I was just thinking, it is funny that RTW and ETW are the two most complained about TW titles of all time, yet they (despite ETW's rocky start) are IMHO by far the best.
Printable View
I was just thinking, it is funny that RTW and ETW are the two most complained about TW titles of all time, yet they (despite ETW's rocky start) are IMHO by far the best.
I've never been able to get into a TW game since M2. I hope R2 will change that.
I decided I don't like my school anymore. I went to the first day of my math class yesterday and the room was completely full, I had to sit on a chair by the wall without any desk. Then they want me pay $40 for a parking sticker. They're planning on building a clock tower that the school doesn't need and will cost thousands of dollars. It makes me mad that they want to take every cent off of me that they possibly can and then build useless stuff that won't enhance my education.
Having an attractive campus is important, but I think my school's priorities are in the wrong order.
They are all like that.
I want, no NEED a blowpipe. Damn that stuff shoots hard
Funnest thing is designing your own projectiles. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
You would actually be surprised how accurate you can be with those.
Maybe later, found a nice short one for sale (90cm) and it has sharp and stun darts. Shooting bottles with stun darts is fun they almost explode. Haven't bought it yet by the way friend brought one. Fun fact, at the smartshop 2 minutes from here I can buy these frogs they use in the jungle. Tempting.
lol :P
I was really looking forward to R2 coming out. Too late, now hooked on MWO. Gotta run LRMs inc
They lick Them. Seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
La meglio gioventu, awesome
Gawd these eyes. http://www.google.nl/search?q=la+meg...eN_Jvr8mJdM%3A
Time really flies.
So if we existed inside a vacuum time would stay still?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
Time is a dimension of its' own, so it doesn't follow the same laws as the classic three dimensions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
Or so you say. ~;) I say that time simply the highest form of energy that is causing everything to move, and as it slowly is converted into lower forms of energy time will slow down continuously and then stop. Prove me wrong. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
In the future Belgian beer will be produced everywhere in the world but will still be called "Belgian"... it won't be made from hops or grains, but instead from the faeces of special GM cockroaches which live on human sewage and crap out pellets of malty/hoppy goodness...
Sounds legit to me. Where can I buy some and when?Quote:
Originally Posted by asai
From your local licenced InBev global outlet in about 2150 something-or-other...
Damnation, I'll have popped off by then. Oh well...Quote:
Originally Posted by asai
Or... I might have it backwards, it might have been mutant cockroaches making beer out of fermented Belgians...
Is it me, or is lately there a weird trend in academic philosophy toward a "practical", "common-sense" realism in which, Oh no guys, we had it right all along, everything is exactly as it seems, or in other words it is exactly as it seems to me and the subsistence-farmer minds of ancient times.
:no:
That is a bad thing?
I thought Belgians already were fermented. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by asai
That is just a consequence of prolonged criticism from the public at large towards notions of being purposely obfuscating with jargon and being removed from reality in Ivory Towers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
That being said, I do believe there is value in things said by the ancients. I like the Epicureans and the Stoics and the ancient Skeptics I have read. What i don't like, is the very beginning of the "modern" philosophy and traditions with people like Descarte talking about demons tricking your eyes or whatever the garbage he spews to justify God's existence.
I'm not talking about the Classical or Late Antique philosophers - who aren't interesting anyway - but notions like "we may take as data for philosophical inquiry many of the things we ordinarily think we know", or that philosophers need not "deny what we all know to be true".
Can you provide some examples to clarify this point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Ahh, I see what you are talking about. Leaving aside that this was published in 1959........I need a few days to fully read and understand what this dude is saying. I don't want to comment in the positive or negative towards "common sense" philosophy without some grounding of what that actually entails.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
EDIT: Whoops got the year wrong.
So sue me.
But there are other, contemporary, offenders, of which I will regrettably not divulge any details.
I am just an ignorant engineering student who only cares about ethics, so I apologize if this new wave of "common sense" philosophy wins me over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency