Moonslayer Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Books cannot predict the future though. Common sense says it would be nuts to invade Iran... sadly this is something 'dubya' seems to be less than gifted with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Books don't predict the future, The Author and Finisher of all things has declared it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonslayer Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Assuming one believes in all that stuff, of course Either way, we agree it would be a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Well of course. That's why it's faith. Everybody believes something & is trusting something. Question is, what is your something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 If any of you is looking for a nice nuke game, you can download this one for $15 from Steam at steampowered.com http://www.everybody-dies.com/about/screenshots.html Nice gameplay and an interesting game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Very touching game. How do you win, LOL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Don'r play it... Guess the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Originally posted by Retributar: A last important note!, the Russian's are reported to have 6 Submarines in the Persian Gulf!. That's not important - the Persian Gulf is a smallish sea with limited depth and essentially a death trap for submarines if the other side controls the air and surface. Useful for intel gathering and showing eth flag, but I'd "guess" that the USN knows pretty much exactly where each of them is and they wouldn't last more than a few hours in a war! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 One thing Rambo has right, you have the audacity to believe Darwin or Newton, even though by tomorrow a revolutionary theory will make their's obsolete. There is no for definites even in Science.. Just Theory! As far as that 1% of where do really come from, why are we here and what is the meaning of life! and for the Dark Matter, what the hell is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Originally posted by jon_j_rambo: Very touching game. How do you win, LOL? Kill more people then they do It's a bit overwhelming but fun. I play it during classes at gamedev uni. For "educational" purposes ofcourse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 I remeber a 1980s Nuclear game, about Islands with Nuclear Buildup. Whole goal was to build up massive amount of Nukes and destroy everyone before they could destroy you. High Tech for it's day and still would be cute... You had Ronald Raygun, Marget Hatchet, Mao the Pun and then some real kewl and though you might level a massive city, didn't mean you won! Once you used nukes, everyone retaliated. Of course only France, Great Britian, Isreal, USA and Russia today are currently Great Nuclear Powers... Several Minor ones... Originally posted by n0kn0k: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by jon_j_rambo: Very touching game. How do you win, LOL? Kill more people then they do It's a bit overwhelming but fun. I play it during classes at gamedev uni. For "educational" purposes ofcourse </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Originally posted by Liam: why are we here and what is the meaning of life! Easy, that's 42! Duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonslayer Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Originally posted by Liam: One thing Rambo has right, you have the audacity to believe Darwin or Newton, even though by tomorrow a revolutionary theory will make their's obsolete. There is no for definites even in Science.. Just Theory! As far as that 1% of where do really come from, why are we here and what is the meaning of life! and for the Dark Matter, what the hell is it? Darwin's theories are probably not 100% correct as there are discrepancies in the fossil record. Newton's theories are similarly not a general set of 'laws' as they are only accurate for low speeds. To say we actually 'know' much of anything is presumptuous at best. Dark matter is matter that is not easily detected (hence 'dark') and ranges from the mundane (planets outside our solar-system) to the near fabulous (W.I.M.P.s). Whether there is a reason that we are here or not is up for debate. Some say a super-being has a plan for us while others say that life is a mere progression of a random sequence of events. Blind faith imho is something that belongs in the past; a native south american tribesman may find a television 'magical' but we should be a bit beyond this as a species now. Personally I have no idea if there is a superior being overseeing our development... but I also find the question largely irrelevant. Why worry about something that can neither be proved nor disproved... it is all a bit pointless. I am sure this forum is not really the place for such discussions, however, so I think this had better be my last word on the subject. Others will doubtless want their right of reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted January 22, 2007 Author Share Posted January 22, 2007 http://www.airamerica.com/node/3207 Submitted by Uffdaguy on January 19, 2007 - 11:29am. | login or register to post comments | email this comment I think we are going to have to face that possibility in the coming years, as China and the US look for more energy sources as they continue to grow. It won't be a clash of ideologies, it will simply be a scrap over resources. That's what led Japan into WWII, even though their top military minds like Yammamoto warned that they would lose if they attacked the US. A country that sees economic strangulation due to a lack of resources is like a wounded animal, and it will make irrational decisions. Why else do we continue to stir the pot in the Middle East? It has nothing to do with establishing democracies, saving people from brutal dictators, or preventing the acquisition of WMDs. It is all about securing oil for the economy. I am still waiting for Bush to start making a strong play for Venezuela. After all, they have a lot of oil, and they aren't halfway around the world. A logical person would try to secure that source as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covert Sniper Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 I remeber a 1980's nuke game by Sid Meier called Balance of Power. It was probably one of his first efforts and it really sucked. The computer played the USSR and the human played the US. The idea was to avoid a nuclear war by 'negotiating' with the computer over things like diplomatic policy changes, troop movements, forgein aid and other aspects of forgien policy concerning allies, opponents and neutral third world countries. The problem was the computer was not a good negotiator. If the USSR (computer) wanted to send one million troops to Mexico and the US (human) objected, the nuclear war started. If the US wanted to send a diplomatic emmissary to Great Britan and the USSR objected, the nuclear war started. The computer NEVER backed down and ALWAYS started a nuclear war. Let's hope that all the folks involved in this situation have at least a trifle more sense than that. Randy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 LOL I remeber BOP I recall too the damned AI never stood down, It was like Defcon 5 24.7 Originally posted by Covert Sniper: I remeber a 1980's nuke game by Sid Meier called Balance of Power. It was probably one of his first efforts and it really sucked. The computer played the USSR and the human played the US. The idea was to avoid a nuclear war by 'negotiating' with the computer over things like diplomatic policy changes, troop movements, forgein aid and other aspects of forgien policy concerning allies, opponents and neutral third world countries. The problem was the computer was not a good negotiator. If the USSR (computer) wanted to send one million troops to Mexico and the US (human) objected, the nuclear war started. If the US wanted to send a diplomatic emmissary to Great Britan and the USSR objected, the nuclear war started. The computer NEVER backed down and ALWAYS started a nuclear war. Let's hope that all the folks involved in this situation have at least a trifle more sense than that. Randy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Originally posted by Retributar: ... I am still waiting for Bush to start making a strong play for Venezuela. After all, they have a lot of oil, and they aren't halfway around the world. A logical person would try to secure that source as soon as possible. Chavez is still selling oil to the U.S. and to other western countries. The Iraq oil embargo created a unique set of circumstances. In Iraq, Bush had three altenative choices: lift the oil embargo, keep the oil embargo, or attack. Bush did not want to lift the embargo as long as Husein was in power, but, he did not want to keep the embargo in place until Husein died of old age (a la Fidel Castro). The Bush administration probably felt there was only choice left: regime change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Yeah, there was a change. Look like a Pez dispensor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bromley Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Originally posted by Covert Sniper: I remeber a 1980's nuke game by Sid Meier called Balance of Power. Chris Crawford, not Sid. I loved the game, but it helped playing it on a Mac and not a PC given the relative levels of GUI at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16769024/ Gulf: "Burns says U.S. 'will protect its interests if Iran seeks to confront us'" The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C, Stennis steams out of the naval base at Kitsap Bremerton, Wa., on Tuesday on its way to the Gulf . Tugboats guide the USS John C. Stennis around as the ship leaves Naval Air Station North Island in Coronado, Calif. Saturday, Jan. 20, 2007. The USS Stennis and its carrier strike group left San Diego Bay on a deployment to the Persian Gulf. Sailors man the rails onboard the USS John C. Stennis as she sails away from Naval Station Kitsap, Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2007 at Naval Station Kitsap in Bremerton, Wash. The Stennis carrier strike group of eight ships and nine air squadrons will arrive in Mideast waters in a matter of weeks, after crossing the Pacific and Indian oceans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 The carriers gotta be somewhere, might as be in the Persian Gulf. U.S. Navy rocks, that's for sure. Off to Zion, pulling for Rapture, -Legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Originally posted by Liam: One thing Rambo has right, you have the audacity to believe Darwin or Newton, even though by tomorrow a revolutionary theory will make their's obsolete. Except it's far more likely to be evolutinoary rather than trevolutionary, and to be more general, showing the previous one to be correct for a limited set of conditions rather than obsolete. There is no for definites even in Science.. What a load of drivel. There is a definite difference between theory and axiom. Just Theory! Bzzztt......nope. There are axioms, and methods too - hence "the scientific method"..... and for the Dark Matter, what the hell is it? one of the unknowns that we know we don't know anything about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Dark Matter could be Hell, eh? A place reserved for the unbelieving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Stalin, Assumption is a large part of what Science is when the field still has a large field to go out into and study to prove what is unproven. Axiom a flowery statement to mean a Logical Guess isn't that what a Huge Portion of Science is, but we take for granted and we read mind's that have learned in institutions and via logical mathematical equation what is so called fact... We had Greek Philospher's saying we came from Fish in the Ancient World, we had medicine we probably do not have today from those times. Probably antibiotics and painkillers today's society cannot replicate. A lot of good old knowledge was supressed by Religion and smallmindedness. I will not add ot it and Mathematicians and Scientists that are basically in the same field today will shrink your mind and Shrinks, who claim still do not understand the Complexity of the Brain let alone do Scientists understand the Complexity of the Universe One day men will move objects with their minds, perhaps already do! One day we will Teleport to the Stars we see by thought, we will transcend the Heavens much like We Imagine Gods because we Believe and we Will it to Happen. Those select few that make it there are those who are truly openminded and Vision is Unparalleled.. Originally posted by Stalin's Organist: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Liam: One thing Rambo has right, you have the audacity to believe Darwin or Newton, even though by tomorrow a revolutionary theory will make their's obsolete. Except it's far more likely to be evolutinoary rather than trevolutionary, and to be more general, showing the previous one to be correct for a limited set of conditions rather than obsolete. There is no for definites even in Science.. What a load of drivel. There is a definite difference between theory and axiom. Just Theory! Bzzztt......nope. There are axioms, and methods too - hence "the scientific method"..... and for the Dark Matter, what the hell is it? one of the unknowns that we know we don't know anything about.... </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Faith doesn't question. Faith doesn't doubt. Faith believes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts