Recent posts by Aidan on Kongregate

Topic: Serious Discussion / Cell Phone Radiation.

Even if there’s a possibility that radiation emitted from cell phones could cause cancer, I think the key point is the abuse of using it. I believe everything our body consumes exaggeratedly is potentially dangerous, so if you don’t spend all of your days talking on the cell phone during decades, you don’t have too much to worry about.

Topic: Kongregate / Locked Content

Originally posted by jesdynf:

Any game posted with content locked to another site’s build is a demo, not a game. Demos get 1s. This is the /Rule Of One/.

Good for you. Why did you care to post this on the forum again?
Besides, of course:

To avoid — well, consolidate — the flaming

Topic: Kongregate / Help the Admins: What's your favorite game on Kong played only with a mouse?

Originally posted by Cj10203040:

Areas! You probably already have it, but its amazing.

Absolutely, Areas is just exceptional.

Other ones worth to mention are:

The Missile Game 3D HS
3D Logic
Hexiom
Caps

Topic: Kongregate / Christmas banner?

I don’t think religion is the issue with Kongregate not having a Christmas banner. If it was like that, there would not have Halloween banners like the past two years, since as far as I know, Halloween is a lot more restricted (regionally) than Christmas.

But well, if you guys think Christmas could be offensive to some other religion… I just don’t think that’s the reason Kongregate wouldn’t put up a Christmas banner (and no, I have no idea what’s the real reason)

Topic: Kongregate / Battalion Ghosts badge issues

Missions 2 and 3 aren’t checking for me

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is Conservipedia a joke?

Well, from the “Article of the Year” about Evolution, you can find this:

In 1993, Professor Miron Baron, M.D., the renowned medical researcher and Professor at Columbia University, wrote in BMJ (British Medical Journal) that there is a conflict relative to the theory of evolution and the notion of genetic determinism concerning homosexuality. Dr. Baron wrote “…from an evolutionary perspective, genetically determined homosexuality would have become extinct long ago because of reduced reproduction.” In the United States, liberals are more likely to believe in the theory of evolution. Also, in the United States, twice as many liberals as conservatives (46% versus 22%) believe people are born homosexual and liberals generally have more favorable opinions about homosexuality. Given Dr. Miron Baron’s commentary about homosexuality, many American liberals are inconsistent on the issues of evolution and homosexuality.

This argument is one that makes me believe they really are serious, because they present this as a perfectly valid argument, when in reality they are linking two different viewpoints and stating that whoever believes in one of them has to believe in the other. Reading it quickly, this may pass unnoticed, but really, it doesn’t make any sense.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

Neither, it seems to be minty fresh.

That’s exactly what I mean. It depends on your interpretation.

With science, it’s simply about cold, hard facts. It isn’t really comforting to know your eyes are blue or why lightning appears. It’s just .. true. It’s great to know, for sure, but I wouldn’t call it comfort. I’d use another word, though I’m not sure, “comfort” just doesn’t seem right.

It’s not just true. It’s what you believe is true. You may not feel this comfort because there are just too many things that are obvious nowadays,but there was a time they weren’t, and then an explanation brought this feeling of comfort, that now you can explain to someone who asks, that the world is a little bit less mysterious.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

trust in technology that has shown time and time again to be working is very different from belief in a deity you’ve never seen in action.

Yes, it is different, but that doesn’t mean it’s not similar. Both try to explain how the world works, and both can convince you of a point. One appeals to a God, the other appeals to human observations, and at the same way you can’t prove that God is a truth, you can’t prove that human observations are truth.

Science isn’t a religion, period. It doesn’t worship anything.

Science is not a religion, but religion is not just about worshipping. The comparison I’m making (and I seem to be repeating this a lot) is about how one can believe in scietific results in a similar way that one can believe in the power of a particular God. – Maybe the title of the thread is a bit confusing here?

So people’s faith in science is vaguely comparable to religion because of the placebo effect?

The placebo effect argument was a specific example of what I’m trying to say. I don’t think that you could say “Wow! Science really is a religion!”, but I don’t think that the two of them are only ‘vaguely’ comparable. There are some significant similarities, and I think the way we believe in either one of them is significantly similar.

These observations are the only things we can work with.

These observations depends on how your brain interprets them. One example: Is this color yellow or green?

Don’t you feel comfortable to say that your eyes are [input color here] because you have genes that says that?

No. It’s a fact and it’s no more comforting saying my eyes are blue than saying they are green.

