Messages

In the God of War games, I didn't understand why the breasts were modeled after implants. This was obviously a purposeful (though anachronistic) design decision.

However, the "sex" minigames were far from frivolous. They appeared early on in both games (GOW: beginning of second level, GOW2: end of first level) and taught the player all the motions for the boss action sequences and finishing moves for some of the enemy types (gorgon, cyclops, etc.). It served to give the player a way to practice the moves without punishment.

What no one suspects is that in the end of the game, you find out that they weren't zombies all along. They just had AIDS!

If this is your first complete film, congratulate yourself! The music carried the scenes between shots well. You had interesting compositions and a few well placed camera tricks (superimposing the lights while unfocusing, etc).

A few things dissatisfied me. It seemed like the most interesting parts weren't shown (the actual table tennis matches, the hand accident, the leg accident, etc.). Considering the budget, very excusable. The lack of characters with memorable personalities stood out, too. The current ones would've worked in a feature length film, when the viewer enough time to spend with the characters to care about them. However, in something this sort, they feel vague (and this is where the boredom creeps in). To me, the most interesting part of the film was when the Spanish kid was introduced (an event which overshadows the climax).

The biggest problem I had with the film was the narration. I could literally walk away from my screen, only listening to the audio, and I wouldn't lose much information. It's all "tell" and little "show". It feels like you weren't confident in the actors to convey the emotions.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, I did enjoy it. Make more!

Is all the narration straight from the short story?

http://www.amazon.com/Cooling-Has-Next-Already-Begun/dp/013172312X

A mere 31 years ago...

BigBrother, these two events are completely unrelated. I for one never cared about that Y2M virus scare one little bit, and truthfully I think it was mainly an American hysteria. I sure as heck never heard about anyone around here stocking up food stuffs etc.

I'm not using this example to "prove" anything, besides show the similarities between two events where the media generated hysteria. What IS irrelevant is that you were not worried and did not hear of anyone reacting. Whether or not you gave a shit, it's a fact that millions of dollars were wasted on this hoax. My point is that, like global warming, we're pouring lots of money (billions for the latter) into it. This fact sets Y2K apart from the "gazillions of predictions" you refer to. So no, they are not completely unrelated.

Sorry, but bringing up that old thing isn't helping you one bit in this debate.

You're debating? Isn't this your first post? Do I detect a snide, condescending tone? Will I have to choke a bitch?

You don't need a degree in anything to tell this graph is bullshit.

For starters, there is no point of reference besides the word "present". How are we, the gullible reader, to divine what year this data (with sources mysteriously absent) was actually compiled? Most credible graphs will have a note like "Data compiled from 2007 Gallup Poll results" or "see Appendix B" attached.

It doesn't indicate what part of this carbon dioxide is man-made. Don't plants (which are only net absorbers during their growth stages) and animals produce this gas too?

Are these temperature changes taken from one place (it doesn't seem to indicate mean/mode, which might be more useful when considering the variety of climates on this planet)?

Finally, I highly doubt there a consistent and accurate measurement for both temperature and C02 levels that spans 400,000 years like the graph claims. According to anthropological studies of mankind's prehistory, we have record of maybe 40,000 years. This would mean that literally 90% of this graph is irrelevant to human production of C02.

This may be of interest also: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=NVVI0TXTKWJIHQFIQMGCFFOAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml

A little critical thinking goes a long way.

Anyone remember Y2K? Every computer in the world failed simultaneously, airplanes fell out of the sky, and microwaves malfunctioned, turning families into brain-dead mutants. Or were those just the doomsayers' predictions? We can laugh now, but the hoax was taken seriously enough that a lot of companies from a lot of industries shelled out millions to update their databases to make them compliant for the extra two digits.

So it might actually be a cooling trend after all (global warming might just be a name)?
That may explain events like this:
http://www.eubusiness.com/news_live/1178625614.03
(Losses of over 80% of production)
and
http://www.jacksonholestartrib.com/articles/2007/06/07/news/top_story/doc4668725066912744978453.txt
I also read that the US is had a record cold winter. Nationwide, the month of April was the coldest in 113 years, with temperatures an average of 20 degrees Fahrenheit lower than usual.

In the 1970's, there was a global cooling scare. Scientists were trying to figure out ways to artificially generate large quantities of C02 to slow the impending ice age.

It seems like a bit of a conflict of interest, when a group supports a theory directly related to their funding. Under GWB, the funding for climate research has increased by billions of dollars. Because of this, your average scientist is more likely to get a grant and a green light if she can link her research to global warming.

