Duxwing

This one is easy! My 12th grade International Relations teacher. He spends almost all class teaching about current internal affairs, mentioning international relations only when he wants to decry US foreign policy. He is a narcissist with paranoid delusions and extreme Marxist views that he spends almost all class teaching, feeding his fragile ego by defeating ridiculous conservative ideas ("conditioning") and implicitly therefrom concluding his system's truth. When anyone disagrees, he subtly insults and shames them into silence, insinuating that by disagreeing with him they agree not only with the "conditioned" position but are "conditioned" (i.e., insane) and believe every other "conditioned" idea. Many kids terrifyingly agree with him, restating his arguments when challenged. His arguments and passions so battered me that I quit his class. A few other kids noticed, too, and I hope to gather them and tell my Social Studies Department Head. -Duxwing

Imagine: an SLS full of Europa payload. My mouth waters... -Duxwing

Mirror's Edge was so fun that I in one marathon sitting almost finished the campaign. Thanks, aj! -Duxwing

I with my dad loved playing Jane's Fleet Command: It is so realistic, immersive, and challenging that the US Navy via it recruits its officers. -Duxwing

Mirror's Edge is exactly what I wanted. Thanks. -Duxwing

What if humans with technology upgrade their consciousnesses, eventually becoming synthetics? -Duxwing

I would like Mirror's Edge because after many years of playing first person shooters and my mother's complaints thereabout I realized that I was enjoying imagining killing people, which seems unsettling. I therefore slowly quit first person shooters, turning to such peaceful games as KSP. I nevertheless enjoy action and adventure's thrill and can remember many occasions when I, little, would feel my heart pound upon imagining fleeing fearsome foes: Mirror's edge allows a thrilling pacifist victory, all in beautiful Frostbite 2. -Duxwing

Dear Ferram, Kerbal Joint Reinforcement's Version Log system needs copy-editing. Would you like some? Below is an example of what I can do: --Full release of proper inertia tensors! Massive parts will feel more massive. --Full release of greater physics easing! Gravitational, centrifugal and coriolis forces will slowly be added to landed and pre-launch crafts, tremendously reducing the initial physics jerk --Launch clamps much more stiffly connect to more-massive-than-stock mod parts --Tightened default joint settings --Decoupler Stiffening Extension will extend to one more part if it is much less massive than the parent / child part --Added Majiir's CompatibilityChecker, which warns users of not using a compatible KSP version -Duxwing PS You cannot receive PMs because you have exceeded your PM limit.

I accept your conceding all points that you heretofor contested. -Duxwing

If China started building a military base on the moon, then other nations might declare war. If no nations declared war, then a game of nuclear whack-a-mole might ensue. -Duxwing

You're saying that real things can be pure properties, but any property cannot exist without something thing. If cannot say your point, then it exists not. My model suspends not reason: it states that the universe came into being, or specifically that time began. I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, and I am not militant, and it is what we're talking about. In your own words: "Of course it is unempirical. So what? I'm not saying Intelligent Design is a scientific theory, I'm saying it's a philosophical problem." You're dodging points. Without evidence you must take it as dogma if you are to prevent epistemological nihilism. So of course gravitational theories have fudge factors. You're not defining a relevant term and then trying to turn the argument around on me for not having already understood it. Part of defending your thesis is explaining it. No, nothing you've said proves that the universe simply came into being. Aha! So you are a solipsist. And if you cannot communicate your knowledge, then you have no point. You're dodging and ad-homming again: these fallacies happen to exist specifically because of informal discourse, wherein forms other than formal logic are permitted. You were arguing that I was "too scientistic" and therefore wrong--in Latin, ad-hominem. Now you're just lying. You were arguing that "Occam's Razor as a methodological procedure doesn't matter in the context here". Thus you contradict your previous argument: "As I said, in the current state of astrophysics and cosmology, the choice is between Dark Matter or geocentrism." -Duxwing

