Dark Moth

Was that aimed at me? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes. Inductive reasoning is often a logical fallacy when used improperly, as in Sand's case. While inductive reasoning is often used in scientific observations, it has limits and doesn't always work when applied to certain situation. Case in point: Sand. He's using a very limited support (his own experience) and used it to apply to all of human society (a favorite tactic of his). " For example: my fiance almost stabbed me. My near-marriage hurt me, therefore, marriage is a harmful, outdated social institution. That is a good example of weak induction, which is what HadeSand is using. Usually good scientific reasoning uses a mixture of inductive and deductive reasoning depending on the situation.

Wrong. )

The problem with Sand is that he uses his own personal experiences to make conclusions and apply standards to society (inductive reasoning).

Not bad, not bad. Except the ponytail of course.

Can't comment due to barefaced silliness of statement.

Are you making a request? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No. )

No sane person would put a gun in Eddo's hands.

Well, glad to see we're now hablando the same idioma.

In today's world, marriage is no longer a purely religious institution. Therefore, it's not a matter of separation of church and state. I thought you would have at least been smart enough to know that. "

Wrong.

That's right! And we all know Sand is right in every single argument, no matter the subject! All hail the supreme arbiter of social standards!

Best of luck to you, man. My prayers go with you.

My point exactly. You didn't watch it, you have no clue what you're talking about. You didn't even see L.T. play. He played well, I know because I watched him play. The Chargers are also not a one-man team. L.T. can't help his defense make plays, nor stop a dumb teammate from taunting an opponent, nor can he stop a punt receiver from dropping the ball. Hence the reason your claim that the Patsies were the better team and L.T. 'choked' is absurd and can't be taken seriously (like much of your football commentary) by anyone who actually watched the game. End of story.

Um, no. The Chargers were the better team, no questions asked. I watched the entire thing (you probably didn't). If it weren't for the Chargers making dumb moves, they would've won. Simply put. The Pats did almost nothing in the first half, and the Chargers offense was doing most of the entire game. I won't even comment on the barefaced silliness of your point about L.T. choking. He didn't choke, the team did. Now please, go back to your sandbox and leave the football talk to people who know what they're talking about. ^_^

I gotta agree with Kelverin that the Chargers just made so many stupid mistakes. I watched the whole game, and I truly think the Chargers were the better team. They just made so many dumb moves, whether it was fumbles, penalties, or just poor decisions, they basically blew the second half and handed the game to the Patriots. Sucks, cause I was pulling for them to win.

Yeah, I just realized that. By the way, it's very easy to turn off. In the menu bar at the top, click on View > Hide Ministore

That's a good deal. If it did cost $200, I definitely would buy the 8 GB model. I guess the only real reservation I have against getting that model is that at $250, you could get a regular iPod for about the same price and get a lot more songs (2000 for the 8GB Nano vs. 7,500 for a 30 GB iPod), plus video playback (and games, though I personally don't care about that). Then again, it is a lot bigger, and the battery life is actually considerably less than that of the Nano. So I guess it depends on what you want out of it. :crazy: Anyhoo, iPod + iTunes is teh roXorZ.

I'm hung over, though. "

I think he's not referring so much as to the war being illegal as he is to just the vast bulk of your statements being completely ridiculous and dull-witted (yet rather entertaining to read). Frankly I don't know which is funnier - your statements themselves or the fact that you actually place yourself on a higher moral pedestal than others. Also, if you think Bush is a dictator, try moving to North Korea, then see if your opinion's still the same. That, or stop wasting intelligent peoples' time with your nonsense.

Having a 2nd gen Ipod Nano, I'd argue it's about a damn near perfect music player. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What capacity? Because I'm looking to buy a 4GB nano once I have the money. Right now I have a 1st gen 2GB model. I don't think I'd ever pay $250 to get an 8GB nano, though. If I were to spend that much money on an mp3 player, I'd just make the jump from a nano to a regular iPod for almost the same price and get much more bang for my buck.

And another thing: people have been mentioning this mini iTunes store on the new version that follows you everywhere. I've seen it on other people's iTunes, but never on mine. And I have the newest version (version 7).

I don't know what all the fuss here is about iPods and iTunes. I've been using both for almost a year now and haven't had any problems whatsoever. I find both hassle-free and easy to use. Then again, maybe my having a Mac has something to do with it.

I'm talking about both jobs, genius. I see your astound sense of logic is only matched by your reading comprehension. ^_^ That wasn't a flame. Very deep sarcasm yes, but not a flame. Maybe instead of attacking my use of smilies and profanity, you should actually trying attacking the points I'm making. Oh, but it seems you can't. And as I said, I'm very secure in my position. I unlike you have at least some idea of what I'm talking about. If I do seem agitated, it's because I get a little tired of having to deal with people like you constantly. I don't know where your prejudice comes from, maybe you had a bad experience, or maybe you got beaten with the soap one too many times at boot camp, but it gets a little boring after a while. You've only spewed off propaganda and outrageous claims to try to justify your hatred of the US and its troops. And yes, they did sign up. That does not make them mass murderers as you want people to believe. And I don't know where you pulled that crazy fact from, but Iraq was far from a perfectly good country. Maybe you don't see anything wrong with living under a bloodthirsty dictator, but I'm sure they did. Or maybe you should go live in the 90's Iraq or North Korea today and see what living under a real dictator was like. And by the way, believe it or not, the Iraqis did want us to topple Saddam in the first place. The man was not liked by his own people. But back to the troops, yes they make mistakes. Yes, friendly fire happens and civilians die. That does not mean they did it on purpose, nor does that mean they are the bloodthirsty murderers you think they are. If you refuse to see that, I really can't help you. Fine, let their blood be on my hands. And let the blood of all American civilians, troops, and innocent Iraqis be on your hands for your despicable support of what the real murders do in Iraq. You really do make me sick, and frankly it appalls me that you feel the need to spout off your nonsense, trying to make monsters out of the very men and women who are dying overseas for ingrates like you. You try to pin everything that goes wrong on American and its troops, whether it be the civil war or the Iraq economy (which by the way is actually better today than it was under Saddam). The absurdity of your stance is pretty much shown by what I've highlighted. You obviously couldn't hope to actually say anything that could be close to being true. Heck, you haven't even disproved a thing I've said. You've only kept spouting the same old boring drivel I've heard from you time after time. Frankly, given the gnat-like nature of your debating skills, that hardly comes as a surprise. And just to clarify something for you, yes WMD's were the main reason to go to Iraq, but they weren't the only reason. The reason also was that he was a brutal dictator who did in fact support terrorism. Or maybe you missed the times he publicly announced he funded suicide bombers and their families in Israel. And Saddam was a threat, even if only indirectly. And I guarantee you, if Saddam could have attained WMD's, he would have. Do you feel he should have been left in power? Answer me that. I'll say it again, this has nothing to do with conservatives 'Bible thumping'. We thought a country was a threat, and we went in to take care of it. Yes, mistakes were made. Yes, it was handled poorly. Yes, we did make a mess. But at least we're trying to fix it. Or can you not comprehend that's the reason we're trying to send more troops over to begin with? The reason they're there is to fix the mess that we (and the Iraqis) have created. Or perhaps you would rather we do nothing, and just cut and run and leave the Iraqis to handle themselves. How caring of you.

Super regeneration. Hell, the ability to heal cuts superfast and regrow limbs has its perks. Gills would be very pimp, too. All you people are going to hell, by the way.

My my, you're a laugh. You haven't stated any facts. The only things you've stated are the same nonsensical propaganda that makes me weep for Americans today. And my view is far from one-dimensional, but take it however you want. Get your "facts" straight. Once again, it has less to do with us and more to do with the fact that the Iraqis simply are caught in a civil war. A civil war that THEY started. The Americans didn't provoke it so much as merely create a power vacuum that allowed it to happen. You're also blatantly ignoring the reason we're still there in the first place: to try and stop this insurgency, stabilize the country, and hopefully save more lives. Not that you'll admit it, of course. Truth hurts, I know. Bush committed a serious error in 2003 by not solidifying our power there when we had the chance. Instead, he reduced troops and opened the door for the insurgency to take place. Maybe because we're still needed, both there and in Iraq, genius? :crazy: The Taliban are still around you know. Maybe you'd rather us just leave and leave the job unfinished, right? What a humanitarian you are. What do you mean I hate the truth? As laughable as it is hearing that from you, I never shy away from the truth. Is it wrong to hate the fact that apparently a ruthless dictator had to keep Iraqis from killing each other? Also, I doubt we would have helped Saddam "decades" earlier if we knew what he would become. Also, don't even bother to try and place the blame on us for those economic sanctions. Those economic sanctions were because of Saddam. Hell, they weren't even solely our doing as you try to make it seem. If Saddam actually did care about his people, he would have stepped down and allowed the sanctions to be lifted. Also, instead of blaming us for starving poor Iraqis, maybe you should blame Saddam for the oil-for-food scandal. Remember that? Saddam bought things with the oil money, but it wasn't all food, I guarantee you. :joy: Maybe if he had bought food with it, the Iraqis wouldn't have been starving so much. "Killing innocent kids" God, you're pathetic. Tell me, how many Americans go out and purposely or accidentally shoot kids? Better yet, how many kids have died from terrorist attacks? Maybe you remember that incident about a suicide bomb going off right next to a group of children being given toys by US troops? Don't even try to pull that bull**** on me. Frankly, it's boring, it's pathetic, and frankly it makes me sick that people like you repeatedly demonize our troops while ignoring the atrocities committed by our own enemies. As for the economic sanctions, see my point above. I'm an oxymoron? Hardly. Losing side? HAHAHA! Seriously, it's not the time for jokes. Trust me, I'm very secure in my stance. Unlike you, I have the comfort of knowing I can back up my statements and am not just spewing off random propaganda fed to me by the liberal media. Trust me, I've heard this stuff before. I've heard better arguments, and from people more convincing than you. You don't impress me. I've heard this stuff from you plenty of times before, and frankly it's hard to take you seriously. Case closed.