The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Comments like this and a few others here and at RoK still make me question how much of your analysis of the game is firsthand and how much is hearsay or influenced by immersing yourself in reviews both before and after playing the game.

Does it matter? If someone makes a good point, does it matter if its me or not?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Those people royally suck. Keeping both parties alive was amazingly easy, unless you were a mindless renegade.

Yeah well, theres apparantly a point system that you need score at least 5 to be able to do it. You get a point for:

Spoiler:

+2 for Tali is exonerated at her trial (eg NOT exiled)
+2 for destroyed the heretics
+1 for resolving the Tali/Legon conflict with a renegade or paragon solution
+1 for Rannoch: Destroy the Geth Squadron on Rannoch (aka fighter base)
+1 for Rannoch: Save the Admiral (not his men, the admiral)

Also you need to complete Legions mission in ME3 and have high reputation. There might be more I don't know about. So it shouldn't be that hard if you import really.

Edit: In other news, SQUEEEE! KORRA IS HERE!

Anyone else feel like "dark matter" and the scientific explanation of it is scientists basically saying "eh, hell if we know." mysterious "mass" that can't be seen or detected in any way except for its gravitation pull? Sounds more like a problem with the theory of gravity more than the existence of some mysterious matter that makes the numbers work.

Why wouldn't you first admit that maybe there is something we don't know about gravity and how it acts in certain places instead of making up "invis-matter" to make the theory work? Sometimes science takes asmuch faith as anything else. that was my main problem with the theory of evolution, during the great "evolution wars" of 2007 or 08 or whenever it was.

Originally posted by truejedi
Anyone else feel like "dark matter" and the scientific explanation of it is scientists basically saying "eh, hell if we know." mysterious "mass" that can't be seen or detected in any way except for its gravitation pull? Sounds more like a problem with the theory of gravity more than the existence of some mysterious matter that makes the numbers work.

Why wouldn't you first admit that maybe there is something we don't know about gravity and how it acts in certain places instead of making up "invis-matter" to make the theory work? Sometimes science takes asmuch faith as anything else. that was my main problem with the theory of evolution, during the great "evolution wars" of 2007 or 08 or whenever it was.

True, but because we know that things with more mass = large gravitational force, and the visible mass in the universe isn't 'massive' enough to have enough force to match the speeds the universe is expanding at. Since they can't see anything else, though any EMS tests, they have to 'fill in the blanks' with dark matter. I suppose it's one of those 'Evidence' needed things, like Antimatter was, before that was discovered. Then again, science has quite a few things now that are mostly just theories.

Quantum entanglement, Quantum tunneling and Quantum 'random particle appearance' cannot be explain.
Entanglement is the one that really annoys me. One particle moves, and another particle somewhere else across the galaxy or the universe moves exactly as the other one does. Faster than Light. Instantly one moves, the other does in sync. Yet we can't understand this effect. I study physics and on a Quantum Physics lecture, we learned about tunneling. An atom can constantly smash against a wall, for example, billions of times. Now, randomly, that same atom can jump from one side of the wall to the other, instantly, without possible explaination.

I've never been able to wrap my head around entanglement. More than dark matter, that one really seems like stuff of guesswork and sci-fi.

just theories.

facepalm

tj, i have 2 things
the first thing is that dark matter is kind of an outgrowth of the model they're using; there is an unexplained amount of gravity and the problem is that laypeople/the press translate "some unknown source of gravity that isn't baryonic matter" into "invisible impermeable mass that is invisible." There is a language disconnect in effect.

the second thing is that i am alwasy a little bit weirded out when the religious charge "SCIENCE REQUIRES FAITH TOO" as though thta is some kind of deathblow; your own worldview calls faith a good thing! (And science is at least up front enough to point out the things that don't have evidenciary support and/or are purely theoretical which doesn't include evolution, btw)

EDIT: SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS SHOTS

Originally posted by Zampanó
[B]

the second thing is that i am alwasy a little bit weirded out when the religious charge "SCIENCE REQUIRES FAITH TOO" as though thta is some kind of deathblow

So TL;DR: The reason why the revelation that "science requires faith too" is a death-blow is because stupid people on your side of the fence make you guys all look bad. lol

Goes to show that most people don't even understand there own arguments. Which is pretty normal I guess, as it's also true for politics. People pick a side without even knowing all that their side entails.

the second thing is that i am alwasy a little bit weirded out when the religious charge "SCIENCE REQUIRES FAITH TOO" as though thta is some kind of deathblow; your own worldview calls faith a good thing! (And science is at least up front enough to point out the things that don't have evidenciary support and/or are purely theoretical which doesn't include evolution, btw)

The point of science is convince the masses. The point of religion (regardless of the fundamentalists) isn't.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
The point of science is convince the masses. The point of religion (regardless of the fundamentalists) isn't.

The universe works according to specific rules, regardless of what the masses think. Science is all over that shit.

Spoiler:
Also, why did nobody warn me about tequila? Like, I knew it was painful but nobody mentioned delicious. It's not as gross as Mountain Dew but way better than Battery Acid. I might have to become a connoisseur of shitty tequila.

----Post Manually Automerged 12:51----

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
stupid people

oh well... idgaf, really.

There are some rhetorical dodges to get around the issue but nobody in a religious debate is going to be swayed (even the audience 😬) so you get more mental masturbation points for expounding at length about the limits of knowledge or some bullshit like that.

tldr: bitches

edit dbl

Why does everybody hate Mountain Dew?

I would have said the opposite laughing

The universe works according to specific rules, regardless of what the masses think. Science is all over that !@#$%^&*.

You miss the point. Because science works on tangible evidence, it's job is to explain to humanity how the world works on that basis. The point of religion isn't to attempt to convince you or prove to you that there's a god. Two fundamentally different issues.

Science(!) wants to explain. Religion wants you to believe.

Used to be that religion would try to explain. But science(!) took over that realm long ago. Now religion has been relegated to providing comforting, quick-and-easy "answers" to metaphysical problems.

Yes, I'm pretty sure its the other way around Beefy. You don't see Atheists trying to convert people outside of Dawkins. Religious Missionaries never stopped being a thing.

As an Agnostic and a science student, I'd probably say something like this.

Religion is the philosophy of egocentric happiness
Science is the philosophy of discovery

For me it is more like this.
Science is the reality.
Religion is for my inner world on a spiritual level.
It's like scientifically there is no god, yet, when we struggle, we still say "God,please, help me".

That's kinda what I mean too. People have faith in God because they want something to look up to. Something to believe in.
Whereas science is unlocking those things. I mean, go back 500 years. People thought the Sun went around Earth and because they couldn't complain it, they said God. Until people like Galileo helped discover Heliocentrism

For me its more like this:

Science is the truth

Religion is a lie.

awepedo

Originally posted by Nephthys
Yes, I'm pretty sure its the other way around Beefy. You don't see Atheists trying to convert people outside of Dawkins. Religious Missionaries never stopped being a thing.

Of course you do. All the atheist converts took to the internet on a worldwide scale. Religious missionaries aren't the rule but rather the exception.

That's kinda what I mean too. People have faith in God because they want something to look up to. Something to believe in.

Pfft, religious people believe that if you don't believe in God you'll go to hell. Theres much more incentive to convert from that. They need to 'save your soul.' Athiests don't believe in shit so on the whole they don't care what you believe.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Pfft, some religious people believe that if you don't believe in God you'll go to hell. Theres much more incentive to convert from that. They need to 'save your soul.' Athiests think is religion is absurd while constantly trying to get the religious side to prove to them that there's a god although nobody is trying to convince them.

Fixed for accuracy.