418 réponses à ce sujet

[sr2josh]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Wow, I like the completely stupid and pointless comparison considering cars are specifically designed to collapse in certain ways on impact to protect their passengers.

The fact that skydivers do not always get turned into paste on impact is beyond debate. Oh wait. Maybe reality doesn't apply to you because it's 'outside of a vacuum?'

I know that you are big into just making things up and hating the actual meanings of words, but I'm just going to leave this here.

All Knowing Wikipedia wrote...

Science fiction is largely based on writing rationally about alternative possible worlds or futures.[2] It is similar to, but differs from fantasy in that, within the context of the story, its imaginary elements are largely possible within scientifically established or scientifically postulated laws of nature(though some elements in a story might still be pure imaginative speculation).

You realize he's going to go there now and edit it to fit his definition, right?

Oh, wait, this isn't TVTropes.

LOL great the knuckle draggers have gone to the concrete bastion of facts known as Wikipedia 

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

Wow, I like the completely stupid and pointless comparison considering cars are specifically designed to collapse in certain ways on impact to protect their passengers.

The fact that skydivers do not always get turned into paste on impact is beyond debate. Oh wait. Maybe reality doesn't apply to you because it's 'outside of a vacuum?'

Yep, the human body is more durable than a car in a high speed impact. 

You've yet to show one instance of where a sky diver hit the ground directly at 120mph, which is the terminal velocity, and survived.

Edit:

Is your arse still chafing because you were too stupid to understand basic economics and statistical modeling limitations?

Modifié par billy the squid, 21 août 2013 - 01:06 .

[LiL Reapur]

Makai81 wrote...

LiL Reapur wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Science fiction is not the same as fantasy. Fantasy is an entirely different genre. That's like saying Dragon Age is science fiction.

EXACTLY

NOT exactly.  DA is medieval magic with absolutely no science being any significant part of the story.

But you said Science fiction is Fantasy(which it isn't) and dragon age is Fantasy........
You are contradicting yourself without even knowing it

Makai81 wrote...
Mass Effect does have elements of real science mixed in with science fantasy which equals science fiction

Modifié par LiL Reapur, 21 août 2013 - 01:07 .

[dreamgazer]

Laws of nature. That's the phrase I've been neglecting.

[Br3admax]

It comes with an outside source. Besides, I have professors who have been doctors for longer than probably all of our lives, and they admit that Wikipedia is solid. Get a dictionary if you want, I'm sure that they too are lying to sabotage your agenda of words that are older than you.

Modifié par Br3ad, 21 août 2013 - 01:07 .

[David7204]

That's completely foolish, Deinon. Anyone on this forum is completely free and able to challenge any edits I've made. All you have to do is attain a consensus that you're right and I'm wrong, and my edits go down the drain.

I'm guessing most people are reluctant to do so because they can no longer rely on getting a thousand thumbs up for making very silly and baselss accusations against BioWare, and they're incapable of arguing otherwise.

[sr2josh]

LiL Reapur wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

LiL Reapur wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Science fiction is not the same as fantasy. Fantasy is an entirely different genre. That's like saying Dragon Age is science fiction.

EXACTLY

NOT exactly.  DA is medieval magic with absolutely no science being any significant part of the story.

But you said Science fiction is Fantasy(which it isn't) and dragon age is Fantasy........
You are contradicting yourself  without even knowing it

I said that science fiction is science and fantasy while DA is MAGIC nonsense with a medieval theme.  

[sr2josh]

Br3ad wrote...

It comes with an outside source. Besides, I have professors who have been doctors for longer than probably all of our lives, and they admit that Wikipedia is solid. Get a dictionary if you want, I'm sure that they too are lying to sabotage your agenda of words that are older than you.

[DeinonSlayer]

David used SCOFF

The attack was ineffective

...In case you hadn't noticed, I was poking fun at your having once edited a TVTropes article and then cited it as evidence to bolster one of your arguments.

[Br3admax]

Makai81 wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

It comes with an outside source. Besides, I have professors who have been doctors for longer than probably all of our lives, and they admit that Wikipedia is solid. [/i][i]Get a dictionary if you want, I'm sure that they too are lying to sabotage your agenda of words that are older than you.

I would like to see the pictures of your three doctorates now. Otherwise you're just trolling. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 21 août 2013 - 01:13 .

[sr2josh]

J. Reezy wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

LiL Reapur wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Science fiction is not the same as fantasy. Fantasy is an entirely different genre. That's like saying Dragon Age is science fiction.

EXACTLY

NOT exactly.  DA is medieval magic with absolutely no science being any significant part of the story.

Wake me up when someone is stupid enough to consider DA science fiction so I can see what you're getting at.

I never said DA was science fiction.  Br3ad thinks it is.

[LiL Reapur]

Makai81 wrote...

I said that science fiction is science and fantasy while DA is MAGIC nonsense with a medieval theme.  

You put Mass Effect and Dragon age in the same category thats where you Contradicted yourself.
The fact is that they are both RPGs. But ME IS Science fiction and DA is Fantasy.

Modifié par LiL Reapur, 21 août 2013 - 01:18 .

[David7204]

I don't recall ever once using TV Tropes as evidence.

I've used it plenty of times as in invitation for people to argue their accusations somewhere they'll actually face scrutiny. That's not evidence.

Do you have any examples of me using TV tropes as evidence?

Modifié par David7204, 21 août 2013 - 01:15 .

[Ravensword]

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Wow, I like the completely stupid and pointless comparison considering cars are specifically designed to collapse in certain ways on impact to protect their passengers.

The fact that skydivers do not always get turned into paste on impact is beyond debate. Oh wait. Maybe reality doesn't apply to you because it's 'outside of a vacuum?'

Yep, the human body is more durable than a car in a high speed impact. 

You've yet to show one instance of where a sky diver hit the ground directly at 120mph, which is the terminal velocity, and survived.

Edit:

Is your arse still chafing because you were too stupid to understand basic economics and statistical modeling limitations?

Arse. Haha. I'll add that to "wanker" as my list of British English words that are more funny than insulting.

[Br3admax]

Makai81 wrote...

J. Reezy wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

LiL Reapur wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Science fiction is not the same as fantasy. Fantasy is an entirely different genre. That's like saying Dragon Age is science fiction.

EXACTLY

NOT exactly.  DA is medieval magic with absolutely no science being any significant part of the story.

Wake me up when someone is stupid enough to consider DA science fiction so I can see what you're getting at.

I never said DA was science fiction.  Br3ad thinks it is.

Do you even read, or do you just talk?

[sr2josh]

LiL Reapur wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

I said that science fiction is science and fantasy while DA is MAGIC nonsense with a medieval theme.  

You put Mass Effect and Dragon age in the same category thats where you Contradicted yourself.
The fact is that they are both RPGs. But ME IS Science fiction and DA is Fantasy. Don't compare the two.

Br3ad put DA and ME in the same category and then you ran with it.  *face+palm*

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

I don't recall ever once using TV Tropes as evidence.

I've used it plenty of times as in invitation for people to argue their accusations somewhere they'll actually face scrutiny. That's not evidence.

Do you have any examples of me using TV tropes as evidence?

Which you can't do because you edit it yourself

[sr2josh]

Br3ad wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

J. Reezy wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

LiL Reapur wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Science fiction is not the same as fantasy. Fantasy is an entirely different genre. That's like saying Dragon Age is science fiction.

EXACTLY

NOT exactly.  DA is medieval magic with absolutely no science being any significant part of the story.

Wake me up when someone is stupid enough to consider DA science fiction so I can see what you're getting at.

I never said DA was science fiction.  Br3ad thinks it is.

Do you even read, or do you just talk?

You apparently are incapable of either with the notable exception of trolling.

[dreamgazer]

Ravensword wrote...

Arse. Haha. I'll add that to "wanker" as my list of British English words that are more funny than insulting.

You should look up how they use the word "fanny".

[Br3admax]

Makai81 wrote...

You apparently are incapable of either with the notable exception of trolling.

Read my quote, again then, and point out where I said DA was science fiction. 

[What a Succulent Ass]

...Almost all of it doesn't make sense.

Starting with eezo.

[David7204]

AresKeith wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I don't recall ever once using TV Tropes as evidence.

I've used it plenty of times as in invitation for people to argue their accusations somewhere they'll actually face scrutiny. That's not evidence.

Do you have any examples of me using TV tropes as evidence?

Which you can't do because you edit it yourself

And why not? I don't control TV Tropes. I'm not a mod. It's not up to me which posts stay and which go.

[In Exile]

David7204 wrote...
And why not? I don't control TV Tropes. I'm not a mod. It's not up to me which posts stay and which go.

Trying to change reality mid-debate to prove that your subjective view is right is generally frowned upon.