213374U

What are you trying to say? And why would you make plans in advance that involve teenagers?

Does prohibition (in this case) work for anything other than diverting law enforcement resources from other, more important tasks? Right. Legalize. It's not worse than booze or cigarettes anyway.

Hooray for stuff!

Yeah, well. I'd like to know so I can make plans in advance.

Well, they could. But only if they are a member of the dreaded Third Generation. But the TOMBS community at large denies the existence of such beings, arguing that, even if they ever existed, their accounts were deleted long ago, and those who believe in them are openly scorned. :ph34r: Uh... wait a second...

Yeah, man. That sucked! Anyhow, is there going to be a session this Friday?

Um... okay. But without the... *ahem* incestuous gay stuff, you know. :ph34r:

A god of stupidity is still a god... "

LOL Proof, Please? In the book, it's STILL the civilians that rule, remember? Civilians that had spent a minimum of two years in the army. Why revolt against it? After all, anyone can participate. Ironically, the rebels would be the fascists in that case, as they would be trying to change the establishment (a meritocratic establishment) by means of force. Thus, violent repression would be warranted. That's how civil wars are started, you know. But I don't think you understood the book very well. The "Tarkin doctrine" doesn't make an appearance at all in the book, as everyone keeps their individual rights and freedoms intact, only political privileges are restricted, in exchange for two years of service. A fair trade if you ask me. This is sci-fi. And not very thrilling at that. I strongly recommend you use paragraphs next time, it will make your post slightly more readble. But let's not spam this thread with this, as it's not about Heinlein's work but the somewhat disappointing FPS soon to be released.

No.

Yeah, but try to understand what you read this time. In the book, the government isn't based around war or has the military as its backbone. It's just a meritocracy. Simple, really. But yeah, it probably wouldn't work. Something to do with the inherent stupidity of humankind, I guess.

The lack of something better to discuss.

Those are two different issues you're talking about. Patches that solve technical issues isn't what the restoration team are doing. If you don't like the game, say so, but don't go around saying that "it needs fixing", because it most certainly does not, in that respect at least. OE aren't helping the restoration team probably because they stand by their work, like it or not. I agree that the game needs more bug fixing, but apparently "they are working on it". People should keep the bitching in check until they openly say that there aren't going to be any more patches.

Yeah! Which one of them is she?

I was going to say that I really don't care for full VA that much, but then I remembered Bloodlines. 'Nuff said.

Hell, yeah.

Ouch.

Damn. OE really need to release some info on PNJ.

If GoA doesn't reply to this, he must be dead or mentally incapacitated.

None of those offer definite evidence. And you obviously don't understand how the mechanism works, as it's not the debris of the "nuclear mushroom" that would block out the sun. And, at any rate, the paper compares it to the C-T event, in which only ~50% of all species became extinct. I have already debated that point, you should read the thread before replying. Not really. If it was so evident, it would have become clear during tests of the larger nuclear devices. It didn't really, and it's speculation at this point. The paper you linked to clearly states that it would depend on the "number, yield, and type of target", adding even more conditions to it. That without mentioning our really limited understanding of atmospherical and meteorological mechanisms on a global scale. While I accept it may be a consequence of nuclear warfare, there are still too many unknowns to take it as gospel. So yeah, while there are people disputing evolution, nuclear winter isn't nearly as accepted OR necessary as evolution.

That sounds awfully like one of those "you take my word for it" comments. I suppose you have data to back your claims?

That mechanism is well understood and accepted. It's not clear that large amounts of thermonuclear blasts would cause that effect, though.

I'm familiar with the concept of nuclear winter. But again, try to find proof that it would destroy all life on Earth. You will find none. The Cretaceous-Tertiary ELE caused similar effects, and only ~50% of all species were destroyed. Most of them were highly specialized organisms with little adaptive capacity. Also, I suggest you do some research on nuclear ordnance, and you will find that thermonuclear warheads (the kind of nuclear weaponry needed to cause the massive fires needed to trigger a nuclear winter) are relatively clean in comparison to their standard counterparts, so the radiation clouds would not be as bad as you presume. Yes, it would be a catastrophe, and civilization would perhaps be set back a few hundred years, but mankind would not become extinct. And how are you so sure that "vaults" are impractical? I don't have specific data on what the US govt. contingency plans for nuclear war are. Somehow, I doubt you do, either. Right now, the cost of putting stuff in orbit is too high, and the benefits are not such a big deal. But give it some time, until going into orbit isn't much more expensive than going to Taiwan. Also, granting exclusive rights only encourages monopolies, and that in turn tends to cause the system to stagnate. Let them rip each other apart for being the first to build a mall on Mars.