Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">T34/76 is 2.4m (h), 3m (w), 6.1m (l). T34/85 is 2.7m (h), 3m (w), 8.15m (l). IOW, it's as tall as the average home's interior ceiling height, 1.5 times as wide as a Chevy Suburban, and 20-60% longer. And by today's standards, it's a small tank. But still a large object to frame in the viewfinder. (One of my hobbies is photography/astrophotography, so I'm quite familiar with taking pictures, and I've probably been doing it since before you were born).

BTW, I've not only seen tanks, I've driven one (the M1A1, as well as the old M113 APC).

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Quote:

posted by stormbinder But according to your logic, after death the human will lack not only receptors, but pathways and even brain itself. At this point the question of your afterlife existense become rather moot

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Filthy Monists ! and material ones at that ! </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, Arryn had beat me by few minutes to it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Aye, it is materialist position indeed, got to admit it. But you have walked this road first with your neurological pathways, I just could not resist... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">*golf claps*

Bravo. Good for you. As you can see, it's not too hard to get to one.

[ July 29, 2004, 10:49: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">T34/76 is 2.4m (h), 3m (w), 6.1m (l). T34/85 is 2.7m (h), 3m (w), 8.15m (l). IOW, it's as tall as the average home's interior ceiling height, 1.5 times as wide as a Chevy Suburban, and 20-60% longer. And by today's standards, it's a small tank. But still a large object to frame in the viewfinder. (One of my hobbies is photography/astrophotography, so I'm quite familiar with taking pictures

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Than we both share the photography hobby Arryn. Are you saying that you can not frame object 2.4m x 3m from 30 feets on standart camera with regular-angle lenses??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, it is a position derived from cold hard logic. The sort of thing you'd get if you fed the facts into an appropriate (and hopefully bug-free) computer program (or a Vulcan from Star Trek) and asked the program for an evaluation and conclusion. There is no credible evidence that thoughts (and thus existence) are independent of the physical human body. Mildly put, it's wishful thinking to believe otherwise. Bluntly put, it's delusional to believe otherwise.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, it is a position derived from cold hard logic. The sort of thing you'd get if you fed the facts into an appropriate (and hopefully bug-free) computer program (or a Vulcan from Star Trek) and asked the program for an evaluation and conclusion. There is no credible evidence that thoughts (and thus existence) are independent of the physical human body. Mildly put, it's wishful thinking to believe otherwise. Bluntly put, it's delusional to believe otherwise. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am not arguing with that Arryn. The cold hard logic is very materialistic. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif And there is nothing wrong with being materialist, I was just playing along with Spike. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif


As for my personal believes, I can say that I am more or less agnostic, if I have to put a label on myself.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On further thought, yes you can. You can probably even get the side aspect of the tank in the frame, and not just the front aspect, from 30' away. 30' is pretty far. If I remembered my high school trignometry from 29 years ago better than I do, I could tell you for sure.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Okay. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Then try the following:

The notion that some all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal entity capable of existing outside the laws of the universe would actually deign to care about something as insignificant as humans is arrogance and conceit on the part of such believers.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Materialism albeit compelling still has many difficulties. May I assume by your logic that you are a hard aethiest ?

And my suggestion that sensory input is causal to sensations like pain etc is quite congenial with both dualism and monist spiritualism.

And storm ! its Spirokeat ! as in a mispelling of that critter you get with limes disease. ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">*golf claps*

Bravo. Good for you. As you can see, it's not too hard to get to one. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif The point is that you don't have one. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif You don't even know how big or how small it is, as you just clearly demonstrated. It is just another delusional story that you mumble about, since you think that it fits your "tough" fictional character, if he would be driving around on very own T34. Along the lines of your other stories, like attacking people with LAWS, booby traping your garage with deadly explosives, being shot by misitrious assasins, hiding in nuclear shelter for the Last several years, et cetera... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">To accept that something is omnipotent and omniscient means that unless they explode themselves with logical immpossibilities (big bang maybe??) they know everything and can do everything and could likely place equal consideration to every single atom in the universe with no limit on his unlimited resources.

Spiro

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, you may not. Nor do I take kindly to the tagline you've ascribed to me.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I prefer "Spike", also.

-- Arryn the agnostic and skeptic

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hmmm. How about the notion that any insignificant human could accurately discern what an all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal entity would or would not deign to care about?

