Since there is ample evidence to suggest Jesus was in fact the descendant of Solomon and David, and therefore he was true Royalty
This is true.
Assuming Jesus The Christ was indeed an earthly human being, which has yet to be substantially proven. (And even the Bible-sans-Gospels is sketchy on this) Not True by a long shot.
Yet you're unwilling to accept the death of Christ, which is one of the most heavily documented events in the history of the world.
Oh really? Where? Give me sources, because other than some book that may-or-may-not have been written around then, I, and many others, can't find any. I mean shit, it is one of the most documented events in history, right? Is that why there's still raging debate on the whole issue, and on the issue of weather or not the man actually existed? Where are all the Roman texts? The Jewish texts? There were plenty of very well known writers living in that area, at that time, and not one wrote about him, or his death. (Josephus does not count, most sane people admit that the reference is an interpolation.) I should narrow that down: dated texts from within 10 years of the "death" of Jesus, not including the Bible. Have fun.
Oh, and by the way, if you're a Christian, get the man's name right. It's Jesus The Christ, or The Christ Jesus. Christ is a TITLE not a NAME. (Meaning "Annointed One") You cannot simply refer to him as "Christ". It's like your sentence above saying "The death of doctor is one of the..."
We don't "misunderstand" Christianity. We understand it perfectly well...you on the other hand, can't even get the name of the person you worship right.
How about "citizen's arresting" the person who vandalised the _tree_ in the first place?
I don't think they're talking about the signs put up by rangers and the like...they're talking about the rednecks who go nail "JESUS SAVES" signs to every frickin tree in the woods they can see. I tear them down as well. Watch as I laugh my ass off and walk away while you're putting me under "citizen's arrest". What a joke.
If a _real_ wrong were being done (like some kid spray painting gang signs on my fence), _real_ people just beat the shit out of the person. Try putting that kid under "citizen's arrest" and see how far that gets you. If you're not willing to administer the punishment yourself, then don't bother crying foul.
The funny part is that they're the ones who've proposed it!
I love that type of realism, which is why I love GT so much: it's almost the perfect racing sim in most respects. It's the perfect balance between realistic, and easy to play for the novice.
The articles I read a bit ago about this game say that it's supposed to be that realistic, (its even going to have body kits and bumpers, side skirts, etc...ugh!) but I think they're being far too ambitious. I also think that it might be based on the Project Gotham engine, and I hated the way that game drove. So far nothing beats GT on that. If I'm in a MR car, it handles much like a real one would. A FF car handles like it should, same for a FR, etc..
The article says that they've brought in engineers, physicists, and the like...so we can only hope..
But to kill off the GT franchise, they've got a lot of work to do. Some of the screen shots I've seen leave me very unimpressed with the cars, and I think they're putting too much emphasis on scenery..scenery is pointless in a racing sim. Who cares if you can render the gravel on the side of the track when I'm going to be passing it at 140+ mph ?
I don't know if GT4 is out here in the states either (GT4 and Halo2 are the only games on my "to buy" list and I'm in no hurry..) but I loved GT2, liked GT3, and from what I've read about GT4 I'll love it. They have my favourite car company finally, and brought back the used cars..which ruined GT3 IMO.
In other words: this game better be f'in spectacular if they expect it to replace GT for people like me.
It sounds so cool that I have to wonder if this will be as cheesy as a NFS game.
Letting us change fuel and spark maps? How are they going to model that, especially with the "non-standard" engines? Are they going to have a list of what engines can fit in what chassis?
If I turn the boost pressure up to 35psi on an 8.5:1 engine with no intercooler, will the engine blow in the game, just like in real life? What about extreme spark advances? Cams? Wheel and rubber sizes, gear ratios, etc..? It seems like too much to me, which is why I'm thinking it will go the "MORE HP = YOU WIN" mentality of the typical arcade racer.
If it approaches realism, has better AI than GT4, real life tracks, and a bigger car list than GT4 then I'm throwing my PS2 away. I've always wanted to play GT with my own soundtrack. Oh yea, it's gotta have rally courses (including Pike's Peak), and the Escudo.
