whale_shark

Well it is not really smart to think that if humans can't find the explanation for something it must be the work of God or SOMETHING(and this is what you are trying to say isn't it). No one knows what really happened and the big bang theory is just theory so it doesn't have to be true. There are many other theories(and mathematical models of universe) about beginning and in some of them there is no beginning but most of them are very hard to understand unlike the big bang theory and this is why everyone thinks there was a big bang:because for average human being that is very easy to understand to(while he can't accept that universe didn't have beginning which is basis of some other theories). There is simple way to imagine that universe didn't have beginning:we all say universe doesn't have limits, so if it doesn't have limits in space why would it have to have limits in time. Now to the original topic. The idea of after life started when humans where very primitive compared to today. then they believed then that Earth has edges and that you fall of if you stepped from the edge further no matter what shape they imagined(circle, square,...) and we all know that isn't true. we all know how life works that it is just physics and chemistry and yet people can't forget this old belief about afterlife probably because they can't accept how insignificant in fact they are. So to answer the question in the title of this topic: THERE ISN'T LIFE AFTER DEATH.

No one can say for sure what happens when we day, but somethings in your post is wrong.to me it seems that you think you or human race are important part of universe or even this world. well that is totally wrong universe and this world would continue to exist and function even if we weren't here(and for our planet that would be even better). think of humans as some kind of animals that have a little more developed brain and from that their conscience comes. but when your brain dies your conscience goes away(just like animals).it is not something like spirit it is just chemistry and physics in the brain which can be on simpler or more complicated and the prove of that is that different species of animals have different intelligence and even within one species there are differences like in humans.some animals can be thought to communicate on the level of the 3 year old child. if there was something more then level of brain development why would someone be more intelligent than the other.why wouldn't we all be the same and in the end why we develop intelligence(and everything that comes with it) as we grow.

If universe doesn't have beginning and end in space(which everyone accepts as a fact today) then how can it have beginning int time. There are many other theories other than Big Bang theories(this theory is well known by bigger part of population just because it is so simple in idea so people tend to accept it without much thinking) and many say that universe didn't have beginning(there are mathematical models of universe made by Stephen Hawking in which he assumed there was not beginning and they explain everything as good as big bang theory does).Even if that is not true and universe had some kind of beginning to say that it was work of god just because we don't understand(humans aren't as smart as people tend to think so) is another way people prove how limited they are.

No you shouldn't maybe you will feel right sometimes because you believe in god but that just how someone came to idea of god who is bigger then this life and will judge to everyone once they die. to me all that sounds like some slave was feeling miserably and searched for reason to keep living and so he invented something that doesn't interfere with life on the earth but will after everyone die.that way slaves had easier time on earth because when his master beat him or something he could tell himself he will suffer in the afterlife(imagination can be very funny).so with believing in god you would become more like that slave and not like free man who you are supposed to be.

No he won't, because there is no god(however you call him) and he did not create the world i mean to say something like that in the 21st century is really stupid(after all what was discovered how can someone still believe in something like that). World will be destroyed when the Sun explodes after it consumes all of its fuel. Bible is just a bunch of stories which were written with good idea but still most of it are just stories to keep people from killing each other(or whatever they would do) when there were no laws, police, courts and prisons and the only thing that could keep someone from crime is fear of punishment in the afterlife because there were no organized crime control.

I think Russian government is really stupid if they think that saying you will aim your missiles at Europe will stop anything because you didn't do anything with aiming a missile without firing it and we all know that they won't do that because that would be their end so if they want they can aim their missiles to any point on the Earth no one should care because even if they don't have some point aimed now they could aim at it in few minutes if they wanted so there really a reason to be concerned about this aiming a missile at something.With their reaction they just showed how pathetic and desperate for attention they are when in reality they can't do anything about it. They still can't accept that they lost cold war. If they are so great and dangerous then why do they feel threatened by some defensive system which is in another country(are they planning to attack Poland/EU in the near future lol). Why don't they build defensive system in some country which is their ally(if there are any) and thus show how great they are. Or maybe they should first try to make standard of living for their own citizens better. It is just incredible how stupid these communists are, wasn't the 20th century enough to show them their system doesn't work or will they need another century of being mediocre at best to understand how stupid the idea of communism is.

