PGS Windows 10 gaming handheld - GPD WIN competitor


@FlapJack, I don't think there are any ideas I hate. We are still apes, regardless of how smart we fancy ourselves to be.

As I said, I don't feel like debating a quote of someone that was intended to be humorous. You might want to work on your attention to detail and reading comprehension. The second paragraph was in response to your "less violence" post, which I quoted in my post.



"This statement is false."
 
You're okay, rygD. I kind of care what you think. You can tell me that you're an ape and I wouldn't bat an eye. Oh wait. At some point you will figure things out and stop needlessly arguing the minutia of posts that I have left. Good luck on that. Either way, you're harmless.



Who likes "new" PGS lies/news? It's not vaporware if you believe that it will eventually be built.
 
eeek eeek? Weeeeee...? I have no idea. I just don't buy the accepted ape or faerie established scenario. I like what science tells us, but it's not always correct. Theory isn't fact.

Also, what sort of temporary mood/inclination doesn't mean that your genitals are suddenly transformed into what you're thinking. I can't personally and sexually identify as a helicopter and fly. Hey look, he or she isn't hurting anyone, maybe we should placate him and play the helicopter game. Oh, look at that beautiful helicopter!

Hey look! Levi is NOT an ape. He's a human being. God created US in his image and that means different things to different people. Man is unique among all God’s creations, having both a material body and an immaterial soul/spirit. We have many unique characteristics that are separate from "apes". Notice that we have apes living today, but somehow Humans came from them? Darwinism or Evolution isn't always correct and they take "leaps" of ignorance to solve their gaps in information.
 
Last edited:
No, but what the alternative? That we're created in God's image? Frankly, I just don't buy that sort of mumbo jumbo when there are biological studies, fossils and genetics to back things up. We are creatures of this earth like all other animalia just vastly more successful (although our success is probably dwarfed by that of the bacteria and maybe the fungi)
 
No, but what the alternative? That we're created in God's image? Frankly, I just don't buy that sort of mumbo jumbo when there are biological studies, fossils and genetics to back things up. We are creatures of this earth like all other animalia just vastly more successful (although our success is probably dwarfed by that of the bacteria and maybe the fungi)

Created in his image can mean that Having the “image” or “likeness” of God means, in the simplest terms, that we were made to resemble God. Adam did not resemble God in the sense of God’s having flesh and blood. Scripture says that “God is spirit” (John 4:24) and therefore exists without a body. However, Adam’s body did mirror the life of God insofar as it was created in perfect health and was not subject to death.

The image of God (Latin: imago dei) refers to the immaterial part of man. It sets man apart from the animal world, fits him for the dominion God intended him to have over the earth (Genesis 1:28), and enables him to commune with his Maker. It is a likeness mentally, morally, and socially.

Mentally, man was created as a rational, volitional agent. In other words, man can reason and man can choose. This is a reflection of God’s intellect and freedom. Anytime someone invents a machine, writes a book, paints a landscape, enjoys a symphony, calculates a sum, or names a pet, he or she is proclaiming the fact that we are made in God’s image.

There are plenty of answers to your question(s), but it's not just about a physical form. It is important though. We were walking erect at the very beginning. We didn't come from a primordial soup.
[doublepost=1488685868,1488685713][/doublepost]
We are creatures of this earth like all other animalia just vastly more successful (although our success is probably dwarfed by that of the bacteria and maybe the fungi)

Oh yes, I am always amazed at the advances of our Bacterial & Fungi Overlords.
[doublepost=1488686114][/doublepost]WTF happened to the GPS?
 
to put things back on topic, we could discuss whether PGS had intelligent design behind it or whether it was a product of unconstrained feature selection.

(also, maybe we should allow scientists to science freely, and people of religion to religion freely, and try to talk to each other about our own areas of expertise, and listen in on the others'... that is, with each keeping an open mind, and allowed their own thoughts... as it stands, we may have an impending ecopocalypse if no one listens to the scientists, regardless/in addition to the regular apocalypse, of course.)
 
Last edited:
Thank you, Ible. I will present the argument that the non-creators of the mythical PGS system were going for a quick "cash grab". There was a rudimentary demo unit posted, but it was a year ago and it was a demo board within a 3-d printed case without any game controls. I think that we all saw it.

One, and there are many great things, but ONE thing that I've learned from watching how these handhelds are being made IS to smell the bullshit. You can see what will work and what's insanely unattainable. We're seeing ridiculous aspirations being squeezed into a system.

That being said....I'm enjoying the GPD Win. It's real and it's a tiny powerhouse.
 
Quote anyone. Now Harlequin is singing... it sounds good. Who knows? I wasn't the one that said those words.
[doublepost=1488707406,1488707296][/doublepost]...Oh rygD. What did you do?
 
