I’ll bet you guys didn’t know Sirleen has a wooden leg ?
Wanna know how he got that wooden leg ? That fucker pulled me from the claws ( no pun intended ) of death when we were in the bush back at Nam.
So there we are being overrun and were all bunkered down and shit. We got Charlie all around us screaming and shooting every fucker that moves so I’m really scared and crying. Sirleen is in the trench right beside me and and he has that crazy look in his eyes ( the one he uses at tournys ) and firing off rounds from his
modded M16 grenade launching rifle ( sanwa trigger ). he see’s he can’t kill them all so he PICKS ME UP on his shoulder like I was wounded ( but I wasn’t, I was just crying ) and he starts running like he has never ran before.
Sirleen is one lucky mutherflower ( proven by past tourny results ) but the SF Gods were NOT with us that day :sad:
Charlie is right on our toosh and Sirleen is getting tired ( I’m fat )
and takes an AK-47 shot right behind the knee. Blows his fucking leg right the fuck off right below the knee !
Soz I start crying harder like a lil bitch but do you think that stopped him ? FUCK NO !!!
Sirleen proceedes to HOP ALL THE WAY OUT THE BUSH WITH ME ON HIS SHOULDER !!!
He was never the same after that shit man. ( Mango Sirleen )
Yes I believe Sirleen deserves a round of aplause.
I certainly agree with this for the most part. I’m just trying to say that a lot of these atheists who take themselves so seriously end up missing the entire point, and also that it takes far more than the simplistic explanations offered by the Kurzweils and Dawkinses to understand the world to any reasonable degree. In his writing, Sirlin projects this know-it-all attitude (he claims it’s a gimmick FWIW) and some people buy into it, so I saw that as an opportunity to fit some serious discussion into FGD. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t chill with Sirlin IRL if he were up for it, though (hell, we somehow ended up teaming in Guilty Gear at MWC one year), as we all know the internet means nothing. =)
EDIT:
Kayin, the thing with future predictions is that by nature they are based more on logical argument (i.e. philosophy) than evidence (i.e. science): The “if A, then B” type stuff, basically. And human beings have historically been very bad at this - hell, back in the 70s, the major environmentalist line was that we were headed for a new ice age. Where most people in the relevant fields take issue with Kurzweil is the assumption that scientific progress will continue to grow exponentially, while there are signs that it is already slowing down.
Something else: Has Kurzweil actually done any peer-reviewed work relating to any of this? This is not a rhetorical question, but an honest one. That’s what separates legitimate science from the papers claiming to prove intelligent design or disprove global warming.
After reading this thread and the jaw-droppingly ridiculous blog posts of Sirlin “I was up against Nuki, but I knew with my Max Payne bullet time gauge there could be only one victor… but then my bullet super power wold not activate and I shockingly lost” I have more respect for Josh the FunkDOC.
I would seriously love to see Sirlin try and explain that post.