Well as long as you have a reason behind doing it.
I think I'll settle on the SR, seeing as how my Sentra is a 4-door, and I intend on it being an uber-sleeper in an area dominated by domestics, so I'll need all the low-end torque and displacement I can get my hands on.
Re:Small engine, fast cars but what about airplane
on
The Bugatti Veyron
·
· Score: 1
I had to butter my ass just to get into the passenger seat of the only one I've ever sat in.
Haha, I'm 6'2 and I fit in them just fine. Just don't get an overly harsh suspension or you'll have knots on the top of your head (Like me). I kinda like a tight fitting car though. I like to put my car on, not get inside of it. I'm also the type who doesn't mind the hassle of a racing harness in a daily driver; I like to drive my car, not have my car drive me, so YMMV.
Rotaries are amazing, but I will agree they aren't for your average driver who has a "Set it and forget it" mentality.
Ok, so I'm a bit off on my Nissan nomenclature..the Z32/Z31 are the same chassis ? the 90/91-96 models, right? Or is the Z31 the 86-ish to 90-ish one?
I hope you haven't gone the way of the vastly over-done Silvia conversion on your 240.
(I myself am debating on tossing an SR20 into my '91 Sentra beater when the GA finally craps out.)
Re:Small engine, fast cars but what about airplane
on
The Bugatti Veyron
·
· Score: 1
The RX-8 engine is called the RENESIS.
The TT RX-7s were no different reliability-wise as any other rotary engine. As you alluded to (and as someone else has pointed out) you just have to know how to take care of it. Granted the TT RX-7 is a PAIN to work on (vacumm hoses galore), but it's just as reliable as any other. Pain in the ass to fix != unreliable.
The thing to remember is that this is NOT YOUR NORMAL RECIPROCATING IC ENGINE!!;)
Also, I'd like to point out that the cost of a tear-down and rebuild (if you do it yourself) are cheaper than "normal" engines, and when something does go wrong, the results are usually a lot cheaper to fix as well.
I'd doubt the Skyline is being juiced. (They have super gas over there. I doubt it'd run more than 1000HP on ours [US] That block can hold a shit load of boost. ) I'd imagine that block will last a while, being a cast iron inline 6. Of course, how long an engine lasts depends a lot more on how it's being used as opposed to how much horsepower (A real tuner gets out, mind you, not some idiot with a 150 shot of NOS) they're making.
I also wanted to nitpick:
While the 240SX (the S13 and S14) body and chassis IS the Silvia, the similarities end there. The Silvia has the SR20DET, and the 240SX has a KA series. KA24E and KA24DE depending on year.
Only the Z32 had a V6 (VG series), all the older Z's have inlines.
That's not really the problem either..granted on a highway the problem is radio/aircraft..but if you're going to run from the cops you won't be on the highway long, if at all.
In the city or on nice mountain roads, having a radio is nice and all, but it doesn't mean that they can _find_ you. Let's see a Crown Vic hold turns like this thing does.;)
The two remaining American auto makers? Would that be Ford, and uh..Ford?;) (I'm guessing you mean Ford and GM)
Domestics have been playing catch-up since the 80's in every field except pure horsepower. Domestics for that past couple of decades have been shit. At least Chrysler got smart and just went to making Trucks/SUVs/Vipers and reselling Mitsubishis. Ford is the only domestic company worth it's salt in the technology game, mostly because of it's close ties to Europe, and experience in the WRC. GM is shit, and for too many reasons to go into here.
Honda makes shit automobiles too. You forgot Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, Volkswagen, Audi, BMW, etc..all who make great cars that plain shit on our domestics and Hondas. There's just too many other great great choices to ever pick a Honda or a domestic.
The best car makers either rally race, or endurance race their offerings. End. Of. Story.
Hondas are over-rated. I'd take a GM 3800 V-6 (good for 300,000+ miles) over a Honda engine any day.
HELL YES!
Now, comming from someone who HATES GM WITH A F'IN PASSION:
That old beast of a v6 was one durable engine. Mine ran like hell for 3 years (already had 180k+ logged on the odometer when I bought the car for $300) with hardly any attention paid to it..changed the oil maybe once or twice...overheated it like mad for a few MONTHS due to a radiator leak (finally killed it one day of course)...try that in your little B16A! The first time you drive more than 1 mile with a bad thermostat, bye bye head gasket! Head warped much? Haha.
I agree with both the parent and gp, older cars are much cheaper to maintain. The only thing I disagree on is that I think late 80's to early 90's cars are more practical and safer than old muscle cars. EFI is your friend. You could have the cleanest, slickest looking Charger R/T on the planet, and I'd still laugh at you sitting there wasting gasoline and rubber. (And then pass you on the highway in my late 80's turbo import that gets 28mpg)
Any 500bhp muscle car that's getting 25MPG didn't come from GM, Ford, or Mopar (or the 60's or 70's for that matter). Carb+V8 != 25MPG no matter how well you tune it; not daily driven, and not practically driven.
You can really (as in real-life driving scenarios) still get 25mpg out of a decent late 80's car, and still have your $150 tranny, $30 starter and your $5 headlights. (And your 500hp if you know what cars to build) Not to mention, waaaayyyy better stock brakes, and stock handling better than any muscle car you can name. Hell, Shelby GT500's have leave (sp) springs and drum brakes in the rear!!
Oh yea, 3-point seatbelts, crumple zones, and airbags are cool too; so is ABS. Have fun when you rear-end someone and the steel hood of that Chevelle SS comes flying through the windshield and cuts your head off.;)
I don't count either as drugs simply because people don't rob/kill/etc.. to get the money to buy them. I honestly couldn't care less what chemicals are in them; it's the social impact that I look at. People don't make a living smoking pot or drinking beer unlike meth and heroin addicts..know what I mean?
I believe those statistics..although I'm not sure if it's the purity/concentration of the drug that theyre getting, or the whole ritualistic atmosphere that surrounds drug use of that type that keeps them comming back. Probably a bit of both.
To put what I mean into different words..it's not so much being high that I miss when I don't have any weed, it's cleaning and breaking up the buds, packing my favourite bong (or making a new one!), filling the fucker with ice, and sitting down with a couple of my friends and chillen out that I miss the most..the whole ritual...if you can dig.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go pick up my pay check so I can go buy a carton of camel wide lights, a couple 40s of king cobra and a quarter.;)
I agree totally, needles bad. Sniffing/Injecting drugs bad. Smoking pot and drinking beer good. Everything else bad. BAD.
Although I tend to disagree on the addiction factor you bring up...most people who I know who are/were into the needle thing didn't start there, just "graduated" to it after already having a severe addiction...."bang for your buck" type of thing..pun intended. I've also noticed that most freebasers are on par addiction-wise as needle users..strictly talking about coke and ice here, I have yet to meet someone who claims to have freebased heroin. (Like I said, horrible waste of money)
no...actually, it's so the "grains" dont stick into any small imperfections in the line-making-surface, rendering them useless (unless you're the gum rubbing type.)
glass is the best for this of course...and mirrors are the most readily available, flat, table/lap sized piece of glass around..it has little if nothing to do with seeing every last bit of coke/ice/heroin..
besides, if you're that serious about wasting the shit you should be banging it anyway...snorting anything is a horrible, horrible waste of your money; any real drug addict will tell you this...
Slashdot Mirror
Since there is ample evidence to suggest Jesus was in fact the descendant of Solomon and David, and therefore he was true Royalty
This is true.
Assuming Jesus The Christ was indeed an earthly human being, which has yet to be substantially proven. (And even the Bible-sans-Gospels is sketchy on this) Not True by a long shot.
Yet you're unwilling to accept the death of Christ, which is one of the most heavily documented events in the history of the world.
Oh really? Where? Give me sources, because other than some book that may-or-may-not have been written around then, I, and many others, can't find any. I mean shit, it is one of the most documented events in history, right? Is that why there's still raging debate on the whole issue, and on the issue of weather or not the man actually existed? Where are all the Roman texts? The Jewish texts? There were plenty of very well known writers living in that area, at that time, and not one wrote about him, or his death. (Josephus does not count, most sane people admit that the reference is an interpolation.) I should narrow that down: dated texts from within 10 years of the "death" of Jesus, not including the Bible. Have fun.
Oh, and by the way, if you're a Christian, get the man's name right. It's Jesus The Christ, or The Christ Jesus. Christ is a TITLE not a NAME. (Meaning "Annointed One") You cannot simply refer to him as "Christ". It's like your sentence above saying "The death of doctor is one of the..."
We don't "misunderstand" Christianity. We understand it perfectly well...you on the other hand, can't even get the name of the person you worship right.
Damn the Mesh Hats! Damn the Girl's Jeans!
DAMN THE FASHIONCORE!!!
Sorry, I had to let that out after seeing that.
A citizen's arrest? You've got to be kidding.
How about "citizen's arresting" the person who vandalised the _tree_ in the first place?
I don't think they're talking about the signs put up by rangers and the like...they're talking about the rednecks who go nail "JESUS SAVES" signs to every frickin tree in the woods they can see. I tear them down as well. Watch as I laugh my ass off and walk away while you're putting me under "citizen's arrest". What a joke.
If a _real_ wrong were being done (like some kid spray painting gang signs on my fence), _real_ people just beat the shit out of the person. Try putting that kid under "citizen's arrest" and see how far that gets you. If you're not willing to administer the punishment yourself, then don't bother crying foul.
I haven't played PGR II, but the first one sucked, I'm sorry..it was just a pretty arcade game.
The funny part is that they're the ones who've proposed it!
I love that type of realism, which is why I love GT so much: it's almost the perfect racing sim in most respects. It's the perfect balance between realistic, and easy to play for the novice.
The articles I read a bit ago about this game say that it's supposed to be that realistic, (its even going to have body kits and bumpers, side skirts, etc...ugh!) but I think they're being far too ambitious. I also think that it might be based on the Project Gotham engine, and I hated the way that game drove. So far nothing beats GT on that. If I'm in a MR car, it handles much like a real one would. A FF car handles like it should, same for a FR, etc..
The article says that they've brought in engineers, physicists, and the like...so we can only hope..
But to kill off the GT franchise, they've got a lot of work to do. Some of the screen shots I've seen leave me very unimpressed with the cars, and I think they're putting too much emphasis on scenery..scenery is pointless in a racing sim. Who cares if you can render the gravel on the side of the track when I'm going to be passing it at 140+ mph ?
I don't know if GT4 is out here in the states either (GT4 and Halo2 are the only games on my "to buy" list and I'm in no hurry..) but I loved GT2, liked GT3, and from what I've read about GT4 I'll love it. They have my favourite car company finally, and brought back the used cars..which ruined GT3 IMO.
In other words: this game better be f'in spectacular if they expect it to replace GT for people like me.
They could tell the difference between a firestone and a yoko if they actually raced (autox)...damn riceboys.
It sounds so cool that I have to wonder if this will be as cheesy as a NFS game.
Letting us change fuel and spark maps? How are they going to model that, especially with the "non-standard" engines? Are they going to have a list of what engines can fit in what chassis?
If I turn the boost pressure up to 35psi on an 8.5:1 engine with no intercooler, will the engine blow in the game, just like in real life? What about extreme spark advances? Cams? Wheel and rubber sizes, gear ratios, etc..? It seems like too much to me, which is why I'm thinking it will go the "MORE HP = YOU WIN" mentality of the typical arcade racer.
If it approaches realism, has better AI than GT4, real life tracks, and a bigger car list than GT4 then I'm throwing my PS2 away. I've always wanted to play GT with my own soundtrack. Oh yea, it's gotta have rally courses (including Pike's Peak), and the Escudo.
No sarcasm at all.