I think attributing to Malaclypse the Younger might be more accurate, although Principia Discordia was assembled from pieces of many sources/contributors, many not credited in the little fragments like that, so even that may be inaccurate. But that was sorta intentional, especially if you read the stuff near the end.
 
I saw a few posts about a Moderator censoring me. That person is Wally.
[doublepost=1488710421,1488710301][/doublepost]Wally wants to clean up the shenanigans, but he really doesn't have to. He's deleting information.
[doublepost=1488710531][/doublepost]What happens when Wally sees his own pouch?

I don't know.
 
I like what science tells us, but it's not always correct.

This is true - that's why the scientific method starts from the position that we don't know everything, and no scientist ever has said that we do. If they did, they're not a scientist and just as bad as cultists or religious fanatics. HOWEVER...

Theory isn't fact.

Yes, it is. This is where the most confusion arises from the disconnect between scientific terminology and terminology that the general public uses.

A scientific theory is as close to fact as you can get. It means that the argument is settled - whatever we're "theorising" about happened (or happens), no question. Examples are the Theory of Gravity or the Theory or Evolution. They're established as having happened - though the fine details may be murky. Evolution definitely happened, though some of the finer details are missing. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor - we know this due to the similarities in our DNA (genetic lineage is a real science, and can be used to trace personal history as well as that of the race in general), even though the fossil record is incomplete in places. Things fall down due to gravity, and we know how it works (that's established fact and has to be if we're ever going to put a man on the moon, which we did, or a space station up in orbit, which we also did) even if we don't actually fully understand what gravity actually is.

When you talk of a theory being vague, in scientific terms you're thinking of a hypothesis. That's where we see something, but can only guess at the reason why it should be. Once the research has been done, then if correct it becomes a scientific theory - and thus fact.

Note that even scientific theories can be overturned if new evidence surfaces - that is the whole point of the scientific process. But theories are very, very unlikely to be overturned since all available evidence overwhelmingly points to their conclusions and there simple isn't any further evidence to be found. And we don't have many established theories. But evolution certainly is one.

Fortunately for the human race at large, scientists don't care that you think that their theories are flawed or inaccurate based on your beliefs, and nobody is ever going to change a scientific theory using belief - so you can go ahead in your ignorance safely in the knowledge that it will change nothing, and scientific theories will continue to be used to make life better for everyone. Possibly at the expense of your beliefs, but that's Ok - you'll be dead in a few decades and will have changed nothing.
 
That was me just being me. I love to test anything. I like to post ASCII art or talk to people. I want to see what I'm up against.

I like you, Wally. Just stop with your shenanigans. We can talk.
[doublepost=1488711449,1488711379][/doublepost]
This is true - that's why the scientific method starts from the position that we don't know everything, and no scientist ever has said that we do. If they did, they're not a scientist and just as bad as cultists or religious fanatics. HOWEVER...



Yes, it is. This is where the most confusion arises from the disconnect between scientific terminology and terminology that the general public uses.

A scientific theory is as close to fact as you can get. It means that the argument is settled - whatever we're "theorising" about happened (or happens), no question. Examples are the Theory of Gravity or the Theory or Evolution. They're established as having happened - though the fine details may be murky. Evolution definitely happened, though some of the finer details are missing. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor - we know this due to the similarities in our DNA (genetic lineage is a real science, and can be used to trace personal history as well as that of the race in general), even though the fossil record is incomplete in places. Things fall down due to gravity, and we know how it works (that's established fact and has to be if we're ever going to put a man on the moon, which we did, or a space station up in orbit, which we also did) even if we don't actually fully understand what gravity actually is.

When you talk of a theory being vague, in scientific terms you're thinking of a hypothesis. That's where we see something, but can only guess at the reason why it should be. Once the research has been done, then if correct it becomes a scientific theory - and thus fact.

Note that even scientific theories can be overturned if new evidence surfaces - that is the whole point of the scientific process. But theories are very, very unlikely to be overturned since all available evidence overwhelmingly points to their conclusions and there simple isn't any further evidence to be found. And we don't have many established theories. But evolution certainly is one.

Fortunately for the human race at large, scientists don't care that you think that their theories are flawed or inaccurate based on your beliefs, and nobody is ever going to change a scientific theory using belief - so you can go ahead in your ignorance safely in the knowledge that it will change nothing, and scientific theories will continue to be used to make life better for everyone. Possibly at the expense of your beliefs, but that's Ok - you'll be dead in a few decades and will have changed nothing.


Nope. Theory is NOT fact. Also, a toilet rider is telling me that I'll be dead in a few decades. Ouch.
 
Back
Top