User talk:Noctarch

From Guild Wars Wiki

Contents 1 Discussion Firstborn 2 Moved 3 lol 4 skill 5 sorry i havent been on much lately 6 Hey, hey, hey.

[edit] Discussion Firstborn

First! is lame. That's why I do it for you so you don't have to bear the shame. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 22:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moved

→ moved from User talk:Isaiah Cartwright

As God exists in absence of science's answers our speculations will not end in absence of Izzy's judgment xD Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 12:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

'Cept God doesn't exist. Dark Morphon(contribs) 14:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

He does - as a fictional construct. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 14:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You have no conclusive evidence that he does or doesn't exist. For all you know, he/she might exist and not exist at the same time. 145.94.74.23 08:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

We that is to say I talked about one appearence of god - in that particular does indeed exist for we are its creator and origin no other meaning was objectof discussion. Doubting that this section yieled anything of worth, I'd suppose (as much to you as to me) to close it. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 12:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea. In fact, I tried doing that, but some discussion about God came up. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I can conclude so by asking me why he would. Everything can be explained by science, it just takes time to get the answers. Dark Morphon(contribs) 15:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

In theory, except for the fact that science is so often wrong (don't get me wrong, I like science, but firstly science relies on a lot on what's highly likely to be true rather than what's proven to be true, and secondly it's not actually possible to prove or disprove everything). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:82.3.255.222 (talk).

Knowledge has never been an absolute value. It consists of the following parameters: conviction, truth, and reasoning. Only truth is a binary value representing either common fasle or true whereas the other two are of gradual nature. Because of this, science, the theory of acknockledgement and the seek for knowledge are still viable objects in the world of the living. We do not have anything better and thus have to live with and by these definitions of knowledge. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 17:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I dispute the defenition of truth. Truth can be relative too and is subjective to perception. 145.94.74.23 11:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Not as part of said and above topic where it is needed as an untouchable value. However, truth in a common sense which does not found on the boolean values may have this relative meaning. That might be called moral truth. I, however, spoke of the logical one. It would be against the laws of logic if the phrase of truth related to it had any diffuse meaning. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 15:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe. I suppose it depends on your defenition of logic, but logic, in a way, is flawed too, because there are things that logic simply cannot comprehend. 145.94.74.23 07:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Quite. For example, logic cannot explain itself. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 09:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] lol

Thanks for your attentiveness. No, i'm not dead. :P I'm rather inactive atm, but i'll still take a look at the wiki every now and then. And excuse me for still not having changed my page design, i actually planned to change it with halloween^^' It's actually completed, but i still wanted to "convert" it into a template before. Besides that, there are several other things i still wanted to do here, i'll try to do so sooner or later. —ZerphaThe Improver 23:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

As soon as I saw this box an idea grew within me. The only change that validated itself and did nothing but achieving its own verification. And what about bringing back all those "lost and gone " notes on so many skill pages? Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 23:17, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

"lost and gone" notes? —ZerphaThe Improver 01:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Skill icon similarities, synergy notes aimed at beginners and such. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 01:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

there are several skills which document icon similarities afair. And i can remember the old wiki having listed lots of these. —ZerphaThe Improver 08:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Me wants moar. Cuique suum mihique omnium. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 13:40, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] skill

if you look closely, it actually says "underated skill" there. the question is, what does "derate" mean in this case? :D - Y0_ich_halt

Un negates the removal (de) of rating. So underating is the adding of rating to a certain object of discussion. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 18:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

ah, i didn't notice it might come from "rate" ;) i thought of derivate all the time. - Y0_ich_halt 20:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The theory of acknowledgment teaches us that justification of knowledge triumphes truth amongst the flawful race of man. In short and informal; As long as your excuse is good enough you never did something wrong. Of course, this can be seen as a locigal fallacy. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 20:27, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

of false knowledge, i dare add. - Y0_ich_halt 21:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Knowledge whose value of truth is disputed. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 21:36, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] sorry i havent been on much lately

sorry i havent been on lately i been wanting to play with you (finish facts and start a new toon) but i had emergency back surgery on saturday and im still recovering so i hope to see you soon KellyLSB 00:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

At least you reasoned it. I'm looking forward to some time to be spent together. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 06:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

me too i might log on for a bit today im regaining left hand mobility KellyLSB 19:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey, hey, hey.

I like you. *thumb up* Vael Victus 15:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, oh, greetings adept of epic randomness! Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 15:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Likes you too ^^ But you know that!!! |Cyan LightHere!| 16:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Though I hear very little of this frying dutchman. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 16:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Vael, any chance you will be online? Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 18:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

My very great excuses =P |Cyan LightHere!| 18:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Did you at least finish the time for heroes? Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 19:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I did... Youre mental support was great ^^ |Cyan LightHere!| 19:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Next time, I'd appreciate it when you call me and there's room for me, too :( Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 19:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Im very sorry for that =( |Cyan LightHere!| 19:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Now reply in-game again and I am fine. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 19:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)