19 Oct 11
Originally posted by DasaBook Three: Eclipse
Simply defeated in every respect.
The plot revolves around a villain from the first book, who is stalking Bella. But this is just a background to the real plot, which is about Edward stalking Bella. The book focuses on the choice Bella must make between Jacob Black and Edward Cullen, two tall, good-looking, devoted men with cool supernatural abilities. This is exactly the kind of problem that normal women face every day.
Halfway through, Stephenie Meyer realizes that Jacob Black is far cooler than Edward and performs a quick character assassination by having him mouth-rape her. Bella punches him and runs away, but later discovers she loves him, which teaches us more lessons:
1) If a girl says she doesn't love you, just keep sexually assaulting her. Eventually she'll realize she likes it.
2) Leading two guys on for years because you 'love them both' is perfectly acceptable, as long as you feel really bad about it at some point.
All through this we learn more about more secondary characters, who like Alice and Jacob are far more interesting than either Edward or Bella. These include:
1) Edward's sister Rosalie, who performed a massacre that sounds like Kill Bill with vampires. Kill Bill! With vampires!!!
2) Edward's brother Jasper, who is old enough to have fought for the South, and used to take part in vampire turf wars. Vampire turf wars!!!!!!!!!
Unfortunately, we only get about five pages each on these guys. This gives us more space for Bella and Edward to stare into each others' eyes and quote from Wuthering Heights, in a good example of the old 'mask the inadequacies of your own work by quoting from someone who could actually write' method.
Also, Bella thinks about vampires some more.
"It was childish, but I liked the idea that his lips would be the last good thing I would feel. Even more embarrassingly, something I would never say aloud, I wanted his venom to poison my system."
Ladies and gentlemen, meet Bella Swan: eighteen and already looking forward to death, she is the perfect role model for your young teenage girl. After an unintentionally hilarious end battle Bella and Edward decide to get married, bringing us to the end of yet another 700 pages without any fuking.
Read more: Twilight | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/funny-36-twilight/#ixzz1bDwN3PAi
19 Oct 11
Originally posted by ZahlanziSounds like a wonderful book, especially the 700 pages without any fuking.
Book Three: Eclipse
The plot revolves around a villain from the first book, who is stalking Bella. But this is just a background to the real plot, which is about Edward stalking Bella. The book focuses on the choice Bella must make between Jacob Black and Edward Cullen, two tall, good-looking, devoted men with cool supernatural abilities. This is exactly ...[text shortened]... more: Twilight | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/funny-36-twilight/#ixzz1bDwN3PAi
I am sure Dasa would like that.
19 Oct 11
Originally posted by DasaI reading a book on Microbiology at the moment. There is no mention of athiesm and I fail to find anything in that book so far that is defeated or needs defeating.
The books are written by cheaters and ignorant pseudo science persons - who have cheated every young school child with pictures of apes and fossils - all fabricated from their atheistic mentalities.
"Forbidden Archeology" has put the last nail in the coffin of the evolution theory.
Atheism is simply defeated in every respect and is only accepted by fools and rascals.
This book is not against religon or the Vedas,it's just a book explaining how things work.
I dont see how you keep equating science with lying, cheating, being,being dishonest,etc.
You dont think that I can read that book, take some factual information from it and incorporate that into my world view? That doing that is somehow dishonest or wrong?
19 Oct 11
Originally posted by karoly aczelIt is only being dishonest when you try to use information from science
I reading a book on Microbiology at the moment. There is no mention of athiesm and I fail to find anything in that book so far that is defeated or needs defeating.
This book is not against religon or the Vedas,it's just a book explaining how things work.
I dont see how you keep equating science with lying, cheating, being,being dishonest,etc.
You ...[text shortened]... from it and incorporate that into my world view? That doing that is somehow dishonest or wrong?
to disprove the existence of God. Right Dasa?
19 Oct 11
Originally posted by Dasathe source of your constant confusion is clear.
