While We Wait: Part 4
- Thread starter Thlayli
- Start date
Symphony D.
Deity
I guess it could just be me.
Oruc
Reactionary
I liked your idea on page 2
Terrance888
Discord Reigns
First update UP! 
I feel proud.
Here's LINK!
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=283741&page=3
I feel proud.Here's LINK!
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=283741&page=3
Daftpanzer
canonically ambiguous
Dachspmg said:
I haven't actually tried installing it on Vista, but I do play EU II on my Vista PC, after copying across my whole game install from my XP computer (and I copied it from a win98 computer before that - the folder is about 7 years old now
).EDIT:
Charles Li said:
Congratulations, I'm too sleepy right now to read things properly, but it looks good! I say don't listen to unhelpful comments from others, so long as you are having fun.
flyingchicken
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2007
- Messages
- 3,783
One of these days, you'll carelessly put out one bit of information on the webs--a picture, a video, a paper, anything--and your fears will not be unfounded.Yes, that is my Wikipedia user account, which I haven't updated in a very long time (on the order of a year and a half I think, outside of removing some vandalism by personal acquaintances of mine). Congratulations, you've scared the . .. .. .. . out of me.
Less surprise, more curiosity! Anyway, it's hard to Google "North King" and find something that connects to you. "Dachspmg" on the other hand dot dot dot too lazy to type out idea
...
Playing China from EU2 to Victoria ROCKS. I have an industrial rating of 30,000(!) now (1890s) while my closest rivals in that regard are the USA (1,400+) and Japan (1,000+). Being top producer of all but 4 territory-dependent things also ROCKS. Meddling in European affairs (particularly in orchestrating the fall of Austria and the rise of Brandenburg/Prussia) also ROCKS.
The only thing that doesn't ROCK is the "Opium Trade" event. Will the game shut up about it if I annex Britain?
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I think so.
@Charles, I read the update, and it's pretty good. Looks like you got something very decent up here
@Charles, I read the update, and it's pretty good. Looks like you got something very decent up here
Symphony D.
Deity
I didn't see this until just now, so:
No, but I can cite somebody who is, which is apparently a hell of a lot more than you can do. Find a better source than I did or be content with losing. That's how the game works.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
Who is your source? Can you prove he/she exists?
Without even reading back, and using my at-times faulty memory, this source is:
Jared Diamond, who wrote Guns, Germs, and Steel.
And if you're going to deny he exists, well, you could, if you were going to be extremely solipsistic about it. (The Universe is my eyes and ears. Everything else is hearsay.) But I choose to believe he exists because he wrote this book, and I also choose to believe that it isn't just a pseudonym for some other guy.
Symphony D.
Deity
...
No, Luckymoose. I hacked Google. A whole lot. I also defrauded Wikipedia.
I have a lot of time on my hands. Maybe you should stop irritating me. It might be unwise in light of my abilities.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
I thought you were talking about someone you knew directly. Forgive me. Still doesn't mean that guy is 100% correct.
Symphony D.
Deity
And congratulations on catching up with the conversation! That's not the point. The point is, he is an expert, and the rest of you aren't. So when the rest of you just present your opinions on animal domestication, I can smack you with:
And then invoke his work. Whether he is absolutely correct or not is largely irrelevant unless you can graduate from advancing opinions and, since none of you are experts either, can cite some research or facts to back your opinions up.
This is what is known as "supporting evidence." The "any animal can be domesticated" camp has so far completely failed to advance any. Until it does my cited source stands, as he has the credentials, research, and experience necessary to make a claim, and to back it up, particularly in lieu of any counter-claims on the subject.
This is pretty much the same message as always: argue the point or don't bother at all.
And then invoke his work. Whether he is absolutely correct or not is largely irrelevant unless you can graduate from advancing opinions and, since none of you are experts either, can cite some research or facts to back your opinions up.
This is what is known as "supporting evidence." The "any animal can be domesticated" camp has so far completely failed to advance any. Until it does my cited source stands, as he has the credentials, research, and experience necessary to make a claim, and to back it up, particularly in lieu of any counter-claims on the subject.
This is pretty much the same message as always: argue the point or don't bother at all.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
So if I was to become an expert on the same things and write a book about how he is wrong, you would not challenge me? I find that hard to believe. You seem like the type of person who would never admit defeat.
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
I'll just chip in with my uneducated opinion: believing animal domestication could apply to any animal is complete and utter lunacy, for more or less obvious reasons. With the elephant, which I believe was one of the points of contention in that thread: aside from the simple point that if they could have, they would have, how do you honestly expect a society to domesticate something with longer lifespans than humans?
Symphony D.
Deity
You're correct! I would, because I would still have a guy saying otherwise, I could find a large number more people in his footnotes and citations (things you likely wouldn't have a lot of if your point was explicitly to advance the opposite theory, science being what it is and all), and your job would be to refute them. Boiled down, I retain strong confidence my camp would outnumber and out argue yours, because I generally don't pick losing teams.
There are four ways to win arguments regularly:
1. Never admit you're wrong.
2. Be right.
3. Engage in (2) enough that other people can't prove you're wrong most of the time.
4. Engage in (3) enough that other people don't bother to even try.
I currently exist in category (4), where whenever a discussion comes up, the rest of you just try various methods of trying to impeach my character or delivery, rather than actually bothering to make any attempt at disproving my statements.
It's kind of tedious, but I get by.
Abaddon
Deity
Well as I have mentioned before, I think my degree in Zoology would lend me some weight beyond amateur interest and reading a book or two that are not exclusivly dealing with the matter in hand.
I will not fall into endless links rushed from google etc. I know what I know though, i certainly slept through enough lectures on it, wrote multiple essays etc on the subject.
I continue to state that anything could be domesticated, but as you should realise that is a pretty harmless statement. I also mentioned need/ease of domestication.
An elephant COULD be domesticated. what inhibits it ever being done is the difficulty in doing so. It would simply take too long to see any benefits. Multiple-many human generations and thus has been far beyond the imagination or desire of man at any point in our history.
It is not worth the effort when they can be tamed to the level we need, and have other animals domesticated that fill other potential needed niches of domestication.
I will not fall into endless links rushed from google etc. I know what I know though, i certainly slept through enough lectures on it, wrote multiple essays etc on the subject.
I continue to state that anything could be domesticated, but as you should realise that is a pretty harmless statement. I also mentioned need/ease of domestication.
An elephant COULD be domesticated. what inhibits it ever being done is the difficulty in doing so. It would simply take too long to see any benefits. Multiple-many human generations and thus has been far beyond the imagination or desire of man at any point in our history.
It is not worth the effort when they can be tamed to the level we need, and have other animals domesticated that fill other potential needed niches of domestication.
Symphony D.
Deity
I will take this unverified expertise at face value for the purposes of this argument, even though it is ultimately meaningless to your advanced position.
I suppose the question that has to be asked then is why, when confronted with a serious question, you abused said expertise to deliver an intellectually vapid statement of no consequence to the argument at hand. That is functionally equivalent to a physicist stating "Well, quantum theory predicts that a spearman will kill tanks sometimes! (in a sample period exceeding the lifetime of the universe)" in a discussion on RNG in Civ3.
Just because something is true over an arbitrarily long time-scale doesn't make it applicable to a discussion on a functional situation. So, if that was your intent, you should have known better.
Abaddon
Deity
You make the claim that it is not possible to domesticate an elephant.
You base this on a book stating that elephants used in a case that is often cited for domestication were in fact not.
I accept that elephants have not been domesticated.
What I am arguing that all animals COULD be domesticated if sufficent directives were obtained.
Yes, certain animals lend themselves to ease of domestication, but with difficulty I do not see why others could.
There has never been sufficient NEED to domesticate the evidence.
------------
On another note.. what would satisfy you as regards verification of my degree?
You base this on a book stating that elephants used in a case that is often cited for domestication were in fact not.
I accept that elephants have not been domesticated.
What I am arguing that all animals COULD be domesticated if sufficent directives were obtained.
Yes, certain animals lend themselves to ease of domestication, but with difficulty I do not see why others could.
There has never been sufficient NEED to domesticate the evidence.
------------
On another note.. what would satisfy you as regards verification of my degree?
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
Oh God. Not this line of argument again. Look, just because something COULD happen doesn't mean we need to bring it up. Unless it is achievable on a human timescale, we can effectively say something is impossible, because we are humans and the subjects of the NES in question are human. You're right, someone with infinite patience could indeed domesticate an elephant. Such a person does not exist, ergo there is no need to bring up the possibility.