.40
I happen to own a P229 as well, until I trade it off for a USP
Best. f'in. handguns. ever.
And, IMO, one of the best sigs-as-in-signiture ever.
My Sig here?? You can have my P229 when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
That is awesome.
At least he has a reason to do a good job - you don't want a pissed off internet after you.
You'd think the same would apply to Microsoft..
Well as long as you have a reason behind doing it.
I think I'll settle on the SR, seeing as how my Sentra is a 4-door, and I intend on it being an uber-sleeper in an area dominated by domestics, so I'll need all the low-end torque and displacement I can get my hands on.
I had to butter my ass just to get into the passenger seat of the only one I've ever sat in.
Haha, I'm 6'2 and I fit in them just fine. Just don't get an overly harsh suspension or you'll have knots on the top of your head (Like me). I kinda like a tight fitting car though. I like to put my car on, not get inside of it. I'm also the type who doesn't mind the hassle of a racing harness in a daily driver; I like to drive my car, not have my car drive me, so YMMV.
Rotaries are amazing, but I will agree they aren't for your average driver who has a "Set it and forget it" mentality.
Ok, so I'm a bit off on my Nissan nomenclature..the Z32/Z31 are the same chassis ? the 90/91-96 models, right? Or is the Z31 the 86-ish to 90-ish one?
I hope you haven't gone the way of the vastly over-done Silvia conversion on your 240.
(I myself am debating on tossing an SR20 into my '91 Sentra beater when the GA finally craps out.)
The RX-8 engine is called the RENESIS.
;)
The TT RX-7s were no different reliability-wise as any other rotary engine. As you alluded to (and as someone else has pointed out) you just have to know how to take care of it. Granted the TT RX-7 is a PAIN to work on (vacumm hoses galore), but it's just as reliable as any other. Pain in the ass to fix != unreliable.
The thing to remember is that this is NOT YOUR NORMAL RECIPROCATING IC ENGINE!!
Also, I'd like to point out that the cost of a tear-down and rebuild (if you do it yourself) are cheaper than "normal" engines, and when something does go wrong, the results are usually a lot cheaper to fix as well.
I'd doubt the Skyline is being juiced. (They have super gas over there. I doubt it'd run more than 1000HP on ours [US] That block can hold a shit load of boost. ) I'd imagine that block will last a while, being a cast iron inline 6. Of course, how long an engine lasts depends a lot more on how it's being used as opposed to how much horsepower (A real tuner gets out, mind you, not some idiot with a 150 shot of NOS) they're making.
I also wanted to nitpick:
While the 240SX (the S13 and S14) body and chassis IS the Silvia, the similarities end there. The Silvia has the SR20DET, and the 240SX has a KA series. KA24E and KA24DE depending on year.
Only the Z32 had a V6 (VG series), all the older Z's have inlines.
That's not really the problem either..granted on a highway the problem is radio/aircraft..but if you're going to run from the cops you won't be on the highway long, if at all.
;)
In the city or on nice mountain roads, having a radio is nice and all, but it doesn't mean that they can _find_ you. Let's see a Crown Vic hold turns like this thing does.
I had never even seen the Milky Way until I moved out here, much less the Northern Lights...so I'll probably end up going to Alaska as well. ;)
I'm in the midwest also, it was hailing a little bit ago.
The thing that pisses me off is that I live about 30 miles from the nearest _town_ so I would have had an awesome show. Pity.
Pffft. Isuzu rules the light truck world. Volvo for all your heavy lifting.
The two remaining American auto makers? Would that be Ford, and uh..Ford? ;) (I'm guessing you mean Ford and GM)
Domestics have been playing catch-up since the 80's in every field except pure horsepower. Domestics for that past couple of decades have been shit. At least Chrysler got smart and just went to making Trucks/SUVs/Vipers and reselling Mitsubishis. Ford is the only domestic company worth it's salt in the technology game, mostly because of it's close ties to Europe, and experience in the WRC. GM is shit, and for too many reasons to go into here.
