By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - NSFW - The Drunk Debate Thread

This could only turn out well...



Around the Network

It positively absolutely has to.

Any other outcome only exists with Lectroids from the 8th dimension.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Bethesda , Bioware, Rockstar, iD and Valve will support Wii U.

















Whoops.......



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Appl ofcourse you have to admmit they are the best company since all of their products are white and modern.. very futuristic ooking too



 

mM

And there will be ______ as well. But the big game is _______. But you won't believe what _________ is bringing.

The ______ engine is already up and running on Wii U. The first home console running it.

But what do I know? I'm drunk, right?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
Viper1 said:
And there will be _enchillada_ as well. But the big game is _suckmyballs_. But you won't believe what __Nr Rocks hand__ is bringing.

The __ass-rapage_ engine is already up and running on Wii U. The first home console running it.

But what do I know? I'm drunk, right?

I am drunk out of my my right now, and my friends are playing Dragon Force's "To the fire and flame" on expert mode on guitar hero, and I'm chatting with you, because I love your virtual cocks.

Call me bi, I don't care.

And ID is the best science on earth, it helps people think a better way than what everybody else thinks, and challenges your mind. Were we all here by chance, or by the design of an awesome Heavenly KING???? I choose the 2nd one, because I'm epic.... FUCKERS!


Record and upload voice >>



happydolphin said:

And ID is the best science on earth, it helps people think a better way than what everybody else thinks, and challenges your mind. Were we all here by chance, or by the design of an awesome Heavenly KING???? I choose the 2nd one, because I'm epic.... FUCKERS!

ID?  I am doing that laughing out loud thing. 

ID is nothing more than the church trying to remain relevant.   As someone with a background in science, ID is like trying to force a theory onto a subject with no evidence to support it first and then using a backwards scientific method to shoehorn ID into a "plausible" theory which fails at every level possible to fail at as a theory.

I'm not saying a God doesn't exisat at all or that he didn't "intelligently deisgn" our universe but he sure as hell did not set things up as ID proponents proclaim.   Any person with a scientific background that advocates the curent theory of ID should be stripped of their right to practice science.   To me, it's the equivelant of a lawyer being adamant that his client is innocent despite video evidence his client commited the crime, bragged of the crime and congessedto the crime with details impossible for others to know.

 

I suppose my biggest problem with ID is that it is a solution trying to find evidence rather that evidence pointing to a solution (you know, as the scientific method was designed to do).



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Viper1 said:
happydolphin said:

And ID is the best science on earth, it helps people think a better way than what everybody else thinks, and challenges your mind. Were we all here by chance, or by the design of an awesome Heavenly KING???? I choose the 2nd one, because I'm epic.... FUCKERS!

ID?  I am doing that laughing out loud thing. 

ID is nothing more than the church trying to remain relevant.   As someone with a background in science, ID is like trying to force a theory onto a subject with no evidence to support it first and then using a backwards scientific method to shoehorn ID into a "plausible" theory which fails at every level possible to fail at as a theory.

I'm not saying a God doesn't exisat at all or that he didn't "intelligently deisgn" our universe but he sure as hell did not set things up as ID proponents proclaim.   Any person with a scientific background that advocates the curent theory of ID should be stripped of their right to practice science.   To me, it's the equivelant of a lawyer being adamant that his client is innocent despite video evidence his client commited the crime, bragged of the crime and congessedto the crime with details impossible for others to know.

 

I suppose my biggest problem with ID is that it is a solution trying to find evidence rather that evidence pointing to a solution (you know, as the scientific method was designed to do).

ID is really more than its origins, it's a concept, one that can be shown to have a bastard history rooted in creationism, but that's just because political correctness says that being affiliated to a thought of faith is wrong, when it really is only wrong if that thought of faith is off the deep end, and Christianity really isn't! Even people living 900 years is believeable. I mean if you're going to believe in parallel universes and all of the things in the world today coming from chance, I mean humans living 900 years is a joke of a step of faith, honestly.

I think you're right, God did make this earth. (lol, I know that's knot what you said but that's what I felt like replying). You think ID proponent as braindead drones, but most of them are as committed to the scientific debate as you are, but I don't know if that's something you'd like entering your frame of M-hindzz.

 

Meh- hayinzzzzz



happydolphin said:

ID is really more than its origins, it's a concept, one that can be shown to have a bastard history rooted in creationism, but that's just because political correctness says that being affiliated to a thought of faith is wrong, when it really is only wrong if that thought of faith is off the deep end, and Christianity really isn't! Even people living 900 years is believeable. I mean if you're going to believe in parallel universes and all of the things in the world today coming from chance, I mean humans living 900 years is a joke of a step of faith, honestly.

I think you're right, God did make this earth. (lol, I know that's knot what you said but that's what I felt like replying). You think ID proponent as braindead drones, but most of them are as committed to the scientific debate as you are, but I don't know if that's something you'd like entering your frame of M-hindzz.

 

Meh- hayinzzzzz

Bold: The concept of multiple universes is radical but has evidence based on the standard model of nuclear physics.   People 4,000 years ago living for 900 years is based on absolutely nothing scientific.  In fact, all evidence suggests that 40 years of age is about as far as it went for most people.    A human being living for 900 years probably has the least amount of evidence as any scientific proclomation to come from King James.

 

Underlined: Committment isn't the problem.   The problem is having an answer prior to having a theory.   You can make any amount of evidence fit a theory if you have a pre-supposed theory.  Look at crime scene analysts for proof.  They will tell that entering a crime scene with a pre-conceived notion of what happened is the worse thing a criminologist can do and in many departments will get you fired.  Let the evidence tell you what to think....     A conclusion before the evidence is not only not scientific, it's ignorant.  

And if God didn't want us to believe in Darwanism, the Big Bang (which is ironically a Catholic theory), etc...he wouldn't have given us brains to question everything in the first place.   He'd have simply made us drones.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Congrats, Ryan. I think. What 3 degrees? I may perhaps have something better to offer you than Wal-mart.



The rEVOLution is not being televised