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Omniscience and omnipotence is a logical impossibility in itself. If you haven't studied philosophy (and physics), you might try doing so.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Touche! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Surely as a skeptic you would be first in the house to put forward possibilities of how something could be outside the boundries of a prescribed theory ?

And as for the 'spike' thing, bah. If i accept the theory that your all just ideas generated by my mind and when I stop thinking about you then you cease to exist till i start again, without god to be thinking about you constantly then 'ole whitebeard' doesnt seem like a bad concept. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Spiro.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On further thought, yes you can. You can probably even get the side aspect of the tank in the frame, and not just the front aspect, from 30' away. 30' is pretty far. If I remembered my high school trignometry from 29 years ago better than I do, I could tell you for sure. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Good. Now you are talking. And yes, I think you are correct and you could indeed fit the length of the tank, or at least large part of it (8.1m). But with 2.4m and 3m frontal shoot you would have no problem whatsoever, even if norf would put his non-existent T34 tanks on top of each other. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 29, 2004, 11:35: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Point taken. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

All right, I am off for today. See you guys later.

[ July 29, 2004, 11:37: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

Im studying philosophy right now, though not physics of course. I have not yet come accross an arguement for omnipotence or omniscience to be logically impossible and thats not to say, Ive read it all and its not there, I just havent come accross it.

Though my next area of study is indeed faith, destiny and purpose, maybe it will show itself.

Spiro.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm on thin ice here, but I do think Arryn's right, in that if you regard omniscience as perpetual awareness and knowledge of the future then there's a real problem with God holding us accountable and punishable for the sins He has always known we're going to commit.

I took a Jehovah's Witness to task on the issue once, and he responded that in his view, God's power to know the future is a power that He rarely chooses to exercise. In other words, while He could know the future, He usually chooses not to. I don't buy it myself, but who's to say it aint so?

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Surely as a skeptic you would be first in the house to put forward possibilities of how something could be outside the boundries of a prescribed theory ?

And as for the 'spike' thing, bah. If i accept the theory that your all just ideas generated by my mind and when I stop thinking about you then you cease to exist till i start again, without god to be thinking about you constantly then 'ole whitebeard' doesnt seem like a bad concept. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Spiro. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This scenario is highly unlikely, but just in case... KEEP THINKING!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Or perhaps you are the Moth, sleeping in the flower, who is dreaming that he is Spirokeat, and dreaming this whole world and its inhabitants who exist only as part of that dream.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif


As for the omnipotence - there is a cenuries-old paradox coming all the way from the Dark Ages IIRC, about God and the stone. Translating it in the modern Version that I, as software engineer, like more: If the God exist and omnipotent, than can He write chess program AI, which would be so good that it could beat even its creator?

(Obviosly the paradox part is that if He can't, than he is not omnopotenet, and if He can, than he is not omnipotent as well http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )


Now I am really off to bed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ July 29, 2004, 11:55: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Cackle, I like that. Im going to attempt to beat my tutor round the head with it.

And sleep tight you guys on the twilight side of the globe, been fun debating stuff all morning.

Spirokeat.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">"Could God create a stone so heavy that He could not lift it." is the original paradox.

I have never heard a satisfactory resolution of this paradox by Christian theologians. It's one of those "inconvenient" things they like to sweep under the rug and hope people won't notice.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Are you really that desperate for fantasy fodder? I mean, now you have an obsession with having a picture of Norfleet for some perverted reason.

After all - a photo does, and proves, nothing. Unless you already know what Norfleet looks like (hint - he probably doesn't look like his avatar), in which case you're more obsessed than even I thought, given that you've managed to hunt down photos of him.

Even with that - photographs are easily doctored. Any idiot (and probably even you) can find a photo of an old tank in a book, the library, or (gasp) the internet, and digitally alter it to put in a acne-covered teenager - oops, that'd be you, I mean, a bearded old coot.

Heck - no need to alter it unless you do have Norfleet's picture on the ceiling above your bed, because he could find a picture of _some_ oldish coot beside an old tank and provide it, and you'd never know the difference.

Flooding perverted idiot.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The same program, fed the facts about conservation of energy and entropy, would also conclude that the existance of the universe as observed is either a fundamental impossiblity or of probability 0 in light of those facts. And yet, there is no credible evidence of any of: "conservation of energy is avoidable", "entropy can decrease in a closed system", or "the universe doesn't exist". Pardon me if I don't trust your logic.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Could you expound on the specifics of the "logically" you are using? To the best of my knoweledge, two Groups believing opposing things about a single thing necessitates neither both being equally right nor both being equally wrong.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

I snuck into the backwoods of Montana and onto the Norfleet estate, decoying the free roaming attack dogs with pork chops swathed in peanut butter, and, after a long arduous stealthy approach, managed to snap a picture of Norfleet's T34:

http://www.soapyfrog.net/images/t34.jpg

Nice ride!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ July 29, 2004, 14:12: Message edited by: Soapyfrog ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You have an unastounding degree of ignorance about physics and cosmology. Get some education before you attempt to argue the topic.

-- Arryn, who majored in astrophysics

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Rather than just giving an insult, could you instead answer a simple question: which resaonably proven theory is it that either permits energy to come from nowhere or permits order in energy to be reclaimed without dumping disorder into other energy?

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Perhaps if you explain what you mean by "energy coming from nowhere", I might understand whether you understand the topic.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

When I say "energy coming from nowhere" I mean energy that has no source, no past; the true creation of energy. Energy that comes from an unobservable location still comes from somewhere - the unobserveable location. The extra dimensions of string theory allow for the "creation" of energy - but only in that no source was observeable due to 3- (or 4-, depending on how you look at it)-d observations in a supposed 11-d universe; however, that energy still came from somewhere even though that somewhere was neither observed nor observeable.

Sufficent?

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

Hopping in the conversation out of nowhere,

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Please don't get upset if someone whose education is centered around physics gets a bit frustrated at that kind of questions. The thing being, along with philosophy, physics is one of the most vocally misunderstood sciences. (Last summer I had the joy of following a news conversation where this guy was absolutely sure about world being 6000-year old etc since in a closed system entropy would increase and earth was such a system. Ergo creation etc. Doh)

Boundary conditions. Current laws of physics, as we now formulate them, aren't valid in certain places, such as Big Bang or event horizon. So if you ask what's beoynd them, the answer would be along the lines "Don't know". That doesn't invalidate current theories, just puts limits to where you can use them. (like, Newtonian versus relativistic physics)

And btw, as I've understood it, the stuff commonly called laws of physics are just (mathematical) representation of what we can observe. To call it a true thing would go in the realm of religion, not science. If it turned out that all the forces are actually created by invisible elves the physics, as we practise it, wouldn't change as long as it could be assured that said elves were consistent in their actions. Only the interpretation.

And I'm sure this post is filled with mistakes also. Otoh, I'm just majoring in physics, not too much can be expected. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sufficient? Yes and no. You've now defined "energy coming from nowhere". Next, a definition of "reasonably proven" would help. Except that it's moot because there are no "reasonably proven" theories of cosmology, and those that we have all state you cannot have "energy coming from nowhere" as you've defined it. (The old "Steady State" theory is quite dead.) BTW, the closest thing to "reasonably proven" theories in all of physics are Einstein's General and Special theories, and the jury is still out on his General. I expect we'll see it superseded within my lifetime, as Newton's was superseded by Einstein's. (Newton's isn't wrong, just incomplete. And I don't think Einstein's is complete either.)

I suspect you bring this up because you have a supposition that you wish to cite. Please do so.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

Arry,

Im not so sure you can use occams razor on the existence of god, in many situations he IS the most simple solution or reason for the apparent illogical existence of the universe as it is.

However, you seem to be getting quite heated in a situation where certainly I am only playing around with some cenceptual theories and most assuredly dont have a knock-down answer to the greater questions that plague philosophy and mankind.

So, that said, I'll bow out of this conversation. Good talking all. Seeya on the next thread.

Spiro.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Perhaps you can explain, since you say energy can't come from nowhere - where did Dog come from? Is God not energy, if he exists? If Dog can come from nowhere, so can energy. So can free beer and the tooth fairy.

And unlike God - I've seen evidence of free beer and the tooth fairy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You did fine. You seem to have a good grasp of the concepts. Congrats.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Postulating omniscient & omnipotent beings is NOT an Occam solution. The Occam solution to the universe appearing "illogical" is: human ignorance.

