Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Discount_Flunky

Member Since 05 Sep 2011
Offline Last Active Dec 21 2011 03:04 AM

#4868582 References to other games in an XBox Live Arcade XNA game

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 03 October 2011 - 09:33 AM

Spoofs are not ilegal. In fact I think the law says you can spoof anything you want. I know for a fact that celerbies are not allowed to sue someone for making spoofs based off them. As long as its clearly a joke I don't think they can do anything. To be safe do not copy anything exalty. Make everything a "likeness" of the object and give it a parody name. Also don't mention games by name because then they can get you for product placment charges. And most of all do not copy the games companies logo. They can defanitly get you for that. You can make fun of other games plot but don't have your charactor "follow" the plot. Basicly don't copy the game itself.


#4867473 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 11:08 PM

"The zionists wanted their own state just for Jews, and a civil war broke out" -- Is that not an accurate statement? Is there not a correlation between the two halves of the sentence?

Correlation isn't the same as causation. The desire for a Jewish state is the main backdrop for the civil war (and the result) -- but that doesn't imply that any one group started it. The first violence was likely caused by nationalist Arabs who were offended by this idea, or simply by Arab racists offended by Jewish migration, not by violent Zionists, but that doesn't matter, as the cause of the war is too complex to blame any one group entirely.

Here's another way of putting it:
"Here is the setting - a desire for national racial identity, here is what followed - civil war"

Can you really not see how you're projecting your own dichotomy onto that sentence?

"That sentence concerns Israel but doesn't directly support Israel, so it must be anti-Israel, herp derp!!!111oneone"?

Except that [debating which one is "more wrong"] is what you've been doing.

Uh, no. I've said that the Palestinians are worse off, which is obviously true. I've pointed out that many of your statements regarding Israel apply equally well to the Palestinians. I've never supported their attacks on Israel, or suggested a solution to the issue that favours the Palestinians, or suggested any solutions at all.

Stop making shit up.


Now you have officially crossed into douche territory. You miss quote me, insult me, and clearly bring your personal "dichotomy" into the debate. You have clearly lost your cool. Who taught you how to debate?

Furthermore if you really are as perfectly neutral as you claim you are, you wouldn't have commented to me in the first place. You responded to something I said to someone else when I disagreed with someone who claimed Israel is a dictatorship and then preceded to rant about nation sizes and Zionist and such.

We really should stop this debate now that you have taken all civilized discussion out of it entirely. Also this debate could last forever and there probably will never be a winner.

(O and if you see 1 positive reputation point for your post. It was me, I accidentally voted it up when I wanted to vote it down, and it's irreversible.)


#4867463 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 10:22 PM

I'm not going to try and debate which one is "more wrong"


Except that is what you've been doing.


#4867461 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 10:15 PM

You said the Zionist caused it.

No. Learn to read.


What are you talking about you said that Zionist caused it on several occasions. The first one being "You know that's where the conflict started from right? The zionists wanted their own state just for Jews, and a civil war broke out"


#4867443 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 09:10 PM

There are no deep seated cultural problems, Jews and Arabs have long been brothers and the majority still feel this way. The problem is 'Zionism'.


LOL


#4867430 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 07:53 PM


I love how everyone throws around all of Israel's supposed "War crimes" and completely ignores the car bombings, suicide bombings, beheading's, and stoning's, committed by the completely innocent and defenseless Palestinians.


Defending one states actions by saying 'but the other guys do it too!' is no defense.

Both sides are killing each other and Israel's continued taking of land is not helping matters and are pushing one group who have no other voice or backing into their actions.

If Israel was to stop their actions then they would have a leg to stand on and would more than likely get more backing if the Palestinians didn't stop their actions.

Right now however what is happening is that one nation, with the backing of another, is stealing land and forcing people from their homes, that group have no other recourse and are fighting back as best they can.

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" has never rung so true.

And there is no 'supposed' about it, just that while the US is backing them they will never be brought to account on them.




I didn't say they were terrorist. I was making the point that it's not a one sided affair. Actually if you look at the correct definition of the word Jihad, Israel is a valid Jihad target.

