390 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The Angry One wrote...

Shepard is not weak minded!
That's why Shepard surrendered to the leader of the Reapers without argument!

Wait..

Beautiful!

Shepard: I... don't know.

Yep... Shepard. Bad things happen to you because you're a dumb ass.
(Fires on Collector ship and hits -- "take 'er in close and finish them off." yep close enough so when the ship blows up it damages the Normandy. Dumb ass.)
(Fires at red tube -- then runs in close to red tube while it's blowing up -- Dumb ass)
(On Rannoch, taking on a reaper on foot -- Dumb ass)

But they made Hackett who was supposed to be a military genius a real dumb ass. They turned Anderson from the character he was in Revelation into a real dumb ass. Basically I think the Alliance Military has a Maximum IQ level of 100.

[The Angry One]

DirtySHISN0 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't prove it won't happen.

Just like you cant prove it will.



The grounds for every pointless debate ever.
When will people give up trying to argue sense where there is no sense to be found.

Er, yes. That's why an appeal to probabilty is a fallacy.

[Bigdoser]

Jonathan Shepard wrote...

My God, this has to be the most hilarious/horrifying thread I've ever come across. Razerath, please, just stop. You're losing this so bad that I'm pretty sure your age is under 16. Go take a basic logic class. Please. If you're /not/ a troll, if you /honestly/ think that Shepard didn't surrender, fine. Maybe your Shepard didn't.

But almost everyone else here doesn't agree with you, and you've made so many contradictions and logical fallacies that this is ridiculous. Mass murder/mass enslavement, or mass... "molestation" they say... is not justified. I call it "mass stagnation and conformity/submission" but whatever. The Reapers are villains; unfortunately, their actions were never justified with sound logic. So please, stop trying to justify flawed reasoning.

Yup hence why I love this thread since its so horrifying AND hilarious well more hilarious I stopped taking him seriously when he called the catalyst a hero. 

[The Angry One]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Shepard is not weak minded!
That's why Shepard surrendered to the leader of the Reapers without argument!

Wait..

Beautiful!

Shepard: I... don't know.

Yep... Shepard. Bad things happen to you because you're a dumb ass.
(Fires on Collector ship and hits -- "take 'er in close and finish them off." yep close enough so when the ship blows up it damages the Normandy. Dumb ass.)
(Fires at red tube -- then runs in close to red tube while it's blowing up -- Dumb ass)
(On Rannoch, taking on a reaper on foot -- Dumb ass)

But they made Hackett who was supposed to be a military genius a real dumb ass. They turned Anderson from the character he was in Revelation into a real dumb ass. Basically I think the Alliance Military has a Maximum IQ level of 100.

Mercury in the water, it's always mercury in the water.

[Grimwick]

Razerath wrote...

The Revolut wrote...

Razerath wrote...

I'm not arguing with a reductionist any longer. Sorry. You're points are completely off topic and filled with semantics.

Do you even know the meaning of semantics?

Yes and all you're doing is picking apart my words to try and prove something that isn't relevant to what I am trying to say. You're constantly arguing about numbers and odds. That's soooo secondary to this argument it's hilarious.

IT'S COMPLETELY RELEVANT!

Can't you understand that? You are saying that a probability exists that somebody will create synthetics that wipe out all life. But you cannot prove that it will happen. You just can't. Your argument that states we should kill these organics to save future organics is therefore wrong.

HOW IS THAT NOT RELEVANT?

[DoktorAffentanz]

Jonathan Shepard wrote...

My God, this has to be the most hilarious/horrifying thread I've ever come across. Razerath, please, just stop. You're losing this so bad that I'm pretty sure your age is under 16. Go take a basic logic class. Please. If you're /not/ a troll, if you /honestly/ think that Shepard didn't surrender, fine. Maybe your Shepard didn't.

But almost everyone else here doesn't agree with you, and you've made so many contradictions and logical fallacies that this is ridiculous. Mass murder/mass enslavement, or mass... "molestation" they say... is not justified. I call it "mass stagnation and conformity/submission" but whatever. The Reapers are villains; unfortunately, their actions were never justified with sound logic. So please, stop trying to justify flawed reasoning.

Oh man, that was not the Mass Effect I signed up for....

[filetemo]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Shepard is not weak minded!
That's why Shepard surrendered to the leader of the Reapers without argument!

Wait..

Beautiful!

Shepard: I... don't know.

Yep... Shepard. Bad things happen to you because you're a dumb ass.
(Fires on Collector ship and hits -- "take 'er in close and finish them off." yep close enough so when the ship blows up it damages the Normandy. Dumb ass.)
(Fires at red tube -- then runs in close to red tube while it's blowing up -- Dumb ass)
(On Rannoch, taking on a reaper on foot -- Dumb ass)

shep: you are a machine, and machines can be broken!
Sovereign: oh, really? you are a human, and humans can be killed! HAHA ******
shep: YOU SMELL BAD
Sov: YOUR MOM HAS A PENIS

[Razerath]

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...
At any point those countless lives could create hundreds of seperate Reaper kinds of antagonists. Any number of those could end organic life for GOOD.

Finally we get to the root of the argument:

AN APPEAL TO PROBABILITY.

You are making a logical fallacy by justifying a solution (genocide of all things) on this possibility.

It's just wrong. There isn't a yes or no or an opinion to be had. It is uncategorically wrong.

There's no point in trying to defend this, there really isn't.

The Reapers exist as an example of what can happen. Seemingly different rogue AI's like the Reapers don't exists because a long long time ago the Reapers probably killed them off to start the preservation of organic life int hese cycles.

Highlighted the most important word there.

It's an appeal to probability, you cannot argue against that.

I'm not arguing with a reductionist any longer. Sorry. You're points are completely off topic and filled with semantics.

Wtf.

I highlighted the word 'can' because that's exactly where you make an appeal to probability:

You say something 'can' happen in the future therefore we must stop it!

That's where you are making your mistake, don't try to deflect the argument by whinging about semantics. That's irrelevant. My points on the other hand have been completely on topic and have pointed out that what you are saying is illogical and therefore wrong.

Good GOD.

Replace can with has and could again if we dont stop it for good.

Does everyone have to explain word for word what they mean to you? Like I said, you pick apart sentences like no one else in this topic.

[The Angry One]

Razerath wrote...
Good GOD.

Replace can with has and could again if we dont stop it for good.

Proof.
Where is your PROOF.

Evidence. Examples. Precidence. Show it. Now.

[Grimwick]

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...
At any point those countless lives could create hundreds of seperate Reaper kinds of antagonists. Any number of those could end organic life for GOOD.

Finally we get to the root of the argument:

AN APPEAL TO PROBABILITY.

You are making a logical fallacy by justifying a solution (genocide of all things) on this possibility.

It's just wrong. There isn't a yes or no or an opinion to be had. It is uncategorically wrong.

There's no point in trying to defend this, there really isn't.

The Reapers exist as an example of what can happen. Seemingly different rogue AI's like the Reapers don't exists because a long long time ago the Reapers probably killed them off to start the preservation of organic life int hese cycles.

Highlighted the most important word there.

It's an appeal to probability, you cannot argue against that.

I'm not arguing with a reductionist any longer. Sorry. You're points are completely off topic and filled with semantics.

Wtf.

I highlighted the word 'can' because that's exactly where you make an appeal to probability:

You say something 'can' happen in the future therefore we must stop it!

That's where you are making your mistake, don't try to deflect the argument by whinging about semantics. That's irrelevant. My points on the other hand have been completely on topic and have pointed out that what you are saying is illogical and therefore wrong.

Good GOD.

Replace can with has and could again if we dont stop it for good.

Does everyone have to explain word for word what they mean to you? Like I said, you pick apart sentences like no one else in this topic.

It has not happened. That is a certainty. It HAS NOT happened!

You're honestly saying that a synthetic race has been created that destroyed all organic life everywhere and continues to destroy future organic life also.

If that's the case then why do any organics exist in ME3?

Help me understand.

[The Night Mammoth]

The Catalyst is proof of its own point?

Morbo is displeased.

LOGIC DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

GOOD NIGHT.

[Razerath]

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

The Revolut wrote...

Razerath wrote...

I'm not arguing with a reductionist any longer. Sorry. You're points are completely off topic and filled with semantics.

Do you even know the meaning of semantics?

Yes and all you're doing is picking apart my words to try and prove something that isn't relevant to what I am trying to say. You're constantly arguing about numbers and odds. That's soooo secondary to this argument it's hilarious.

IT'S COMPLETELY RELEVANT!

Can't you understand that? You are saying that a probability exists that somebody will create synthetics that wipe out all life. But you cannot prove that it will happen. You just can't. Your argument that states we should kill these organics to save future organics is therefore wrong.

HOW IS THAT NOT RELEVANT?

It's not my goddamn argument. It's the Reapers. I am just clearly seeing the end of the game for what it is and what happened unlike 99% of you, "You're losing Razerath" who gave up on trying to figure it out. Fine, everyone be happy with either trying to make up some IT bull or not understanding the ending because it's a mental block for most of you.

Can't... comprehend... war.... or... sacrifice for...greater...good.

I got what I wanted out of this whole topic, a sense of why you all don't understand the ending in the way that I do. Plenty of lolz and...

End Topic ( Happy? )

EDIT: Organics exist in ME3 because the Reapers have allowed it.

Modifié par Razerath, 24 juin 2012 - 10:54 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Razerath wrote...

Does everyone have to explain word for word what they mean to you? Like I said, you pick apart sentences like no one else in this topic.

Yes. 

[The Angry One]

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

[Taboo]

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

<3

[Razerath]

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

Sorry to jump back in but you never make decisions unless you're 100% sure of the results? Oh I am not going to even bother disarming this bomb because if I mess up it will explode?

[Jonathan Shepard]

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

Even Mordin's realization that he should be the one to cure the Genophage is proof that "what ifs" are not enough in the ME universe. 

All those "what if the Krogan rebel again"s aren't enough. So all those "what if there's an evil machine race made by organics that kills more organics than the reapers do" is also not enough. You would be making the same mistake Mordin admits he made, to judge like that. 

Different, yes, but similar. 

Modifié par Jonathan Shepard, 24 juin 2012 - 11:03 .

[Grimwick]

Razerath wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Razerath wrote...

The Revolut wrote...

Razerath wrote...

I'm not arguing with a reductionist any longer. Sorry. You're points are completely off topic and filled with semantics.

Do you even know the meaning of semantics?

Yes and all you're doing is picking apart my words to try and prove something that isn't relevant to what I am trying to say. You're constantly arguing about numbers and odds. That's soooo secondary to this argument it's hilarious.

IT'S COMPLETELY RELEVANT!

Can't you understand that? You are saying that a probability exists that somebody will create synthetics that wipe out all life. But you cannot prove that it will happen. You just can't. Your argument that states we should kill these organics to save future organics is therefore wrong.

HOW IS THAT NOT RELEVANT?

It's not my goddamn argument. It's the Reapers. I am just clearly seeing the end of the game for what it is and what happened unlike 99% of you, "You're losing Razerath" who gave up on trying to figure it out. Fine, everyone be happy with either trying to make up some IT bull or not understanding the ending because it's a mental block for most of you.

Can't... comprehend... war.... or... sacrifice for...greater...good.

I got what I wanted out of this whole topic, a sense of why you all don't understand the ending in the way that I do. Plenty of lolz and...

End Topic ( Happy? )

EDIT: Organics exist in ME3 because the Reapers have allowed it.

Ok well you just admitted to being a troll right there. 

Because I can't leave a terrible argument unaccounted for I will conclude.

1) It doesn't matter whether it's your argument or the reapers. You were trying to defend something that doesn't make sense. declaring it somebody else's opinion is no excuse for that logic.

2) Your ad hominem makes me laugh.

3) Haha so we can't understand it, but you can? All the evidence is to the contrary I'm afraid.

@EDIT:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *vomits in horror at the absurdity of that statement* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA.

So a race of synthetics has been created which kills all organics. This race was designed to stop synthetics killing organics in the future. The only example of a race killing all organics was in fact this race. this race is a solution to a problem that was created by themselves.

If I read anymore logic like that I'll have an epileptic fit.

[Taboo]

Razerath wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

Sorry to jump back in but you never make decisions unless you're 100% sure of the results? Oh I am not going to even bother disarming this bomb because if I mess up it will explode?

Nice strawman.

Some people, like myseld, have OCD. We are not risk takers. It is my nature.

[DoktorAffentanz]

Oh of course. You can't prove sh*t and now we all just "didn't get" the ending. Sure!

Me too stupid to understand.....

I hope you're satisfied now, cause you made me totally realize that I'm an idiot and now I'm sad......

[The Angry One]

Razerath wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

Sorry to jump back in but you never make decisions unless you're 100% sure of the results? Oh I am not going to even bother disarming this bomb because if I mess up it will explode?

Except we're talking about a decision based on no certainty whatsoever.

Hypothetical situation.
I appear before you and say I'm from the future. I tell you that in the future, one of your descendants will be directly responsible for the deaths of 10 billion people. It turns out this can only be prevented if you die.

Do you accept this?

For the purposes of this hyopthetical situation, assume time travel is possible. So no whining about that.

Modifié par The Angry One, 24 juin 2012 - 11:04 .

[Razerath]

The Angry One wrote...

Razerath wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

We comprehend sacrifice. You don't comprehend that sacrifice must be FOR SOMETHING.
NOT because the enemy says it must be so. You have no reason to believe it.

You are advocating sacrifice for what might happen, some day. Not good enough. Not acceptable.

Sorry to jump back in but you never make decisions unless you're 100% sure of the results? Oh I am not going to even bother disarming this bomb because if I mess up it will explode?

Except we're talking about a decision based on no certainty whatsoever.

Hypothetical situation.
I appear before you and say I'm from the future. I tell you that in the future, one of your descendants will be directly responsible for the deaths of 10 billion people. It turns out this can only be prevented if you die.

Do you accept this?

For the purposes of this hyopthetical situation, assume time travel is possible. So no whining about that.

No because there is no proof. If you were the person who killed 10 million and could prove it that would be another story. I would then suicide.

To everyone - I am not abandoning this at all. I feel like what the Starchild said and what he is is proof enough to take one of the three actions. You all don't think that is true and that is OK. Like I said before you don't understand the way I see the end.

EDIT: Or you just don't agree with it. I don't think Starchild lied, you all apprently do and therefore would... do what then?

Modifié par Razerath, 24 juin 2012 - 11:08 .

[The Angry One]

Razerath wrote...

No because there is no proof. If you were the person who killed 10 million and could prove it that would be another story. I would then suicide.

Okay, so you would demand proof..... except if I was the one who did it?
Being.. the murderer.. makes me more credible?

We now go live the the planet Vulcan where we present this concentrated anti-logic to the Vulcans and see the effects.

www.youtube.com/watch

Oh dear.

[Jonathan Shepard]

Razerath wrote...

No because there is no proof. If you were the person who killed 10 million and could prove it that would be another story. I would then suicide.

To everyone - I am not abandoning this at all. I feel like what the Starchild said and what he is is proof enough to take one of the three actions. You all don't think that is true and that is OK. Like I said before you don't understand the way I see the end.

This is the point we're trying to make! There's no proof to believe what the Catalyst says! In fact, the Geth making peace with the Quarians (if you encouage it) is proof that the Catalyst is wrong! So why doesn't Shepard bring this up? Because he /becomes weak minded and submits to the Reapers without questioning them./ There is no proof in his words that what he said is true. No evidence! His words are NOT enough!

[capitaine66]

The only thing we can be sure of, it's that blasto would have done a far better job than shepard