Avatar of Alkeni Synair
  • Last Seen: 8 yrs ago
  • Old Guild Username: Alkeni Synair
  • Joined: 11 yrs ago
  • Posts: 137 (0.03 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Alkeni Synair 11 yrs ago

Status

Recent Statuses

8 yrs ago
Current Being Sick - 0/10 would not recommend.
7 likes
8 yrs ago
To never die and conquer all - that is winning.
1 like
8 yrs ago
I am back. Word to the wise, never buy an HP Chromebook. It never ends well.
8 yrs ago
I have a new computer and am dealing with some RL related stuff with it (transfering important files, etc), so I will probably not be able to get any roleplaying done this weekend.
8 yrs ago
Being wrong Isn't a Democracy!

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

Okay, that wasn't supposed to be happen. Damn the quoting system sucks on the new forum.

Ikina Vear

Age: 23
Gender: Female
Race: Tiefling - Tieflings are human-based planetouched, native outsiders that are infused with the touch of the fiendish planes, most often through descent from fiends — demons, devils, evil deities, and others who have bred with humans.

Job/Skills: While holding a minor knowledge in blacksmithing, enough to make normal repairs to weapons and armors, her true knowledge base has always been combat - despite the peaceful nature of the town. She easily picked her bow up as a known hunter in the small town and often spent most of her spare time practicing various martial styles that she had 'seemed' to pick up from the imagination of her own mind. Besides this, she knows basic survival knowledge and can survive - in theory - indefinitely in the wild without the need for a market, farms, or artificial shelter.

Magic: While unknown to herself and others, her linage mixed with elvish blood has given her a deep, subtle, and powerful magic aura. Though untrained and unfocused right now, it grants her unusually high reflexes even for a seasoned warrior and keen awareness in reading body language when it comes to physical harm, having made her one of the best hunters in Penderghast. The limits or potential of actually honing this magic into it's more powerful forms is also unknown.

Personality: Despite her dark heritage she seems to hold a surprisingly high moral center, though she does tend to slip from time to time, giving into a more depressed and cold attitude. She is also a very attentive individual and when she finds a task worth doing or feels something must be done, she is both focused and determined to see the task done. On more causal matters, she tends to be laid back and carefree, giving to a witty sarcastic remark in an attempt to bring some humor. Behind her outer shell though, she is a true hopeless romantic, but tends to be hesitant about letting certain people in.


Better.
PM sent.
Okay.
-Bump-
Magic Magnum said
People are entitled to post their own opinion, even if others have stated it.If anything it helps highlight it's not just one person with said mindset but multiple people.

Exactly. While having the most people on your side may not be proof that you are 'right', it is helpful to success in an argument, and multiple people arguing the same position can in fact establish their collective proposition better, especially if they are aware of each other and work together explicitly or implicitly.
So Boerd said
The burden of proof is on whomever is making the statement. I can say green swans exist. You cannot prove they don't. Therefore you can only say you don't know. By making the assertion that they don't, the burden is on you to prove it. Green swans exist is an verifiable, unfalsifiable statement. The opposite is unverifiable and falsifiable. Making a definitive statement which is unverifiable is silly, don't you think?The burden is on the atheist and the theist both. It is not on the agnostic.


That's nonsense on like- fifteen different levels.

I was not putting the burden of proof on the agnostic. The fence-sitters are not party to the debate except when they try to pin the blame on both sides because they don't feel like standing up and being counted. The burden of proof lies on the theist, because they are the one making the claim.
A Cursed Lineage - the Last of House Calvian added to the list in the first post.
Julian smirked. "That's good. If everyone is in the main chapel, it will make getting where we need to get easier. What's the relic they have here, and how much are they charging to get in to see it?" Just about every temple, even the smallest one in the most backwater village had some kind of relic. Some were even genuine artifacts of holy power, most of the rest being genuinely associated with the saints and heroes they claimed to be (even if they lacked any powers beyond that which prayer and belief could bring). And of course, the frauds, though the Church tried their best to keep those out of the temples as much as they could.

Julian figured they could go as pilgrims a short time before one of the masses, get in to see the relic, and then hide out until mass got everyone into the chapel. They might have to worry about the stray guard or custodian, but a hell of a lot less people than if they went at another time. Money to get into the relic, unless they were charging an obsecene price, wouldn't be that hard for him to front as well.
Because I happen to enjoy the cut and thrust of reasonable, reasoned debate/argument/whatever you want to call it. I don't care if I convince the other person, I care if I make a good showing in support of my proposition - its also good practice for meaningful debates/arguments/etc in the real world, rather than these ones we have here online.
Its nice and easy to sit there and say that because there is no way to know either way it is impossible to make a definitive statement about the existence of god. Except for the fact that that is nonsense. If I say that I have a baseball in my left hand right now, there is no way anyone can tell, because there is no one in this room I'm in right now. You have no way of knowing. Granted. But you are under no obligation to believe that I have baseball in my left hand, nor act as though such is the case, unless I provide proof. I am the one making the claim. Therefore, the burden of proof is on me, and effectively, in the minds of everyone else (or at least, people who like proof), I'm not holding a baseball in my left hand.

The 'God' and 'Not-God' propositions are not two sides of the same coin, propositions that can be equally proven. First of all, it is impossible to prove a negative. You cannot prove that something does not exist, because it would have left no indication of its existence (since it didn't exist). Things that do not exist cannot provide data. Proving a negative is impossible. All that can be done in support of the negative proposition is to disproven given evidence that is in support of the positive proposition. The burden of proof is not on the atheist. The burden of proof is on the theist, the person making the claim. If the positive claim (God exists) has insufficient evidence to establish it, then we can actually say that God doesn't exist - because there is yet no proof for his existence.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet