STUFF
-
Posts
59 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Events
Forums
Blogs
Downloads
Posts posted by STUFF
-
-
O.o
LSD is not very positive is he?
Anyway, it IS uncomfortable to use the Analog stick in the PSP, it's no big secret. It's position is just awkward.
As far as for easier way to play. With the PSP you need to have the right firmware, then you have to have the right Emulators and you have to make it all work, which personally I don't know how difficult it all is, but it CAN be confusing. I've known of plenty of people who tell me they have a PSP but they don't play Emulated games in it because they don't know how to. Me being one of them.
The GBA, you just buy the flash cart, upload roms, play.
I believe this is what he means.
-
I've been playing FFXI for almost 2 years now. Well, more like a year and a half.
I think the only way to trully enjoy an MMORPG is to not get too obsessed with it. To not try to be the best. To not try to be the ultimate level so fast.
You try to do those things, and it'll bore the crap out of you.
I should have had a couple of jobs at level 75 (ultimate level in ffxi) but all I have is a level 60 white mage. Because I don't play THAT much and when I do play, I rather enjoy walking around helping newer people more than leveling. I actually hate leveling. But I do it sometimes to try and become stronger so I can help more.
Some people get too much into MMORPGs though. It's sad. Whenever I log in, I know there are some people that will be there. No matter what time I seem to log in, they always seem to be in the game.
FFXI btw, from what I hear, has the best story for a MMORPG. It's not that great of a story when you begin, but after Rank 6 it really gets interesting. And then they made Chains of Promathia which is a awesome story in itself.
-
I have a PSP even though I'm a Nintendo Fanboy.
However I still have no games for it because there are no games that I care for on it yet.
I'm not a fan of GTA so I can't even get excited about that. The only game coming out for it that I care about is Ghouls N Ghosts. And I'm not even sure when thats coming out.
So mostly I use it to watch movies when on the go and to show it to friends so they can see how purty it is. Which it IS purty. Just not that entertaining.
I used to use it for MP3 music, but now I'm getting me a Nano... well, as soon as they fix that scratching issue.
As far as Games, DS is the one that has most of the things I care for.
Castlevania Dawn of Sorrow
Sonic Rush
The New super mario game (not sure about the name or release date)
Metroid Prime Hunters (although I wish they'd make a new 2D Metroid game)
Mario Kart
Nintendogs (which I already have).
As you can see I'm more into the older style of games.
-
I love my PSP, but it's not too Portable. In the way that I'd never take it and just throw it in my pocket.
1. Because it's too big.
2. It would get nasty scratches.
yea I could buy a case or just use the cover it comes with, but it's still just too bulky.
-
I have the PSP and the NDS and I'll probably go get me a Micro soon.
Why? Because the thing is TRULY portable. I mean if you can carry keys then you can carry this thing.
I'm really glad that they made the new SP systems with the brighter light, because I lost mine and I need to buy me a new one too.
I'm trying to build a collection of vidoe game systems that have been a part of my life. So an SP has to be there.
-
That was awesome!!
Loved it, downloaded it. -
20 ...... hey at least I don't spam hehe
-
I don't come here very often but I will never forget the place.
My greatest memory about this place was also at the time of XXL and trying to help Game Cop with whatever I could. I was never much help but I tried hehe.
I really am glad to see how far this place has gone and Game Cop I realy admire your comitment to this place. But quit thinking about XXL
-
Yup, I think I'm getting me a flash cartridge for my GBA instead
-
Is it me or do these shots not look too exciting?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I would love a nice 2D mario game. Kind of a mixture of 2D and 3D. But the other games, they look kinda.... boring and old.
-
Just because you fail to understand the scientific principles doesn't make it wrong.
Take a few advanced classes and learn stuff before you try to argue.
Many scientists are people who believe in God and know how to separate proper thought from bullshit.
And the stories about floods and dragons isn't worth mentioning since peopel back then were idiots. Even bigger idiots than we are now.
Let's just retire this arguement because I've got too much work to do right now.
I thought this was supposed to be a debate, I guess I was wrong. Its really just a flame thread and it should indeed be closed.
Whenever you are ready to have an actual debate, my AIM name is "tadstuff" and my yahoo ID is "tsnstuff" feel free to contact me.
PS: You didn't give me any proof of anything, just more theories.
-
Let me explain my point nice and simple.
Evolution believes that all life came from one single organism. That we share dna with whatever and we are related to it.
My point? In the history of humanity no one has been ever able to prove that one KIND of animal came from another KIND of animal. Yes, they show tons of similarities (which kinda prove that they were all created by the same creator actually) but it is all just belief.
Evolutionists belief that because of all the similarities, we must be related.
Creationists Belief that we were all created.
It is all a Belief system. You must have as much Faith as a Christian to believe in Evolution. You just have faith in other things.
Science, please don't say Chirstians don't believe in science. I love science, 99% of science is good.
The Bible has always been the same. Sience however is always trying to explain that which it can't. And as soon as they fall into a place where they don't know where to go, they change their theories.
Science has never been able to prove the Bible wrong though.
Hehe, a couple of years ago I read this article on the news about these scientists were so surprised because these stars had gone away from their star family in the span of 10 years. They said they couldn't believe it because this process usually takes over a thousand years.
I found it funny because, here they are looking at it happen in 10 years, they have the proof that it has happened in 10 years, but they say this is wrong because normally it takes over a thousand. They have no proof whatsoever that it should take 1,000 years. But they'll consider this some kind of cosmic mistake even though there is the proof.
So back to my point. In the history of Mankind, has there ever been proof of one KIND of animal producing another KIND of animal? Has a dog ever produced a non dog? We have many types of Dogs, yes, but they are still Dogs. Same with all KINDS of animals.
Again, it's all just Faith. Discussing this here is totally useless for we are just both insulting each others faith.
When you look around, you'll see a lot more proof against evolution than Creationism. There are many different stories of the flood in many different countries. All involving a man who put a bunch of animals in a boat and a flood came. There are many legends of men Killing Dragons (which is what Dinosaurs were called before they made the word Dinosaur in the 1800s). Even the Bible describes a Dragon. Pictures of Dinosaurs in caves (hmm, must have seen it to draw it).
However, Evolutionists don't like the belief that they are not in control. So they don't like to believe that they have a creator. Because when you have a creator you can't do whatever you want. No, you have someone to explain your actions to. They don't like that so they decide to not believe in it. But if you don't believe in God, then where did all this come from? So they have to make up answers. Answers that require as much faith (more even) than believing in God. But it's ok for them, they can believe that, because it doesn't involve God, therefore they still keep total control of their lives and they still get to do whatever they want.
-
Wow, I can't believe I totally missed out on this topic, for it is one I love to debate about.
I will admit, I'm at work and was unable to read all the posts. So I will just give my view.
Creation has much better scientific proof to support it. Scientific proof you ask? Yup Scientific proof. When you hear about the great flood it really makes a lot more sense than something happening millions of years ago. Things like Petrified boots prove that petrification doesn't take thousands of years.
Even carbon dating proves that the earth is not even 35 thousand years old because earth still hasn't reached equilibrium. We see fosils of animals that were still flying. Surely these didn't fly for thousands of years until slowly they got petrified. And even if they had just laid in the sand for thousands of years, wouldn't some other animal come and eat it?
Evolution:
There are 6 kinds of evolution.
1- Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang
2- Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen.
3- Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets.
4- Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter.
5- Macroevolution Origin of major kinds.
6- Microevolution Variations within kinds.
There is proof to only one of these. That would be number 6. Microevolution. Yes, we have seen Dogs give different dogs. So that one can be proven. The rest can not. The rest are just beliefs. A cat has never come out of a Dog, a monkey has never come out of a elephant. A man has never ccome out of a Monkey.
Yes, I know, Men and monkey look a lot alike, but there is no actual proof of a man coming out of a monkey. Scientists will show you all these bones they've found to "prove" their theories but really it isn't proof. We have plenty of people now that come out deformed, they have different bones. And most of the time they make up most of the bones. We all remember the Neanderthal man. Made a full skeleton based on a tooth which later was proven to be a pigs tooth.
No one has ever seen space be created. They made up the big bang theory. A theory where nothing blows up and makes up everything (yea, that's easier to believe than God). However there were problems with that theory for not all the planets rotate the same way. So they decided that a huge meteor hit this planet and that's why it rotetes differently. Aha. sure.
No one has ever seen life come out of something dead. There is no proof of that. IT has never happened. But they believe it is what happened. It rained for thousands of years on rocks and these microscopic beigns showed up. yea.
So, on the contrary to what I read in the begining pages of this debate, it actually seems like Creation has better proof than Evolution. All those fossils prove a great flood much more than evolution.
This brings me to my last point. Evolution is nothing but a religion. As you can see, it is all based on beliefs and not on facts. And it was a religion to make people feel ok about slavery.
This is why Darwin decided to renew Evolution, because it was needed at his time. People needed to feel that they were greater than their slaves. So he wrote is famous book "The Origin of Species". Where he would let people know that some of use are more evolved than others. Therefore some of us are Better than others. Therefore it is ok to have slaves because they are under the owner, they are less evolved.
Did you know they used to keep Australian Natives in Zoos because they were though of as being less evolved creatures instead of humans?
Evolution was also the reason why Hitler did what he did. He believed all the people he killed were less than him. So it was ok.
But, again, evolution is nothing but at religious belief, and if you think you have actual scientific proof of evolution, then please by all means go here and you will win $250,000 dollars. Yea, Dr. Hovind has been offering this money since 1990 and no one has been able to give him the scientific proof yet. So one of you might get lucky.
Oh man, I just had to print that out and bring it to my professor, we shared a good laugh over it.
Anyway, here goes.
You do realize that carbon dating is not used to determine the age of the Earth? Probably not. The best way to calculate the Earth's age is using the Pb/Pb isochron age, which is derived from samples from the Earth and meteorites. Also dating the rest of the solar system is used in approximating how old the Earth is. Using those techniques some rocks have been dated all the way back to 3.9 BYA and some minerals on it go back to 4.1 BYA. And fossils didn't just lay in the sand, as time passes sediment lays on top of it and covers it. Just go outside and dig deep enough and you'll see the layers.
That's 6 kinds of evolution is alright since it's basically true. Since I am a biology person and not a geologist, physicist, or chemist, I won't worry about the first 4 since I haven't read enough of those. However there is evidence for micro and macro evolution.
Nothing can really be proved 100%. However, we can be quite certain about many natural things because of research and study, which is the case in evolution.
First of all...how the flock will cat come out of a dog? Why would a monkey come out of an elephant? Man come out of monkeys? HOW MANY TIMES DOES IT HAVE TO BE STATED THAT EVOLUTION DOESN'T SAY THAT MAN CAME FROM MONKEYS!!?! We share a common ancestor and evolved separately. Humans came after a progression of other lesser primates and we are still progressing. You don't seem to know the basics of biology so don't try to argue what you can't explain. Here is proof of evolution:
*All life shows a fundamental unity in the mechanisms of replication, heritablility, catalysis, and metabolism.
* Common descent predicts a nested hierarchy pattern, or groups within groups. We see just such an arrangement in a unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchy, the so-called tree of life.
* Different lines of evidence give the same arrangement of the tree of life. We get essentially the same results whether we look at morphological, biochemical, or genetic traits.
* Fossil animals fit in the same tree of life. We find several cases of transitional forms in the fossil record.
* The fossils appear in a chronological order showing change consistent with common descent over hundreds of millions of years, and inconsistent with sudden creation.
* Many organisms show rudimentary, vestigial characters such as sightless eyes or wings useless for flight.
* Atavisms sometimes occur. An atavism is the reappearance of a character present in a distant ancestors but lost in the organism's immediate ancestors. We only see atavisms consistent with organisms' evolutionary histories.
* Ontogeny (embryology and developmental biology) gives information about the historical pathway of an organism's evolution. For example, whales and many snakes develop hind limbs as embryos which are reabsorbed before birth.
* The distribution of species is consistent with their evolutionary history. For example, marsupials are mostly limited to Australia, and the exceptions are explained by continental drift. Remote islands often have species groups that are highly diverse in habits and general appearance but closely related genetically. This consistency still holds when the distribution of fossil species is included.
* Evolution predicts that new structures are adapted from other structures that already exist, and thus similarity in structures should reflect evolutionary history rather than function. We see this frequently. For example, human hands, bat wings, horse legs, whale flippers, and mole forelimbs all have similar bone structure despite their different functions.
* The same principle applies on a molecular level. Humans share a large percentage of their genes, probably more than 70%, with a fruit fly or a nematode worm.
* When two organisms evolve the same function independently, different structures are often recruited. For example, wings of birds, bats, pterosaurs, and insects all have different structures. Gliding has been implemented in many additional ways. Again, this applies on a molecular level, too.
* The constraints of evolutionary history sometimes lead to suboptimal structures and functions. For example, the human throat and respiratory system make it impossible to breathe and swallow at the same time and make us susceptible to choking.
* Suboptimality appears also on the molecular level. For example, much DNA is nonfunctional.
* Some nonfunctional DNA, such as certain transposons, pseudogenes, and endogenous viruses, show a pattern of inheritance indicating common ancestry.
* Speciation has been observed.
* The day-to-day aspects of evolution -- heritable genetic change, morphological variation and change, functional change, and natural selection -- are seen to occur at rates consistent with common descent.
Source: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html
And about the planets not rotating the same way...
1. The Big Bang was not an explosion; it was an inflation. Space itself expanded.
2. The Big Bang material was not originally rotating. (How could it be? What would it rotate relative to?)
3. Conservation of angular momentum doesn't require that everything spin the same way. It requires that a change in spin in one object be compensated for by an opposite change in spin in one or more other objects. Retrograde planets are not a violation of angular momentum because other bodies in the early solar system could account for the compensating spin.
4. If the Big Bang were an explosion, we would expect different spins. When something explodes, pieces fly out spinning in all directions.
5. The Solar System formed long after the Big Bang; it got its angular momentum from turbulence in the interstellar cloud from which it was born.
6. Planets' spins can change considerably, due to tidal drag and precession. If the spin-axis precession is at approximately the same frequency as some of the orbit-parameter oscillations due to perturbations, the spin axis may acquire large chaotic oscillations, possibly making it retrograde. Tidal drag and capture of large retrograde-orbit satellites may also cause retrograde spin.
7. Some of the outer planets' satellites are in retrograde orbits; that is likely a side effect of their capture from drag by residual gases around their primaries early in the Solar System's history.
Source: http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Retrograde...es_the_Big_Bang
Evolution has much better scientific proof than Creationism. Just try to enter a university with that mindset and try to argue with a professor about that and just see how you will get humiliated. There is a reason more work is done on evolution that creationism and it's not because of religion, it's because it makes more sense.
And the use of evolution as a tool for racism was known as Social Darwinism and is a complete misconception of Darwin's work. But did you know that anti-Semitism and xenophobia were around for centuries before and done by CHRISTIANS! Hell even Martin Luther was an anti-semite. So don't even bring up the use of evolution for horrible deeds because religion has MUCH MORE blood on its hands.
its nice that you can quote me all this but you still failed to give me proof of anything other than microevolution.
-
Wow, I can't believe I totally missed out on this topic, for it is one I love to debate about.
I will admit, I'm at work and was unable to read all the posts. So I will just give my view.
Creation has much better scientific proof to support it. Scientific proof you ask? Yup Scientific proof. When you hear about the great flood it really makes a lot more sense than something happening millions of years ago. Things like Petrified boots prove that petrification doesn't take thousands of years.
Even carbon dating proves that the earth is not even 35 thousand years old because earth still hasn't reached equilibrium. We see fosils of animals that were still flying. Surely these didn't fly for thousands of years until slowly they got petrified. And even if they had just laid in the sand for thousands of years, wouldn't some other animal come and eat it?
Evolution:
There are 6 kinds of evolution.
1- Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang
2- Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen.
3- Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets.
4- Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter.
5- Macroevolution Origin of major kinds.
6- Microevolution Variations within kinds.
There is proof to only one of these. That would be number 6. Microevolution. Yes, we have seen Dogs give different dogs. So that one can be proven. The rest can not. The rest are just beliefs. A cat has never come out of a Dog, a monkey has never come out of a elephant. A man has never ccome out of a Monkey.
Yes, I know, Men and monkey look a lot alike, but there is no actual proof of a man coming out of a monkey. Scientists will show you all these bones they've found to "prove" their theories but really it isn't proof. We have plenty of people now that come out deformed, they have different bones. And most of the time they make up most of the bones. We all remember the Neanderthal man. Made a full skeleton based on a tooth which later was proven to be a pigs tooth.
No one has ever seen space be created. They made up the big bang theory. A theory where nothing blows up and makes up everything (yea, that's easier to believe than God). However there were problems with that theory for not all the planets rotate the same way. So they decided that a huge meteor hit this planet and that's why it rotetes differently. Aha. sure.
No one has ever seen life come out of something dead. There is no proof of that. IT has never happened. But they believe it is what happened. It rained for thousands of years on rocks and these microscopic beigns showed up. yea.
So, on the contrary to what I read in the begining pages of this debate, it actually seems like Creation has better proof than Evolution. All those fossils prove a great flood much more than evolution.
This brings me to my last point. Evolution is nothing but a religion. As you can see, it is all based on beliefs and not on facts. And it was a religion to make people feel ok about slavery.
This is why Darwin decided to renew Evolution, because it was needed at his time. People needed to feel that they were greater than their slaves. So he wrote is famous book "The Origin of Species". Where he would let people know that some of use are more evolved than others. Therefore some of us are Better than others. Therefore it is ok to have slaves because they are under the owner, they are less evolved.
Did you know they used to keep Australian Natives in Zoos because they were though of as being less evolved creatures instead of humans?
Evolution was also the reason why Hitler did what he did. He believed all the people he killed were less than him. So it was ok.
But, again, evolution is nothing but at religious belief, and if you think you have actual scientific proof of evolution, then please by all means go here and you will win $250,000 dollars. Yea, Dr. Hovind has been offering this money since 1990 and no one has been able to give him the scientific proof yet. So one of you might get lucky.
-
Sweet, happy Bday!
-
I don't know who I would vote for. But I'm just gonna say this.
If there was an Election between George W. Bush and Richard Simmons, I would have to go for Richard.
-
Well, actually that's a picture of someones actual arcade machine. I just looked for arcade machines in Google image. So I have no idea who's it is. But as soon as I saw it I was like "Perfect"
-
Even though I was born in 1978, I've always liked the 70s disco music.
When it comes to love songs though, I love the 50s.
I'm not a fan of the stuff you hear now a days either. It's all about sex and gangs. I don't want to sound old but, what are kids thinking about now a days???
-
I like to keep mine simple. MEATLOVERS BABY!!!!!
-
Yes, actually I grabbed a couple of the ideas I saw and made it. Like from yours I took the "DotCom" I liked that. From Phil Death I took the arcade idea, and I also looked at the Welcome logo, that's where I got the Saying at the bottom and I looked at the logo on top (from the default skin) to get the colors.
Oh yea, then I decided that a circuit board would look nice as a background, probably came from having seen yours. So I guess I can credit that one to you too.
-
My Appologies for not working on this sooner.
I tried to work on this, however I wasn't getting many ideas. So I decided to just make a simple one.
So, here is my enry.
-
OH boy, an image contest
I love these. I guess I'll give it a go. I'm not that good with Photoshop, but, I've seen worst hehe. -
Dammit XXL.
Oh well. Here is all the info about the IP. Maybe if plenty of us complain, they might take aways his internet privilidge or something.
OrgName: Schofield Barracks
OrgID: SCHOFI
Address: 516th Signal Brigade
Address: Ft. Shafter
City: Honolulu
StateProv: HI
PostalCode: 96858-5410
Country: US
NetRange: 150.137.0.0 - 150.137.255.255
CIDR: 150.137.0.0/16
NetName: SCHOFIELDNET
NetHandle: NET-150-137-0-0-1
Parent: NET-150-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Assignment
NameServer: NS01.ARMY.MIL
NameServer: NS02.ARMY.MIL
NameServer: NS03.ARMY.MIL
Comment:
RegDate: 1991-05-14
Updated: 1999-12-23
TechHandle: MR460-ARIN
TechName: Reid Mike
TechPhone: 1-808-438-2643
TechEmail: REIDM@shafter-emh3.army.mil
Do you own a PSP?
in Gossip Café [/offtopic]
Posted
I would agree that it is expensive in the sense that it's difficult for the regular joe to just go and spend $250 bucks on a gadget.
However I believe that the amount of technology you get is worth the $250 bucks.