I think you got me wrong here. The comfort I’m talking about is that you know why your eyes are of that color. It may not make much sense to you, since it seems like an obvius thing. But I’ll try another example:

There was a lightining. The human asked: Why does it happen?
One religion says: There is a god that’s responsible for making these. When he is angry with humans he throws lightinings and usually the god of rain cries because he likes humans and don’t like to see us being punished, so he makes it rain to make our crops grow stronger.

Science says: Within a cloud, there are many electrons giving off their charges. When the difference between these charges is great enough to overcome the air’s natural insulation, which keeps these charges from mixing, a lightning flash can take place.

Both of them explained it. Each one based on particular reasons, but it’s an explanation. And if you believe in any one of these, it makes you comfortable, because your curiosity has found an answer.

I may accept something is true when many individual scientists, who would love to criticize one another until the point the results are deemed false, come to the same conclusion.

Isn’t that what ‘to convince’ means?

I think you’re confusing “science” with “math”.

Yeah, maybe the first post was a bit confusing. I wasn’t trying to say that any particular axiom makes scientific results a matter of belief, that was just an example of how some theories are only true if you believe that a basic thing is also true. Another example, is that Einstein’s theory of relativity is all based upon the veracity of the principle of relativity.

And you may find a wikipedia citation not so reliable, but a more careful research will give you the same conclusion:

Certain principles of relativity have been widely assumed in most scientific disciplines. One of the most widespread is the belief that any law of nature should be the same at all times; and scientific investigations generally assume that laws of nature are the same regardless of the person measuring them. These sorts of principles have been incorporated into scientific inquiry at the most fundamental of levels.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

Originally posted by TheBSG:

No I don’t. That’s how our brains work, not how science works.

I’m not trying to explain how science or religion works. I’m trying to estabilish a correlation as how our brain interpret them.

Did you even read the link I posted? At the end, it says that “These results extend our knowledge of how beliefs and expectations affect the brain’s neurochemistry and show that one’s mental response to a challenge can affect the brain and body in ways that are relevant to health.”

And it’s exactly what I mean. It’s not that faith ‘worked’ directly, it was your belief in it that caused a response. And that belief was that the medicine was scientifically proven to work.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

How does the Placebo Effect have anything to do with science being a religion?

I think the placebo effect has lots to do with it.

The placebo effect works because you believe that science was capable of reaching a substance that will cure you. You’re not believing that god will help you and save you. You believe that pill will do its job, because science is that good.

See the similarity now?

Originally posted by xxXPsychoFadeXxx:

In my opinion, religion is a continuation of science. Human uses God to explain everything he fails to explain with science.

Even though the scientific method was created after many other religions?
Science and religion may be complementary to each other, but not exactly on the “use God to explain what science can’t” kind of way. There are many ways to mix science with religion, and each person has its own views and boundaries to this.

Do we know it’s real? Do we know anything is real? What is real any way? Why should we care?

Ask these questions about God to someone who believes. It’s the same thing.

Religion is more for comfort while science is more for discovery of the “truth”, with truth being that what we observe.

Don’t you feel comfortable to say that your eyes are [input color here] because you have genes that says that?
Science also brings comfort. In a different way, I agree. But nonetheless, it’s comfort.

And yes, I agree there are just too many variables in some experiments that makes their conclusions suspicious, but what I’m saying is that you are able to believe in someone who convinces you, sometimes with science, sometimes with religion.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

Originally posted by TheBSG:

Because the vast majority of people take science at face value doesn’t mean it’s a religion. Science works. Faith doesn’t.

Medical science says that certain medicine works, however, the placebo effect also works. Would you tell me that faith doesn’t work even after scientists recognizing it as something that does?

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

They’re proven, without using mathematics. You don’t even have to use any mathematical names, because obviously you ended up with the same result. The equal sign indicates this and is as such right in its “assumption”.

Actually, I was trying to reach a more philosophical thinking. You can prove to yourself (and to others) that X + Y = Y + X, but you can’t prove that this sentence is an absolute truth. It’s possible to show it with rocks, like you did, but you can’t prove that your senses are telling you the truth. What you perceive of the world around you it’s an interpretation that your brain makes. Who can prove that this is the truth? Just because we are humans the world must be like we think it is?

Everyday lots of scientific studies and conclusions are published. Today, show you numbers “proving” that eggs cause diabetes. A month later, another study shows different number “proving” that eggs prevent diabetes. – I don’t have sources for this, it’s just an example of opposing theories both proved truthful that I not so rarely see.

