Baniboy

I never see ads while browsing except if I'm browsing on opera, but I can block ads in opera too, simply by not allowing iframes and javascript on sites I don't know. And have you thought that by clicking on those ads you may find something useful and benefit people. People get their paycheck, and google could improve it's services like gmail and adsense. Yes they are useless, but somebody could get a job for your clicks

A very long time ago(like when I was 9 yrs old), I got addicted to runescape (I know, stupid game). I somehow managed to stop it after I realized how much time I wasted playing that stupid game. After that, I've been interested into doing something more useful, like actually learning something when I'm online. After 4 years, I started playing this MMORPG called "Perfect World". After 4 days of playing, I realized I was getting addicted again, I stopped it and I will never start again!I'm a casual gamer nowadays, I play online poker with betsson poker client when I have nothing to do. I sometimes played CS:S too but I reinstalled winblows and I haven't installed it again. So yes, you can quit gaming.Game addiction is a real and serious thing, message to parents: Don't let your kid play more than 1 hr of mmorpg per day! My solution was, as simple as it sounds, jogging. Any physical activity will do! Just try! Now I'm addicted to jogging but that is a million times better addiction than game addiction!

I tried to answer you 3 days ago but Xisto suddenly stopped working Anyway, you were right about the infinity of time being impossible. :angel: You said that god is not a part of the physical realm. If it's not, then how can it affect the physical realm? Another problem is time, can you imagine a realm without time which god supposedly exists in? Time is another thing made up by man, time technically doesn't exist. Time is relative, time is something made up by looking at a cycle that repeats itself and comparing other things to them. Let us assume that there must be an ultimate cause for the physical realm, shouldn't there be an ultimate cause for non-physical realm? Can you imagine anything out of this realm? What religion does is claims the impossible and then simply states that you can't disprove/prove it by science, because it simply doesn't exist in this realm. What caused this undetectable being to create this universe? Why would this being want us to worship it? Wouldn't ultimate cause need an ultimate purpose too? I sure can't answer these. To me, stuff that needs a cause is what is happening, I don't even want to start to somehow philosophically try to find out if existance itself needs a cause. But the events in the bible are not true, god didn't create the earth in six days, there was no flood, Jesus was not the son of god(I'm sure if he was, he would've happily told us so, but he didn't). Almost none of the biblical events did never happen, so it's not a reliable resource for information. It was written by men (even christians don't deny that). And you can't use a book as empirical evidence to prove yahwe's or any other god's existance. You're "stripping" the bible here, yes, you're stripping all the nonsense and all there is left is the existance of god. You can't pick and choose from your own holy book, it either has to be totally right(which we know it isn't, we are not gonna argue about that, are we?), or it has to be totally wrong. If you believe in the god of the bible which you believe is His word, but not in all the rest of the bible, you will burn in hell. There are/were many books(and many other beliefs that aren't even written) on this planet, every single one of them claiming they are 100% right without any evidence. Just because the majority of people believes in one book, it doesn't mean it's right, it means that there once was something that spread this belief (roman empire). What makes you think that you're right about the bible? Because your parents beliefs and where you are born mostly determine what you believe in? What makes you think that pastafarianism(Flying Spaghetti Monster) isn't the way to go? Why, because it's seems to be made-up out of nothing? Exactly! That's why I prefer to not make up something against the laws of physics. If I do, I will modify it to fit them or I will dump the whole idea. Anyway, by simple logic, there must've been something that caused the big bang, but look how far we have come, from the earth being the center of the universe, to our solar system, our galaxy, more galaxies... Who knows what we'll discover next? Have you heard about the multiverse hypothesis? Anyway, I'm not saying god(s)'s existance is impossible, but saying that our imaginary friend(s) couldn't have created the universe... People could actually do something useful for humanity itself and our planet's health, instead, we waste our time on things that we shouldn't as an (relatively) intelligent specie, one being religion, but there are many others.

Well that's some weird dream :angel: I don't know which ones you've watched too much, torchwood or cold war films JK, anyway, there's a way to continue your dream when you next time sleep, you just have to think about it before you fall asleep. That might not work, but I have continued my dreams, like a tv series, it didn't end up good tho, the last two were nightmares so I stopped doing it.

