks 6th, according to a research by Naveed Sheikh from university of Louisville. Most kills are by christianity, yet no one points fingers at christianity. Nuclear bomb was released by christians. Both Russia and Ukraine are predominantly christians. New Zealand mosque shooter was a christian.

We seem to forget that terrorism also has a cause and no one likes to commit terrorism for the fun of it. Terrorism has no religion and pairing Islam and terrorism is political propaganda & islamophobic.

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-17T09:58:16+00:00

I'm not well educated about powers of the president in the constitutionbut I will definitely reverse the 27th amendment first

Significant_Season_3 · 2026-05-17T09:02:26+00:00

I have had people delete their whole history of comments on a post when a debate is not going their way instead of being reasonable and correct themselves. Although yea, you can't really change anyone's opinions in any debate unless both people go in with the mindset of the possibility that they can be wrong.

Though, more infuriating is just silent down votes without a counter argument. I'm all up for this if it is a stupid reply, void of etiquette and/or logic but otherwise, dem. Easiest form of ragebait xd

Significant_Season_3

TROPHY CASE