Cantousent

I thought your avatar was your picture, Weiser.

This is great. I wish I would have seen it sooner. I hadn't thought of a lot of this stuff.

I can hold my own in deathmatch and I still prefer teamplay. I hate running around a map shooting anyone that moves. I don't see anything on the horizon to replace RtcW. I remember this one fellow in the clan was an english guy. Heavy accent on voice. Anyhow, he had the foulest mouth. It was the funniest thing to play and have him cursing and making idle chat. Funny, but not always funny to folks trying to compete. heh heh. Oh well, don't want to hijack the thread. You should create an Obsidian clan for RtcW and challenge the folks at Midway.

we're such bad people.

heh heh heh It's the classicist in me, I guess. Anyhow, Christians have been some of the most bloodthirsty folks in history.

You know gymnastics were so much better when there was really something at stake. Bring in a bull and see how many of these athletes can hop over the top without getting gored to death. Make gymnastics a bloodsport again! That's my vote.

hahahaha that was a good one, mkreku. lolol

newegg is awesome. I ordered everything Sunday night and I received everything except the CPU this morning before 11am.

I believe, at the time that Bush made that statement, we hadn't heard from bin Laden in some time. Folks speculated he might be dead and others disagreed. At about the time of this statement, the SoD was going out of his way to goad bin Laden as well. If I'm not mistaken, soon after, maybe a week or two, bin Laden released a tape. Someone could probably look into the timeline. I'm too lazy.

"Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of -- " "THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all. So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did. And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means." "Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?" "THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban. But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money. And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom. Mike Allen. I'm working my way back, slowly but surely. Michael."

You know, Ironically, my wife and I have less debt than in the 90s but our savings, investments, and retirement have grown more slowly. Now, part of that is due to the fact that I was working in the 90s and have since returned to school. Part of it that our dollar doesn't seem to stretch as far. Still, our investments have grown far more slowly because stocks are no longer sky rocketing. At least that's my take. I'm not an economist. BTW: the tax cuts didn't result in the recession. Since the recession was underway before the tax cuts took effect, I would say the tax cuts are clearly not the cause. I don't think you meant it to come across that way, but that's how it sounds.

lol. Hey, I liked John Candy. Okay, back on topic, I hope there isn't another terrorist attack also.

Don't insult Phosphor. He's Candian, not American!

I guess it's all over now, but one of my concerns is heat. How much heat will the 9800 pro generate and what would the 9600 overclock have generated. The case has three fans, which I might replace. I think everything should be cool enough.

I disagree. There are events recorded in history. These events need no supernatural explanation. The Roman empire was not overcome because an army of Christians sprang out of the ground. Christianity did not spread primarily at the end of the sword. A lot of people bought into the Christian message. Whether you're a Christian and believe that this came from enlightenment or an atheist and believe that this rapid spread of Christianity came from the gullible nature of people, the fact is that Christianity spread quickly as a persecuted religion. That is, indeed, a fact. I am a Christian. I am not a racist "hillbilly." I don't know any "hillbillies" personally, but I do notice that you're quick to call someone else racist while using quite bigoted terms. I respect that many folks here are atheists. ...But if the last few arguments are meant to highlight how open minded or enlightened atheists are, then I'm glad to let folks read this thread and draw their own conclussions.

The very earliest Christianity was considered a sect of Judaism. Soon thereafter, it was persecuted in the Roman empire. Do you contend that Christians conquered Rome. Just because you have a bone to pick with Christians knocking on your door is a stupid reason to ignore the facts.

okay, rational discussion has left the thread, apparently. First of all, I didn't say that Monotheism led to democracy. I said, "Still, the western democracies did flourish in monotheistic cultures. Even if democracies did exist, that still doesn't take away the fact that western Christians embraced democracy in the end." That is undoubtedly true. Democracy has flourished in the west and did so before it flourished elsewhere. I don't contend that Christianity is the cause of democracy, but it can't have had an overly detrimental effect on democracy. To say that what is essentially a primative society has a democracy is only half of the truth. Loose organizations along tribal lines are "democratic." I won't argue with that. However, because each able bodied man has a say in primative societies does not make for a democracy. A democracy relies upon institutions. While you can make the argument that primative societies have such institutions, you're going to have to stretch. The nature of western democracies in which there is great concern for the enfranchisement of the majority of adult citizens does not derive from pagan values. Once again, you can make the claim, but that doesn't make it true. The spread of Christianity through Europe came as a result of many factors. To say that Europe was "Christianized through the sword" is no better than saying that Europe was converted because the message of redemption and an afterlife were appealing to the people. I won't error on the side of broad generalizations if you don't. "You make it sound like Westerners were christian by choice, they were never christian by choice, more than anything folk were christian out of fear." Rubbish. You're literally saying that people were "never christian by choice?" Never? Not once? It's amazing to see how far people will go to attack Christianity. I don't mind having a frank discussion. I really don't. I'm pretty good about admitting when the facts are against me. In this case, you're just making quick comments out of what can only be your predisposition. You say Christianity has never had a positive influence on the world. Never. Furthermore, you won't even concede that the western democracies, complete with self sustaining institutions of democracy, formed in Christian societies. Absolute rubbish. Your argument seems to be against monotheism. Does that mean you're polytheistic? I believe India serves as a good examples that polytheism is certainly alive and well in today's world. I have no bone to pick with polytheism. I do, however, have something against your claims. Mostly, however, there has to be some basis from which to build the discussion. If you won't admit to self evident truths, then there is no going forward. I will gladly allow you to keep to your clearly wrong minded and prejudicial views.