There seem to be a lot of unanswered questions...
Historically, haven't volcanic eruptions changed global climate more than anything man-made (Krakatoa, 1883)? Also, doesn't man-made C02 emissions make up a very small percentage of greenhouse gasses (which are mostly water vapor)? During the "Industrial Revolution" years (advent of the factory system, no pollution caps, etc.), why was the weather significantly colder than in previous years? Why is the average temperature increasing on Mars, a planet without human life? How will using only two pieces of toilet paper per day help cool the planet?

Several years ago, I took an environmental engineering class (our professor has a PhD in fuel science, M. Tech and B. Tech in chemical engineering). He talked about a cyclical weather structure (apparently there are remnants of ancient vineyards in Great Britain). 

No-good dirty God-damned hippies!!!

Out of morbid curiosity, are there any screenshots?

In the US alone, about 50,000 people die every year from alcohol related accidents. Cigarette smoking kills about 400,000 people annually.

In the entire history of mankind, there has never been record of a single mortality caused by marijuana.

I abhor cigarettes personally, but I can see the up side. Employees that smoke get more breaks, and now that public smoking is restricted in many places, there are additional social benefits. For instance, I see a lot of guys meeting girls outside of bars when someone needs a light or a cigarette. It's quiet enough to hold an actual conversation and no friends around to interfere.

Back when I took comparative literature, the professor was obsessed with the detective stories and the dime pulp novels of old. At the height of their popularity, they were the source of controversy. From a narrative standpoint, they are arranged backwards, starting with the result then backtracking to the cause. Apparently, a lot of people were upset with this, because when trying to solve the murder, the reader would put themselves in the suspect's shoes, mentally re-enacting the deed. The possible connection between the literary act and a "real" one is explored in novels like "Strangers on a Train", where the main character (who becomes a murderer) reads a lot of these mystery books.

Maybe this isn't totally off-topic, but along the lines of video games pushing the limits:

http://www.honestgamers.com/systems/content.php?review_id=4775&game_id=21487&console_id=13

Yeah, they're 3d models and no one is technically getting hurt... but if we replace simulated murders with another illegal act (in this case, rape), does the argument still hold?

I realize it's inconsistent, but I'm the first to admit that the link I posted disturbed me slightly more than anything I read or saw about Manhunt 2.

Besides, the violence in the game looks cheesy (Rockstar games tend to fall on the lower end of a system's graphics technology anyways). Sneaking up behind someone and pulling out one of their vertebrae with a pair of pliers? Give me a break.

That being the case, I don't think Rockstar can hide behind the fact it's "only a game", especially in today's social climate.

Heheheh. Read it again. It's a new version.

Now it's a race to see who can finish their game first and keep the title!

Bingo! I should've just PMed you instead out posting.

Despite its flaws, I really enjoyed this one.

Hi all,

I was thinking of an adventure game I played about 6 years ago (although it came out around the same time as Full Throttle did). It featured a hard-boiled private eye who narrated the story in a deadpan style characteristic of film noir. The game itself was first person and revolved around visiting places at the specific times (I don't remember being able to explore much, though you did have a few instances where you could find clues). The game had several endings. In your office, you could take a drink from the bottle in the desk drawer, and the detective narrator would recap the case (sometimes leading to a revelation).

Also, it was not FMV.

Any idea what game I'm talking about?

If your dad never let your mom out and she couldn't drive, how did she have a job and make money for the family?

For the ballgame analogy, it's more like you've got Babe Ruth on the bench, but it's up to you to sub him in.

You ruin a painting and that is all you have done. You rape a woman, kill her children in front of her and then kill her? That's awful. And bear in mind that the women of those days mostly just obeying men... did they deserve this fate?

There's only one Being who can say what anyone deserves. So they did. If you continue reading Jeremiah, you will find how God wept for the people He destroyed.

48:28 Leave your towns, you inhabitants of Moab. Go and live in the cliffs. Be like a dove that makes its nest high on the sides of a ravine.

48:29 I have heard how proud the people of Moab are, I know how haughty they are. I have heard how arrogant, proud, and haughty they are, what a high opinion they have of themselves.

48:30 I, the Lord, affirm that I know how arrogant they are. But their pride is ill-founded. Their boastings will prove to be false.

48:31. So I will weep with sorrow for Moab. I will cry out in sadness for all of Moab. I will moan for the people of Kir Heres.

48:36 So my heart moans for Moab like a flute playing a funeral song. Yes, like a flute playing a funeral song, my heart moans for the people of Kir Heres. For the wealth they have gained will perish.

48:47 "Yet in days to come I will reverse Moab's ill fortune.” says the Lord. The judgment against Moab ends here.

At a point, a person loses their humanity to the sin (by their own choice) and there is nothing redeemable left.

God created free will. It'd be arrogant to assume that we are somehow entitled to it.

I have given examples where god has ordered the murder of innocent people.

According to Scripture, everyone is born into sin. No human is innocent, and on our own merits, we all deserve death.