Recent posts by norumaru on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

In Germany, we have civil unions, and they are treated virtually the same by the law. It’s not ideal, but it’s better than nothing.

 
Flag Post

Topic: General Gaming / The "What was that game called?" Thread

I am looking for a game I played ages ago. It was a platformer that featured fighting with a couple of different moves and RPG elements, such as upgrading certain special attacks. I seem to remember that coins or something like that was involved in levelling, and one of the playable characters was a panda. THere was also a magic system of some sort, but I don’t remember much of that. Any ideas?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Girlfriend Mode: The Controversy, and the Concept

According to the ESA, 42% of gamers are female, so tha “male majority” is not really that large, and it has been shrinking for years.

The problem with the term “girlfriend mode” is that it pigeonholes 1. gamers as by default male (or homosexual, but I kinda doubt that was on the guy’s mind at the time) and 2. girls as by default uninterested in games, which perpetuates two old, dumb stereotypes that heven’t been true for decades in one swoop.

The problem is not made any better by the fact that it really doesn’t take much to avoid it. There’s a mountain of terms to choose from that are non-gendered. How about “casual mode”? Hell, go “friend mode”. The viedo game industry by and large has a huge sexism problem. This is not the worst of it by far, but it’s no wonder that it’s a touchy subject, so the guy should just have fired up one more neutron and went for a neutral term.

The concept itself, I actually like a lot. I imagine it’s hard to balance it so that the casual skillteŕee doesn’t make players who actually play a lot overpowered when they use it, but it could work.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Stopping time is IMPOSSIBLE, and I have proof that needs debating

Originally posted by Blood_Shadow:

So many misconceptions in this thread… Sigh.

First, time is not merely a perception or a state of mind. It is a very real physical entity, as real as the three dimensions of space. I don’t care what school of philosophy you’re coming from, but special relativity disagrees with you, and it has been verified by countless experiments.

Thank you. This shoudn’t have taken 20 posts to get to! Shame on everyone else in this thread.

This OP, kids, is why you should avoid ideas whose proponent’s talk transcrips start with “Speaker takes multiple prolonged bong rips”.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / THe rise of oil prices

Originally posted by softest_voice:

Oh for sure don. The oil and gas prices being paid in Europe are ridiculous!

On the other hand, most European countries have functioning public transport networks throughout and between the cities. At least here in Germany, a big part of the taxes on gas is explicitly there to encourage using PT rather than everyone driving in their own car. That kind of policy is unrealistic in the US, where public transport is treated more as a novelty item than a viable way of travelling by both the governments and the people (the exception being New York).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Controlled human evolution?

No, this would not work at all. The viruses and bacteria that cause the illnesses also evolve, that is why illnesses are still around, and why for example the flu wave you see every winter dies down after a month or 6 weeks (when enough people have had it to provide herd immunity), but rolls around again the next year (when the spreading conditions are good again, and the virus is different enough to pass by the immunity).

Other things, like heritable diseases or aberration-caused ones such as cancer, are still around because they are piggybacking on a useful feature. Cancer for example is, at its core, basically caused by a self-perpetuating DNA transcription error (as far as we understand, and put in extremely simple terms). We get rising rates of it because more people live long enough to see such an error occur. The only way to get rid of it is to fundamentally change DNA transcription, and evolution can’t provide that kind of ground-level overhaul.

So, even ethics aside, this just won’t work.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Racism against Germany.

The question what constitutes a species and where it ends is kind of debated right now, but one thing that’s certain is that a species can have different races with different phenotypes inside it. Another thing biologists agree on is that all individuals that can mate and produce fertile offspring are of the same species. We are all Homo sapiens sapiens.

In fact, the human genome is singularly homogenous. The whole of humanity has less genetic variation than a normal pack of chimpanzees in the wild.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "New World Order"?

These are big boy clubs for rich, influential people and their offspring. That a lot of presidents have been members of them is odd only in the sense that it’s odd how it’s always movie industry people who get the oscars.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Feminism and Sexual Equality

So? There’s been a good deal of job discrimination for decades because corporations were (and still are) hiring men over women under virtually any circumstances, especially for higher positions. We’re just starting to experience what women have faced for virtually ever.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why are you Atheist?

Originally posted by Winnabago:
Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Vastly superior capabilities, for one.

No one considers, say, Superman divine.

You haven’t been following DC comics much, I take it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / A Question, for those familiar with the Cell Theory

By definition, a virus is an infectious agent that can only replicate inside the cells of a living organism. They are not cells, they are little more than a strand of RNA and a vehicle for it.

Whether or not viruses even count as “alive” is still debated, because on their own, they are incapable of procreation (and they don’t have a metabolism, but that’s irrelevant to my point). They cannot prevail, much less spread without cells nearby. Its the archetype of a parasite. There is no way that viruses have existed before the first cells.

There are viruses, however, that prey on prokaryotes. They are called Bacteriophages, and their existence suggests that while viruses can’t have existed before cells, they have probably been around since shortly after the first ones.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / A Question, for those familiar with the Cell Theory

To clear up a few misconceptions here, DNA or RNA is not only a storage medium for genetic code. If that was its only function, any old long molecule would be OK. The whole reason why cells use ribonucleic acids is that they are capable of self-replication. All they need is an environment with abundant amino acids. The Miller-Urey experiment demonstrated how these amino acids can be formed under the conditions that we think are close to those of the pre-life earth. Formation of simple pre-life replicating molecules called tPNA has been recreated in the lab.

As soon as there is replication with variation, an evolutionary process starts. This is so trivial that I don’t really know where to find a source for it: Molecules that replicate and produce replicating copies will keep replicating longer than those that do not replicate, stable molecules will replicate more than those that break apart easily, etc., and you’ve got a pre-life selection process.

