Jess♥

I can't believe tv nihon made such a farce of episode 16. watching up to about halfway and seeing they don't translate omochi and soe other things i ws a little confused but then we get to what must have been the funniest thing ever. and they just decided not to translate any of it. the cards are shouting out what must be catch phrases from den-o, and not a single bit is translated. WTF is up with that ?!!? if this goes on, I'm just not gonna watch TVN's releases. if they are gonna leave things un translated like that, whats the freaking point??

oh wow, that's so wierd!! i was gonna say gackt, but then looking at the face, it's an amalgamation of kuuga and kiva.

another DLC? wow, we are getting spoiled! and with a sequel on it's way as well!

were you playing it on ultra hard?? I really do not consider fallout 3 to be a difficult game.

i think e can compare some aspects with any of them, but just to keep in with the spirit of what abarekiller is saying .. tsukasa is like faiz in hte following way -

sometimes we only realise teh things we love when it is changed or gone. I love this advert althoughy saying that, this is teh one i grew more accustomed to, i just really like the other one

yeah, just watch the whole series' of star trek from TOS to ENT and we will somply say that Q set everything back to normal. by some miracle everything is exactly the same as it was. you could swear you had seen it before. that Q is magnificent.

what does that actually class as though? isn't it a bit of a grey area? you kill the terrible mutants, but at the same time, don't you kill all ghouls and creatures like fawkes? I personally felt that the FEV virus constituted genocide. so I didn't add it in.

wow, what a diverse view. well you have many many people who will standby evolution as a firm belief. I was just noting that such a fantastic creature would have them really struggling. as for what you said about the complexities.. well I can't say i understand it all. perhaps i can read more about what you wrote when i have more of an opportuity.

if you haven't already, you should watch an animated film called 'flight of dragons'. it's based on a book of the same name that explores those very themes. but the film is much more fun! if such a thing existed, I think that would have to disprove evolution theory. that kind of wild setup just couldn't happen by accident.

it's obvious to me on the very first look, that is a fantasy, what-if scenario. this is not based on any real creature. it says quite clearly "fantasy made real" . it doesn't say, fatasy has turned out to be reality, they said MADE real. in other words, they made it. but if you want discussion on wether or not dragons could be real... it depends. I say yes. because i believe that many things are possible outside humanity's little 'bubble' of 'accepted fact'. if you want to ask, within the chronicles of accepted genetics and physics etc, no a dragon is not really a likely outcome of any evolutionary chain. I believe a dragon is real because it exists inside the mind of mankind. think of the film, the neverewnding story. mans imagination ives rise to a real world that is in a sort of other dimension. anything you can dream up in your mind, actually exists. you just can't physically go there with this body. that's my view on it. there are other concepts and views. one way to view it is that dragons are spirits of the mountains. they guard the treasure (naturally occuring minerals) under the mountain and are the cause of cave-ins etc. another way to view it is that dragons are actually silicon based lifeforms living within the magma inside the earth.

what is that site based on? and how accurate do you think it can truly be? ex-astris-scientia has it at 295m. which, when looking at the windows, makes perfect sense.

this is true, if you are looking at the engineering compared to just the neck. I did consider it. one part of me is saying I should give teh guys a break and try and appreciate what they did, another part of me is saying, why the hell should i make excuses for them? well even when i looked at that proportion and thought that part looked the same, I still thought it looked wrong. it felt wrong. i looked at the balance of the enterprise as i feel it should be. it looks like a graceful swan in some ways. but more important, it looks like it is leaning forwards. this is due to hte balance being thrown forwards, the engineering is mostly outside the dish. but with the new one, the engineering is mostly underneath the dish. it doesn't look like it leaning. this is why it feels wrong to me. I felt like the enterprise always looked graceful, but now it doesn't look gracefrul. actually i have thought about the artistic merits of this design and i disagree with it because it does something that reall irks me. something that has really bothered me about this new star trek. sex. they seem to focus on it in a way star trek never has. it's hard to explain.. but when i looked at it, this new enteprise i realised what the designer had done. the designer had changed teh engineering section into the enterprises 'gear'. it's supposed to be the body, but now it is it's 'tackle'. it takes away the innocense and purity of star trek for me. i am not a very sex focused individual, I keep that part of me to places and times where it is appropriate, so that is something i love about the star trek universe. it has always been appropriate. but this new one is not appropriate in that sense.