But I wouldn't use an OS just for browsing the internet, there's so much more I do with my computer that I couldn't possibly do in Chrome OS. And as I could guess, google will force Chrome browser with it first before other browsers get developed for that platform, yea it's fast, butNo adblocks, and google dominates internet ad business, maybe this is just a trick to get more money from ads (Am I the only one here suspecting this?!).No privacy, by accepting google license agreement to use Chrome, you sell your rights to google for free. All your browsing will be easily indexed.I really can't understand why google would try to dominate operating system area with an open source project that obviously isn't beneficial. SO THERE'S SOMETHING FISHY HERE... And you can't deny it.

I wouldn't agree with you that directors are retarded, after all, writers are the one that write the sketches. So they should be called retarded.<offtopic> also don't like talk shows, they're so fake. There are "laugh" and "applause" lights in the studio, how fake can it get than that? Now that's retarded, yes they can be entertaining, but all it seems to be is that some movie stars come to promote their new movie and try to sound funny. The show hosts are total clowns. </offtopic>

There is no problem for time gaps. You totally ignored my eternal cycle thing. You're still with that everything needs a cause theory. There is no logical proof that everything needs a cause, but not god, because so it says in a almost 2000 years old textbook. The is no problem with time gap, because we do not have to cross it, we exist in the present and it's a mathematical impossibility to go forward or backwards in time. Time is also relative to the speed we move. I also was not stating that eternal is impossible, but stating that eternal anything is impossible to understand. Let me make a more clear argument, like a summary or something: 1. First law of thermodynamics: Matter and/or energy can't be created nor destroyed, but can change into one another. If matter and energy can't be created or destroyed, yet it exist, it must've always existed. Pure logic. 2. The universe will most likely(by the knowledge of our time) shrink back to where it "came from". Causing another big bang (it's not really an explosion, it's just the expansion of time-space). Eternal cycle. To my understanding, time-space expands after every big bang. So no, time-space is eternal, but it shrinks and expands. Because if everything needs a cause, so does god(this would cause an eternal cycle of causes), and if god is not matter or energy, god doesn't exist. As I already said, you can't simply get out of this by saying "by definition god is eter...". EDIT: As for god is outside of the universe, we can't go outside the universe and verify that. To me, it seems that everything outside this reality doesn't exist, I might be wrong of course. I mean like, it's impossible for the product of our imagination to create the universe isn't it? Now I know you'll ignore my argument and just repeat yourself(or possibly take one portion of it and turn it against me, ignoring the rest of the argument). I have realized that nobody can force their beliefs on somebody even by using logic, the truth is something one has to realize himself/herself.

