Author Topic: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?  (Read 16399 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline krjal

  • Pac-Man Maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #30 on: April 01, 2005, 06:54:47 pm »
That was a good one. Hadn't seen it before.

Thanks :)
+++"Sometimes, when I look into the abyss, the abyss looks back" - [tmo]+++

dapunisher

  • Guest
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2005, 09:57:12 am »
WeltallZero, So we battle again eh? HAHAHA But seriously, I enjoy your imputs.
But here is one for you
Evolution is when a species changes over time right? Like how many evolutionists believe man evolved from monkeys, right?
Where you there to see a monkey turn into a man?
Did YOU physically see it happen slowly over time?
Of course you'll say well there is factual evidence to support this
Well, no there is not. You're forgetting the missing link. Without the missing link you have monkey, and you have man. And NOTHING to bridge the gap.
Where is this missing link? I'll tell you where...it doesn't exist. No one has found the missing link, and you can't convince me otherwise
If man evolved from monkey...why are there still monkey's to this day?
Wouldn't, according to Darwin's theory of natural selection, the weaker species die out?
And as for other animals, ALOT of "factual" information for evolution was fabricated during the 19th and 20 centuries
Go to drdino.com
Dr. Kent Hovind is offering $250,000 to anyone that can prove evolution happens or has happened
He debates thousands of evolutionists every year
So far no one has won the $250,000

Here's another one for you
Do blackholes exist?
Yes
Have you seen one physically?
Has ANYONE seen one physically?
Isn't it just inferred, hypotheisized that they exist?
Isn't it a scientific "fact" that they exist?
Isn't it scary that scientists accept things as fact, and worse yet press those facts on people without any physical proof?

Which makes evoltionists and most scientists.....religious
They believe in things they cannot see

Here's another one for you
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed right?
That IS a scientific law right?
Why is it a law? Because HUMAN BEINGS have never proven the opposite
Does that make it a hard solid fact? I guess to most it does
But if matter can neither be created nor destroyed, where did the universe come from?

Anyway, I'm going to stop here. No need battling each other over and over. You are entitled to your oppinions, and I to mine. You want to believe we all came from cosmic dust and amino acid soup? Fine
I want to believe that some giant old guy farted and created the known universe? Fine

But let's end it here, like gentleman shall we?

Oh and in passing to answer your question
I don't know who created God....and I don't really care.

Offline krjal

  • Pac-Man Maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #32 on: April 02, 2005, 09:06:00 pm »
Yes.

You do sound a little vindictive when saying all this stuff which basically boils down to: We don't know, so we believe.

Though I agree there is a lot of dodgy 'science' going on at the moment you really just have to take it in the right way.

ps. There is also 'evidence' to support the nonexistance of black holes.
+++"Sometimes, when I look into the abyss, the abyss looks back" - [tmo]+++

Offline Stromko

  • Phoenix Fighter
  • **
  • Posts: 164
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #33 on: April 03, 2005, 04:54:55 am »
I doubt they could see Spore as that much of a threat, lots of games have magic and super-technology and all sorts of fantasy elements, actually a lot of games have Creationist backstories but scientific-minded gamers generally don't care because it's part of the fantasy world. I don't think creationists could see Spore as any particular threat, they can just say the game's a work of fantasy and doesn't prove anything.

There are millions of unanswerable questions that one could ask about any faith's Creation story, because of the fact that religious beliefs are often held to be absolutely, 100% true. And nobody can prove anything, therefore, if there was a religious text written a few millenia ago that explained in detail the theory of evolution; and put it as Divine Fact; then I would be doubting it just as I doubt Creationism. Because, nothing can be proven, and mortal beings are capable of error.

Evolution is the best theory I have to go on, as of this moment. I'll consider anything more believable that comes along. Among the thousands of equally plausible Creationist believes in the world, I find Evolution has the most proof. (Damn I can't believe I spent an hour pondering all this instead of reading more cool threads ;))

Offline WeltallZero

  • Fire Truck Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2005, 04:59:19 am »
WeltallZero, So we battle again eh? HAHAHA But seriously, I enjoy your imputs.
But here is one for you
Evolution is when a species changes over time right? Like how many evolutionists believe man evolved from monkeys, right?
Where you there to see a monkey turn into a man?
Did YOU physically see it happen slowly over time?
Of course you'll say well there is factual evidence to support this
Well, no there is not. You're forgetting the missing link. Without the missing link you have monkey, and you have man. And NOTHING to bridge
the gap.

Um, you're quite misguided, and I see that a very over-simplificated paleoanthropology has been fed to you. From the Smithsonian National Musseum of Natural History:

A "missing link" in paleoanthropology is a bit of a misnomer. The "missing link" idea refers to a popular belief that there is just one piece of the puzzle that is missing between modern humans and our closest relatives, apes. However, this is not the case. The human family tree is rich and contains many different species

Our lineage begins in Africa at least six million years ago when the earliest hominins (early humans) branched off from the African apes. Our genealogical tree gained many more branches through time as species of hominins adapted to diverse environmental conditions. At many times in the past, more than one species of hominin lived at the same time. As new fossils are found, we continually add new forms of hominins to our tree. There is no one piece of evidence, no single "missing link," that unlocks all the secrets of our ancestry.


Quote
Where is this missing link? I'll tell you where...it doesn't exist. No one has found the missing link, and you can't convince me otherwise
If man evolved from monkey...why are there still monkey's to this day?
Wouldn't, according to Darwin's theory of natural selection, the weaker species die out?

Again, it seems your actual knowledge about evolution is rather limited. There is no "weaker" and "stronger" species, only "fitter" for their enviroments. "The Selfish Gene" and "The Blind Watchmaker" are good reads on this, I suggest you check them out.
Also, no offense, but it seems that even the most elemental common knowledge about evolution eludes you as well. Man never evolved from monkeys; apes, monkeys and humans all evolved from common ancestors, most of which are now, indeed, extinct. I thought (or perhaps, hoped) even creationists would know as much. I would beg that you research even a bit of the most basic facts about evolution before embarrasing yourself any further. Surely you have, at the very least, heard about the neanderthal and cro-magnon?

Quote
And as for other animals, ALOT of "factual" information for evolution was fabricated during the 19th and 20 centuries.
Go to drdino.com

Ah, a completely religion-independant site, with extremely strict scientific methods, I see. Any single so-called scientific that cites god every two sentences gets a noticeable credibility drop in my book.
In any case, time and again, throughout all history, most if not all factual information about religion has been proven to be made up (which is why faith is required, obviously). But somehow most believers (including you, I'm guessing) choose to ignore that as counter-proof against religion. Which is actually perfectly valid: false proof does not itself invalidate a theory.

Quote
Dr. Kent Hovind is offering $250,000 to anyone that can prove evolution happens or has happened
He debates thousands of evolutionists every year
So far no one has won the $250,000

OK, I'll give you 250,000$ if you prove that the sky is blue. Keep in mind I'm only giving you the money if you manage to convince me, and it's up to me to decide if you "proof" is valid or not.

Quote
Here's another one for you
Do blackholes exist?
Yes
Have you seen one physically?
Has ANYONE seen one physically?

Actually, yes, one was found recently about five years ago; it was quite big news. Let me check the 'net... aha.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/980908074632.htm
Interestingly, and being the incurable skeptic I am, I STILL am not entirely convinced that they exist; but mostly, because I haven't researched the subject too much, since I'm not that interested.

Quote
Isn't it just inferred, hypotheisized that they exist?
Isn't it a scientific "fact" that they exist?
Isn't it scary that scientists accept things as fact, and worse yet press those facts on people without any physical proof?

Sorry, you'll have to find another example, as it seems there is at least some physical proof for this one. In any case, I have yet to find anyone "pressing facts" regarding black holes to me (which I would actually find rather scary).

Quote
Which makes evoltionists and most scientists.....religious
They believe in things they cannot see

There is a difference between "seeing" and "having proof". If you only believe in things you see with your own eyes, I expect your reality will be really constricted. Why, I'm not sure if I should be talking with you, since you don't believe in me then.

Quote
Here's another one for you
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed right?

Correction: matter can be created from huge amounts of energy via atomic and sub-atomic processes, and be converted to huge amounts of energy likewise.

Quote
That IS a scientific law right?
Why is it a law? Because HUMAN BEINGS have never proven the opposite

Um, pretty much, though it's a bit more complicated. Nothing proving the opposite has been found, and all evidence points to the fact that this is an universal law. Universal as in observed to be true in every corner of the universe known by man.

Quote
Does that make it a hard solid fact? I guess to most it does
But if matter can neither be created nor destroyed, where did the universe come from?

We don't know.
And that simple phrase is, precisely, what distinguises science from religion and what makes your comparison valid. We don't claim to know everything, and more importantly, we don't make up the bits we don't know. We provide several theories but we don't pass them as "truth". The Big Bang is still a theory; if a better, more likely one comes up, it'll surely replace it.

Quote
Anyway, I'm going to stop here. No need battling each other over and over. You are entitled to your oppinions, and I to mine. You want to believe we all came from cosmic dust and amino acid soup? Fine
I want to believe that some giant old guy farted and created the known universe? Fine

I'm perfectly fine with that. It's just the spreading of misinformation and lies that bothers me.

Quote
But let's end it here, like gentleman shall we?

Haha, classic. "Let's end this after I've said all I wanted". I have a better idea, let's finish this NOW, after I've proven the extent of your scientific knowledge. :)
Like gentlemen, huh?

Quote
Oh and in passing to answer your question
I don't know who created God....and I don't really care.

You don't care, or you realize this is a fundamental flaw on your entire system of beliefs that you carefully choose to ignore? Let me ask you a different question then: do you acknowledge someone or something had to create Him?

Offline WeltallZero

  • Fire Truck Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #35 on: April 03, 2005, 05:04:28 am »
Oh, on the matter (no pun intended) of black holes:

http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q7

Offline Sensei Jinx

  • Mystery House Madman
  • **
  • Posts: 203
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #36 on: April 04, 2005, 08:37:07 pm »
Heh, I live in one of the most Conservative states in the union. However, I seriously doubt that anyone will "boycott" Spore. Well, at least if they acted logically they wouldn't...it's just a game. If you don't believe in evolution, then fine. It's not like Spore would brainwash you or your child. And if you really hate the idea of the game, then just don't buy it.

And as to the argument of creationism and evolution...well, if you believe that God created us, then you also believe that he created everything else, including the laws of nature and physics. Some people who believe in God also believe in evolution, as somebody else stated earlier. They just believe that God used evolution to help him meet his purpose. But others believe he didn't.

I think the point I'm trying to make is that proof of evolution is not proof that God doesn't exist.

Offline bselig

  • Boot Hill Bandit
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #37 on: April 04, 2005, 09:32:28 pm »
Hey, isn't this game all about Intellgient Design?  The player acting as the hand of God, able to arbitrarily mold his creature, nay, society in any manner He sees fit.  Sure, it doesn't literally conform to the timeline laid out in the bible, but neither does, say Civ. 

Anyway, if they nobody is banning The Sims for allowing alternative relationships, indeed making them roughly as easy to attain as the norm, and infanticide(I think?), I don't think Spore will be a problem.

Offline NoobZoRz

  • Atari Combat Vet
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #38 on: June 07, 2005, 12:11:46 pm »
Gentlemen, the answer is quite simple, actually: I DONT CARE...
Matthew 12:25 <br />  -Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand."

Offline Gandysampras

  • Fishing Derby Champion
  • ***
  • Posts: 371
  • Spore - It's whatever you want it to be
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #39 on: June 07, 2005, 12:17:06 pm »
I know your new but i couldnt stop myself, why bring back a long dead topic that no1 is posting in anymore? There are plenty of new topics, i would have been able to let this go if your post hadn't been so pathetically pointless, so in future keep the posts useful not useless.

Offline Oviraptor

  • Moderator
  • R-Type Force Pod
  • *****
  • Posts: 6692
  • tastes just like chicken
    • View Profile
    • Oviraptor's World
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #40 on: June 07, 2005, 12:34:03 pm »
Yes, especially threads over a month old.

Offline Sporeaholicomg99

  • Galaxian Guru
  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • u laf cos i different. i laf @ u cos u all da same
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #41 on: June 07, 2005, 02:03:12 pm »
All i say is
 

If you don't like the game(i can't understand why annyone wouldn't) then don't get it there is no point boycotting stuff

the way that christians moan about everything against their religeon is wrong they aren't exactly careful to say 'peace be upon him after saying muhammad so why should we always have to accomodate their rules??

sorry I'm a frustrated artist



Offline Gandysampras

  • Fishing Derby Champion
  • ***
  • Posts: 371
  • Spore - It's whatever you want it to be
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #42 on: June 07, 2005, 02:05:11 pm »
Quote from: Gandysampras
I'm a christian and my family has no problem with violence in games, or anything really, my dad's playing doom at this exact momnet actually! Spore will be welcomed by the christian community, as a path for video games makers to follow away from violence anyway! so i dont think anyones going to have a problem with it, more like everyone ever will want it!

Offline Anou Mawi

  • Phoenix Fighter
  • **
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #43 on: June 07, 2005, 05:43:48 pm »
One problem I just discovered.In the US, I am sure that there is no leagle(and plosible)way of boycotting a game other than not buying it therefore making them loose $50 per person.

Offline Daxx

  • Golden Axe Battler
  • *****
  • Posts: 8613
    • View Profile
Re: How many conservative states shall boycot this game?
« Reply #44 on: June 08, 2005, 08:05:43 am »
I feel I must reply to some of the responses in this thread, just to clear up some discrepancies. Sorry about the lengthy nature of the post.