Human's once thought (and some still do) that various gods caused rain, sunshine, volcanoes, etc. Classic examples of ignorance.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The event horizon of a black hole, as far as anyone can tell, anyway, doesn't do anything important to either entropy or conservation of energy; when mass or energy goes over the event horizon of a black hole, it increases the mass of the black hole accordingly. Current theory (I'm using the term loosely, I know) has it that black holes slowly evaporate into radiation - at a net increase in entropy. Newtonian and relativistic physics both support conservation of energy - to the point where relativity actually relies on the conservation of energy to do many of it's transitions in coming up with the theory, although it had to change the definition of energy to make everything work. Historically, every time someone has thought they have come up with a way around either, it has been an issue of a new form of energy, a mistake/contamination somewhere along the line, or a hoax. Those two principals are as proven as anything gets in physics, boundaries or no. I've yet to hear of any credible scientific hypothesis that would truly violate either without referring to God in some form.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sorry, I overlooked a mistake you made. The are no unusual physics involved with the "event horizon" of a black hole. It is simply a mathematical region where matter inside that radius must travel faster than the speed of light if it were to escape to the other side of the "dividing line". The center of a black hole (a singularity in some theories) and the singularity of the Big Bang (again, in certain theories) is where the laws of physics (as we presently understand them) break down. IOW, you get mathematical infinities as solutions to equations.

BTW, there is a current theory, not particularly well-known by most people, that postulates that a black hole does not contain a singularity, and that some rather exotic stuff lies within the event horizon.

EDIT: typo

[ July 29, 2004, 14:44: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The definition of "reasonably proven" I'm using for this debate is looser than you seem to be wanting to use - any theory that has carried through on a reasonable number of tests will suffice for these purposes. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I can repost the conclusion of my proof from earlier (a one of four must be true) if you like, but mostly my supposition is that you can't logically refute the existance of Him as readily as you appear to think you can.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you go back and read the proof I posted earlier, you might note that the only required property of God (as one possiblity of 4) I had listed was:
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">- in which case, origins need not apply, and your question is rather moot.

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

This apparently got lost in the shuffle, so I'm bringing it back to the top for a moment.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Could you expound on the specifics of the "logically" you are using? To the best of my knoweledge, two Groups believing opposing things about a single thing necessitates neither both being equally right nor both being equally wrong. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The more extravagant the claim, the more rigid must the proof be. If I claim to have a degree from MIT (I don't), you might believe me. If I claim to have seen a UFO, I'd be asked to provide photos. If I claimed to have been abducted by ETs and that they did experiments on me, I'd have to (at the very least) show that I had been missing and show physical evidence on my body of having been 'probed'. If I claimed to *be* an ET, you can be assured that I'm going to be rather thoroughly examined -- by a psychiatrist if the physicians find nothing.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As Zap pointed out, the (current) laws of entropy *begin* at time=0 (the bang). The laws do not apply, do not exist prior to that point. And time also begins at that point. There is no such thing as "big bang minus 3 days". Time has no mathematical meaning before the "bang". Ergo, the universe is not infinitely old. (And it does not have infinite energy either, even if it was infinitely old.)

Your whole "proof" falls apart because it is based on bad assumptions and outright ignorance of cosmological physics.

BTW, had your assumptions been correct, the proof would still have failed because you did not rigorously derive God from the presented facts. You jumped to a conclusion.

It'd be the same thing as saying "I see an object in the sky I cannot identify, so it must be a Russian bomber". It *could* be a Russian bomber, but it doesn't *have* to be one. It could be almost anything.

Ignorance of reality != proof of God. QED

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hm, it hasn't ever been quite clear to me what's the stuff with the black holes anyway, so thanks for the clarification. Okay, not the edge, the center. The discussion goes far too theoretical for us little engineering physicists... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Anyone else noted that the original topic has gained some heat on itself also, by the way?

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As Zap pointed out, the (current) laws of entropy *begin* at time=0 (the bang). The laws do not apply, do not exist prior to that point. And time also begins at that point. There is no such thing as "big bang minus 3 days". Time has no mathematical meaning before the "bang". Ergo, the universe is not infinitely old.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is a very extravagant claim to say that the laws of physics do not apply past a certain point. Do you have any proof of this? Any reliable, citeable observations of a case where physicis were suspended? <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Where did I say the universe had infinite energy? <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Apparently you didn't read the logic closely - I did not jump to the conclusion that God exists; I went to "...one of the following must be true..." and you seem to have assumed a conclusion of a specific one of those four / all of those four. This one of your counter-arguments falls apart on the basis that you are not arguing against my specific arguments. Shucks, I'd even mentioned in the section you quote (i've just now added italics to that specific piece of where I quoted you quoting me - it wasn't italicized in the original) that only one of the four need be true, with no reference as to which one.

