@Crumpets I think that's a bit of a cheat really, I mean, you are granting yourself the right to make statement but effectively deny me the right to respond to it. Well, I can respond to it, but you will not let me hear your thoughts on my response. I can do two things, I can respond and hope you'll change your mind or save myself some time and not respond at all. Actually, I am going to do something in between, I do question my own beliefs all the time. I had certain beliefs about global warming for instance that have been changed in the past few weeks, I constantly worry that I might be on the wrong track and I don't selectively search for reinforcements of my own convictions. I try to be as open minded as possible which is why I didn't condemn anyone for believing. @TheLeonard112. That is true to some extent, however, she posted the video recommending us to watch it. So I did. Then, of course, I had an opinion about it and decided to reply. I didn't intend to rant, nor do I think I did. I only tried to explain the best way I could why these videos should not be believed. Especially the first video had a strong Christian foundation to it, so it should only be expected that I incorporated that same Christianity in my attempt to shed a new light on videos like the ones she brought up. Not really, I just don't take things on faith. Of course I believe that when I drop a pen, it will fall down. But that is merely reasonable expectations based on experience (and scientific theory, mind you the scientific meaning of theory, not "just" a theory. There is a vital difference). Then I'd say we disagree. Though maybe we don't. I think objective truth and understanding of the world does provide happiness, even more so than faith. Because on truth, we can build reasonable expectations, a sense of fullfillment that faith promises but can never deliver. @King. I have absolutely no issue with anything you've said. To you, happiness is more important, that is fine. I would consider it a risky strategy for life to take guesses and make decisions based on gut feelings. It can work out, yes, but it can also end in catastrophic failures. I consider that objective facts and reasoning are not only a safer path through life but one with more fullfillment. If I know what my boundaries are, if I know the facts of the world, then I can set my ambitions to where I know I can fullfill them, thus achieving great happiness. @All You all do care for truth, you really do. Why else would you take on a religion if you knew it wasn't true? No, you tell yourselves it is true, and the idea that it is true makes you happy. See the point? "Truth" inspires happiness, not the other way around. So in the end, we care for the same thing. Truth. Because it is an enabler of happiness. Ask yourselves if you would believe a religion that you know to be false, just because it makes you feel nice when the sun sets above some ocean or another? I daresay you wouldn't, not in the slightest because there are many more reasons to admire sunsets. If you didn't care for truth none of you would bother having this discussion. So we have some common ground here, we all care for the same thing. I say the pathway to that "Truth" is reason and logic, some of you say the pathway is faith, in reply to which I would point out that faith is gullibility. I only care so much about religion because it is presented as...take a guess...Truth. And I care for truth, like we all do. Religion demonstrably isn't truth. If people were to keep their faith to themselves I'd have no issue or quarrel whatsoever. But they don't. Especially not in the United States. It is being presented as a manual to life, a pathway to truth. Tell me, if you know, and can demonstrate something to be blatantly false, wouldn't you fight for that? Wouldn't you raise your voice to let people hear both sides? So they can make up their own minds instead of being told what eat and drink, how to breathe, how to life, how to pray?
But we don't know if religion is false, we don't know if god is real or not, so when given the choice, if beliving in him leds us to a more fofilling life, why not? (did you notice I stuck up for ya by the way? ) all in all no one really knows, so why worry?
@Crumpet: I find to many world shattering events would get boring? Just some advice for the future. Never start your epics with a world shattering problem (Unless maybe they revolve around the same quest). Close it out with that.
not world shattering, just world changing, and you know how people hate change also you guys ever heard of history repeating it's self? well, here it is!
@Exzalia: Well repeating itself 3 times in a row in all these peoples lives? That's a bit stretching it. Oh and by the way post in OM. I mean Lincoln asked a question and I don't have any characters that can answer with you guys.
only twice well of darkness there were no uncastales and the second time it was mages wipeing out uncatables, this time it's uncastables trying to wipe out mages and finally WW1 WW2 happens in real life too bud
@Exzalia: I never said it didn't. I'm saying in most cases of it happening its normally in two different points of history when the group that experineced it last is either really old or dead. But the case about world wars isn't the best. World 1 and World War 2 happened for different reasons. There were other world wars before those two that I'm sure are more similar then World War 1 and 2 are to each other.
you forgget king people of this world live to 300, totally reasonable for multiple wars to effect the same people and if i remeber correctly if it wasn't for ww1 ww2 would not of happened. they are linked, just as toe2, was eventually the catalist for toe3's conflict it's just humanitisy refusal to learn from past mistakes
Okay, you're gonna need to tell me about these other world wars, because as far as I know, there's never been any other wars on the scales of the WWs, nothing that would make them 'world wars' anyway.
@Exzalia: I know they live longer. That's why I think you should of waited to pull something like this again. And that's not really true what you said about the world wars. World War 1 and World War 2 are unrelated conflicts as far as I'm concerned. They just share a name. If World War 1 didn't happen then World War 2 probably still would of happened. Hitler still probably would of rose to power and then so on and so forth. The two world wars have nothing to do with mistakes. One has to do with with an assassination of a man which lead to a chain of events that started World War One Two was what happened when a mad man comes into power and convinces everyone else to go mad with him. You see what I'm saying? The World Wars are not catalist for each other. @Phoenix: Here I got this off wiki. I don't wanna write all of different wars that can be considered world wars. Most span multiple continents, different countries and global warfare. Now do I agree with all of them being world wars? No but some certainly count on that list. the Greco–Persian Wars (499 BC – 449 BC) the Wars of Alexander the Great (335 BC – 323 BC) the First Punic War (264 BC – 241 BC) the Second Punic War (218 BC – 201 BC) the Roman–Syrian War (192 BC – 188 BC) the Roman–Persian Wars (92 BC – 629 AD) the First Mithridatic War (89 BC – 85 BC) the Arab–Byzantine wars (629 AD – 1050s AD) the Second Crusade (1145 AD – 1149 AD) the Byzantine–Ottoman Wars (1265 AD – 1479 AD) the Eighty Years' War (1568 AD – 1648 AD) the Dutch–Portuguese War (1602 AD – 1663 AD) the Nine Years' War (1688 AD – 1697 AD), also called the "War of the Grand Alliance" or "War of the Palatine Succession" the War of the Spanish Succession (1701 AD – 1714 AD) the War of the Austrian Succession (1740 AD – 1748 AD) the Seven Years' War (1754 AD – 1763 AD), which Winston Churchill called "the first world war" in A History of the English-Speaking Peoples[8] the American Revolutionary War (1775 AD – 1783 AD) the French Revolutionary Wars (1792 AD – 1802 AD) the Quasi-War (1798 AD – 1800 AD) the Napoleonic Wars (1803 AD – 1815 AD) the Crimean War (1853 AD – 1856 AD) the Spanish–American War (1898 AD)
BLAH!!! The two world wars have nothing to do with mistakes. I screwed up with one part I wrote. They do have to do with mistakes but not the same mistakes.
@King WW1 and WW2 are very much related. Hitler very much abused the pride of the Germans, which had been tormented by the defeat they had suffered at the end of WW1, to rise to power. If WW1 had not happened, then Germany would not have been nearly as eager to throw itself into another war. Germany was very much humiliated after WW1, even forced to pay the allied forces and to keep their military very bare bones. To say that WW1 and WW2 are unrelated is to say that a lightbulb and electricity are unrelated.
None of those, and I'm a history buff so I'm not just talking out my butt here, are on the scale of the World Wars. There's a reason that the world wars are called, 'world wars.' They weren't just a few nations fighting against each other, they engulfed all of europe and most of asia in total war, and eventually pulled the US in. Those others might have been big, but none even compare to the World Wars...
@Mac @Phoenix Well shit I'm teenager Did you expect me to know everything about history? Well I don't but I need to....I just don't yet. Oh well I picked up a new fact today. Also Alexander The Great took over most known world. I'm counting that shit as a world war.
I know they live longer. That's why I think you should of waited to pull something like this again. And that's not really true what you said about the world wars. World War 1 and World War 2 are unrelated conflicts as far as I'm concerned. They just share a name. If World War 1 didn't happen then World War 2 probably still would of happened. Hitler still probably would of rose to power and then so on and so forth. The two world wars have nothing to do with mistakes. One has to do with with an assassination of a man which lead to a chain of events that started World War One Two was what happened when a mad man comes into power and convinces everyone else to go mad with him. You see what I'm saying? The World Wars are not catalist for each other. you need to retake history hitler fought in ww1 as a soulder, when germany lost ww1 they where forced to sign a brutal treaty that threw them into hard economic times, they had to pay back america britian and france for all of their amunition and other such things, this cause germanies people to become very poor and desprate, an desprate people are more fanitcal. hitler survived ww1, and blamed the jews for germanies economic problems caused by ww1, this is what he used to maniplute the people into electing him. he used the people desperation to gain power, then he tried to take back all the land germany lost thanks to ww1. in short. germanies fate after world war 1 gave hitler the leverage he needed to gain power and start ww2, in other words. ww1, DIRECTLY caused ww2, I could go on but ask anyone and they'll tell you they are linked! Your the first person I have met to think other wise, I modled this in toe the mages nearly wiped out the uncatsables in toe2, 70 years later magic is now gone and the anger the uncatables feel coupled with the lack of power from the mages has sparked another conflict but this time the uncastbles have the adavantage and want to wipe out mages. toe2, caused toe3 problems, history has repeated.
@Exzalia: I just said I was wrong. (And yes Hitler fought in WW1 I know that) Fucking hell!!! I can't be expected to know all this shit. I haven't even been on this Earth long yet and I we didn't cover WW2 history in school this year or last. They taught us other things like about where humans came from, first civilizations and world history but we didn't stay on the subjects of wars long. Then the year after that it was a class about African American history. Now am I saying I'm terrible at history? No I'm pretty damn good at it. Nothing but A's and B's in that subject. But I can only debate based on what I know. Did I know right this time? No I didn't and for that I'm sorry. I'll learn it all eventually....hell I'm doing it now.
I'm actually pretty good at history. Just not wars. I mean we learned about them (More so other wars then those two) but it wasn't our main focus. I'm better with myths, figures (I learned about most of those on my own accord) and of course what I've been taught so far in School or by other places. Which would be AF history, civilizations, some political affairs of different points in history etc and it was basically world history. No am I going to know about World War 2 and 1 better ever? Of course I'm an intelligent person(Yes I fancy myself smart person or at the very least person who will be so as I have a really good memory for things. So I figure it'll pay off down the line) so it would be against my beliefs not to learn about the world wars better. But for now I happened to roll the dice and lost the draw.
Hitler used charisma and desperation to get eglected. The anti-Semitism didn't kick into full gear until later (though he was influenced by it before his career). Also, he used to be a painter. I thought that was pretty vital to the discussion.
neglected They already told me Crumpets and finally don't you mean elected? Of course that was a play on words but I just thought I'd point it out.