Honda makes shit automobiles too. You forgot Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, Volkswagen, Audi, BMW, etc..all who make great cars that plain shit on our domestics and Hondas. There's just too many other great great choices to ever pick a Honda or a domestic.
The best car makers either rally race, or endurance race their offerings. End. Of. Story.
Hondas are over-rated. I'd take a GM 3800 V-6 (good for 300,000+ miles) over a Honda engine any day.
HELL YES!
Now, comming from someone who HATES GM WITH A F'IN PASSION:
That old beast of a v6 was one durable engine. Mine ran like hell for 3 years (already had 180k+ logged on the odometer when I bought the car for $300) with hardly any attention paid to it..changed the oil maybe once or twice...overheated it like mad for a few MONTHS due to a radiator leak (finally killed it one day of course)...try that in your little B16A! The first time you drive more than 1 mile with a bad thermostat, bye bye head gasket! Head warped much? Haha.
I agree with both the parent and gp, older cars are much cheaper to maintain. The only thing I disagree on is that I think late 80's to early 90's cars are more practical and safer than old muscle cars. EFI is your friend. You could have the cleanest, slickest looking Charger R/T on the planet, and I'd still laugh at you sitting there wasting gasoline and rubber. (And then pass you on the highway in my late 80's turbo import that gets 28mpg)
;)
Any 500bhp muscle car that's getting 25MPG didn't come from GM, Ford, or Mopar (or the 60's or 70's for that matter). Carb+V8 != 25MPG no matter how well you tune it; not daily driven, and not practically driven.
You can really (as in real-life driving scenarios) still get 25mpg out of a decent late 80's car, and still have your $150 tranny, $30 starter and your $5 headlights. (And your 500hp if you know what cars to build) Not to mention, waaaayyyy better stock brakes, and stock handling better than any muscle car you can name. Hell, Shelby GT500's have leave (sp) springs and drum brakes in the rear!!
Oh yea, 3-point seatbelts, crumple zones, and airbags are cool too; so is ABS. Have fun when you rear-end someone and the steel hood of that Chevelle SS comes flying through the windshield and cuts your head off.
I don't count either as drugs simply because people don't rob/kill/etc.. to get the money to buy them. I honestly couldn't care less what chemicals are in them; it's the social impact that I look at. People don't make a living smoking pot or drinking beer unlike meth and heroin addicts..know what I mean?
;)
I believe those statistics..although I'm not sure if it's the purity/concentration of the drug that theyre getting, or the whole ritualistic atmosphere that surrounds drug use of that type that keeps them comming back. Probably a bit of both.
To put what I mean into different words..it's not so much being high that I miss when I don't have any weed, it's cleaning and breaking up the buds, packing my favourite bong (or making a new one!), filling the fucker with ice, and sitting down with a couple of my friends and chillen out that I miss the most..the whole ritual...if you can dig.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go pick up my pay check so I can go buy a carton of camel wide lights, a couple 40s of king cobra and a quarter.
(I got my priorities, haha.)
You get the cookie.
I agree totally, needles bad. Sniffing/Injecting drugs bad. Smoking pot and drinking beer good. Everything else bad. BAD.
Although I tend to disagree on the addiction factor you bring up...most people who I know who are/were into the needle thing didn't start there, just "graduated" to it after already having a severe addiction...."bang for your buck" type of thing..pun intended. I've also noticed that most freebasers are on par addiction-wise as needle users..strictly talking about coke and ice here, I have yet to meet someone who claims to have freebased heroin. (Like I said, horrible waste of money)
But, like I said before: BAD BAD BAD.
BAD.
no...actually, it's so the "grains" dont stick into any small imperfections in the line-making-surface, rendering them useless (unless you're the gum rubbing type.)
glass is the best for this of course...and mirrors are the most readily available, flat, table/lap sized piece of glass around..it has little if nothing to do with seeing every last bit of coke/ice/heroin..
besides, if you're that serious about wasting the shit you should be banging it anyway...snorting anything is a horrible, horrible waste of your money; any real drug addict will tell you this...