Everyone blames the Israels because their on top, but don't think for a second that it would any different if the tables were turned. If fact it would probably be worse because Israel is on Americas leash, while the Palestinians have no limitations and their surrounded by people who are encouraging them to attack Israel.


#4867429 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 07:44 PM

Israel is aggressive, they won't stop trying (and succeeding) to kick out Palestinians if the Palestinians stopped attacking.

Yes the Jews land did start small, but then Palestine and Israel fought a war. Guess what, Israel won, that's the way it is. It also doesn't matter how much they used to have. They only care about what they have now, and their land is the main reason they oppose Palestine's sovereignty.




The Jews lost it fair and square a long time ago and only got it back because it was given to them. They probably would have never earnt it back through their own military efforts if Big Brother wasn't giving out his hand-me-downs. The Palestinians aren't just fighting for land they lost, they are fighting to keep the land they have.

The World-hates-the-Jews card is old, it's torn, it's like a marked card in poker or go-fish and is just not acceptable in this game. Everyone had to fight for their existence in the history of the world and many civilisations were annihilated from existence. I bet they feel more hated than the Jews, if you could ask them. Why should anyone feel sorry for people alive today for something that didn't actually happen to them? They probably wouldn't have even been born if those things didn't happen! Heck, with the way of slaves and conquests, I bet there are plenty of people with a Jewish line if we choose to look that far back.




Big Brother? Reread 1984 and you'll discover that name doesn't apply here.

Well if they didn't win it fair and square back then they share have now. They won the struggle for Independence. At the time they had very little outside help after the British left. Then pretty much the entire Middle East invaded them and they beat them all in SIX days. The thing is most reasoning's for one nation work for the other nation if you look at it a different.

"The World-hates-the-Jews card is old, it's torn, it's like a marked card in poker or go-fish and is just not acceptable in this game." Say that to the Jews. It doesn't matter what the world thinks. They fell threatened on every side, and now they have an army. Why would they not strike back?


The last point is a good point. If you look back you kind of have to conclude that almost everyone has Jewish blood somewhere in their veins. They have just been scattered so much throughout history.


#4867280 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 12:14 PM




Here's the simple answer: if you think there are any simple answers to any questions regarding the Middle East, you're wrong.

It's just that simple.


There are simple answers, but no-one in power has the heart or courage to ask the right questions.

No. There are plenty of simplistic answers. There are no simple answers. If you don't know the difference, your answers will be simplistic.



I rather think the old, 'no simple answer' routine is merely just the mask of impotence. Or the answer of someone who has reneged on their values and now finds themselves weighing both the 'devil' and the 'divine'.

How about;
Stop building Illegal 'settlements'.

Is this too simplistic for you?
How about, hold Israel accountable to International law?

I know it get's awfully complicated when one has double standards.




I love how everyone throws around all of Israel's supposed "War crimes" and completely ignores the car bombings, suicide bombings, beheading's, and stoning's, committed by the completely innocent and defenseless Palestinians.


#4867277 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 11:59 AM

1) Your last point doesn't even address what I said at all. 2) You said them trying to join together caused it, then you said the Zionist caused it all in the same sentence. That's a compelelty redundant statement. 3) Also how does them failing to come together then change the fact that it's a good Idea now?

1) I wasn't addressing what you said, or the discussion between yourself and EgoDeath. I was having a good laugh at the bizarro world described in your post. Big difference in intent. Seriously, I actually burst out laughing, which takes a lot, so I had to comment.
2) lol what? The time before "starting a civil war" is called "joining together" now? You can't really join together if you've not been separated by the civil war yet, right? I said the civil war grew out of a desire for a jewish state. That's not a contradiction. It's also not a statement that places blame on either side - I didn't say zionist's *caused* it. Lern2comprehend.
3) You're imagining that I said a one-state solution is a bad idea? I was asking if you knew they used to be "one state" not because it's a bad idea, but because by the imaginary world you were describing, it seemed you were unaware of the fact.




--Israel and Palestine really should just morph into one nation--
You know that's where the conflict started from right?
The zionists wanted their own state just for Jews, and a civil war broke out, which has never really ended.


I said that Israel and Palestine should be unified.


