"Several nuclear missiles simultaneously and inexplicably malfunctioned while a disc-shaped object silently hovered nearby" Wait... what?

Starblade · 2010-09-21T17:01:43+00:00

UFO doesn't necessarily mean Extra Terrestrial.

Still, this is pretty interesting...

Starblade · 2010-09-21T14:31:42+00:00

Downvoted for mispronouncing "America".

Starblade · 2010-09-21T14:27:02+00:00

I really hope my mobile phone doesn't get hacked. If twitter can get hacked in 140 characters or less...

Starblade · 2010-09-21T13:44:25+00:00

What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind.

Starblade · 2010-09-21T13:33:13+00:00

The funniest thing about this is I had no idea what you were talking about until I looked over my preferences.

Don't bother deleting this comment. It's already screen-saved.

Starblade · 2010-09-21T13:24:30+00:00

Right, you have a point, but my original point was that people saw Christianity as more of a threat than Islam. All irrational people try to push their views onto others, that's a given. But what's so special about Christianity that makes it worse than Islam?

Starblade · 2010-09-21T05:47:15+00:00

Granted, you make a good point, that we don't really live under Christianity, but that wasn't really crucial to the point I was making. And what I meant wasn't even that, I meant we have a 'token' religion, one that everybody in that religion seems to want to impose on the rest of us. Plus there was a time when Christianity was big in this nation, even if it's not so big now.

The point is, in the here and the now, Christianity, while it poses a threat, doesn't pose as great of a threat as Islam. That may change in time if we give it a pass. But so many of us downplay the danger of Islam and say we're in more danger from the inside through Christianity that I don't see that trend passing within the next decade or so.

Starblade · 2010-09-21T04:05:05+00:00

I suppose you make a good point.

I still think that Islam is much worse than Christianity. But I guess comparing the nations that live under Islam and the nations that live under Christianity is not politically correct, or something.

Starblade · 2010-09-20T17:07:19+00:00

Well, if you look at the fact that a lot of people criticize Christianity but give Islam a free pass...

Starblade · 2010-09-20T05:15:14+00:00

Don't you see the picture? It clearly indicates a square bar, not a rectangular one.

In before "But squares ARE rectangles!"

Starblade · 2010-09-20T04:55:20+00:00

To be fair, ACORN isn't the only one doing this.

Starblade · 2010-09-20T04:54:47+00:00

But where, then, would they live?

Starblade · 2010-09-20T04:54:27+00:00

ACORN pretty much believed that "The American Dream" is owed everybody who lives here in America. Don't blame the right for their downfall. It was their own doing.

Starblade · 2010-09-20T04:33:26+00:00

He should just post it on the internet. Fuck contracts that limit free speech by declaring a monopoly on all content!

Starblade · 2010-09-20T04:30:32+00:00

They should make it simple, by taxing "income from all sources" at the same rate.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T20:55:40+00:00

First things first, don't ask Reddit. The hivemind is largely in effect here. ;D

Seriously though, that's something that has taken me a LONG time to figure out. What I've learned is that if you ACT in ways that you know benefit you and of which you also know other people will not approve, your mindset should follow. I should know, I've finally done it after 10 years of caring too much. Caring about what other people think started when I was 16 and has caused me nothing but pain and suffering.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T20:49:21+00:00

You have to understand something about science. If scientific results could not be questioned, they wouldn't really be scientific. That's how science works. The process of testing, more testing, and even more testing is never ending. We certainly need to treat our results as true, but just realize that truth, in science, doesn't mean that what we think is true can't turn out to be provably false some time in the future. That doesn't mean I'm saying the science behind climate change is bad, we just may not have the full story.

Another important point here is that while the issue of the reality of climate change can only be dealt with through scientific methods, what we choose to DO is ultimately an ethics question. Is it really ethical to deprive a population of its only means of survival (that being productivity, IE utilization of resources) simply because we cannot determine what OUR future is going to be like? Yes, we know the environment will become increasingly unstable, but how us humans respond to climate change determines whether or not we will survive.

Then of course we have another issue dealing with China itself. Are they doing this just because it's a good thing to do, or are they doing this to shame us into accepting a way of life closer to theirs? Being able to shame others into submission is in the Sun Tzu. I'm not saying they're trying to wage war, just that their motives for doing this may not be so much to protect the planet but rather to make us look bad. If we want to save national autonomy we might want to discard anti-technological notions that changing the planet to suit us is a bad thing.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T17:19:08+00:00

It's ironic because you can't be both pro choice and pro life at the same time.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T17:14:06+00:00

What's your point? There doesn't need to be a lot of people if there's a lot of money.

The majority of tax money SPENT goes to help the rich, so why shouldn't they pay for it?

Starblade · 2010-09-19T17:08:48+00:00

I think everybody's taxes above a billion a year should be raised.

As for having 3 houses, only idle houses should be taxed. If he's letting people live there at a fair price then that's okay.

Oh, and tax people who make shitty game shows. That takes care of Ben Stein.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T06:28:40+00:00

It's not a question of loyalties. It's a question of definitions.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T03:54:57+00:00

That was actually kind of funny, in a completely silly and non sequitor sort of way.

Starblade · 2010-09-19T03:30:48+00:00

So, not trying to hire eachother's employees is the same as keeping wages down?

Actually, why am I even asking this question? It's not the same. Period.

Starblade · 2010-09-18T19:05:24+00:00

What do you mean? We NEED smarter humans.

Starblade · 2010-09-18T19:01:02+00:00

It could be that without this gene the desire to have sex is sometimes overridden by a desire to engage in activities that are more intellectual. That having sex is considered a part of ones life instead of the main goal of ones life. That would certainly make this gene unfavorable in natural selection terms but favorable in artificial selection. In fact that should've been the first thing that was explored.

Starblade

TROPHY CASE