CORFAISUS'S PROFILE
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
"Winning" internet arguments via dismissive hyperbolic falsehoods and selective ignorance.
Unallocated Skill Points
"Take this beautiful moment and make a joke out of it. If you can't, you're a slave to it."
"The imperfections show the face."
Unallocated Skill Points
"Take this beautiful moment and make a joke out of it. If you can't, you're a slave to it."
"The imperfections show the face."
Search
Filter
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Sated
Corfaisus shouldn't talk shit about shit that he doesn't know shit about.
Well that just leaves my game and I'm not talking shit about my game. I'm the only one who doesn't.
OTL
What are you thinking about right now?
author=GreatRedSpirit
Truth of the Universe: Bill Nye is one of the few who can rock a bowtie
He's also not actually a scientist.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Liberty
Most people seem to think that inbreeding effects in the first generation of breeding - not true.
That's good news for my cousin.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=SatedCorfaisusGenesis 19:30 through 19:38 say otherwise. And I thought I was the one who needed to do some reading?
This would also account for why inbreeding is never mentioned... in the Bible.
As if you didn't use Google.
In a world so polluted with sin (funny how you redacted "condoned", because you knew you were wrong even on that front). This was post-Sodom and Gomorrah, after all. We were talking about how Adam and Eve filled the earth with inbred sprouts from day one and how the Bible clearly says this is okay.
This would imply there was at least one entire civilization before the creation of Adam and Eve and the original sin that spelled their banishment from the garden of Eden. This would also account for why inbreeding is never mentioned or condoned in the Bible.
This is one complete statement ("Chapters are typically separated by relevance." was just mentioned before a double-space to separate it from this in itself). You can't take one thing, neglect the other and declare checkmate on it.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Satedauthor=CorfaisusThe bible claims that Adam was the first human and that his genealogy dates back ~6,000 years, so your claim is that humans only came about ~6,000 years ago.
The Young Earth proposition is disproven by the usage of "era of time" as opposed to 24-hour period in the original Hebrew. The Bible never claimed the Earth is only 6,000 years old, only that the genealogy of Adam dated back that far.
Based on available scientific evidence, my claim is that dogs were domesticated at least ~14,700 years ago.
These two statements clearly contradict one another. So just like I said at the start of all this, Christianity and science are not compatible with one another. Those who claim to "believe" both are lying to themselves about one or the other.
Genesis 1:27 mentions the creation of humans both male and female while the birth of Adam doesn't happen until Genesis 2:7. Adam was written as the first "of the dust of the earth", meaning he was separated by the others. Why? Perhaps by death as it's said "from ashes to ashes and dust to dust". Death didn't enter the world until the first sin, but that need not mean a mortal death but a spiritual death, where one goes to the "grave"* separated from God. These are two entirely different chapters, which if you've ever written/read a story, makes a shit ton of difference. Chapters are typically separated by relevance.
This would imply there was at least one entire civilization before the creation of Adam and Eve and the original sin that spelled their banishment from the garden of Eden. This would also account for why inbreeding is never mentioned or condoned in the Bible.
We can also assume that this is why Adam's eyes being opened was so astonishing, as he would've been chosen by God to start a new lineage that would extend forward through the founding of the children of Israel, the enslavement in Egypt, the Exodus and all other accounts leading up to the birth of the Son of God, Jesus. If he was the first then why would it matter? If there wasn't already so much at stake, starting over wouldn't be such a hassle. It wasn't until sin was so prevalent in the world (not even the jealous slaughter of Abel by Cain was enough) that God brought a flood upon the Earth and swore never to destroy the world again by flood, using the rainbow as a covenant.
Maybe you should read the first page of the Bible before quoting it?
*Sheol or Hades.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Sated
Of course, this is a waste of time as "reasoning will never make a man correct an ill opinion, which by reasoning he never acquired". I'll stay comfortable in the knowledge that my "belief system" doesn't dictate that humans were "created" after the domestication of dogs...
The Young Earth proposition is disproven by the usage of "era of time" as opposed to 24-hour period in the original Hebrew. The Bible never claimed the Earth is only 6,000 years old, only that the genealogy of Adam dated back that far.
The Biblical account of Creation and the theory of the Big Bang aren't actually that far off when you really consider it, with the largest discrepancy being a matter of intelligent design versus astronomical chance. The fact that modern man came last (in the final era leading up to oral historical records) says enough.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Jeroen_Sol
But atheism isn't the rejection of the claim a god exists. It is the claim no god exists.
It's a very different thing to say: "You have not proven a god exists" than to say "No god exists."
The rejection of both the claims of a god existing and not existing is called agnosticism, and is fundamentally different from atheism in that it doesn't make a claim.
This. Education.
Dolly A sad death
I guarantee you're not going to get far as a commercial production using Chrono Trigger rips. You should fix that ASAP.
What are you thinking about right now?
'Quoth the raven "Nevermore".'
You see, Edgar Allen Poe was a tortured man who spoke his pain through his art and was renowned for it. Anthony W of Runescape fame is much different.
This douchenugget took his undeniable hatred for all humankind and centered it into his work - "Olaf's Quest" - where you must make it across a slippery bridge to fight a boss in order to get a negligible reward. One misstep due to the RNG and the ridiculously high probability of failure will see you retracing your steps back up a mountain, into a cave and back to the beginning of the bridge. The game doesn't remember how far you progressed and ensure you don't fail up to that point again like a smart game/developer would, so you'll more than likely fail to get up to that point ever again.
I completed this quest once before in my youth (clearly before I became an adult with next to no patience for intentional bullshit) and I refuse to return to it after what just happened. Many attempts and two steps into the bridge and I... I just can't. I thought my head was going to explode. I'm pretty sure I got a crick in my neck because of how tense I made it when I lost my temper. It can't be that hard to make a game that doesn't suck. Even if you're trying to mess with people, there's a very clear line you don't cross and that's making the player want to put their head through a wall.
So here I am browsing Google, filling in word combinations that should provide very few if any results because it's so incredibly stupid/likely to go horribly wrong. I'm up to "bikini unicycle", and as was to be expected, perhaps one accurate result.
You see, Edgar Allen Poe was a tortured man who spoke his pain through his art and was renowned for it. Anthony W of Runescape fame is much different.
This douchenugget took his undeniable hatred for all humankind and centered it into his work - "Olaf's Quest" - where you must make it across a slippery bridge to fight a boss in order to get a negligible reward. One misstep due to the RNG and the ridiculously high probability of failure will see you retracing your steps back up a mountain, into a cave and back to the beginning of the bridge. The game doesn't remember how far you progressed and ensure you don't fail up to that point again like a smart game/developer would, so you'll more than likely fail to get up to that point ever again.
I completed this quest once before in my youth (clearly before I became an adult with next to no patience for intentional bullshit) and I refuse to return to it after what just happened. Many attempts and two steps into the bridge and I... I just can't. I thought my head was going to explode. I'm pretty sure I got a crick in my neck because of how tense I made it when I lost my temper. It can't be that hard to make a game that doesn't suck. Even if you're trying to mess with people, there's a very clear line you don't cross and that's making the player want to put their head through a wall.
So here I am browsing Google, filling in word combinations that should provide very few if any results because it's so incredibly stupid/likely to go horribly wrong. I'm up to "bikini unicycle", and as was to be expected, perhaps one accurate result.