this would be impossible because you can't analyze everything that happened to someone in his life and say ok this is the thing that made him murderer.there are too many variables and if you do find something that you think made him a murderer you could probably find thousands of others who experienced same thing and didn't become a murderer. to become a murderer there must be something wrong with you in your head because we all have problems in life(it is impossible to make society without problems) but we deal with them differently. if you think about that probably every person has had an experience which could made him kill someone but most of us don't, so it is not problem of society it is problem of individuals. there are probably some cases where you could put bigger part of blame for a murder on someone else(or more of them) and not the person that did it(like some of posters said before woman who kills her husband because he was beating her for years) but even in that case there are other ways of dealing with it(people should not take justice into their own hands they should let those who are supposed to do it do it). what i definitely think is that punishments should be worse than they are maybe than people wouldn't feel the need to take justice in their own hands. i don't see how is idea that if you don't work you don't eat cruel or unusual(if it is then we are all being cruelly or unusually punished ) the idea is that they would have to work to survive(every one of them would work on tasks that would be given him, and would be something like watering the garden, making a meal for himself etc, if he refused then he wouldn't get food, they would all get water). i didn't say nothing about torture anywhere in my post(but that isn't a bad idea ), what i meant when i said they should suffer is that they should lack privileges that normal person have but still have to work to live, and they would be aware of it whole time which should be enough for anyone to suffer. if someone killed himself(by starvation or any other way he thought of) he would still suffer because just thinking about killing yourself isn't pleasant, and i would make sure they don't have any tools or things with which they could easily kill themselves so death itself would be very unpleasant so they would suffer the most before it all ends. living like that for whole time you are in prison, is i think proper punishment for someone who killed someone else.

I don't think they should be killed(at least not instantly) because they wouldn't suffer(when you are dead you don't care how you died and what you did wrong), but i think they should be in prisons where there is nothing but things necessary for survival(food,water and what ever some law about this would say) and they would have to grow their own vegetables, cook for themselves and stuff like that so money from taxes is spent in minimum possible way. If someone would refuse to cooperate then he wouldn't get food so he would die but suffer before he dies(or he would have to kill himself in any way he can think of).

Croatia: 4/10good:-some people(very few)-nature(like in any other country)bad:-corruption is everywhere-people care about tradition and religion too much-70% of population is poor or almost poor-too hot(for the past month or so temperature didn't drop below 30 degrees celsius and before that was above 25 for about 2 months)-schools(i'm a student right now and on the best college but from day one i was disappointed and so were all my friends)-politics-lack of jobs even for the people with college-slow internet and it's expensive-...to conclude i can't wait to get out of here

I think that we should try to save the world but just for the animals and plants because humans do not deserve it just because they are destroying those life forms. Sad thing is that humans will probably be one the last species alive and when they do finally go away(in any way it will happen: extinction, colonization of other planets...) the life on this planet will probably be destroyed or it will be just like it was in the beginning. The problem with saving the world is that it is practically impossible considering how many humans are on this planet and that they all want best possible standard of living.Less than a 50% of humans has modern standard of living and it brought us to big problems already, now imagine what would happen if that percentage grows for 20% or more the problems would grow exponentially. The other problem is that you can't teach all people to care for environment in fact probably most people won't care about it at all. So to conclude this i want to save the world but think it is impossible as long humans are here in such big number(one of my professor at college told us that, based on some recent studies, in order to have modern standard of living and not to have big impact on environment there should be just 5% of todays population on planet).

there must be life outside our planet and to think otherwise is really stupid just look at the life on earth it has developed in so hostile environments that someone would say it is impossible if you told him so.within last few months scientists have discovered planet that has temperature which is similar to the temperature on earth so liquid water can exist there and we all know that water is basis of life on earth so why not there.that planet is not far from earth in universe proportions.but even without water life could exist based on some other elements in very different environments and probably very different shapes which we can't even think of.just think of this every time you are in doubt every star you see in the night sky is potential sun and for each star you see there billions and billions and billions... of others

the problem with global warming is bigger then people think it's not just it will few degrees warmer the whole climate will change causing the polar ice to melt and then you will have the problem in that that every city on coast will be at least partly under watter. Periods without rain will be longer so plants will grow slower and this changes the whole ecological system.The natural disasters will be more frequent and that will be a major problem just look what happened to New Orleans that kind of things could become "normal". Professor of physics on my college talked about this one time and he said something like this(about where is the real problem):"earth population is about 20 times greater than what it should be if we want to keep our environment unchanged with current standard of living." He also said that resources(oil and gas mostly) will be major problem in about 50 years and there could be big wars if some good way of replacing them isn't found. Someone posted how earth has mechanisms how it will keep things in normal, but that isn't likely because the rate at which this change happens is to big, in the past changes were much slower, but now they are so fast that whole system will fail. How to stop it- you can't without killing a big part of people because every person on earth wants the standard of modern world and more than a half of population doesn't have it yet so the things will only get worse.

I play Civ IV too and it is a very good game but somehow Civ III was more playable for me. I played Civ III for 2 years and i think i could play it again, while with Civ IV i don't have that feeling it's like i play one or two games and then i don't want to play for a month.Some of my friends which play turn based strategies have the similar experiences.This could be only coincidence but as i can see hitmanblood agrees with this so obviously there plenty of people feeling like this. Good parts of the game are graphics, many civilizations and like all other games from the series depth, details and very few illogical things. Anyone who wants to try a good turn based strategy game should try this game i think they won't be disappointed

i played all of games in age of series and the best game in my opinion is age of mythology because it is most original(those mythology creatures really add much to playability and so do special powers you get with chosen gods).units are really good balanced and the graphics is good.after not playing for 2 years one of my friends suggested today that we start playing it again and i think we will even if it is for few days only just to bring back the memories.

age of empires is a great game from the first version to the last(i would include here age of mythology even thou it is different from age of empires series).With each new version Microsoft set new standards in RTS games from every aspect you look at it

i've played all version since fs98 and i must admit every time it surprises me how much better the new version is. the newest version is almost perfect even if you are not a fan of fs try it you will not be disappointed

i like tennis(played and watched it since i can remember it), basketball(started playing it because most of my friends played it and now i love specially after i started following nba), golf(never tried it because it is too expensive for me for now but i have feeling i would love it just from watching it), baseball(never played it like golf too but the feeling is again there)

my advice is get thinking in c++ written by bruce eckel from this address http://www.odioworks.com/46-Bruce_Eckel&%233onic_Books.html or some other if this doesn't work(google for the title there are plenty of servers from which you can download it for free). the book covers all aspects of c++ in 2 volumes and if you go through both volumes(few times possibly) i think you will know c++ pretty well.book is written pretty simple so it isn't hard to read it and fully understand it.

I agree it is probably the best rts game ever. Units are great and really good balanced. upgrades for the units are very important they can change the outcome of battle. during the battle you must be active or you could easily lose even with larger/stronger army. companies/doctrines are very nicely organized and balanced. playing is very different based on company/doctrine chosen.graphic is really good even when on low settings, the sound is best ever(depending on the position on map volume of for example howitzer firing changes...) of course there are some problems like tanks blocking each other what can be very annoying and often changes the outcome of battle(instead of a victory you get disaster).mortars and similar bombarding units are very useful and can be deciding factor(for the attacked side they are very frustrating because often you aren't in position to do anything about it). the way you collect resources by holding points is very good and like in w4k it keeps the action going from almost 1st minute of a game but this is also very hard part for a beginner and it can get frustrating(you take a point and 30secs later, if you don't defend it, come enemy engineers and take it from you which is very distracting when you are not used to it).using replay feature you can see some really impressive and realistically looking scenes by zooming in and adjusting angle of the camera(you could make a good movie with this).simply put great game.

I played Civilization III and Civilization IV and i must say i enjoyed Civilization III more. Some of my friends who play strategies mostly agree with this.This is good example how graphics isn't most important in fact here it seems to have negative effect. For me the best strategies are Total War series games.

My favorites would be Age Of Mythology(played it for 4 years in LAN with my friends, we really studied it to the last detail- knew every shortcut,every units strength or weakness...if only i put so much effort into something else i would have been millionaire probably) and today we play Company Of Heroes with the same passion(we are students right now and many times instead going to the lectures we stay home and play it for hours)

Share your thoughts. Who and why will be better, what do you expect from them statisticswise...