The Dota Matchmaking is perfect, the thing is, since it's a Beta and there are few players, you rarely find games.
At least they do something about trolls/leavers, not like LoL.

And what limits are you talking about Ropa ? Give examples please.

And btw, LoL attracted every guys, not only players.
I saw people calling others "no-life" playing LoL. I mean, some people started playing computer games when they found LoL.
Plus Riot sucks: all they want is money. They don't care about player experience.

Quote from: Komito on July 23, 2012, 06:55 AM(Edit: ^^ Also, it would pretty much defeat the whole point of "Earth ending" lol...)

Not if the whole world doesn't exist but in our mind. ^^'
Anyway, I was joking, let's go back to the topic.  

PS: Btw, I really guess God and all that stuff were just a history from a book called Bible.
A history told to childs to preachify (bad things, good things).
If you look well, these are just the rules of life "do not kill, do not steal, etc..".

And one day, some guy decided to fool other people by telling this is true and so they started to enlist people (for money or power, don't know).

I hardly believe this.

Lol, how can you say so ?!

Dota heroes and items are so much better.
They really deserve their name of "heroes" in Dota, not in LoL.
All heroes are goddamn cheated, so that's balanced.

And Dota is for pro gamer, you're not allowed to do mistakes.
The only bad point of Dota is that last hits are goddamn hard to do (depending on heroes for sure, but still).

I bought my key some days ago, add me if you want to play some games: xDragonfirex

Quote from: Komito on July 22, 2012, 03:09 PMWhat if the world Ends in 20 seconds?

It did, you're just living through your mind right now.
The whole world is the one your brain created after your "death".
Welcome in the matrix and her infinite loop.

Those 4 lifes are only one (from birth to natural death):


Burn me, I'm a witch ! xD

What if this substance - through chemical process - just increases human senses (rather increasing the brain capability to "understand/analyze" the senses the human feels) ?
And so Free just was able to analyze the room through his senses (hearing, feeling) ?

Here again, it's just presumption. But we need a start, don't we ?

Quote from: ropa on July 22, 2012, 09:52 AMSome people prefer to live in uncertainty until further evidence appears, other choose the easy way out: it must have been god, nothing to worry about.

Yes and no.
Anyway, you think I'm the second part, but sorry, I'm from the first.

Dude, all I said since then can be explained by epilepsy (absences, hallucinations (even if once we were 2), winces, etc...).
Maybe not why I sometimes "die of heat" and my body is warm as hell, but for the rest yes (Edit: my bad, it can be the aura).

I've never read anything about it (until now), but I lived and live 90% of the symptoms frequently.
Except maybe the thing with the light flashing hard.
Doesn't mean I suffer of Epilepsy, but that's a start. I have something to search on.
Thanks !

Quote from: ropa on July 21, 2012, 10:59 AMAs opposed to me not already knowing?

We cannot prove the nonexistence of anything, therefore, anything could exist. However, here we are, focusing on the figure of God as opposed to more interesting things that could exist, like Elves. The only reason one can get away talking about certain magic (Christian magic) is culture, history and fear for death. Face it, become a free man.

edit: and if you're one of those agnostics of sorts, it's the same thing except culture and history don't play a role, fear for death does, hope or desire for the existence of something greater than you and other very simply explained sociological traits. It only takes a poor kid to desire magic existed for it to become recorded in his brain, he only has to say it and it will retro-aliment for ever and ever thanks to the approval and constant repetition of their dogma by people who share this same desire, and with this sectary procedure, we have people that believe in magic and are not slapped in the face by common sense because democracy enhances it.

But the pattern is clear, either the existence of God is proven in the next 30 years or religion will be seen as fanaticism and be embraced only by minorities (regarding numbers) and freaks. We'll have stronger drugs though, so we'll always have people like Free.

I didn't pretty understood your post, but I'll tell you something (maybe it will help): I'm atheist and don't believe in god.
And I used to be one of the most realistic man ... until I lived what I lived.

Quote from: Cueshark on July 21, 2012, 01:00 PMThere's no need to resort to calling anyone dumb Abnaxus.

A guy talking as Ramone did to "answer" my post is just a dumb guy.
And he's still digging himself by telling my argument was based on my knowledge and not on what he just said (I love how he makes me say what I never did, and that's what I dislike in him: lawyer).

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PM
What do you base this on? Einstein based this feeling on Newtonian physics because Mercury's orbit didn't add up. Even a brilliant mind like his needed more than just a gut feeling.

I can't tell. Sorry to have brought this up.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PM
The only point I can get from what you're saying is that all knowledge is useless until we know everything because we're missing a viewpoint and therefore don't know anything.

Yes and no, you went too far.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PM
Does that mean that if you're in a fight, you think there's a weakness and no evidence reaches your perception of that weakness - do you keep waiting for that proof to pop up for years and years until evidence finally arises? I have bad news for you then - you'll have lost the fight before the evidence arises.

Can't I keep it in mind while trying to find another weakness ?
And btw, I never said I would be passive meanwhile.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PMhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/11/neutrinos_not_faster_than_light/
Must have been a very quickly made documentary if they come up with new facts

I really love the links you provide, but I'm not good enough in english to greatly understand it... I need subtitles or it to be in french...
Thanks anyway, I like your attention. :/

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PM
Now who's jumping to conclusions? You're asking me to make an assumption on the diagnosis based on sketchy descriptions (there's entire book cases written about discerning one type of lump from another) and then to make an assumption on an unproven treatment. For all I know, your dad had a self limiting disease. There's plenty of those around, I can't exclude that possibility from your little anecdote.

It's just an anecdote, not a conclusion. About the psycologic, it's just my opinion, I have zero proof about it but my belief.

What do you mean by self limiting disease ?

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 04:33 PM
Were they regular bumps? What's the colour? What was their consistency? Did they contain fluid? How long were they on their location? Were they accompanied by any other symptoms (fever? joint ache? shortness of breath?)? Medical history? Maximum size of the lumps? Growth rate? Were they clustered or spread diffusely? Any other skin lesions? Did they appear on skin only or also on mucous membranes (eg in his mouth)? How long did he have these symptoms? Were they recurring? When did he start having them? Didn't they ever take a biopsy of one of those tumors?

I can give you the answer if you want them (just need to ask my dad: I can't remember myself since I was young).

Quote from: ropa on July 21, 2012, 10:08 PM
Of course you understand why I have a hard time believing it, I mean, you come here claiming to have experienced telepathy (amongst many others things) with you girl friend after taking sense altering narcotics (she didn't, doesn't matter)...

Some of us didn't take narcotics.

Quote from: Free on July 21, 2012, 01:45 PM
What do you mean by 'frequencies'?

Well, it's like a radio station, you turn the knob and the frequency and therefore channel changes. If you are feeling low energy state as in "lazy", you can't be "super pumped" at the same time for example.. therefore you only experience what you're tuned into. On one of my trips when I drank Ayahuasca, I could see with my eyelids closed (even put my hands in front of my eyes to make sure) the same space I could see with my eyes open, and it wasn't just "me tripping balls" as I could describe the room and the changes my girlfriend (she was fully sober) tried to make in there so we could "prove" it wasn't just my imagination. I was tuned into frequency that scientists would think is not humanly possible probably. It's a common thing to have an objective trip (as in others experience/see the same thing you do) with Ayahuasca (its possible with other substances also I'm sure). I believe that when you switch dimensions from 3d to higher ones, you are able to experience a whole new range of frequencies that your not able to experience with 3d alone. When you dream, I believe you are not bound by 3d reality.

Thanks god, I found someone who believe in frequencies !
I was believing it before talking to my dad, and he confessed me he was believing it too while telling me 2 anecdotes he lived about it (and without narcotics too).
We think a family can communicate through certain frequencies (genetic reasons ? Dunno).
It has never been said it was frequencies, but 2 people far away feeling something special to the situation one is living is a quite known thing.
Could we share our experiences ?

About lucid dreams, I used to have many of them when I was young, and not on purpose.

PS: Talking about dreams, maybe you could help me D1 (since you know pretty much things).
There was a dream I did twice in my life, and it's the strangest I have and probably will ever live. And I never understood the meaning of it.
All I can remember from it is the grains, and when awoke I was shouting "the grains, the grains, they all felt. All grains felt".
I was lost, totally lost, my head was bursting as hell while anesthetized, I was like stuck between dream and real life.
I was shouting as if I was dying (for real, I hope I'll never live this again (well, in fact I want just to understand it. But knowledge > pain)).
Do you know what it can be ? What it means ? Or anyone I could talk to (to?) understand it ?

I don't use it as an argument.
As said, it's an anecdote, a case.
And I'd like to know what a doctor and/or scientists would say about this.

Here, I just want answers, I'm not arguying on anything.

PS: You're conclusion about your example is "religion is an hoax". But the real conclusion is "the bishop is an hoax".

PSS: All I want is that you realise there is a possibility all this exists.
In string theory, it said we had one chance over 1 Billion (or more) to cross a wall by pushing it.
But what if the real magic is that there is a scientific reason to grow those chances ? These are just presumption tho (I'm not telling it's true).

As you noticed, I don't have the knowledge of all this science, just know some part.
So I have to argue with what I have (lol, so we're coming back to what you said D1 ^^' ), BUT without telling aberrations tho.

@Ramone: If you're that dumb, then I'll satisfy myself by ignoring you mate.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 08:59 AMDid you know that before the middle ages, the ancient greeks knew the earth was round, just like the romans did? They looked at the sea and noticed that they first saw the sails of the ship and only later did they see the bottom part. They also saw that the shadow on the moon was round and concluded that the earth was causing this shadow.
Did you know there was even a greek a coule of hundred years before we started counting who knew the earth revolved around the sun? Look up aristarchus. That man was a badass
They even knew how to calculate the size of the sun and moon in relation to the earth!
Their observations gave them wrong numbers to work with, but their methods were flawless.
I'd like to think our methods of observation have improved over time, though

All the "new" observations you gave were missing to the one telling the earth was flat.
And so I think we're missing clues to tell another end to physic.
If you don't understand what I mean with that, then I give up, I don't know how to make you realize my point...  

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 08:59 AMNo, I can't argue against your experiences, but personal experiences are notoriously unreliable, one of the reasons is the one you mentioned already. This is why we need to verify observations to show that someting is true. going by personal experience only is what I would call a hasty conclusion (e.g. The earth looks flat, so, it must be flat)

Did you notice I said I don't take it as a basis ?
I saw something not prooven, so I can't, but I also can't ignore it.

Example: During a fight, you think having found the weakness of your opponent, what do you do ?
You rush on it ? Even if it was false and it leads you to death ?
No, you keep it in mind until getting a proof of it (or at least another occasion to analyze it).
That's what I mean about magic: I saw it, but I can't believe in it. BUT, I can't ignore it in case it was true.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 08:59 AMAs for the particle faster than light: did you try a bit of reading on that subject? It was a conclusion based on experiments at CERN in Geneva. The speed mesured was about 30 micrometers per second. This is well within the margin of error of measurements and they actually done the experiment again with different, independant scientists, which showed that it was indeed a measurement error (an accepted concept in the scientific community). Te scientist you were talking about is professor Brian Cox btw.

Nop, I just watched that documentary and waited for that gigantic particle accelerator (they said about 5 years to construct it).
But ok, you get the point here.  

Quote from: DarkOne on July 21, 2012, 08:59 AMMagnetisors are hacks. Look up James Randi. An ex-magician, who spends a lot of time exposing frauds, very successfully, I might add.

Then I'll tell you the anecdote (well, I have already told it, but, interesting enough imo):

QuoteMy father used to have an unkown desease which made him gets tumors (benign or not, we don't know, it was just "balls") randomly appear on his body and then randomly dissapear to go somewhere else, from feet to head. He went to many doctors and no ones found what it was.
He went to a magnetisor, and after some meeting, it totally dissappeared and never came back again.

What do you think of it ?
Imo, it's just psycologic. I mean, he healed the desease on his own: seeing the magnetiser was just the trigger (yeah, you know what I think about human capabilities   ).
As a doctor, do you have anything to tell about it ? Don't you agree it's very strange ? Plus it was not hallucination, otherwise hundreds of person constantly did the same hallucination at a different time.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 20, 2012, 10:13 PM
I sincerely have a problem with people trying to make their point with "look at what we don't know!". If you can't make your point with things you know/can explain/can reason, then you don't have a point.

We make our conclusions on the things we know, not on the things we don't know. If we're going to make conclusions based on what we don't know, then nobody can function at any job/project/hobby/whatever. It's not a hasty conclusion if all the evidence points to a certain conclusion.

I don't know how to make myself being understood (it's goddamn rare tho)...
It's not a "look at what we don't know", or it is, but also without being.

Let me give you an easy example:
Long time ago, people used to think the earth was flat, why ?
Because when they were looking at the horizon, there were seeing a flat land far as the eyes.
They used your way of thinking: the "look at what we have". But that doesn't mean you're right.
Cause first, you could be missing clues (what I'm hardly pointing on) and second, your clues could be false.

This is a point, weither you can admit it or not.

Quote from: DarkOne on July 20, 2012, 10:13 PM
About using "supernatural" as an argument. Can anyone explain the difference between supernatural and magic? If you can't explain it, then that means you would be using magic as an argument - do you really want to do that?

Yes I do, and that's what I meant, I just used "scientific" word not to bother you.
You read my subject on the "supernatural" things I lived, so if you understood, you would understand my point (even if you don't believe it).

Anyway, I guess you feel like when someone tell me "god exists".
They're saying god exists without having any proofs or even having seen something related to it. So it's stupid to believe in something so abstract (otherwise it has never been prooven that birds couldn't be aliens, so let's all kill the birds !).
BUT, I did (weither it was hallucination or not, I did, you can't deny it). I'm not saying this is true, but since I saw some things incredible, it's not my base, but I can't discard it.

I'm just trying to show you I already took this fact in consideration.
So you can't just call a thing that has already been excluded (I'm sure you won't get me now xD).

Quote from: Free on July 20, 2012, 10:54 PM
EVERYTHING I'M ABOUT TO SAY IS MY OPINION ONLY. I'm not trying to force feed anyone anything.. but I understand these are tender subjects  so I wanted to make sure everyone understands this.

Lol. xD
Dude, my pre-last post wasn't pointing you tho, but another guy calling others "crazy" because he had different thoughs (which wasn't you).
So you don't have to tell such things.  

Anyway, I didn't fully get your post, but I'm highly interested on what you said.
So if you could make me a very short summary (don't want to bother you), I would thank you pretty much.

Quote from: Ramone on July 20, 2012, 11:08 PM
"Look at what we don't know" in combination with "what if.." Yeah, it's hard to communicate with those ppl.. It's like those astrology guys/chicks.. Hard to explain anyshit and after some time U give up and let them be.

And just for the record, there's three of "what if" in Abnax 1 simple question..  .. .
There's a saying here about those "what if's"... says "If grandma had a dick she would be grandpa!" ;x

Don't take hasty conclusions. Especially cause you're digging yourself into the pit (cause most of the time, you don't understand me and so you start spreading stupid conclusions).
You don't like me, I don't like the way you're argumenting/talking, that's fine. Just shut up together.

Plus, do you really think we would know what we currently know if some physicians & philosophers weren't "looking at what we don't know" and using the "what if" ?
If I remember well, that was one of the basic methods of Einstein. And it led him to the string theory for example.


PS: I heard a scientist found a particle which could go faster than the light (which is supposed to be the fastest, and almost every researches and the physic is based on so: which would lead to a total remake of physic if it was false), and they are making a particle accelerator big enough to proove so (in asia if I remember well).
I heard that on a scientific documentary, so except if I missunderstood some things, you can't tell I dreamed it.  

PSS: D1, I'd like to have your opinion about "magnetisers" ?
Not that I believe it is real and works, I'll give you a funny anecdote.

So I'll ask one single question as an answer to all of this:

What if there is a natural/realistic/scientific reason for the now called "supernatural" things ? What if we're just not yet able to find those reasons ?

What I tell from the very start is that we know a lot about the earth, but what if that "lot" is just 10% of the whole thing ?

Cue (and every others tho): Do not conclude too hastily, that's all I have to say.

Edit: Yeah, the single question is parted in 3 questions. xD

Not all, but some.

And telling nobody can know is some kind of logical fact.
You have never seen god to proove it, and scientists have never given proofs about no afterlife (they have some thoughs and a start of a proof, but not a real one).
And especially, what if we all are back to a single string after death (string from string theory) ? (That's a dumb example, just to know there are infinite possibilities we can't erase.) 

To finish, about the "aware that we died", read the parenthesis, I knew someone would call that and prevented it. 

What is scary, it's that you all claim for one thing or another without even knowing what you're talking about.

None of us (on the earth) knows the answer and the only way to know is death (weither we "live" and understand or die and "can't know": it's still an answer).

So talking about it is one thing, claiming it is the truth is just dumb.

PS: 777 ... Bar !!!