It's like a blindfolded man sitting in broad daylight saying "I love the dark" and swatting anyone who tries to take the damned thing off.
by Shadow Creator January 01, 2008
A real time strategy game spanning the ages. The first one, at its release time, was quite good, albeit a bit cheesy.
The second release was horrible, and should not be touched with a ten foot pole. The fun completely disappeared and the units performed circa 1995 AI
The third installment is set for release in November of this year and already looks like shit judging based on the 'monsters' to be included as futuristic units and the technical problems in the beta.
The second release was horrible, and should not be touched with a ten foot pole. The fun completely disappeared and the units performed circa 1995 AI
The third installment is set for release in November of this year and already looks like shit judging based on the 'monsters' to be included as futuristic units and the technical problems in the beta.
Empire Earth had potential but was flopped. The developers were somewhat lazy with the first but it was much more forgivable because it was released in 2000.
by Shadow Creator September 08, 2007
1. Usually, a self claimed internet residing 'know it all' who claims to have the knowledge to flop what he/she perceives as a 'conspiracy theory' on its head. This is often a means for showing off. The complete opposite of a hardcore conspiracy theorist, debunkers usually have little common sense, little or no ability to connect the dots, no respect for common sense and call everything that that is outside their narrow a conspiracy theory. Since they profess to rely on hard evidence so much, this often seeps out of the domain of 'hard evidence', and they begin to fabricate so called 'truths' based primarily on jumping to conclusions and ad hominem attacks. Their favorite tactic is to try to 'get something out of the way' by attempting to embarrass their opponent and call it a done deal.
2. The other type of debunker consists of those who are anti-establishment and attempt to expose mainstream fraud and nonsense for what it is using logic, anecdotal evidence, and supplemental facts and figures. They are commonly insulted with the term 'conspiracy theorist' by those who wish to tarnish their reputations. Although still fallible, anti-establishment 'debunkers' commonly have less of an emotional stake in their arguments, as they have seen the light far more than their naive counterparts. Some do, however, take this too far and become truly raving lunatics.
2. The other type of debunker consists of those who are anti-establishment and attempt to expose mainstream fraud and nonsense for what it is using logic, anecdotal evidence, and supplemental facts and figures. They are commonly insulted with the term 'conspiracy theorist' by those who wish to tarnish their reputations. Although still fallible, anti-establishment 'debunkers' commonly have less of an emotional stake in their arguments, as they have seen the light far more than their naive counterparts. Some do, however, take this too far and become truly raving lunatics.
As Joseph explained why psychiatry is not hard science, the debunker yelled "STOP WITH THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUT BIG PHARMA". However, it's not a conspiracy theory that most funding for psychiatric studies comes from big pharma, that they fund the ads in medical journals profusely, that they conduct their own studies on the drugs they push, that they have a much larger budget (and therefore much larger influence) than the FDA, that they fund APA conventions, and that it is not hard to skew data if you have so much power and are working in a poorly understood area.
by Shadow Creator November 22, 2007
Usually, some poor excuse for a sex based relationship, though this is disguised in supposed 'love'. No, I'm not bitter, I can just observe that 95%+ of 'relationships' are total horseshit.
If you don't use your brain and understand your partner, don't expect any more (or to be any more) than your average 'girlfriend'.
by Shadow Creator December 30, 2007
It's like jaywalking, an offense that virtually everyone commits. There difference between the two is that speed laws are actually enforced (though quite selectively), usually to meet quotas.
Oh noes you were speeding 90 mph in the middle of the night on the interstate with no other cars within a mile what a danger to other citizens
by Shadow Creator December 26, 2007
The opposite of brainfreeze, this happens when you eat something very spicy (it works mostly with that hot Chinese mustard in restaurants) and it sends a burning sensation up your nose and into your skull. This happens even more frequently when you eat more of it while the feeling is in your nose...
Usually dissipates in a few seconds
Usually dissipates in a few seconds
by Shadow Creator August 20, 2008
A profession that is seemingly obsessed with enforcing the status quo. Genuine emotional understanding, empathy, and deep interactions have been replaced by some supposedly 'objective science'; a mere attempt to ignore the talent that some have with relating to others and medicalize emotions. Whether a person has a 'disorder' or 'disease' is not determined by whether someone has a visible ailment that has a specific biological cause, but by a system of observed behaviors that can wildly vary from psychiatrist to psychiatrist.
Many people trust the field of psychiatry simply because it involves 'doctors'. People in modern society have been taught to believe anything that the man in the white lab coat says, regardless of whether he or she is actually a doctor.