Where does all the food come from and how and why?????
first, the 'why' of your question is completely unnecessary. there doesn't need to be a reason for food being here.
second is what you call 'food.' simply put, there is no 'food.' food is a label given by humans to anything that is edible by humans. what you call 'food' are either living entities or parts manufactured by living entities. we have to destroy these living entities for survival. the simple act of living is a constant act of murder as thousands of living things must die to keep you alive.
this is no proof of a god, at most it is proof of malice and madness. if you accept that a mad god is responsible for all this, you may have a point to make.
20 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by VoidSpiritDasa this is another example of what I mean. You are not going to be
the source of your constant confusion is clear.
first, the 'why' of your question is completely unnecessary. there doesn't need to be a reason for food being here.
second is what you call 'food.' simply put, there is no 'food.' food is a label given by humans to anything that is edible by humans. what you call 'food' are either living entities o ...[text shortened]... if you accept that a mad god is responsible for all this, you may have a point to make.
able to reason with guys like this no matter how good your arguments
might be. They have a much different way of looking at things. It is
called a different world view. They can not possibly see fruits and
vegetables as being supplied so we have food to eat. It has no purpose
to them not even to supply oxygen. It is all just a freak accident to them.
20 Oct 11
Originally posted by RJHindsThere is no point in arguing with you because you have no scope of how big the universe is... It is so big that there is probably life elsewhere in it.
Dasa this is another example of what I mean. You are not going to be
able to reason with guys like this no matter how good your arguments
might be. They have a much different way of looking at things. It is
called a different world view. They can not possibly see fruits and
vegetables as being supplied so we have food to eat. It has no purpose
to them not even to supply oxygen. It is all just a freak accident to them.
The probability of life in a universe this big is probably near 100% and if the universe is infinite it IS 100%
20 Oct 11
Originally posted by tomtom232I'm curious sir. Have you read any books by Zecharia Sitchin?
There is no point in arguing with you because you have no scope of how big the universe is... It is so big that there is probably life elsewhere in it.
The probability of life in a universe this big is probably near 100% and if the universe is infinite it IS 100%
20 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by sumydidSitchin claimed to get his information from ancient sumerian tablets. I dunno if these tablets even exist but I just cannot buy his story.
I'm curious sir. Have you read any books by Zecharia Sitchin?
If Sitchin were correct, then that means humans were evolved from apes at the hands of the Anunnaki, who inhabit Nibiru, which is on a 3,600 year elongated elliptical orbit around the sun, in order to mine gold for them. Sitchin also claimed these people are the Nephilim of the Bible. He also claimed all sumerian myths are based on this.
I think it incredibly more likely that he read some authentic sumerian tablets and then fabricated the rest, thinking it was the "only" explanation for the sumerian myths.
20 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by DasaI've got to agree now. It IS very simple. 4 billion years of life evolving from a puddle couldn't possibly make a cantaloupe. Cantaloupe is VERY delicious, and that's not just by chance my friend. Cantaloupe meat is a perfect orange. The meat is succulent and the perfect balance of sweet and tart. The stuff nearly melts in your mouth! It is perfect.
Food.
So simple and so eloquent - this is the evidence for the existence of God.
How did all the plentiful, healthy, tasty, nutritious, colourful, variegated, and life giving food come from.
Thousand of varieties of foods and spices.
All for mankind's pleasure.
The planet could have given man a few varieties of grey sloppy mush for food.......but ...[text shortened]... tell us that all this food evolved from the muddy puddle - which is absurd and still dishonest.
Could a cantaloupe just happen by chance? Did it just drive it self to the market for me to eat? No, it was put there first by GOD, and GOD put the produce guy at the market so when I got there I could purchase it.
Thank you GOD, thank YOU for cantaloupe.
P-
20 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by Phlabibitactually i think God meant for them to be free, just saying.
I've got to agree now. It IS very simple. 4 billion years of life evolving from a puddle couldn't possibly make a cantaloupe. Cantaloupe is VERY delicious, and that's not just by chance my friend. Cantaloupe meat is a perfect orange. The meat is succulent and the perfect balance of sweet and tart. The stuff nearly melts in your mouth! It is perfect. ...[text shortened]... et so when I got there I could purchase it.
Thank you GOD, thank YOU for cantaloupe.
P-
