|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 21, 2011 3:02:59 GMT -5
6:02 pm in Melbourne, Australia, and everything is fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 21:59:48 GMT -5
Sorry I didn't see your post before I posted, Sae. *hugs* It will be okay. Harold Camping has already been proven wrong with his doomsday date twice before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 21:38:54 GMT -5
Just quickly... I approve of what you said, Sarn. I just want to make a minor point of clarification. ^^; I believe the calendar reset was either Christ's death or resurrection, which were only really three days apart, so it doesn't matter so much. He was trotting around for thirty odd years in the BCs before the ADs marched in. ^^ I think you got that impression because of the assumption that "AD" stands for "After Death". It's meant to be "Anno Domini", Latin for "in the years of our master", and was intended to be from the birth year of Jesus. But the monk had got the dates off by about 6 years, and by the time the mistake was found it had already become a standard reference point for naming dates. So the era is now grandfathered in, even though most will agree that Jesus birth happened some years earlier. (His birth was during a census year, which happens on a fixed cycle.) |
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 20:51:48 GMT -5
I figured that Mad's ego is already a lost cause, and Joey's inane flattery can't possibly swell it any larger than... oh who am I kidding. xD Joey's quite vain, probably not as much as Mad, but his flattery of his friends seems to blend perceptibly into his flattery of himself. And thanks so much for your feedback, Fish. I'm just at this stage where, immediately after I finish the script, I reread it and it seems horrifyingly unfunny. But I know this subjective feeling should pass as long as the script really is working ;D I might not have time to draw it in the next week or two, though, as I've got a stack of assessment for uni coming up, but after that I should be able to slot it in somewhere. And yeah, I think I forgot to mention it, but I'm open to all cameo appearances too.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 5:57:54 GMT -5
I'd like to know when I die. Because I know I work best when under a deadline. xD
No seriously. I procrastinate on everything. I've barely done any driving and I've had my learner's licence for over two years. I have a heapload of paintings I'd like to paint, stuff I'd like to make, things that I just haven't bothered to find time for. I just let the inspiration wither and die.
But whenever I have some kind of pressing deadline, like a special issue for the NT, or a friend's birthday, or an essay due, or things like that, I work harder and better the closer I get to the cut-off date. That's why I think I'll create the best work of my life when I'm all senile and in retirement, teeth falling out, organ functions dropping off. If I know I've got a set time limit, it'll compel me to not be lazy with my time. Because time is precious.
xD. I think I just made it sound like I can't wait to be an old granny.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 4:10:36 GMT -5
But the bold claims Harold Camping are making are not the generalised, "there will be a judgement day", "it will happen soon", "I should be ready for it in my lifetime" statements. He's naming a particularly exact date and time for it, basing a whole campaign on that date. And his methods of interpreting the Bible as if he's hacking into an encripted message are far from the mainstream.
Debating religious principles using the Bible as evidence is not simply a matter of cherry-picking verses that support your stance and ignoring verses that don't. It's about looking at the Bible as a whole, taking verses in their proper context, applying common sense, understanding the particular author's intentions, reading intelligently what is being said and what is meant by it. This is the whole point of the discipline of study called hermeneutics, and its principles are well known and widely used by both Christians and theologians (who can be believers or unbelievers, as this discipline is practically a branch of literature studies) around the world.
Harold Camping, on the other hand, claims to have a "secret formula" which extracts information from the Bible, which is utterly alien to basic principles of understanding what words mean. That makes him not mainstream.
Sorry if I wasn't clear before. It is true that the concept of an impending judgement day in itself can seem radical to people who do not accept the words of the Bible as truth. But to most Bible believers, the arrogance of claiming an exact date when this clearly contradicts multiple Bible verses is radical. Just because some people use highly dubious methods of interpreting the Bible - cherry-picking, if you will - does not necessarily mean that all people use equally dubious methods in reading scripture.
I'm sure there are examples of (psuedo-) scientists who give science a bad name, who go against the mainstream and cherry pick their results from empirical data in order provide false evidence for their premises. That does not mean that scientists who apply appropriate scientific principles are anything like those pseudo-scientists, or that arguing from the grounding of empirical data is a flawed study in itself. By the same token, you can not discredit the Bible solely based on the fact that some people have wildly eccentric and illogical interpretations of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 20, 2011 0:28:20 GMT -5
I think it's shameful how many people this is going to reach. Harold Camping's teaching is based on a seriously warped understanding of the Bible; he interprets it using a mathematical algorithm that only he seems to understand. And yet from the quote I found on the website JDB linked to, it sounds like he barely remembers any mathsy-sounding words beyond his arithmetic, and claims the calculations "would probably crash Google’s computers". This is seriously embarrassing and it gives thousands of people a horrible impression of Christianity.
And it's dangerous, too. But that's a whole 'nother disturbing can of worms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 19, 2011 11:05:20 GMT -5
Double post omg. Once I got this idea, I had to make it into a script quicksmart, or I'd lose all the passion for it.
THE VILLAIN = "The Cinephile", a movie-loving villain who wears 3-D glasses at all times and looks a bit like a Charlie Chaplin but more evulz. Haven't drawn him yet.
THE SCENE = A Moltaran-inspired movie theatre. Red stalactites hang darkly from above. The title of a poor quality movie is projected on the big screen (something along the lines of “It Came From Another Kreludor”, idk).
THE SCRIPT
#1.
Last time on Team Squad Force...
Alas! The dastardly Cinephile has taken hold of one of our heroes! What horrors await poor Blindside Boy in the Cinephile’s Theatre of Doom? And will he betray his friends?
Joey: (roped to a chair in the front row) I’LL TELL YOU EVERYTHING ABOUT THEM.
#2.
Cinephile: Quiet you. I haven’t said what horrors await you yet. In 15 minutes, a movie with a half star rating will commence and it will be awful.
Joey: *SOB* But- but- but I’ll get a sore neck in the front row! OH THE DISCOMFORT.
#3.
Joey: That’s it -that’s all I can take! Did you know... the Petite Pulveriser’s eyes gleam like embers in the setting sun?
Cinephile: Uhh...
Joey: ... after he’s eaten, the drool on Banana Bruiser’s chin shimmers like liquid crystals...
Cinephile: um, I don’t need to know this...
Joey: ... Lieutenant Awesome’s sheer awesomeness oozes out of every awesome pore in his awesome fishscaled fishface...
Cinephile: You really mean that? That sounds awesome...
#4. Five sentimental minutes later...
(The two are in tears and have slung an arm around each other’s shoulder. Joey is not bound to the chair any more.)
Joey: And then after the tandem bike race over the rainbow, Banana Bruiser said, “Hey Blindy, you rock so much and you’re so smart and better looking than us”.
Cinephile: They all sound so awesome. Especially Lieutenant Awesome. Man it must be good to be on a super team.
#5. (a mini-panel) (this is written as a sound-effect: DRAMATIC ENTRANCE! )
Joey: (looks around in alarm) *gasp* it must be...
#6.
(Dramatically, the three other Team Squad Force members enter the theatre holding popcorn and slushies. Action lines! Epicness!)
#7.
Cinephile: Team Squad Force?!! Omigosh, I’m finally meeting you! (Especially Lieutenant Awesome!!) Say, how about you drop Blindside Boy and recruit me instead?
Joey: BACK YOU FIEEEND
#8. (a series of three small panels, with Joey minorly injuring the Cinephile. *SMAK*, *miss* and then the final one is marked *STUBB* as Joey defeats the villain by stomping on his toe. Ouchie?)
#9.
(Cinephile is hopping away on one foot in the background)
Joey: Loyal friends, what a relief to finally see you with my own eye... after all that time you were searching tirelessly for me...
#10.
Emsohl: Uhhh... yeaaaahhhh. (Looks askance. As if they spent no time searching.)
Mad: Meh. Searching was boring. Then we needed refreshments...
Tombstones: Movie here in ten minutes!
#11.
Joey: (blank face) Y-you mean...?
Emsohl: (looking consoling) Yes.
#12.
Emsohl: TEAM SQUAD FORCE MOVIE NIGHT.
Joey: (all goo-goo-eyed) You guys are AWESOME.
#13.
Until next time, Team Squad Force Go!
(The four are watching the movie. It’s got poorly crafted spaceships and planets dangled on strings)
Joey: Not too far to the front, I get a sore neck and...
Mad: Quiet you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 18, 2011 10:06:32 GMT -5
I have the start of an idea, I think. Joey is captured by evil villain, and thinks he's being interrogated, but 'cause he's such a coward he's immediately like, "ILL TELL YOU EVERYTHING. *STARTS SPILLING AWKWARD PERSONAL DETAILS*"
edit:
I got it. My villain is... The Cinephile! And he tries to interrogate Joey by forcing him to watch a 1/2 star movie, but Joey is horrified because he's been strapped to a chair in the front row of the cinema-lair and if he watches the movie from there HE'LL GET A SORE NECK.
And there's more, but I need to type it into a coherent script.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 16, 2011 9:09:13 GMT -5
Heh. I chose the other option -- torture body-person B, reward body-person A -- but for a completely different reason than it assumed I would.
See, my thought is that I'd rather hurt myself than anyone else, and for who 'I' am, the mind matters more than the body. Quite honestly, I was assuming that when minds were switched back to the normal bodies, the bodies would be whole once more. But even so, so long as nothing was broken or scarred or anything like that... I don't think I would've changed my response. Residual pain is something, sure, but... the feeling of being torture isn't something I'd wish on anyone, especially if it's psychological torture, not just physical.
The reward didn't even enter into my thought process, though I think the question assumed it would. Sure, it's a nice bonus to choose the option that also ends up with my original body-person being rewarded, but. I don't care. I'd give away more of the money than I actually used, I suspect. So if I can be hurt and save another person the pain, I would. *shrug* I would rather not be forced to hurt anyone, but... yeah. I think in the question, it said you wanted the reward (regardless of whether you actually did or not XD)
Although, your response, and Sock said the same thing as you, puzzles me a little. I mean, I just can't imagine actually volunteering to be tortured rather than another person. I mean, there's selfish reasons- I really don't wanna get tortured XD But there's also that you know nothing about the other person. They could be a terrorist, or a dictator, or something. You don't know anything about them. To be fair, it's a tough decision, and there's no way I can impose on you that by choosing not to be tortured you're doing wrong. You have a right not to be tortured.
(Below is a rambly emotional spillage)
But about the other person being a dictator or a terrorist... does this mean that the torture can be justified, because it's punishing them? Even though in most civilised states torture is not legally given out as a punishment for offenses? I never want to see torture employed on people's bodies in revenge for their crimes. Judicial torture is awful, it infects the state criminal justice systems with the idea that a human body is OK to brutally violate. And illegal torture is a violent and terrible crime, whether the victim did something bad enough to warrant a criminal conviction or not. So. I can never be complicit in allowing the torture of another person, no matter who. Allowing another person to torture the crap out of a helpless human being is as bad a crime as torturing them myself. If the only way to defy that is to be tortured myself... well I won't enjoy it in the least. But I refuse to assist in the torture of another. I refuse to let them break my integrity, however much else they may break.
I realise I'll probably deny all these words while under actual torture. But in the scenario, I get to make my decision before any torture starts, and presumably I can't change the decision once it's started. Then after the session is over, and I start to regain my composure, I doubt I'd regret it or wish it were done on someone else. I'd thank God I survived, and that I didn't cave in before the commencement when I actually had the power of choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 15, 2011 8:24:42 GMT -5
In the second part, the form smugly said I got it wrong when I got exactly the result I wanted from the situation.
I chose to torture Body-Person A, and reward Body-Person B. That's because I wanted to be the one tortured, so I would not be complicit in torturing Body-Person B.
I figured, when the torture happens, the body of A experiences the torture, the emotional duress and the pain. That's my body. It just has someone else's memories in it, but that doesn't mean that B experiences the torture. Body A is informed by the thoughts of B.
After the torture, B receives their memories back. But that's not the same as torturing them. Because in my experience, the memory of pain is far, far less acute than the actual physical sensation of pain. Maybe the humiliation of torture would stick with the memory... but if they didn't already know it, I could reassure person B later that they really weren't put to shame, it happened to my body, and that should probably help them recover their psyche a bit.
I think the one-million dollar reward was really just a thing to trick you. It makes you think that the person not tortured would be the one rewarded. Anyway I wouldn't let myself or another person be tortured for a reward of million dollars. Pain puts things in perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 15, 2011 7:09:37 GMT -5
Have an awesome birthday, Pat!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 14, 2011 10:12:57 GMT -5
I've finished the design thingamajig! And I'm happy with the damsel plot idea we've got at the moment. Blindside Boy's got a sort of half-mask in the shape of a B. I wasn't sure if the mask would still work if he had different facial expressions so I drew a few faces to check if the mask would distort strangely. It seems okay. I just gotta be careful to position the eye first, then fit the mask around it, and not the other way around, but it's not too hard anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 13, 2011 3:54:30 GMT -5
*works at Australia Post* The weight and dimensions can also be a factor in whether or not the book will be defined as a documents-only "letter". In Australia, if the sketchbook exceeds 500 grams or is more than 2 cm thick, then it'll be classed as a parcel, and it'll need a customs declaration if you're sending it internationally.
But yeah, the post systems are probably different from this in other countries. If in doubt, your local Post Office staff will help you out, since they send these kinds of parcels all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacmanite on May 13, 2011 0:52:53 GMT -5
I sure wouldn't mind that. ^_^
|
|