Psychiatry is also involved in 'prescribing' huge quantities of often dangerous drugs; though for some they do blunt or alleviate symptoms (about as good as alcohol), many experience 'positive effects' only in the vein of placebo, or experience only negative effects. This, however, does not mean that the drugs actually CURE anything. Psychiatric drugs are supposed to work by 'building up in your bloodstream', which is a way to convince 'patients' that they are receiving legitimate treatment, and is nothing short of a complete lie. Most of this happens because of pharmaceutical company involvement. Most 'research' is horribly skewed to promote the companies' drugs, as the variables are EXTREMELY subjective, i.e. a 'rating' scale for 'depression'.
All in all, most psychiatrists are not 'evil', just controlled by a few money obsessed individuals who would rather enforce the status quo; hence blind leading the blind. Some psychiatrists do desire to change the field, but have a hard time getting through the system if they don't shut up and try to think for themselves. Many 'professionals' in the field are arrogant because they have been taught to believe that they can understand others well by essentially wasting time learning utter nonsense in 'university'. There has never been proof of mental disorders originating from 'biochemical factors' or any 'genetic chemical imbalance', but psychiatry dangerously takes the technical reality that biochemical/genetic factors are involved in everything in our lives and takes the huge logical leap to the idea that we end up miserable BECAUSE something goes 'wrong' in the brain. The reality is the opposite. The brain adjusts to negative circumstances just as it does to positive, and a change of circumstances coupled with emotional healing will always be more effective than any kind of psychiatry/placebo effect. People just don't have the patience, and those at the top are not willing to admit that the cause of all this suffering is a poor status quo combined with rigid enforcement of such 'norms', and materialism gone rampant.
Critics of psychiatry are sometimes intelligent, but sometimes include idiots like Tom Cruise. Avoid them at all costs. Unfortunately, people like him have given anti-psychiatry a bad name, even if his basic premise may have some merit.
Many people trust the field of psychiatry simply because it involves 'doctors'. People in modern society have been taught to believe anything that the man in the white lab coat says, regardless of whether he or she is actually a doctor.
Psychiatry is also involved in 'prescribing' huge quantities of often dangerous drugs; though for some they do blunt or alleviate symptoms (about as good as alcohol), many experience 'positive effects' only in the vein of placebo, or experience only negative effects. This, however, does not mean that the drugs actually CURE anything. Psychiatric drugs are supposed to work by 'building up in your bloodstream', which is a way to convince 'patients' that they are receiving legitimate treatment, and is nothing short of a complete lie. Most of this happens because of pharmaceutical company involvement. Most 'research' is horribly skewed to promote the companies' drugs, as the variables are EXTREMELY subjective, i.e. a 'rating' scale for 'depression'.
All in all, most psychiatrists are not 'evil', just controlled by a few money obsessed individuals who would rather enforce the status quo; hence blind leading the blind. Some psychiatrists do desire to change the field, but have a hard time getting through the system if they don't shut up and try to think for themselves. Many 'professionals' in the field are arrogant because they have been taught to believe that they can understand others well by essentially wasting time learning utter nonsense in 'university'. There has never been proof of mental disorders originating from 'biochemical factors' or any 'genetic chemical imbalance', but psychiatry dangerously takes the technical reality that biochemical/genetic factors are involved in everything in our lives and takes the huge logical leap to the idea that we end up miserable BECAUSE something goes 'wrong' in the brain. The reality is the opposite. The brain adjusts to negative circumstances just as it does to positive, and a change of circumstances coupled with emotional healing will always be more effective than any kind of psychiatry/placebo effect. People just don't have the patience, and those at the top are not willing to admit that the cause of all this suffering is a poor status quo combined with rigid enforcement of such 'norms', and materialism gone rampant.
Critics of psychiatry are sometimes intelligent, but sometimes include idiots like Tom Cruise. Avoid them at all costs. Unfortunately, people like him have given anti-psychiatry a bad name, even if his basic premise may have some merit.
Indeed, I HAVE had a 'major mental disorder', and the 'medications' me on did nothing but mess my life up worse. With a change of attitude (which demonstrates the reality that a person in extreme distress can change if they are given even a bit of hope), I pulled myself out of extreme, chronic depression that most psychiatrists would have insisted was a 'chemical imbalance'. Healing from emotional stress is a long and arduous process which requires relation and collaboration with emotionally intelligent and wise individuals, not popping pills. Psychiatry is little more than an attempt to make money which exploits others' arrogance.
by Shadow Creator August 31, 2007