When a scientist publishes conclusions about something, do you first go repeat the experiment, collect data, and verify the conclusion before being convinced that it’s true, or do you simply believe he’s telling the truth because it’s a scientific conclusion?

That’s the similarity to religion I’m talking about.

Scientists believe the world must be how they perceive it, and make hypothesis and reach conclusions all based on that first belief. On the other hand, you believe in the scientist and use his conclusion to make another ones. But all this still depends on that first belief of how the world must be.

That’s why the equations I showed are called axioms. They are the base truth you must assume (or believe) so that you can reach your conclusions.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is science a kind of religion?

Isn’t it funny how science got so intricated into us that everything now requires some kind of ‘proof’?

But it wasn’t always like that. In fact, much (just not to say all) of the scientific knowledge is based upon beliefs, or if you prefer, axioms, that means “a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follow from it.”

That’s pretty much saying: If you believe in this, then my conclusions are true.

And those axioms are part of the very foundation of mathematics:
In Linear Algebra, a vector space follows some axioms, some of which are:
x+y = y+x
0+x = x+0 = x
1x = 1
c(x+y) = cx + cy

Now, these may look obvious, but they are axioms, no one PROVED they are right.

Doesn’t that make anyone who makes scientific conclusion a believer of science? And doesn’t that make science a religion? And if it does, how is it different opposing science and religion from christians and jews?

Source of vector space axioms: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~tao/resource/general/121.1.00s/vector_axioms.html

Topic: Kongregate / To Greg: A Travesty

I believe in two reasons for the downrating of Pel:

first: due to its rapidly increase in difficulty. As pointed out here, the avergae gamer nowadays doesn’t seem to like games that are too hard.

second: As sad as it sounds, due to its simplicity. I may be wrong here (And how I wish I am!), but I think most people just can’t enjoy games that are too simple, that don’t have in-game achievements, or multiple stages and/or quests, monetary system, stunning music and eye-candy graphics. True, there are many simple games that got badges in the past:
areas (3.69)
hexiom (3.73)
z-rox (3.87)
and yes, pwong2 (4.02)

But again, just as the ratings say: The simpler it is, the ‘worse’ it is. Not for me, though. Areas is just an exceptional game, that got its rating dropped like a cannonball after the badges, and the same with hexiom an z-rox. Pwong2 survived an over-4 rating due to “in-game achievements, multiple stages, monetary system, stunning music and eye-candy graphics”.

Anyways, there are just too many games for greg to take care of all of them (Personally, I don’t think I would handle dozens of badges per week =P).

But I believe Pel does deserve a badge spotlight, and just to catch the opportunity: Other ‘simple’ games that also deserve badges:
an old one: minim
and a recent one: caps

Topic: Kongregate / Kongregate Needs Harder Badges!

I think the Kongregate community changed a lot since the first badges came out.

Back then, the best games were recognized easier, and people who played actually played them for fun, since points were rather scarce with only points challenge. I can’t be sure of this, but at least makes sense to me that when there were no badges, greg had more time to analyze each game and its unique carachteristics, to make badges that really meant something.

I’m not saying that this isn’t happening anymore. I just think that there are LOTS more games now that deserve badges. And greg is doing an awesome job creating so many badges for so many games. And since there are so many games, I believe it’s harder to explore a game to its full content so a GREAT badge will come out.

Back to the community: I believe it’s impossimble to please everyone. There are many kinds of people who play on Kongregate. Some of them only come for badges, and feel forced to earn every single one, or at least all the medium and hard ones. Some of them come to chat and sometimes find a good game. Some of them come straight to the forums and rarely even play.

The chat update brought an interesting number: How many people got a specific badge. Don’t you think that if the hard badges were easy there wouldn’t be such a big difference on this number on the majority of games that have a hard and a medium/easy? Analyzing these numbers, you can see that fewer people get the hard ones.

I don’t think Kongregate needs harder badges, but I sure miss badges like the hard for surviving 200 second on particles (which I don’t have because I’m not over my frustrating 197 record yet), or like the MindScape one, that required you to collect like everything, so you had to go searching throughout the whole amazing game for them. I would like to see badges that required you to make something that’s hard, and that you wouldn’t normally do when playing it for the first time.

Hope I made some sense there.

Topic: Kongregate / How do I change to my normal avatar with blood stains?

