Hello,

I wrote a little Python script to check the time remaining on Carlilock . Note that if you have any penalties set for checking the remaining time it will trigger them.

It requires Python 2.7 and the mechanize library . You have to replace USER and PASS below with your username and password ...

Hello,

I'm trying to find some inspiration for femdom fiction I'm writing. I wanted to find historical examples of females dominating males. Examples of paid dominatrices exist, but I was looking for something non-consensual: details on the treatment of male Roman slaves by female slaveowners and ...

If I have time, I'll make a torrent with all the scripts I can find. Would anyone except me be willing to seed?

If you do end up buying it, please make sure they're not blood diamonds; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_diamond.

Well....I'm going to try and respond to things said to or about me......remember, I do not debate well at all.....so consider this more as, me posting my thoughts. *Smile*

***

Les wrote:
Remember the "World Cup"
You can't play "Soccer" either.

Uh huh! I can so play soccer, just not well. *lol ...

It is not empirically falsifiable

That's not what you said before. I agree that God is not empirically falsifiable - but so what? That seems a bit irrelevant.

What did you think I meant? That's always the definition I've heard.

The point I was making implicitly was that there is no certain ...

Whoa, hold on a second there...the existence of gods is an inherently unfalsifiable claim? If that's true, what are all these atheist philosophers of religion doing with their lives? I guess I should email them all and tell them they're wasting their time..they're going to be so disappointed :lol ...

Putting my two cents worth in here......I don't think that would be fair to the rest of us, if you did the debate in the chat room. The whole idea of the thread was to do it here, so that we all could watch.

*steps away from the microphone....and blushes*

Um well hmm... Alliteration and I ...

So, in the spirit of the pursuit of knowledge and debating skills, I've agreed to put in a few ideas for a debates. More will come as the trickle in, but for now, two propositions:

1. Moral agents ought to do what is in their self-interest (opposing)
2. Taxation qualifies as theft (defending)


I ...

I'm considering this, but don't want to waste too much time on it.

Possible topics would be existence of gods (I would argue against) and moral vegetarianism (I would argue for).

I think you're still missing the point, as you've just merely restated your position once again. Yes, we're arguing semantics. My argument is that "agnostic atheist/gnostic atheist" is unnecessarily long-winded, and makes discussions less clear. Basically what I'm saying is this: the stance that ...

Agnostic atheist means, "I do not believe there is a god, but I do not think that it is a provable claim"

Gnostic atheist means, "I do not believe there is a god, and I think it is a provable claim" (although how this would work is beyond me)

Just saying "agnostic" does not indicate whether one is ...

I don't think it makes it clearer, it just totally changes the meaning.

So yes you can be just agnostic for certain cases. However when it comes to religion, you either practice it, or you don't. There is no middle ground for you to dick around in and say I am not taking any sides at all. It just is not there. If you claim you are agnostic and practice religion, then ...

Well, I see the old atheist/agnostic debate has come up again...

I view terms like "atheist" and "agnostic" as labels depending on a person's view regarding not one, but two propositions. The simplest way to explain is with a chart:

http://i51.tinypic.com/14d3b7c.jpg


So, no, under this view ...