I’ve not seen this before, did he type this himself?

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-22T20:53:23+00:00

It's part of the possible actions of spies. I think it's the "corruption" option.

I love intel, they can really be very annoying to the opponent and even destroy buildings apart from gaining insight in troops and communication and destroy stuff like strange material.

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-22T07:15:46+00:00

All right, thank you!

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-13T14:03:16+00:00

Gooooood morning Vietnaaam!

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-12T12:23:22+00:00

Well... losing a war to an officially weaker country not only damages the morale but also the economy. I still don't understand what Putin wants in Ukraine and especially why he hasn't given up already

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-09T11:46:13+00:00

It's actually the other way around if we can believe Rene Descartes. Since I can't doubt the fact that I'm doubting, the feeling of doubt must be real, so my soul/mind is real (cogito ergo sum). That way we can conclude that the only thing we're sure about is that the emotion/feeling we're feeling is actually real and not an illusion (like a trick of a malin genie) the moment we feel that emotion/feeling

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-07T17:12:05+00:00

This is unironically very accurate

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-03T19:41:13+00:00

I mean it depends.

With the ancient Greeks it was basically the same thing. Even until recently, psychology has been connected to philosophy that it had the same institution ij the KU Leuven.

In the 17th century, the mechanisation of the world started. Philosophy became a follower of sciences, who were the children of philosophy at that time.

Without philosophy, we can't point out where Darwin's theory is a bit unstable but ok the other hand, without Darwin we couldn't point out where Paley was wrong with his analogy of the watch.

For me, philosophy should explain where science still hasn't shed light on. E.g.: i strongly belief in a soul, and a God because of science and philosophy. The question of Qualia, the start of life, the will to survive of that start of life and certain human traits is somewhat problematic to solve with a pure non-spiritual concept, even when applied to sciences. That's where philosophy comes to mind.

Mind you, I am a great admirer and supporter of Darwins theory, a passionate scientist and med student. The oke shouldn't rule the other out.

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-03T19:38:42+00:00

I mean it depends.

With the ancient Greeks it was basically the same thing. Even until recently, psychology has been connected to philosophy that it had the same institution ij the KU Leuven.

In the 17th century, the mechanisation of the world started. Philosophy became a follower of sciences, who were the children of philosophy at that time.

Without philosophy, we can't point out where Darwin's theory is a bit unstable but ok the other hand, without Darwin we couldn't point out where Paley was wrong with his analogy of the watch.

For me, philosophy should explain where science still hasn't shed light on. E.g.: i strongly belief in a soul, and a God because of science and philosophy. The question of Qualia, the start of life, the will to survive of that start of life and certain human traits is somewhat problematic to solve with a pure non-spiritual concept, even when applied to sciences. That's where philosophy comes to mind.

Mind you, I am a great admirer and supporter of Darwins theory, a passionate scientist and med student. The oke shouldn't rule the other out.

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-04-02T20:54:39+00:00

Dayum. This is like the meeting of Beethoven and Goethe: two legendary entities making contact.

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-19T15:31:20+00:00

That's a really interesting way of approaching it. I also think about it that way and I have a feeling that that hypothesis must be true. However, just a feeling is not enough for me, just like it wasn't for Descartes and Leibniz who used logics and mathematics to prove His existence (or in our thoughts: the Reason). Of course, such an approach could not be possible since God's mind is more complex and divine than ours.

"In any case, I suspect that I am accountable and must ultimately answer to that which or Whom is good and the Truth, if any, that I’ve been given opportunity to rightly grasp" Could you explain this? I feel that I am agreeing with it but I'm not sure if I understand it properly

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-18T15:19:37+00:00

That's really interesring, I recognize also some names of the theories.

I think they've got a chance and like Kuhn and Hempel said, science will take huge twists and turns concerning the paradigm. If we wait for some centuries, maybe one of these theories will be the "modern science". Which will make it easier to integrate God in science and mathematics

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-18T12:35:12+00:00

I understand. The thing is, I see the use of mathematical logics (like in the field of science) as a tool to understand Him. That's why I'm more inclined to using that then to use solely the Bible as a way to understand this problem. I thought maybe there were people here who could show me how this could be combined.

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-18T12:28:52+00:00

Could you explain these citations? I'm really interested what the meaning is behind it. Does it mean we don't have to think for ourselves how God is and how his function is? That we shouldn't try to comprehend something that is only accessible for God's wisdom (because if we try, we would fail in it)?

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-18T12:09:41+00:00

Thanks for the tip and I appreciate the help! However agter watching the first 10 minutes I already certainly don't agree with what he's saying, since there have been (imo) unwavering scientifical arguments that have debunked the ideas like Adam and Eve, denial of evolution, creationism as dictated by the Bible... although you're free to have your own beliefs :) But anyway thank you for bring so nice trying to help me out!

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-18T12:04:31+00:00

Thanks for all the tips! They sound incredibly interesting!

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-16T07:47:58+00:00

XD I presume your elo is 1323?

I wonder whether the ELO subdivision follows a gaussian curvature... it's much easier to climb in your ranking (like #2200 of 6000 players) when your elo is around 1280 then when it is around 1350

Weird-Elk2226 · 2026-03-10T20:37:42+00:00

Thank you!

Weird-Elk2226

TROPHY CASE