are you absolutely sure? come on, you should know i don't say many things without first investigating appropriately. i didn't post this earlier because i thought it unnecessary and perhaps overkill. but now i think it is appropriate.

we could measure the suns temperature from outside the atmosphere, but the problem now is that we wouldn't have any data from the past. i guess we could see a steady increase if one existed. but it wouldn't tell us if that was unusual. (the earth may naturally drift closer and then further away from the sun, or the sun might have steady raise and then decrease in temperature.) one thing i would point out is resolution. if you look at the earth from space, you see a load of green and brown and you see a steady gradation as forest turns to desert. if you are on the ground on the other hand, you will see various clumps of bushes and grass, and various patches of barren land. it's not a steady gradation. this illustrates if you see something from a low resolution, it smooths everything out. there may have been many many peaks in the past, but due to the way scientists measure data, they can't see that much detail and so they only see a blurred version. we all should know that the earth was much hotter when the dinosaurs were alive.

I'm a little glad.... I think, at least the new enterprise is better designed than tha enterprise E. I don't like that thing, too flat. looks like a turkey with no neck.

maybe that's why they removed the number suffix?

no. there is no evidence that 'says' such a thing. be very careful not to mislead or be misled. the evidence allows a suggestion that the raise in global temperatures may be exacurbated by the activity of mankind in the last hundred years or so. however it is evidence of a recent abnormal peak in temperature. it is people that say it is due to exhaust fumes etc. people. not evidence.

but you get the choice. unless they change it in the continuation and it doesn't give you a choice.

what strikes me as odd is the existence of two issues. on one hand you have global warming, the earth having more heat energy in the atmosphere than before, and on hte other hand, there is teh 'energy crisis' that people are predicting with oil being finite, why is it that the two are not linked? we are running out of energy sources, yet more energy is being retained in the atmosphere. we need some way of extracting ambient heat energy from the atmosphere. it would certainly help on hot days, making our houses cooler and it would also give us extra energy to use.

the thing is, they have showed studies and it has shown that global temperature has peaked in hte last century or so. the amount of 'peak-ing' is disproportionate to the amount of any heat peaks in the past as evidenced by levels of oxygen in certain protozoa or something like that, it's some evience they were using anyhow. they have looked at multiple sources of evidences and it showed a substantial increase in global temperatures since the industrial age. this is what i believe to be circumstantial evidence and also incomplete. now, looking at this evidence as it stands, it is pretty easy to draw teh conclusion that the industrial age is responsible, but there is no direct evidence that humanity and our machines are responsible for a global warming that is likely to continue and cause environmental damage. in fact, there has been many controversy over this and there have been independant studies that contradict the study that was performed by the government agencies.

the venture class is called scout ship in canon. it's what was used by data in insurrection. from what i remember, it was very similar to a shuttle.

there is a website called ex-astris-scientia that has a listing of all canon star trek ships. just took a look, and apparently there is a federation fighter, but it has not appeared in any movie or episode apart from the modified one used by the maquis. http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/fedshuttles2.htm it's called a peregrine class, but i'm not too sure about this as it is actually referred to as a courier ship in hte only mention of it in the DS9 episode.

oh, am I in error? I would not have said starfleet had fighter type vessels, since i thought they called all small vessels shuttles. but if they actually specifically refer to them as fighters, i stand corrected, my memory of those series is a little fuzzy.

you could call it a tactical attack vessel. I think this is what it was referred to as. designed to fight the borg. also, the enterprise E was likely designed more as a war ship, you can tell by the subdued lighting of the ship. it has exactly the same sort of feel as the alternate enterprise in one of the mirror universe episodes. usually, the placement of phasers on the starships is sufficient to fend off any vessel. the fighting in star trek universe is more determined by power levels, how strong your shields are etc. also, since in star trek, their mission is primarily one of peace and exploration, they are not generally at war, so they don't really use war 'fighter' type ships.