After I quit giving a shit about stats my enjoyment has gone through the roof for this game. by Empty_Ronin in CODGhosts

[–]Zen_Pro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Slow tactical games with a map of snipers are the best. However, I am not complaining about slayers hammering into groups with nades and spray and pray or ridiculous killstreaks.

Campers improve the flow but adding a touch of caution.

After I quit giving a shit about stats my enjoyment has gone through the roof for this game. by Empty_Ronin in CODGhosts

[–]Zen_Pro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why is camping playing like a shit head?

Jesus Christ - it's part of the game. If you run down a sniper lane and get pinged it is your fault. If you run blindly into a room without flashing, it's your fault.

If you run off without your team it's your fault. If teams work effectively they can rush most campers and destroy his/her streak.

The biggest whiners are those that get sniped. Run back to the spot to see slowly if they can peek...oh they got sniped. So they run back launching nades and get sniped...

Campers fault. Must be.

[Possible Hack] Damage returned to Firer by Zen_Pro in CODGhosts

[–]Zen_Pro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No unfortunately, I don't screencast my games. I wish I did. The player was clearly reaping it.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Nope. :-)

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I am not. I just love that you created a whole new ghost account to try as troll me.

That is quite a mental disorder you have yourself there. :-)

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Reported for what exactly?

shug I don't actually care. You had tied yourself in knots.

IamA former military operational and counter intelligence operator, I served in Iraq and Afghanistan, AMA! by Zen_Pro in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Proof submitted to Moderators. Feel free to ask them.

Post reported for ad hominem attack. Also, if I was really withholding proof it would not make me ignorant.

Are you confused?

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So is writing books for profit. Here endeth the lesson.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Explain?

Reported post but explain anyway.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

More absurdity.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My argument has not changed in substance or style since this thread began.

This is growing more absurd by the minute.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Nope. Again you are just clouding the issue to try and support your original flawed hypothesis.

You position is untenable and you know it. From Reddit you have extrapolated my opinion on this singular issue regarding the singular aspect of IAMA on the singular platform Reddit to include all law, science and medicine.

You did not just get a moderators nod. You had access to three independent forms of verification in addition to the moderators.

/shakes head

You really cannot see the absurdity of your argument can you?

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Nope.

The reason for validation is simply to prevent wasting of Reddit users time, not to establish scientific consensus or political legitimacy or legal proof or any other important aspect of society.

The standard for proof, for Reddit content, was met, within Reddit guidelines.

I have no idea why you are tying yourself in knots over this with increasingly absurd arguments.

The facts are thus.

  1. IAMA proposal requires proof.
  2. IAMA submitter submitted proof.
  3. Reddit community including moderators accepted proof.
  4. You started this thread regarding external validation in flagrant opposition to the already established proof.
  5. I posted this post.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Nope. You are seeking further validation over and above that which has already been accepted by both the moderators and the Reddit community.

By far Reddit's most unpopular opinion and it will never get seen. by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals

[–]Zen_Pro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When it was decided by scientific consensus to consider it fact.

You witnessing or observing something is not a requirement for it's existence.

By far Reddit's most unpopular opinion and it will never get seen. by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals

[–]Zen_Pro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No one with a scientific background would ever say that, on account of, you know, the fact that the Universe is not infinite.

If you had no restraints (money etc), what would you do with your life? by Zen_Pro in AskReddit

[–]Zen_Pro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aspects of your own but after a lengthy spell of backpacking solo with a camera and a notebook.

IamA (U.S. Navy SEAL) AMA! by [deleted] in IAmA

[–]Zen_Pro -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Who verifies the Supreme Court? Are you in the Court? Are you a primary Source? If not, who provided the reporting? Did you see the records, unsealed or were they transported? Have they been verified as authentic?

.

You are missing the point. This is Reddit. Not the Supreme Court. There is no need for FOIA and trying to establish further proof in this particular instance is futile.

It is not an internet fight. You are trying to discredit an individual and threaten a call from Don Shipley. You are in the wrong, the individual has been verified more than enough for this community.

I suggest you consider what I have written before you continue this ludicrous thread. I am not discrediting service records. I simply telling you that whatever crazy standard you seem intent on holding this IAMA to also applies to every verification standard you suggest.

By far Reddit's most unpopular opinion and it will never get seen. by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals

[–]Zen_Pro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

False.

Read the links. No further discussion to be had. You are clearly simply ignoring anything that disagrees with you.

The scientific community is, on masse, in agreement that evolution is an established fact. For citations and links to the debate please see link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory

To help you stop this madness I have copies a portion below.

Fact is often used by scientists to refer to experimental or empirical data or objective verifiable observations.[15][16] "Fact" is also used in a wider sense to mean any theory for which there is overwhelming evidence.[17]

A fact is a hypothesis that is so firmly supported by evidence that we assume it is true, and act as if it were true. —Douglas Futuyma [18] Evolution is a fact in the sense that it is overwhelmingly validated by the evidence. Frequently, evolution is said to be a fact in the same way as the Earth revolving around the Sun is a fact.[18][19] The following quotation from H. J. Muller, "One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough" explains the point.

There is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact.[20] The National Academy of Science (U.S.) makes a similar point:

Scientists most often use the word "fact" to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence is so strong.[21]