First you said "You know that's where the conflict started from right?" this implies the conflict started because they were unified. Then you said this "The zionists wanted their own state just for Jews, and a civil war broke out" which implies that the conflict started because they were divided. As written the two statements contradict each other.


Imaginary world you say? You clearly stated in the first post that the Jews started it and that they were acting on their own. Completely leaving out the part about the British. Implieing that the Jews invaded the area like some hoard. No body who really knows anything about the subject would leave the British out. It was the way that British handled it that really started it. "O hi Palestinians, we want the Jews to live here now, so we're going to take away all your land and give it to them. Now I want you guys to play nice so if I catch you messing with the Jews I'm going to SHOOT you." Not exactly a good way to introduce to groups.


Also I like to point out that Palestinian is not a nationality, it's an ethnic group. There has never been a Palestinian nation. That area of the world, until recently, has been ruled by someone else going all the way back to when the Jews where first thrown out of Israel. That's another factor in why it's taking them so long for them to become a real nation. They don't have as legitimate of claim to lands compared to the Jews. The Jews have ruled the area for over 3000 years while the Palestinians are just descendants of Arab settlers that came there in like the 10th century who have never had a real nation. If you can really determine who should own land based on "who used it more" then the Jews win every time.


#4867181 Why does Israel get so much special treatment when it comes down to nuclear w...

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 07:13 AM

...

Oh man, I actually laughed out loud half way through that!
I'm not "taking sides" with the Palestinians here, but... who has been teaching you history?

--With what has happened to them it's understandable why they have gotten to the point where they are now--
By the same token, I assume this also applies to the Palestinians? Including the ones who were forced from their homes during the creation of Israel within their land? Both sides have been through hell at each other's hands, but it's pretty hard to argue that the Palestinian side hasn't been worse off.

--They do not oppose the creation of a sovereign Palestinian nation--
Except that they're taking every effort to stop the Palestinians from seeking recognition as a sovereign nation...

--They are opposed to it because they are already a small country, and their afraid of Palestine slowly chipping away their territory, as they already have done.--
That's where I LOLed.
Here's the original lines of the part of Palestine that Israel was created within: http://en.wikipedia....estine_1947.png
Here's the current lines: http://upload.wikime...tlements%29.png
N.B. that the majority of the green area is occupied by Israeli forces, with the Palestinian residents living under martial law and apartheid. It's being chipped away at constantly by new settlements.

--Israel and Palestine really should just morph into one nation--
You know that's where the conflict started from right? The zionists wanted their own state just for Jews, and a civil war broke out, which has never really ended.


You really didn't address half of what I said in fact you miss quoted me a few times. He called Israel a brutal dictatorship. 1. This a lie. 2. It means he is on the side of the Palestinians, a neutral person would not have said that.

When I said "With what has happened to them it's understandable why they have gotten to the point where they are now" I was referring to their entire history. The Jews are the most hated people who have ever existed. It's easier to make a list of the nations who haven't tried to wipe them off the face of the earth. They didn't just appear out of some Tarsus gate somewhere and start slaughtering hundreds of "innocent" Palestinians. Fist they were persecuted all over Europe and then six million of them where killed in the Holocaust. After that happened (and this is the most important part) Britain felt sorry for them and forced the Palestinians out of their homes so that the Jews could have back their ancient ancestral home. It wasn't the Jews, it was the British. That's the part that everyone forgets.


I clearly did not deny that they are opposing Palestine becoming a sovereign nation as you miss quoted me saying.

Yes the Jews land did start small, but then Palestine and Israel fought a war. Guess what, Israel won, that's the way it is. It also doesn't matter how much they used to have. They only care about what they have now, and their land is the main reason they oppose Palestine's sovereignty.

Your last point doesn't even address what I said at all. You said them trying to join together caused it, then you said the Zionist caused it all in the same sentence. That's a compelelty redundant statement. Also how does them failing to come together then change the fact that it's a good Idea now?


#4867145 Possible neutrinos travel faster than light

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 29 September 2011 - 05:48 AM

Why is gravity "the only thing" that could have slowed down light?

