1342 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

ExtremeOne wrote...
F**k their crimes they saved humanity in Mass Effect 2 and the alliance did not do one dam thing . Cerberus is out for humanity no matter what . The alliance has never gave a dam about humanity.  

Yeah, it's not like they sacrificed a great deal trying to help everyone.

Oh, wait...

You know what the funny is? Cerberus is also doing a great job killing humans themselves.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

[Jagri]

Someone With Mass wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...
F**k their crimes they saved humanity in Mass Effect 2 and the alliance did not do one dam thing . Cerberus is out for humanity no matter what . The alliance has never gave a dam about humanity.  

Yeah, it's not like they sacrificed a great deal trying to help everyone.

Oh, wait...

You know what the funny is? Cerberus is also doing a great job killing humans themselves.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Heh... Funny how the Alliances efforts are ignored in the first game or that the Council saved humanity from becoming a blood stain at the hands of the Turians during the First Contact War.

Modifié par Jagri, 29 avril 2011 - 01:28 .

[man giraffedog000]

OK, there seems to be some confusion about Man-Giraffe-Dog on the forums, notably that it just looks like a Giraffe-Dog. Well... that's the POINT. Why do you think I'm the only one warning you. It's disguised as a Giraffe-Dog until it's ready to take over the world.
OK this is how Man-Giraffe-Dog came to be:


While growing up it was spotted in the wild (but the team was all killed by it and the photos were recovered afterwards)


After which it began its infiltration of humanity, disguised as Giraffe-Dog:


Which leaves us here. Man-Giraffe-Dog is poised to attack and destroy humanity and I'm trying to warn everyone before it's too late. This is totally serial guys. You need to prepare.

Excelsior!

[Dean_the_Young]

Jagri wrote...

Heh... Funny how the Alliances efforts are ignored in the first game or that the Council saved humanity from becoming a blood stain at the hands of the Turians during the First Contact War.

The Council kindly refraining the Council's military from massacring Humanity is about as inspiring as a voting machine certifying itself with an internet anti-virus, or a teacher boasting that he always wears a condom while he teaches your daughter's class.

Yes, it's nice, and strictly better than the alternative, but there's already something seriously wrong if it needs to be brought up as a defense.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 29 avril 2011 - 01:37 .

[Someone With Mass]

And as a Council race, do you know what other resource humanity have access to? The Spectres.

So if they feel like there's a problem somewhere, they can just send a Spectre there to investigate.

[ExtremeOne]

Jagri wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...
F**k their crimes they saved humanity in Mass Effect 2 and the alliance did not do one dam thing . Cerberus is out for humanity no matter what . The alliance has never gave a dam about humanity.  

Yeah, it's not like they sacrificed a great deal trying to help everyone.

Oh, wait...

You know what the funny is? Cerberus is also doing a great job killing humans themselves.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Heh... Funny how the Alliances efforts are ignored in the first game or that the Council saved humanity from becoming a blood stain at the hands of the Turians during the First Contact War.

  


humanity was what saved the galaxy in ME 1 not the council or its races .  

[TevinterMagister]

Is this thread IC or OOC? Can't believe people taking moral stands on fiction.

[luzburg]

008Zulu wrote...

luzburg wrote...
maybe. but i thougt the reapes/ collectors wantet him/her beacause they always seek "rare" induvidials from any race to se wich rase was the most evolved, like in lair of the shadowbroker if you god miranda with you wile conforonting the shadowbroker he comments that lawson may even fech a beter prise from the collectors than shepard since shes genetacly engenired and so on... the human reaper requierd nothing else than lots of humans no mather hwo they were...

i think killing sovergin made shepard only very intresting to the reapers...

so prehaps when the reapers invade they recognice TIM and cerberus as somthing usefull and then start to maniulate TIM toughtpatterns....  like with saren. maybe the intoctrination only have been dormant util the reapers find a use for him.

only way to know for shure is to wait until me3 is released. or maybe its revealed in the next novel so we have a god motive to go after cerbereus (exept the other sick **** they have done) in me3 from the start, so its not starts as random atacks thas only anoys you while you try to fight the reapers


funny that the shadowborker has the same comment regardess if you have destroyed the colllecotrs

If you do broker after the Suicide, the broker indicates that portions of the base may have survived. I reckon a trip back through Omega 3 may be in the cards. Which means either we get to keep SR2 Normandy, or it's registration is changed to Alliance. Either way its win-win.

What you said about Saren, I hope get to fight TIM the same way.

maybe we get to presuade TIM to shoot himself XD

[Someone With Mass]

ExtremeOne wrote...
humanity was what saved the galaxy in ME 1 not the council or its races .  

Are you actually reading the comments at this point?

Your ignorance of the lore is so amusing sometimes.

[Jagri]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The Council kindly refraining the Council's military from massacring Humanity is about as inspiring as a voting machine certifying itself with an internet anti-virus, or a teacher boasting that he always wears a condom while he teaches your daughter's class.

Yes, it's nice, and strictly better than the alternative, but there's already something seriously wrong if it needs to be brought up as a defense.