Successful democracies weren't around, though. Look at it this way, we can call a lot of tribal groups more or less democratic, but that's simply not the same thing as a democracy. Athens was clearly a democracy, not only in giving citizens a say in public matters, but in developing democratic institutions. I am a great admirer of the Athenian democracy. I'm a great admirer of Pericles. Personally, I think the Athenian democracy gets a bum wrap, especially since folks judged that democracies were unstable and undesireable based on the Athenian example. The examples of ancient democracies were one of the biggest arguments against democracy in the United States. Still, the western democracies did flourish in monotheistic cultures. Even if democracies did exist, that still doesn't take away the fact that western Christians embraced democracy in the end. Even more, the western democracies which, at that time, were still Christian in nature, led the world in free press, womens rights, and a plethora of other democratic and changing themes. Hell, France, moreso than most nations, has been a progressive force for centuries. I don't mind talking frankly about those times and areas where Christianity and Christians have failed. I would just hope that folks would be willing to see the good that has come of it. ...And I'm not even talking in a religious sense. I'm talking about society and social issues.

Well, I decided on the specs I posted above. I'd seen Tom's Hardware and decided to keep the 9800pro video card. I agonized over going for the Athlon 64 in a big way. Still, even though it would have been faster, and I like the Nforce3-250 a lot, I went with the Intel. I've just been using Intel for so long, and so successfully, that I didn't want to take a chance. ...And the prices were virtually the same. I think the difference between the Athlon 64 2.2 and the Intel CPU above, if we count the motherboards, was something like $2. If I were suggesting the system to someone else, I would suggest the Athlon but, to show I'm a hypocrite, when it came time for me to lay my money down, I was a coward. Overall, the folks suggesting a high-end graphics card prevailed on my reasoning. I didn't buy the best CPU, but the motherboard does support faster CPUs if I want to upgrade. The case is huge and has a good power supply and three fans, so if I choose, at a later time, I can just replace the motherboard and CPU and keep the case and other hardware. Let's face it, though, as long as it keeps up with the games I play at reasonable settings, I'll stick with thise setup for a long time. As for the OpenGl 2.0, I got that from the newegg.com website. Now, it's possible that they had it wrong, but the difference in price between the xt and pro was substantial. The cheapest xt was $339 and the pro was $266. So, I don't know if newegg had it wrong, but I was willing to chance it. Anyhow, I was already buying into mkreku's reasoning on the matter and it made sense to me to go for the pro. I don't doubt that the xt is faster. I just don't think it was $71 faster.

You know, I've thought about seeking a job in quality assurance just because it sounds like fun. ...But I already spend too much time on gaming and I've got a lot of school to finish before the bitter end. I just can't see sending in a resume for it. Plus, I'd just feel silly. I know that it's a serious job, but it just seems like I'm a bit old to be a play tester. I'm woefully underqualified to be a game desiger, so that idea is gone. My forays into C++ were interesting but not particularly fruitful. That is, unless odd little programs that take me forever to finish is considered fruitful. Good luck to Aurora, though. Probably the best way to go is to send in a resume with a good cover letter. That or they have a job postings page around here somewhere, I'm sure. If you're lucky, they'll have an online application area which saves you the trouble of putting together a resume specifically for the computer game industry. Hell, you'll end up needing to do both probably, just because it's a cruel world in which we live.

technically speaking, since it pertains to the man, it is ad hominem. ...But, in this case, it's not true. I like to differentiate between ad hominem attacks based on just attacking the other guy and ad hominem attacks that go to the central issue. If Bush were literally to have substandard intelligence, then it would be a pertinent point to make in the discussion. It would be ad hominem, but only in the technical sense, not in the broader use of the word as a personal attack. Anyhow, ad hominem is Latin. I know what it means.

If you believe bush to have less than average intelligence, Servant, then it is not an ad hominem attack. It is a statement of fact concerning the overall discussion that happens to relate specifcally to the man. There's nothing to be done about that. If you really do believe that Bush's intelligence is literally less than average, your views are distorted. I mean, do liberals truly believe that Bush is mentally retarded? It's a false claim on its face and it is a distraction to the folks who actually vote: the American public. Oh, wait, let's hear some of my European freinds make a comment to the effect that Americans are idiots in general. Hey, if that gets you excited and provides some good times with likeminded folks, more power to you. ...But it's not a compelling apart from the hardcore faithful. Somewhere along the line we should concede that Bush is not, technically speaking, an idiot. There are plenty of policy reasons to oppose Bush if you're a liberal, but attacking him personally is just a distraction from your more compelling arguments. Now, you might say he sometimes acts like an idiot. Hell, I'll agree with that. Sometimes all of us do.

Okay, I'd like to express some gratitude on the advice you guys have given me. I took everything I read, did some research on some of what you've said, finalized everything and made my purchase. A few weeks of thinking and pondering the issue and I've ended up with a system that I hope will last me another three years. After all, the system I have now wasn't better for its time and it's lasted pretty well. Once again, thanks.

That might be more convincing if the democracies of the western world weren't born out of Monotheistic cultures.

hahahaha. That was funny, Adria. I think it's a good idea to separate fundamental moral foundations from specific, often quite specific, cultural information. On its face, I have to agree with the idea that religion is a basis for behavior. Because of that fact, it has always been embroiled in the political process. Sometimes religion is separated from the actual government and the government uses religion for its own purposes. Sometimes, religion is either the government or seeks to use the government for its own purposes. I don't mind folks being hostile to religion. Religious folks for thousands of years have gone out of their way to give religion a bad name. That's why I prefer to think that we're better off talking about religion later and living well now. An argument for virtue is much more compelling when it comes from someone who is actually virtuous. heh heh