Seeing as how you clearly aren't reading my Posts very carefully, there isn't much point in further discussion, is there?

Edit: fixed a grammer mistake

[ July 29, 2004, 16:04: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not a lawyer (though I might occasionally play-act as one around here), but to my understanding of copyright law, Woody's statement quoted in the article's Last paragraph on page 2 should invalidate any attempt to enforce the copyright by the new copyright holder. Woody, in effect, says "the song is mine, I'm claiming credit for it, but the use of the song is in the public domain". Of course, our legal system favors those with money and power over the rights of the public at large, so despite what I think is a clear-cut issue, I have little doubt some moron of a judge will rule against Jibjab and in favor of the anal-retentive music company.

EDIT: typo

[ July 29, 2004, 16:25: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">And where, exactly, did I say I didn't know how big or small it is? I never claimed to know much about photography, sure. As far as I'm concerned, I point, aim, and shoot. I do know that it would seem unreasonably difficult to try and focus a camera that is sitting on the floor, given that I'd have to pick it up and look through it to do so, which would change its position, thus undermining the point of the exercise.

And man, this thread just goes all OVER the place.

[ July 29, 2004, 18:33: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL. This tank could surely fool me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Soapyfrog, watch for the booby traps, minefields and sniper rifles, that Norf remotely controls from the secret lair in his nuclear shelter. Geting in is one thing. Geting out may prove to be even harder. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif You see, once the word gets out that norf don't really have tank, THEY , who are out there to get poor old norf, will grow bolder. He can't afford it to happen, so watch your back. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 29, 2004, 19:59: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Are you really that desperate for fantasy fodder? I mean, now you have an obsession with having a picture of Norfleet for some perverted reason.

After all - a photo does, and proves, nothing. Unless you already know what Norfleet looks like (hint - he probably doesn't look like his avatar), in which case you're more obsessed than even I thought, given that you've managed to hunt down photos of him.

Even with that - photographs are easily doctored. Any idiot (and probably even you) can find a photo of an old tank in a book, the library, or (gasp) the internet, and digitally alter it to put in a acne-covered teenager - oops, that'd be you, I mean, a bearded old coot.

Heck - no need to alter it unless you do have Norfleet's picture on the ceiling above your bed, because he could find a picture of _some_ oldish coot beside an old tank and provide it, and you'd never know the difference.

Flooding perverted idiot. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I wouldn't go so far as calling your pervented idiot Cain, but since you said so yourslef I have no choice to agree with you, since your letter prove it quite clearly. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Man, please, your homosexual fantasties regarding Norfleet hold no interest to me, although they certanly explain why you are the only person in the entire forum defending him. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Maybe you shold try personal love letters next time, huh? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Forum is kindof tough medium for expressing your tender feeling my friend. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

As for the pictures and tanks - c'mon, I expected you to be at least a little smarter than norf. Was I wrong? Sorry dude, I don't want to rain on your parade, but can't you think of very simple way to prove that these pictures are norfleet's, and not some random person from the internet?!? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif If you can't, I can give you a hint, but I knidof hope you will be able to figure it out yourslef, it's not hard, really. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

And friendly advice - next time before hoping on your favorite horse and raiding to rescue the love of your life, try to think a little bit before you write, otherwise you will look very stupid, like you do now, when you couldn't even think of simple way to profe autenticity of the photo, when any 8 year old kid with average IQ could quickly come up with logical solution for this mindbogling problem. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif


Regards,
Stormbinder

[ July 29, 2004, 19:57: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you go back and read the proof I posted earlier, you might note that the only required property of God (as one possiblity of 4) I had listed was:

Quote:

Some being which can ignore the laws of physics

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">- in which case, origins need not apply, and your question is rather moot. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If one being can ignore the laws of physics - they aren't laws. If one being can break the laws - other beings, entities, energies, and objects can.