I trust you mean the Council refraining the Turian Hiearchy from massacring humanity? Last I checked the Turian Hiearchy started the conflict of their own violition and not as a offical action or response of the Council. Of course it began as a perceived violation of galactic law as far as Mass Relay usage goes but the degree and response was all directed by the Turians.

If the Alliance was to attack the Batarian without consulting the Council then by your stand point its the Council attacking the Batarians?

[Dean_the_Young]

Jagri wrote...


I trust you mean the Council refraining the Turian Hiearchy from massacring humanity? Last I checked the Turian Hiearchy started the conflict of their own violition and not as a offical action or response of the Council. Of course it began as a perceived violation of galactic law as far as Mass Relay usage goes but the degree and response was all directed by the Turians.

The Turians are the Council's military arm. That's their primary
role as a part of... the Council. The Council saving Humanity from it's
own organ and component isn't a feat to be thanked for: it's a expected action and correction of a failure.

Expecting deep gratitude for not continuing to do significant and unjust harm to someone is not a reasonable demand to have of others. Not hurting other people is the expected norm.

If the Alliance was to attack the Batarian without consulting the Council then by your stand point its the Council attacking the Batarians?

Before Mass Effect 1? No. After Mass Effect 1? Yes. If a component of an organization starts something, it reflects on the organization as a whole. If Texas sends its national guard into Mexico, the US as a whole can be held responsible.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 29 avril 2011 - 05:19 .

[The Unfallen]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

An anti-Cerberus thread made by a Zulu. Delicious irony is delicious.

Ha... HAHAHA!

[Jagri]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The Turians are the Council's military arm. That's their primary
role as a part of... the Council. The Council saving Humanity from it's
own organ and component isn't a feat to be thanked for: it's a expected action and correction of a failure.

Expecting deep gratitude for not continuing to do significant and unjust harm to someone is not a reasonable demand to have of others. Not hurting other people is the expected norm.

Before Mass Effect 1? No. After Mass Effect 1? Yes. If a component of an organization starts something, it reflects on the organization as a whole. If Texas sends its national guard into Mexico, the US as a whole can be held responsible.

A expected action? I think there is a false sense of entitlement being felt towards the Council. The Council wasn't required or even expected to step into the Turian's military engagement. Humanity could have been killed to the last and written off as a extremely hostile species and no one would batter a eye or sensory organ as it were.

The Council stepped in and effectively stopped a fight humanity had no chance to win. They did it likely for their own reasons and purposes but hay when it comes to annihilation why not accept any help you can get even if there will be strings attached... Hint hint Cerberus

[didymos1120]

ExtremeOne wrote...

humanity was what saved the galaxy in ME 1 not the council or its races .  

Well, actually, in a very real sense, it was the Protheans.  No beacon, no cipher, no data file from Vigil?  Shep couldn't have done jack. No tampering with the keepers? Shep wouldn't have even been born and humanity would never have left Earth, much less the solar system, as the Reapers would have invaded a couple millenia ago. 

And don't forget, without Shiala: no Cipher.  Without Benezia: no coordinates for the Mu-relay.  Without Liara: no finding Ilos.  Without Tali: no evidence against Saren, no first human Spectre. Without the STG (who were sent by the Council): no destruction of Saren's base on Virmire.  With a modicum of thought, you can find other examples where aliens played instrumental roles, either backstory-wise or during the game.

[008Zulu]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Then the UN is irrelevant, and disobeying the law can be a moral obligation.
[/quote]

If you want to disobey laws like No Murder or Sexual assault of a minor, go right ahead.  But don't say things like the UN is ineffective because they made freedom of speech a universally recognised right.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Not answered. A citation of the personal views of millions of defense lawyers is not answered by a selective sampling, and highly biased, depictioned of music defense lawers by someone who doesn't even claim to have talked to one.
[/quote]

I see what you did there, by saying that you are direct condradiction of your statements concerning the Acid experiments. You have offered your personal views on the crimes commited by Cerberus, with out citing any sort of medical proof that injecting acid is beneficial.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Zulunew
[/quote]

The Zulunew part just confuses me.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
And you, apparently, are bound by none. Yes, we've established that. Now, have you dropped your assertion that people can return to normal lives after killing people, or do you intend to argue the source you requested which discuses about the minority and even passable nature of post-traumatic stress disorders?
[/quote]

Wrong again, my assertion that killers and murderers cannot return to normal lives is still very much alive. As for the source, you have yet to state one that comes from a reputable publication.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
They can improve how the body works without knowing how the entire body works. They can understand how the body will work in some cases without in any way implying how it will work in others. Genetic understanding is very much an evolving field in the Mass Effect universe, with mentions in the in-game news about new treatments and new research available for sampling.
[/quote]

You cannont improve the engine of a car unless you know how the engine works. The genetic modifications used by soldiers, even the Lazarus technology. None of it would be possible if they didn't know how the body worked in its entirety.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Which is sidestepping the point that, by your argument, racism was morally right because a majority believed it so. The people who insisted on changing it, by your standard, were morally wrong for defying and arguing against the majority.
[/quote]

Racism was legally right, for a time. Those with a higher set of ethics and morals (which constituted of the majority) decided to change that.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Whether they are right or not to hate Cerberus depends on their arguments and moral belief systems, not the number of people who claim to hate Cerberus. An appeal to the majority is still a logical fallacy.[/quote]

The majority would claim to hate Cerberus because of their various crimes and transgressions: Murder, kidnapping and torture. If you asked the majority, this would be their answer. The majority all giving the same answer is not a logical fallacy.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Gillian is the biotic girl who  was a Cerberus project and taken to the Quarian flotilla, as described in the events of Mass Effect: Ascension.

Blowing up a Quarian ship in and of itself is not terrorism. It's criminal. It's murder. It's reckless disregard to the safety of others. But terrorism is not simply any crime that hurts a number of people. Terrorism is political.
[/quote]

Human dominance at any cost, TIM's mantra. Cerberus cells are made of anti-alien pro-human with little or no direct oversight. If Gillian were such a threat, then why not a bullet to the head in the dead of night while she sleeps. Bombing an alien ship to get one human is a political statement "Don't take something that belongs to Cerberus"

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Or you can also add other things to the acid. Dilution is not the only solution.

Now that we'have agreed that, in fact, there was more to the solution injected in Toombs than was explicitly known...
[/quote]

I never agreed that the acid was altered, I still maintain that it was pure Thresher acid, and unless there is mitigating evidence, we can only assume it was pure acid. Obvious it wasn't the full amount a grown Thresher can spit.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Cerberus doesn't need to be useful only against the Reapers: the Collectors, a fatal threat or not, were indeed doing much harm to innocenents, and were involved in other operations that would have had catastrophic consequences had Cerberus not interfered, intervened, and brought back Shepard so that they could then ally and help him. Cerberus's role was a requirement in stopping the success of the Omega Plague (or else Mordin would have been killed before the cure distributed), preventing the Heretic Virus from turning all Geth into Reaper zealots, and actually stopping the Collectors before tens of thousands to millions more could have been hit, all while setting the stage [/quote]

Supposition. Mordin is a highly trained former member of the STG, with a pack of mechs. He would have been able to release the cure regardless. Legion is a highly advanced prototype platform, and an able bodied combatant who is highly skilled. There is no cause for doubt that he could have managed to infiltrate the Heretic station and complete the mission on his own. If you try to place the events of the game in a linear timeline, at most the destruction of the base gave these supposed millions of victims maybe 2 or 3 weeks that they wouldn't have had otherwise.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Some acids are malign. Some are not. Acid is a category: harmful acids are a subcateogry. There is no 'prove' about an entire category: it's a category.

And when we're dealing with fictional elements and compounds that are never analyzed in depth, it's even more nonsensical.
[/quote]

We have all seen the destructive capabilities of Thresher acid, there is no doubt of this. I know Thresher acid isn't a real substance. Acid is generally considered harmful, Toombs said the pain was excruciating. From the size of a Thresher we can extrapolate its dietary requirements and required intake. It's primary method of eating is by surprise and incapacitating with a potent acid. Since it relies on stealth the acid must be potent enough to incapacitate quickly else the target will escape and all that energy would have been expended for nothing. Given its size and apparent gap between meals it could very well be a fatal mistake.

In order to better aid in digestion, the acid would have to come from it's stomach (similar to a vulture or heron's defensive techniques). So assume the acid is a highly concentrated form of hydrochrolic acid.

Now, present the medicianl benefite of injecting that (unaltered as the accusation states) in to the human bloodstream.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
No. Nor have I ever said we should. But we should certainly avoid factually incorrect assertions and then insist on defending it on purely moral grounds.

Morally bad science is not technical-bad science, and to claim one because of the other is intellectually lazy and dishonest. Don't oppose unethical science on the grounds it doesn't work: the science doesn't work like that. Oppose it because you deem it unethical, regardless of whether it works or not.

And then recognize that your ethics are not the only ethics in the world, and that unless you intend to be an moral universalist and that every culture and every person who disagrees with you is wrong, that different cultures will have different ethical standards. What is good by your standards is not necessarily good by theirs. What is acceptible by theirs is not necessarily good in yours. [/quote]

Cerberus is made up entierely of humans, they are part of our culture. As with above, many oppose Cerberus (in addition) because of their unethical attitude towads science. They thought it was ok to put a mentally handicapped person in a giant machine in order to try and control the Geth. They thought it was ok to make Jack (as a child) murder other children and give her narcotics as a reward when she did. They thought it was a good idea to inject acid in to the bloodstream of other humans. They thought it was a good idea to murder half the colonists on Horizon just to prove a theory. In what culture or universe is this morally or ethically acceptable behaviour?

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Find a culture that doesn't de-sensitize in a crisis, and you'll have a harder task. I can point to the US pre- and post-9-11 for a culture shift on civil liberties, I can point to the Soviet Union and US during the Cold War in regards to everything from human testing to international interventionism, I can point towards Japan pre-, during, and post-WW2 culture shifts on militarism, I can point towards the various empires and insurgencies during the era of colonialism for the justification of 'extreme measures for their own good' and vice versa, I can point to the Hundred Years War as a period in which the ethics and culture of what is now Germany was profoundly changed, I can point to the Napoleonic Wars, I can point to the Civil War and the American Revolutionary War, I can point towards the global Great Depression...

Read history. Take your pick: rights and liberties flourish during times of peace, and contract or even reverse during periods of fear and war. When times are tough, people cling to security and obstructionist idealism is increasingle thrown away. When security is taken for granted, people cling to and encourage idealism. This varies by time period, by region and nation, and even by generations. Culture changes. Ethics change.

In the context that matters in regards to Cerberus, is the Alliance. The generational defining event that shaped it was the First Contact War, and the potential fear it faced was extinction and destruction, both as a race and as an identity.[/quote]

Of the last 3000 years, maybe 80 of those years have been without a war of some kind. 2920 years of constant fighting. Rights and liberties can and have flourished despite the fighting. How you conduct yourself during a time of war is how the world will see you in times of peace. Take all of the events that include Cerberus in Mass Effect 1 and 2, and you will see how the world at large views Cerberus. Homicidal (the biotic in the Quarian fleet), Brutal (killing an Alliance Admiral, Jack at Teltin) Unethical (injecting acid in to a human, David {Overlord}) and Murderers (half the colony of Horizon). When Shepard is at his trial, you bet he is going to spill the beans on Cerberus's activities, and it all will be the truth.

Modifié par 008Zulu, 29 avril 2011 - 11:19 .

[General User]

Vitamin C is an acid, so is aspirin. The list of medications and injections that are painful is… lengthy.

To my way of thinking, there are legitimate grounds on which to object to Cpl. Toombs treatment, but the fact that he experienced pain is only one of them if those treatments were not medically necessary. 

Modifié par General User, 29 avril 2011 - 11:49 .

[008Zulu]

Here's another one for the list. Its a theory, newly formed in relation to this topic and to the people who said ME2 was pointless...

(It assumes the male pronoun)
TIM knew the Collectors had a base (he wants it and the tech it contains) beyond the Omega 4 relay, before Shepard even died. The only reason you make a special relay is to keep people away from something big, since they came from and returned through it, them having a base is a reasonable conclusion.

Miranda and TIM talking at the beginning of ME2, the context and tense of the conversation indicates Shepard is alive, but they speak as if he is already dead,

Miranda says "If we lose him, humanity might follow." (I might be off on the exact wording)
TIM responds "Then see to it we don't lose him.".

Research on Lazarus begins. We know TIM is not above murdering humans (he told the Collectors Ash was on Horizon, he knew the Collectors would get some of the colonists) to test a theory (see Horizon), so he tells the Collectors where and when Shepard will be. They show up and blast him away. TIM recovers the body and resurrects him, using the situation to gain his trust.

Indoctrination take weeks or months to affect the target(s), otherwise they would figure out what was going on and run away. TIM suspected the Collector's used a sophisticated IFF to get safely through the Omega 4 relay, no one ever returned and if there was danger they would have pulled a u-turn so fast even Joker would be jealous of the skill. The Cerberus team was dispatched to the Reaper husk some time before Shepard woke up, did not go well for them.

The trip to the Collector ship was a viable explanation for knowing the Collectors had a base (and needing the IFF to get through it), Shepard would have asked how hew knew about the base or IFF unless there were adequate evidence to explain it otherwise.

Paragon- So thinking Shepard now trusts him, TIM sends him through the Omega 4 relay in order to secure the base. But Shepard ends up destroying it. As a result (in ME3) TIM orders Shepard be put to death.

Renegade- So thinking Shepard now trusts him, TIM sends him through the Omega 4 relay in order to secure the base. He secures it in short order. (now we enter ME3...) In the computers TIM finds the schematics for a Reaper, the Human Reaper, wanting to build his own he starts to it (maybe mass cloning or starts to kidnap people of his own, perhaps both as to not draw attention), but lo and behold, the primary ingredient is Shepard! (the Reapers, if by Harbinger's prattling, want Shepard alive Not for revenge {Reapers are machines and don't have emotions} but for the Reaper they have bubbling away) So he turns on Shepard and tries to get him in to the Reaper, Shepard is not amused.

We never played ME2, ME2 played us. Well, TIM played us.

Just a theory, admittedly interesting, but a theory nevertheless.

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]008Zulu wrote...

If you want to disobey laws like No Murder or Sexual assault of a minor, go right ahead.  But don't say things like the UN is ineffective because they made freedom of speech a universally recognised right.[/quote]Alright. The UN is ineffective because they did not make freedom of speech a universally recognized right. They got a lot of people to sign the document, and then did precisely nothing when those same signatories proceeded not to recognize the freedom of speach.

Getting empty gestures that are promptly violated rather than results other than the gestures themselves is, generally, a strong standard of ineffective behavior.


[quote]
I see what you did there, by saying that you are direct condradiction of your statements concerning the Acid experiments. You have offered your personal views on the crimes commited by Cerberus, with out citing any sort of medical proof that injecting acid is beneficial.[/quote]...yes. Drug types I offered were in no way proof, because they exist solely in my mind.

Uh, no. Apparently you don't see what I did there. Or you don't comprehend, which isn't as dignified.

[quote]
The Zulunew part just confuses me.[/quote]Zulu is an old, crazy poster on this board with a well deserved reputation for crazy, illogical assertions, and a formidable resiliance to logic.
.
[quote]

Wrong again, my assertion that killers and murderers cannot return to normal lives is still very much alive. As for the source, you have yet to state one that comes from a reputable publication.[/quote]And what, precisely, is irreputable about the document I provided, whereas you, the accuser, have provided none?

[quote]
You cannont improve the engine of a car unless you know how the engine works.[/quote]Actually, you can. Trial and error especially, as well as advancing and improving understanding. Maintanence as well: it's actually quite common that the knowledge to fix something is far less than the knowledge of how it works.

Most scientific fields exist on the basis that further improvements are only possible by obtaining more knowledge, not that knowledge is already mastered and we're still working out the kinks. Cars, and the internal combustion engine, are old, but we're still improving them despite knowing the basics of internal combustion because we increasingly advance our understanding of the field in its other forms: thermo-dynamics, hydraulics, chemistry, metalurgy, efficiency.


[quote]
The genetic modifications used by soldiers, even the Lazarus technology. None of it would be possible if they didn't know how the body worked in its entirety.[/quote]Science would like a word with you: it wants its developmental history back.
[quote]
Racism was legally right, for a time. Those with a higher set of ethics and morals (which constituted of the majority) decided to change that.[/quote]Racism was always morally wrong and intellectually flawed, regardless of the legality. Majority presumption doesn't change that.

[quote]
The majority would claim to hate Cerberus because of their various crimes and transgressions: Murder, kidnapping and torture. If you asked the majority, this would be their answer. The majority all giving the same answer is not a logical fallacy.[/quote]Indeed, but you weren't defending on the basis of the majority giving the same answers: you were defending on the point that they were the majority. The majority is never right or wrong simply because it is the majority, but because of the components of its positions.


[quote]
Human dominance at any cost, TIM's mantra. Cerberus cells are made of anti-alien pro-human with little or no direct oversight. If Gillian were such a threat, then why not a bullet to the head in the dead of night while she sleeps. Bombing an alien ship to get one human is a political statement "Don't take something that belongs to Cerberus"[/quote]And yet, blowing up the ship wasn't violence aimed to push a political effect on the Quarian public or government to change their views or policies. The organization of Cerberus cells is irrelevant: cell structure organizations transcend terrorism.

Gillian wasn't the target of assassination, but re-capture after she was taken away: destroying the ship was to cover tracks after her recovery.
[quote]
I never agreed that the acid was altered, I still maintain that it was pure Thresher acid, and unless there is mitigating evidence, we can only assume it was pure acid. Obvious it wasn't the full amount a grown Thresher can spit.[/quote]No, we can not 'only' assume: we can't assume at all. A confirmation bias assumption is just that.


[quote]
Supposition. Mordin is a highly trained former member of the STG, with a pack of mechs. He would have been able to release the cure regardless.[/quote]And you accuse me of supposition? Mordin was bunkered in a clinic which needed the mechs to defend, and was not of the quality or armament of Shepard and his team.
[quote]
Legion is a highly advanced prototype platform, and an able bodied combatant who is highly skilled. There is no cause for doubt that he could have managed to infiltrate the Heretic station and complete the mission on his own. [/quote]Legion was knocked out on the Derilect Reaper after infiltrating and being locked in the core. That most certainly cause for doubt that, baring Shepard's rescue, he could have regained consciousness, fought off the Husks, fought through the waves of abominations that non-existan Shepard wasn't going to kill, and escape in order to successfully break through the Heretic station's external defenses without a provided Stealth Ship of proprietary technology and still fight its way through a large number of Geth platforms, again without Shepard's caliber as backup.

That's a pretty darn long cause for doubt.


[quote]
If you try to place the events of the game in a linear timeline, at most the destruction of the base gave these supposed millions of victims maybe 2 or 3 weeks that they wouldn't have had otherwise.[/quote]I wasn't aware the Reapers were only 2-3 weeks away, because Arrival implies monthes or years, while there isn't nother Terminus threat massacring human colonies.
[quote]
Acid is generally considered harmful, [/quote]Except, in fact, it isn't. There is no 'acids are bad, bases are good': bases can kill you just as surely, and painfully, as acids.

You're making assumptions on assumptions on assumptions to fit your own confirmation bias, starting with a pop-culture interpretation of what acid entails and continuing with a progressively more arbitrary series of assumptions 'we must presume' in order to make an entirely new cdharge.


[quote]

Cerberus is made up entierely of humans, they are part of our culture.[/quote]There is no unitary 'our' culture. There is a collective of a number of cultures, many of which disagree with you.
[quote]
As with above, many oppose Cerberus (in addition) because of their unethical attitude towads science. They thought it was ok to put a mentally handicapped person in a giant machine in order to try and control the Geth.[/quote]Most cultures have done plenty worse to plenty more for the good of the group. Sacrifice of the few for the many is a cultural staple across Human cultures.

[quote]
They thought it was ok to make Jack (as a child) murder other children and give her narcotics as a reward when she did. [/quote]Ignorring the whole Teltin was a rogue cell point, you will find real human cultures that accept child soldiers and narcotic conditioning.
[quote]
They thought it was a good idea to inject acid in to the bloodstream of other humans. [/quote]Chemistry and medicine has shown that inejections in the blood stream can be a good idea.
[quote]
They thought it was a good idea to murder half the colonists on Horizon just to prove a theory. [/quote]I'm sorry, do the Collectors not exist now? Are they devoid of responsiblity?

Choosing a battlefield when there's already going to be one eventually regardless is not magicking up casualties that would not otherwise exist.
[quote]
In what culture or universe is this morally or ethically acceptable behaviour?[/quote]European, North American, South American, African, and Asian cultures have all practiced various combinations of what you have listed in the last half-century alone. Human experimentation, torture, assassination, genocide, poisonings...

So to answer your question... most universes with humans, really.
[quote]
Of the last 3000 years, maybe 80 of those years have been without a war of some kind. 2920 years of constant fighting. Rights and liberties can and have flourished despite the fighting.

[/quote]When the math is laughable from the start, you know you have a bad argument at hand.

There has not been 'constant fighting' across the globe for all but 80 of the last 3000 years. There hasn't been constant fighting across the globe for the last hundred. There is no unitary shared culture, nor is their a unitary shared experience. There may, for the sake of concession alone, have been only 80 years were everyone was at peace... but in those years that weren't, those who were at peace can well progress as if they are at peace, while those who are at war progress as they will at war.

When the Europeans were killing eachother by the cartload in WW1, the South Americans were not. When the Chinese were fighting an invasion from the Japanese in the 1930's, Africa was not sharing the experience or cultural direction. When Partition occured in India led to much death and devastation, the Soviet Union was entering as much of a golden age as it ever could.

The absolute lack of distinction on your part to assert a single culture is mindblowing.

[Dean_the_Young]

008Zulu wrote...

Just a theory, admittedly interesting, but a theory nevertheless.

It's incredibly stupid on a number of levels ranging from the inept rational for why Shepard needed to die at all to the number of needless impossible to predict variations such as Shepard being recovered at all, Shepard being recovered in an intact state, and Shepard even being able to be revived, even before the first shot was fired, all of which must proceed in the precise manner without any unintended interruption at the wrong time in order to may, potentially, work.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 30 avril 2011 - 03:17 .

[008Zulu]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
It's incredibly stupid on a number of levels ranging from the inept rational for why Shepard needed to die at all to the number of needless impossible to predict variations such as Shepard being recovered at all, Shepard being recovered in an intact state, and Shepard even being able to be revived, even before the first shot was fired, all of which must proceed in the precise manner without any unintended interruption at the wrong time in order to may, potentially, work.

He needed Shepard to die so he could ressurect him under the guise of showing that he is trying to save humanity. Theres no better way to earn someones trust than by saving their life. It's not like he could have recruited him while he was still alive and serving under the Alliance.


I wonder, if it is your true objection because you are pro-Cerberus and don't want to see them painted in any more negative light than they are currently.

[Dean_the_Young]

008Zulu wrote...

He needed Shepard to die so he could ressurect him under the guise of showing that he is trying to save humanity.

They didn't even know they could bring Shepard back from the dead.

There is no provided reason why they needed to get the Collectors to do the job for them.

There is no sensible reason why particle weaponry which, you know, vaporizes, should be the means to kill Shepard.

There is no practical reason why Shepard should be killed in space.

There is no logistical reason why Shepard's recovery needed to be a haphazard affair requiring a defeat of the Shadow Broker and the willing assistance of an Asari and Shepard ally.

Theres no better way to earn someones trust than by saving their life.

Sure: by saving their life in ways that don't involve killing them. Not only is that easier to arrange, it's also easier to do in case you, you know, learn that you can't bring people back from the dead afterall.

It's not like he could have recruited him while he was still alive and serving under the Alliance.

Since Shepard didn't join up with Cerberus because TIM saved the life but rather because the Collectors were targetting the Human colonies and the Alliance and Council weren't doing anything in response for other reasons... yes, he could have done just that.

I wonder, if it is your true objection because you are pro-Cerberus and don't want to see them painted in any more negative light than they are currently.

It could be that.

Or it could be because it's an incredibly stupid plan that doesn't stand up to 'why can't we simply this' litmus test.

Like, 'why must we recruit aliens from beyond the Omega 4 relay to kill Shepard in the manner most likely to lead to the destruction of the body and put it beyond our reach' as opposed to 'why don't we poison Shepard's omnigel, if we can kill president's and popes, and then steal the body from the funeral'?

Or 'why do we kill Shepard out in an area we can't recover the body, when we could do so whenever and wherever we want while we stand by without our own potential stealth craft?'

Or 'why do we try to kill the person we want to bring back to life with weaponry that will dissentigrate him if it hits him, in a gravity well that could easily destroy the body'?

Or 'why do we need Commander Shepard in the first place rather than spend the money on an army to break through the relay and mug the Collectors, if that's our goal in the first place and Shepard's just a tool.'




Now, if we really want to bring out the metagaming guns,

'Why is no mention, substantiation, or support made for this theory in any Mass Effect medium, at any point, despite a number of opportunities to look in TIM's head?'

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 30 avril 2011 - 04:12 .

[DPSSOC]

008Zulu wrote...
He needed Shepard to die so he could ressurect him under the guise of showing that he is trying to save humanity.

Why?  Why did he need Shepard to die?  Why not just orchestrate a scenario where death is a very real possibility and swoop in to save him?  Why risk not being able to bring him back to life?  Not to mention the fact that if this were all TIM's plan wouldn't he have had someone ready and waiting to grab Shepard's body?  Wouldn't he have avoided the whole Shadow Broker fiasco?

008Zulu wrote...
Theres no better way to earn someones trust than by saving their life. It's not like he could have recruited him while he was still alive and serving under the Alliance.

Why not?  Why couldn't they have Miranda or Jacob or Kelly sidle up to Shepard in a bar (Shepard does have down time) and say, "I represent an organization that believes you about the Reapers and wants to help.  Here's a sample of the intel we've been able to gather, if your interested meet us at this location at this time.  Come alone."  This jeopardizes at most two operatives (if the person who meets Shepard isn't the same person he met in the bar) and allows for setting up a convinced Shep's faked death.  That way he'd be an active agent rather than a resource drain and he'd be witness to the Council and Alliance's mistreatment of his memory, warming him all the more to Cerberus.

[008Zulu]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Alright. The UN is ineffective because they did not make freedom of speech a universally recognized right. They got a lot of people to sign the document, and then did precisely nothing when those same signatories proceeded not to recognize the freedom of speach.

Getting empty gestures that are promptly violated rather than results other than the gestures themselves is, generally, a strong standard of ineffective behavior. [/quote]

Its effectivness is not the matter at hand.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

...yes. Drug types I offered were in no way proof, because they exist solely in my mind.

Uh, no. Apparently you don't see what I did there. Or you don't comprehend, which isn't as dignified.
[/quote]

I was unaware that steroids are in fact acid, since it was specifically acid I was referring to.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Zulu is an old, crazy poster on this board with a well deserved reputation for crazy, illogical assertions, and a formidable resiliance to logic.
.[/quote]

He too is pro-Cerberus. Oh, check the registration dates, I was Zulu first.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
And what, precisely, is irreputable about the document I provided, whereas you, the accuser, have provided none?
[/quote]

Links from reputable sources, psychology magazines, wikipedia articles. Whatever you can find to back up your claim.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Actually, you can. Trial and error especially, as well as advancing and improving understanding. Maintanence as well: it's actually quite common that the knowledge to fix something is far less than the knowledge of how it works.[/quote]

So if you wanted fix a broken leg you would use a welding torch? If you don't know what your working on how can you be expected to fix it?

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Science would like a word with you: it wants its developmental history back.[/quote]

Oh...zing! When they developed Lazarus (or traded humans to the Collectors for the tech, who knows), They couldn't have injected all sorts of chemicals and affixed all sorts of bone grafting cybernetics without know how it might affect the surrounding tissue.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...Racism was always morally wrong and intellectually flawed, regardless of the legality. Majority presumption doesn't change that.[/quote]

The majority didn't presume anything. they knew it was morally wrong and set about to change it.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Indeed, but you weren't defending on the basis of the majority giving the same answers: you were defending on the point that they were the majority. The majority is never right or wrong simply because it is the majority, but because of the components of its positions.
[/quote]

And those components were the various crimes Cerberus has commited.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
And yet, blowing up the ship wasn't violence aimed to push a political effect on the Quarian public or government to change their views or policies. The organization of Cerberus cells is irrelevant: cell structure organizations transcend terrorism.
[/quote]

It wasn't designed to affect pollitical change, it was to scare them in to not interfering with Cerberus projects.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Gillian wasn't the target of assassination, but re-capture after she was taken away: destroying the ship was to cover tracks after her recovery.
[/quote]

I'm sure the Quarians are appreciative of that distinction.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
No, we can not 'only' assume: we can't assume at all. A confirmation bias assumption is just that.
[/quote]

We can only assume facts in evidence. Acid was said to be what was injected, a medical exam once Toombs escaped would have confirmed that.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
And you accuse me of supposition? Mordin was bunkered in a clinic which needed the mechs to defend, and was not of the quality or armament of Shepard and his team.[/quote]

Given that he was an infiltration specialts he could easily have been in and out before anyone knew he was there, he and his team slipped past the Krogan defenses on numerous occasions during the Genophage project. Krogan are much smater and better prepared than Vorcha.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Legion was knocked out on the Derilect Reaper after infiltrating and being locked in the core. That most certainly cause for doubt that, baring Shepard's rescue, he could have regained consciousness, fought off the Husks, fought through the waves of abominations that non-existan Shepard wasn't going to kill, and escape in order to successfully break through the Heretic station's external defenses without a provided Stealth Ship of proprietary technology and still fight its way through a large number of Geth platforms, again without Shepard's caliber as backup.

That's a pretty darn long cause for doubt.[/quote]

He was knocked out while trying to lower the field for Shepard, if Shepard hadn't of been there Legion wouldn't have been caught flat footed, Legion's escape path wasn't the way Shepard came in. He could have approached under no thrust in a small enough craft, he wouldn't have been detected. He can manifest drones and hack synthetics to do his bidding.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
I wasn't aware the Reapers were only 2-3 weeks away, because Arrival implies monthes or years, while there isn't nother Terminus threat massacring human colonies.
[/quote]

The course of Mass Effect 2 takes place over a relatively short period of time, true that there is no official measurement of time, given the jumps between systems (per Shadowbroker where jumping between systems can take a few hours, and the combat takes place in realtime) it is likely the story took approximately 2 weeks to a month to complete. The finding of Object Rho, based on what the Doctor tells us, takes place almost at exactly the same time Shepard wakes up. Smuggling in the parts to build the base and engines took several weeks.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
You're making assumptions on assumptions on assumptions to fit your own confirmation bias, starting with a pop-culture interpretation of what acid entails and continuing with a progressively more arbitrary series of assumptions 'we must presume' in order to make an entirely new cdharge.
[/quote]

Start up Mass Effect 1, engage a Thresher on foot and see how long you last. Even the codex entries state it as being acid. These are not assumptions.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
There is no unitary 'our' culture. There is a collective of a number of cultures, many of which disagree with you.
[/quote]

In the Mass Effect universe this is not a clear distinction, people say they are from different countries, but there are no racial prejudices which indicate a kind of informal unity.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Most cultures have done plenty worse to plenty more for the good of the group. Sacrifice of the few for the many is a cultural staple across Human cultures.
[/quote]

If they volunteer for the good of the group, yes. But if they are forced or otherwise coerced then all sense of acheivement or nobility is tainted.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...Ignorring the whole Teltin was a rogue cell point, you will find real human cultures that accept child soldiers and narcotic conditioning. [/quote]

My ass it was rogue. Information is TIM's weapon, he was very clear on that. He would have known. What of Gillian, from what you say she and Jack have a common thread in their history. Just how many Cerberus cells have gone rogue? As the number goes up and up, so does TIM's level of incompetance. Also, accept is not a word I would use, force is more like it.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...Chemistry and medicine has shown that inejections in the blood stream can be a good idea.[/quote]

Tell you what, get some hydrochloric acid and inject it in to your own veins, then tell us what good it has done for you.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...I'm sorry, do the Collectors not exist now? Are they devoid of responsiblity?

Choosing a battlefield when there's already going to be one eventually regardless is not magicking up casualties that would not otherwise exist.[/quote]

They wouldn't have gone there if TIM didn't tell them. And why didn't he choose a smaller colony in order to minimise casualties? Since he set the whole thing up he could have timed it so the Normandy got there before there were too many taken.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
European, North American, South American, African, and Asian cultures have all practiced various combinations of what you have listed in the last half-century alone. Human experimentation, torture, assassination, genocide, poisonings...

So to answer your question... most universes with humans, really.
[/quote]

Are they not vilified for these actions? Do we not condem the leaders for allowing it to happen? We call them monsters for these acts. Cerberus is as much of a moster as the people who do it even today.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
[quote]008Zulu wrote...
Of the last 3000 years, maybe 80 of those years have been without a war of some kind. 2920 years of constant fighting. Rights and liberties can and have flourished despite the fighting. [/quote]

When the math is laughable from the start, you know you have a bad argument at hand.

There has not been 'constant fighting' across the globe for all but 80 of the last 3000 years. There hasn't been constant fighting across the globe for the last hundred. There is no unitary shared culture, nor is their a unitary shared experience. There may, for the sake of concession alone, have been only 80 years were everyone was at peace... but in those years that weren't, those who were at peace can well progress as if they are at peace, while those who are at war progress as they will at war.

The absolute lack of distinction on your part to assert a single culture is mindblowing.
[/quote]

What is truly mindblowing is that in the sentance I wrote you somehow extrapolated that I said constant fighting accross the globe. I said "constant fighting" as in there has been armed conflict at some point on the planet for a cumulative total of 2920 of the last 3000 years. Since you appear to have a modicum of intelligence, I expected you to be able to make the distinction.

Modifié par 008Zulu, 30 avril 2011 - 04:59 .