I custom-build each craft for each mission and test due to a quicksave-ban test my lifters scores of times. I also fly my entire mission in sandbox mode first, ensuring that all systems within safety margins function. No craft in my present career save has ever killed a Kerbal, and my lifters are stable and forgiving. -Duxwing

Potency is a property of something, making the pure form absurd. You're going to solipsism. From that same assumption follows the far more parsimonious hypothesis, "The universe, its own initial cause, came into being" Intelligent design and creationism are the same thing: when creationism went out of style, creationists renamed their philosophy intelligent design. So are you abandoning empiricism? Gravity is not fully understood. Now you're just arguing from authority. If you're not arguing that it's scientific, then it belongs not in this forum subsection, and if it's philosophical, then your present justification most parsimoniously proves that the universe simply came into being. Intelligent Design requires more than one assumption. Without evidence we have nothing but Occam's Razor whereby to make existence claims. If you want to further epistemeologically doubt, then consider the Munchausen Trilemma. The universe would simply come into being whether the designer exists or not because the designer would require supernatural means to create the universe because the universe all of reality, including the designer himself. Ad hominem. No true Scotsman and Moving the Goalposts. Non-sequitur: a geocentric universe could have Dark Matter. -Duxwing

I think that I misunderstood your initial point: do you believe that "pure potency" is not an absurd conclusion? Intelligent Design is discredited because its assumption that an intelligent designer exists is philosophically unsound because any intelligent designer is by definition supernatural and therefore incomprehensible. The assumptions necessary for ID are inherently faith-based because among them is the assumption of an intelligent designer, who by definition would be supernatural and therefore incomprehensible and therefore unknowable. And I agree that believing scientific theories requires faith in their assumptions, and many of these theories--e.g., Newton's Laws of Motion--have so long so very well predicted phenomena that I doubt that you would disagree with those theories. I agree. Many budding theories have fudge factors. What is your conclusion therefrom? If by "myth" you mean untestable hypothesis, then intelligent design is unempirical. If we for your argument's sake momentarily abandon empiricism, then we by Occam's Razor choose the simplest hypothesis, which is that the universe simply came into being: an intelligent designer is not necessary. Are you from our ignorance of Dark Matter concluding that the universe was intelligently designed? -Duxwing

If "replacing the cartesian metaphysical premises of modern science with thomism" causes absurd conclusions, then that replacement is absurd. Intelligent design is a discredted solution to the problem of the initial cause. The current solution is that what we know as the universe began about 13.7e9 years ago, and that if we later find that something earlier existed, then we'll think about it. Taking the ID side makes one a crackpot because dark matter is hypothetical matter that could explain observed galaxy structure whereas Intelligent design is myth. Furthermore, you're arguing from incredulity and planting a red herring because you have not argued against Dark Matter. -Duxwing

Have you considered to each planet sending a swarm of probes? -Duxwing

Thanks, agathorn! -Duxwing

I cannot find a tutorial on such basic functions as saving programs. How can I perform them, or where can I find one? -Duxwing

I have edited the songs. -Duxwing

This mod could become useful for all KSP players--handicapped or not--by with mouse movements controlling the craft. -Duxwing

You could without reducing functionality have five parachute models--1.25m cone, .625m cone, 1.25 stack, .625m stack, and radial--and make tweakable whether they are double chute, main, drogue, or drag, reducing memory load and increasing elegance. -Duxwing

"Jebediah is my copilot" "Kod is my copilot" "My other car is a rocket" "If you can read this, run!" "How's my flying? Call 1800-SCREAMING DEATH" "For SCIEEEENCE!" "Born to fly!" "Kerbal Fi: do or die!" "My rocket, right or wrong." "On the wings of the wind." "Audaces Fortuna juvat!" "Fortune favors the bold!" "Join the Corps: the Kerbanaut Corps!" "Be Kerbal Strong." "We need volunteers!" -Duxwing

I perhaps by ignorance have never heard a sociologist claim that most people morally behave only because of their religious codes: would you please link me to evidence of this consensus? -Duxwing

Proving that claim would require enormous amounts of evidence: have it? -Duxwing

I now understand your design. Thanks. -Duxwing