Um, no. There's plenty of factual evidence for evolution (and none against, incidentally), from fossil records to vestigial organs and everything in between. That several religions choose to ignore them doesn't magically make them go away. The supposed inexistence of factual basis for evolution is a (rather blatant) lie that religions groups, especially Catholics and Christians, have been desperately trying to spread lately.

This is true. There is plenty of factual evidence for evolution. Of course, there is also factual evidence for creationism, as well as other theories. (To pre-empt your response, I cite the Bible, theories on Intelligent Design and the Teleological arguments and Religious Experience. These are all just as factual as the evidence you cite; bearing in mind that being factual carries no sense of truth, because a fact can be just as likely wrong as right. However, the covering up of evidence and lying is reprehensible.

And to anyone that says yeah well you Catholics are in the same category, I say....exactly. Which is what makes us both RELIGIOUS, and not factual.

Catolicism isn't nearly close to the same category. Besides the already discussed factual evidence, Occam's razor cuts through religion much more easily than through evolution. 

I might differ. This is a very inappropriate use of Mr. Occam’s principle. Besides the fact that you cannot use his principle to ‘prove’ something (it being merely a general principle for certain circumstances – I would suggest quantum theory is more complicated than Newtonian physics, for example – you have posited no proof of your implied claim that evolution as a theory is less complicated than any other theories, including creationism.

Also, evolution isn't a religion or a belief (so "believing in evolution" is a wrong statement). It's a scientific theory and, as such, individuals choose to accept it based solely on the proof presented to them, and nothing else. No "faith" is required or expected to cover up obvious holes in its logical reasoning.

Actually, evolutionism, or the accepting of evolution as the method of our creation, is. It is a meme, just as creationism is. Logical Positivist principles can show us that any standpoint is a belief, because all proof for any creation theory is at best indirect; you have not seen it personally.

'Sides if you believe in Evolution, this is just more proof that for something to exist...it needs to be C R E A T E D.

Ah. So, who created God then?

You are obviously not familiar with the Cosmological argument for the existence of God. This shows that without infinite regress the properties of God do not require Him to be created – he is defined to be outside of temporal causality and so does not have to conform to the rules of cause and effect.

Um, you're quite misguided, and I see that a very over-simplificated paleoanthropology has been fed to you. From the Smithsonian National Musseum of Natural History:

You are correct. His argument is poorly constructed.

Again, it seems your actual knowledge about evolution is rather limited. There is no "weaker" and "stronger" species, only "fitter" for their enviroments. "The Selfish Gene" and "The Blind Watchmaker" are good reads on this, I suggest you check them out.

As you are an avid reader of Dawkins, you should understand that his arguments are loaded with value judgements, and therefore must be read carefully. The same is true of any book on this topic – all have their own perceptions and seek to convert others, to the cult of Creationism, and to the cult of Evolutionism. They are indeed good reads – Dawkins’ ideas have merit as theories.

Also, no offense, but it seems that even the most elemental common knowledge about evolution eludes you as well. Man never evolved from monkeys; apes, monkeys and humans all evolved from common ancestors, most of which are now, indeed, extinct. I thought (or perhaps, hoped) even creationists would know as much. I would beg that you research even a bit of the most basic facts about evolution before embarrasing yourself any further. Surely you have, at the very least, heard about the neanderthal and cro-magnon?

This is unfortunately the state many uninformed people are in. To understand an issue you must analyse all sides. Many (especially in the US, and unfortunately also in the UK, as well as around the world) base their judgements without information. You accuse each other of having no perspective, and I urge you both (and others) to read both sides of the issue.

In any case, time and again, throughout all history, most if not all factual information about religion has been proven to be made up

And this gem of a fact comes from where?

Does that make it a hard solid fact? I guess to most it does
But if matter can neither be created nor destroyed, where did the universe come from?

The problem with dapunisher’s argument is that he uses a poor analogy. This would equally work with any string of cause and effect. His reasoning goes that there has been found no Sufficient Reason for matter (or matter/energy, if you prefer, we all know it’s the same thing).

We don't know.
And that simple phrase is, precisely, what distinguises science from religion and what makes your comparison valid. We don't claim to know everything, and more importantly, we don't make up the bits we don't know. We provide several theories but we don't pass them as "truth". The Big Bang is still a theory; if a better, more likely one comes up, it'll surely replace it.

This is quite true, but irrelevant. This does nothing more to validate your theory.

But let's end it here, like gentleman shall we?

Haha, classic. "Let's end this after I've said all I wanted". I have a better idea, let's finish this NOW, after I've proven the extent of your scientific knowledge. 
Like gentlemen, huh?

How’s about we finish this now? No argument is ever finished until all propositions are exhausted. I find your arrogance breathtaking, but I also take issue with dapunisher’s apparent ignorance. I can play devil’s advocate all day, if you want, it’s not really an issue.