You can make it manually, by adding this picture overlay on your original avatar:

http://cdn4.kongregate.com/images/campaigns/l4d2_infected_fury/overlay_infected.png

Although I think you can only change your avatar back without opting out after the zombie month is over…

Topic: Off-topic / Who's that anime char?

Hey guys, for the ones who like anime, there’s a game where they give you a character and you tell who is. Very nice and fun!

www.animechar.cjb.net

Try it out and tell what you think. ^^

Topic: Kongregate / a new chat setup

I think it could be a good ideia, if you could also choose to not change your color – thus not revealing your gender -.

and…

Originally posted by Jonny666:

Yeah, i really don’t get how people can go out online, i mean, theirs no physical affection, just words, and if you are prepared to go out with someone seriously online, you really need to get out more.

I know here is not the place to discuss about this, but I don’t think people who make relationships on the internet lacks sociability.

Topic: Kongregate / EPIC WEEK!!

Pretty good game choices for epic week, greg! I was kind of frustraded that a year passed and we didn’t get another buried treasure week. But this week sure did compensate for that! I really hope these kind of events turn out to happen more often, there are so many games that are waiting badges for a long time, and a crazy week like this is a perfect opportunity for them. =D

Topic: Kongregate / New Kongregate Version - Forum Edition! (CR 2009.09.15)

Pretty awesome update there. It’s been quite a while the forums needed to be worked on. Good idea to put the technical support up there to gain more visibility =D

Originally posted by Phoenix00017:

My guess is we’ll end up rotating which ones are featured on the main page while the others will all collect on /forums/games and be visible on their respective pages. That way we can feature a fair number of games without them crowding our main forum page.

Can I take that when there are forums for like, 100 games, the /forums/games will have pages, each one showing something like 20 games or so, or it will just put all 100 at once? – Yeah, I know it kind of early to think of something like this, but the question just hit me =P

Topic: The Arts / [group] Writer's Block

Wow. Pretty good, Laxaria.

About the message, I have only one thing to point:

Why does he have to fall?
Wouldn’t it have the same (or more) impact if standing there on the peak he realizes that there are even higher mountains to climb? Even though he surpassed a big mountain, there would always be another higher one to climb, so he must keep climbing.

The falling makes it a lot more frustrating, by not being able to really climb.

Well, that’s just a personal opinion. I can’t guarantee that I gave the poem the same meaning YOU did. Actually, the chance of that happenning is pretty slim, but the way I was reading, it would be more meaningful if it was the way I said here.

About the structure:
I love how every verse is linked by a single word. The few poetry I tried to do it had this kind of structure.

About the way it sounds when you read aloud:
There are some poems I find this very important, and when I began to read yours aloud, I felt like you put some kind of effort in this. My only problem was with this part:
“Walking up the steep slope alone,
Jagged rocks and unstable soil,
Threaten to derail me.”

I don’t know if you really was worried about this aspect, but when I try to read this part aloud, the words (and here you have to forgive my crazy philosophy) build a certain rythm with their phonetics on the first line that is completely broken by the second line. I’m not talking about counting syllables or stuff like that, it’s just the way the words sound that on the first line begins to build an awesome sound that is wasted by the second line and doesn’t come back later.

Am I being too picky?

Topic: The Arts / [Group] Literary Writing Project: DEADLINE, 24 HOURS!

Hey Laxaria, I’m still working on my text. Currently at 2800/5000. But I think I won’t finish it. I have too many tests next week and the time I thought I would have is now gone.
Thanks anyway for doing this, because it made me start writing again after a long time. I have all of the story already planned, so I’ll finish when I have more time and will show it to you guys.

Topic: The Arts / What do you do?- forum RPG[Goodbye cruel (fantasy) world]

Grab a map and try to find some people for information about the island, the big building.
Maybe the weapons shop have some kind of weapon that could be useful against trees or big chinks of wood, since that pickaxe turned out to be pretty useless

Topic: The Arts / What do you do?- forum RPG[Goodbye cruel (fantasy) world]

Run to the deck and look for a life-boat or something that you could use as one.

Topic: The Arts / [Group] Literary Writing Project: DEADLINE, 24 HOURS!

Originally posted by SaintAjora:

psychological mystery

You might be thinking of this, which is somewhat related to and sometimes overlapping the mystery genre. It’s all in how you frame it.

Yes, that’s kind of more related to what I’m trying to work on. I just like to explore personalities and how they would react in unusual circumstances more than exploring the situation itself.