How about our theory of light is completely wrong and it never moves with speed C but always slightly slower depending on other factors than gravity? Thus both special and general relativity can still hold (as C being constant in all reference frames but not the speed of light).






Also gravity itself does not effect light. It can effect space time which in turn effects light, but without mass gravity can't act on it. (Just pointing it out not really a comment towards you)


#4866354 Possible neutrinos travel faster than light

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 27 September 2011 - 02:37 AM

@Eelco

You talk to me like I'm a third grade boy vainly hoping that time travels exists so I can go back and see Charlemagne or something. Many high profile scientist have put there entire careers into the theory of time travel. It IS A POSSIBILITY using today concepts of science. It's it partially feasible? I really doubt it, but it is theoretically possible. If you aren't read up on the latest theories of time travel then you can't really call yourself a science fan. The truth is stranger then fiction, that's a fact that has been proven time and time again. There are scientist who state that you can create a new universe using giant lasers for crying out loud. Science fiction has nothing on real science.


#4866269 Possible neutrinos travel faster than light

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 26 September 2011 - 05:52 PM


For instance many scientists are starting to find proof that humans have a sixth sense.


Can has links?


http://noosphere.princeton.edu/

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

These are some I could find. It's really hard to get links about scientific developments when you don't know the name of the experiment or the names of the scientist evolved


#4866247 Possible neutrinos travel faster than light

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 26 September 2011 - 04:28 PM



snip


What are you talking about the theory of relatively does talk about time and therefore time travel. According to the theory of relatively the faster something travels the slower time passes for that object. Also the higher the gravity around an object the slower time passes for it. Therefore if you travel faster than the speed of light, according to the equation, you would go backwards in time. The notion of time travel was originally proposed by scientist studying relatively, not science fiction writers.


O RLLY?

Indeed, more velocity means slower passing of time; but clearly the geometry of the equation doesnt allow for the extrapolation you posit here, since time dilation as a function of v isnt even differentiable at v==c; it has an infinite slope. The correct extrapolation of ever more velocity isnt into negative time; the correct extrapolation is that the function doesnt extend into the v>c domain at all cause it completely curves away from that domain and doesnt point toward it at all.

Try and plug v > c into the formula for time dilation; you dont get a negative number as your naive extrapolation would have, but an imaginary one. An imaginary flow of time... indeed a concept more apt for science fiction writers than scientists. (or perhaps scientists looking to pry funding loose from people who never looked at the math themselves)


When you put v = c you get 0 which means times stops for the object. The thing is though that getting anything to go the speed of light that has mass takes infinite energy, because things also get more massive the faster they go. According to the equation mass is infinite at the speed of light therefore the energy needed to go faster then the speed of light is impossible to reach. That is way the possibility of Neutrioes going faster then light is so freaky, because that implies that there is a loop hole in relativity.

When most scientist speak of time travel mostly they speak of using something like a black hole's gravity field to make yourself live way longer then you normally would so that you can see the future. The only way to got to the past would be a worm hole, and those haven't been proven yet. Also you could only go back to the time that the worm hole was created.

Edit: Also just because something sounds far fetched it doesn't mean it's form or should only be mentioned in science fiction. There's a lot crazy science out there. For instance many scientists are starting to find proof that humans have a sixth sense.


#4866123 Possible neutrinos travel faster than light

Posted by Discount_Flunky on 26 September 2011 - 10:42 AM


Uh, Photons do too reach the maximum speed of light.....Photons are massless particles that move unhindered because gravity only exerts a pull upon things with mass....


That's not true. Photons DO have a mass, however they don't have a rest mass (I hope this is the right word, in german it's called "Ruhemasse"). If photons had no mass then light could not be bent, however it is possible in extremely strong gravitational fields. These kinds of distortions are actually used to detect black holes (the quiet ones ;) ).

*edit*

I can't find an english source, but this (beware, german) is what I'm talking about. But according to that source, "bewegte masse" (moving mass, or something like that) just seems to be another word for energy. It renders my comment somewhat pointless :)




Photons don't have mass. They are bent by black holes because space time is warped by black holes. What you are refering to is an increase in kinetic engery.




PARTNERS