According to the widely accepted RNA world hypothesis, the first cells most likely did not contain DNA, but rather RNA. RNA is basically one side of a DNA double helix, so it is ready and open for transcription by amino acids. Formation of RNA molecules (and their predecessors, see above) has been reproduced in the lab.

Next thing would be cell membranes. The Fox experiments showed that spontaneous formation of peptide membranes is possible. Furthermore, the existence of separate mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA really proves that endosymbiosis can and did happen in single-cell organisms. And frequently enough, no less, that two obvious and one debated case have survived. This gun’s still smoking even though it’s been in the evidence locker for aeons.

So much for the formation of the first cell. Turns out we know quite a lot about it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bottom of the Ocean Creatures

Problem is, no 30m squid have been found yet. Here’s a handy chart.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Proof found, ending gun control and bans lowered crime

Originally posted by jhco50:

Clean up your own faults before you try to tell others how to live. But that is what a conservative is prone to do, mind his own business.

Unless you’re homosexual. Or an immigrant. Or unwantedly pregnant. Or a woman.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by GameCrazyKid:

Christianity is, by technical definition, a theory.

Hahahaha! No. Not even close.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Ban straight people from procreating. It’s them who keep having all these gay children.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Your opinions of Abortion

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by DarkBaron:

Jhco, do you enjoy sex? Because, according to your philosophy, you should have sex only to procreate. Any time you do not, you are wasting lots of sperm, and unborn children.

Actually Baron, sex is for marriage, between a man and a woman. It is something special that you share with the one you love, not the slut down the street.

That’s just, like, your opinion, man. Also, it doesn’t answer the question, nor provide any helpful argument towards the conondrum expressed therein. A lot of married couples use contraception, and a lot of married women get abortions.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Economic Crisis: Obama getting Re-Elected?

Since when has government been giving industry jobs to people?

The ones relocating the jobs to China, Indonesia and other cheap-labour countries (Japan is not one of them, btw) are the big corporations who manufacture the stuff. The Government has little say in it, be it Obama, Huntsman or (please, Americans, don’t) Michelle Bachmann.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why are you Atheist?

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:
Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

The people are the ones believing in it. The Bible doesn’t do anything except be there. It is being preached by priests. I’d say that, yes, the priests are being influenced by the Bible, but the masses are being influenced by the priests. That’s only because people have the ability to persuade. It’s much harder for a book to do that.

So your argument is that the book bears little responsibility for the religion or the views espoused. Huh. Aside from being a thoroughly anti-clerical argument (and I’d say anti-catholic specifically), it also sounds like unhistorical nonsense.

Good thing there’s literature on the perception of Christianity from within. This book features tons of research on the reasons why young people are leaving the church, and none of them are scripture- or doctrine-related. Here is the gist of it. All of the reasons are related to the way the church treats its members and issues of interest.

If these people believed in the bible first and the church second, you’d think they’d switch churches, but not turn their backs on it entirely, but that is exactly what is happening. Fed up with the bigotry and other antics of the priests and institutions, people leave the faith.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

I can see how some people, even of a liberal mindset, wouldn’t want to take the risk of giving their kids early exposure. Not so much to homosexuality, but to the subcultures that go along with it. We’ve mentioned transsexuality already in this thread; I mean, LGBTQ is a BIG general grouping for a lot of smaller sexual moeurs.

Not to attack you personally, this is just one point that has always baffled me. What harm do people suppose will come from having a kid see gay people? Even if it is something rather extreme, let’s say a dude with another dude on a leash. Do people really think this will fundamentally change the later desires of the kid? Like, seeing gays makes them gay, and seeing kinky people will make them be into kinky stuff? Because I’m not buying it.

People will want to do what satisfies them sexually, no matter where or even if they see it. Would someone who is into kinky sex (regardless of hetero or homo) not be into it if he/she hadn’t seen that one TV show or whatever? I don’t think so. And even if so, what’s wrong with being into kinky stuff? It’s pretty much accepted that gay or straight isn’t much of a choice, so why does the level of kink even matter anymore?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Condoms

Originally posted by NickWalker12:
Originally posted by AaronB:

…Teens aren’t the only ones who use them.

COMPLETELY incorrect.

[citation needed]

I mean, damn. My parents used to use condoms. All of my friends use condoms. I use condoms. None of these people are teenagers.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Atheists: Are religious people hacks?

I don’t even think they are necessarily lying. Self-suggestion goes a long way, and people will see what they already believe.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Astrology: Is there any Truth to it?

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

All right, I guess I’ll defend Astrology.

My sign (according to the traditional western version) is Scorpio.

Most likely, that sign has been essentially assigned to you randomly. It has no connection to the sun circle anymore.

So yeah, bunk.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Origins of the Universe

Originally posted by MrRubix:

It may turn out to be an unknowable concept. It would be like a character in a video game trying to get evidence of the physical hardware console’s existence/operations.

That… that is the greatest analogy for the problem with measuring the pre-universe conditions I’ve ever seen. Thank you.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Origins of the Universe

Well then, why is “nothing” more stable than “something”? I have most of my admittedly rudimentary knowledge of physics from easily readable science-for-dummies books like Bill Bryson’s Short History of Almost Everything and many similar. The two arguments I put forth there aren’t completely mine, either, they are from those exact books, but I found them interesting and they do make a lot of sense to me.

Please, educate me if they are demonstrably wrong.
I’m more of a bio/evo-devo guy, and even that just as a hobby. I don’t know advanced physics. I trusted in books written by people more educated on this to break it down for me, but I will do my best to follow.