Number 6 is a false dilemma, it has nothing to do with that question. It's a leftover from another reply to Hovind's question. Anyway, here's what I was saying: "We have many transitional fossils between reptiles and birds, and also the evolution of the eye is possible as we have evidence for that too." Click here and here. Bats do have hollow bones, but so do all mammals. Mammals have hollow bones filled with marrow(so do bats) but bird bones are filled with air. What makes bats capable of flight is also a good example of evolution. Let me quote: RNA can form without god(s) (of course not if you go to a subatomic level and ask what keeps particles from breaking apart). The catalyst for this process is called Montmorillonite. Nucleotides can form through chemical reactions without god magically "creating" them out of nothing. These nucleotides theen can form polynucleotides (poly meaning many/multi FYI). The catalyst for this chemical reaction to form nucleotide chains is montmorillonite. My source is many publications in research gate. That is for only one nucleotide, I know, but I'm sure we'll discover how the other 3 for DNA form more in the future. I also recommend watching this video 1 min and 54 sec of it's beginnning. A perfect and all-knowing designer wouldn't design so many flaws. The truth is that many mutations - no matter how beneficial they may be - have side effects. You can watch this video for more info. "god did it" means, nevertheless, "we don't know". What I meant that scientists are not totally lost when it comes to the origin of life. @KansukeKojima: Evolution doesn't disprove god neither god does disprove evolution. Evolution DOES disprove the creationism in most religions. You can't believe in contradicting theories(creationism is not a theory, but I didn't find any other good words for describing what it is). To me it seems that you believe that by logic you prove the existance of god, but you don't. You make a compromise in your logical thinking to make the existance of god(s) possible. Your logic is apparently like this: Everything needs a cause, but now you make up your own stuff, you say that although evrything does need a cause, but not god, because he's eternal and what not. Logic doesn't work like that. You say that god is not bound to the laws of physics and logic. So... you get it? The only thing I can think of that isn't bound to the laws of physics and logic is human imagination. Yes, logical absolutes apply everywhere, so to god. You could wipe out the whole god thing and just say that universe is eternal, you wouldn't have to make compromise in your logic to understand the stuff around you. Other problem is of course, human mind can not understand what eternal means. You can understand normally time like this: let's say I say I'm 15 years old(which I am btw ), you make sence of it by trying to remember how much 1 year is(not by days, but how long it feels to you) and multiplying it by 15 and somehow imagining... Now let's apply that to eternal. 1 or more (amount of time of your choice) multiplied by eter... *Wait.. I can't do that!* See? The result wouldn't make sense, it wouldn't give you a measurable answer. Eternality itself(I don't know if that's even a word..) however, is possible. So remember this, you can't simply get out of it by saying "god by definition is eternal", because the only way this would make sense is that god(s) is/are not being(s), but the force behind the laws of physics. Then, the statements "god is everywhere" and "god is eternal" do make sense, but I'll also add, "god is everything". So in some sense I would use the word "god" as a synonym to the word "universe" /* My own "belief" */ I personally believe(not know, but I believe in what I believe by using my own logic) that universe is eternal. The big bang could've been caused by a shrinking universe(or something else, but this is the best we got right now). So, if universe is eternal(cycle), everything somehow starts to make sense. Except the "why" question of course, but that isn't even explained in creationism. We can never understand the deeper meaning of why something happened/happens, because it would cause an eternal cycle of why questions which we can not answer to. The reason this makes sense to me is that because no matter or energy could've came out of nowhere, they always existed. This applies because is that something which is not energy or matter, doesn't exist and *POOF* - coming to existance doesn't make sense nor is possible by the laws of physics, they must've always existed and cycled continously creating the universe, life and everything we know. /* End of my personal thoughts that have so little evidence behind them, but my logic makes sense to me (hehe). If it doesn't to you, please tell why */ Now my choice of calling people idiots, it's because they know they have a large influence on others, they missuse it by lying to them. That, dear trapsters, is "evil". Now moving into even more stupid arguments: Click here and watch this video. My reply, bananas evolved from wild bananas due to human artificially breeding them for good qualities. Source: google image search with keywords "wild banana". Let's move on now... Now, microevolution has already been proven using the scientific method (Side note to truefusion: creation science is as much science as reptiles are birds, they do however share a common ancestor: thirst for knowing what is happening around you.). Because creationists can't deny it, all they can(actually they can't, but they think they can) deny is macroevolution, which is microevolution on a larger scale. After a short natural selection and mutation process(microevolution), subspecies still share most of the original specie's unique charecteristic combos. In macroevolution, they, the "subspecie" which has now developed into its own specie, shares some similar unique charecteristic combos with it's ancestor, but has many charecteristic combos which are unique to that specie only. In short, stop using this argument as well. It's used to deny that evolved from early hominids/humanoids, which is like saying these: (wolf, probably hasn't evolved much in the last 11 000 years) can evolve to these: (chihuahua, cute little fella) But hominids that look so much similar to us, are devil's work to test our faith and what not... I don't have time now to show an example of hominid but use google search. Quick edit: This came out to be a bit longer than I intended it to be, but it's also much better than the post I was writing earlier (the one that got destroyed). Quick edit2: Creationism fights against the first law of thermodynamics, so does big bang if they claim it came out of nothing, just because we don't have evidence before it. In other words if your theory fights against some usual stuff we know about the universe, it isn't that dead yet, but if it doesn't go by any laws of thermodynamics, you have lost your credibility. enough said.

I'm not much of a computer fan, so I don't think if I'll join your forum. I do have a suggestion for your theme tho.You could use a gradient positioned in the top of your page. something with the height of 300-500 px and width of 1 px. It could give you a more glossy look. Or you could search for a theme that looks good. Hope you get a lot of members! I might join but I have a lot of things to do right now.

I will reply to this tomorrow, 'cause I was almost finished with a megapost on this topic and the I accidently destroyed it when I was dragging an image to the tab I was writing the reply on. So, I don't think I can repeat my masterpiece again but I'll try, but not today... sorry

Note that this was not a debate against or for evolution, this was simply a post to point out that you shouldn't use these arguments that are very unscientific and already debunked, since it seems that everyone coming up with these arguments think they are the first one to do so! I quoted simply because I didn't know the answer. I didn't quote so I could prove that "if a man with that kind of intelligence believes in something, you should too"(like often non-evolutionists quote Albert Einstein), I quoted the answer for that question I found on the web. I quoted because I'm not a biologist neither any other expert on any fields of science. I didn't answer some questions because they didn't have anything to do with evolution. There are plenty of transitional fossils between fish and amphibians, reptiles and birds etc. I don't have to answer this(how wings/eyes evolved), you can google it and find many transitional fossils for wings and also many for eyes. Evolution doesn't disprove any god. But it states that the diversity of life we see today was achieved through the process of natural selection. Abiogenesis somewhat provides the answer through explaning how DNA lifeforms were formed. No, I was pointing to mutation. Mutation is a random process that can produce new DNA, so with time, a specie can produce unique features. At least according to christian belief, god is all-powerful and all-knowing. Such god would not have to perfect his design or split his own design into two or more branches and destroy the original creation. Why does ostrich have hollow bones like birds but it doesn't fly? Did the intelligent designer make weaker bones on purpose? There are a lot of things that don't make sence if it was/were intelligent designer(s) that created animals. I didn't list evidence about my debunks because they are pretty much available all over the web. What makes creation science funny is that it is not science because it doesn't use the scientific method to prove things. Therefore not science, PERIOD. I was not attacking this one guy, but this one guy happened to have all these weird arguments that are already debunked. These are repeated over and over again. I was simply informing what to not use to be taken seriously. Replying to Rob, I do not think that any holy books should be taken literaly, because it wouldn't even make sence. Most of the holy books were written before modern science, and after modern science started to develop people started to find out about things and the relihious explanations weren't valid anymore. That is why creationism doesn't make sence if it hasn't been hammered into your head when you were young. Funny fact, creationism didn't make sence even when I was 6. But this topic is about evolution and what arguments not to use when debating against it. Exactly! Anyway, to me, evolution theory is what makes sence out of this giant soup of nonsence. Sure it has some holes, it had more holes when Darwin first "created" it. Most holes have been fixed now, thanks to DNA, fossils and other stuff. Actually it could be that the other one is no more logical than the other. Just like Biblical god isn't more logical than Thor, Krishna, Allah and the flying spaghetti monster. But the comparison is to state that none of them make sence, since both are saying that a supernatural being or beings created life in an undescribable way. 1. To verify universe's existance you must be observing it from outside.2. Everything is possible, but not probable. To verify this you would have to be outside the universe, using the scientific method. 3. Just because human beings don't understand that something can exist without a cause, doesn't mean it can't, again, you have to observe from outside. So how can god exist if it needs a cause too. If something isn't matter or energy, by the laws of physics, it doesn't exist. "Because you do not exist, you are incapable of doing anything - including bringing yourself into existence." - Neither does god 4. Pointing to the big bang, scientists don't have theories, but they have some ideas. Google is your friend. 6. So for god. eternal god isn't possible because you already stated that it needs an "uncaused cause" to exist. You are not observing this from outside of the universe and this isn't a good answer. The existance of god is very possible, I agree, but I don't think it's anything like a human mind has made up till now. There are many religions, and as far as I can see, nothing makes christianity, buddhism or islam "the right one". I agree with you. Wow this topic has gone so offtopic Your posts were interesting to read.

When you're debating against an evolutionist, you can only use logic, science and evidence in your arguments. However we always see these idiots that like to attack against a scientific theory with very unscientific arguments, like Kent Hovind(who is now in the jail by the way ), and simply lying to people's faces! How to not make a fool out of yourself in the eyes of who you're debating against and everyone else. First note: Actually learn about what you're debating against, nobody will even consider debating you when you obviously have no understanding over the theory of evolution. Got off with that, now some really stupid arguments you should not use: 1. "If evolution is true, then why there aren't any transitional fossils", probably what you'll receive as a response is silence. Not silence of "I don't what to say", more like: "I'm shocked of your stupidity". This is a lie that many people have repeated over and over again, they don't seem to understand that repeating a lie no matter how many times, doesn't make it true. 2. "Evolution says that we evolved from nothing". NO, NO, NO! This will make you look very stupid. There's abiogenesis to explain the origin of life and how life began on earth, which is a good theory and has been tested and apparently, long amino acid chains can form without fairy dust 3. "If we evolved from apes, why can't we see apes evolving into humanoids today?". Evolution doesn't state that we evolved from modern apes, but that we had a common ancestor. Remember, that every modern living being has evolved, not just us. Simply, from an early ape specie which then divided into 2 subspecies which then caused the extinction of the original specie since they were more succesful. 4. Don't use quotes of famous people stating god/creationism is real, it proves nothing but your idiocy. Many famous people in history believed the earth was flat. Did it make it flat? That is called quote mining FYI. 5. Stay in the point, if you're talking about common ancestry, don't start talking about "the eye is too complex to have evolved", ALRIGHT!? 6. "The eye/wings is/are too complex to have evolved" Take an example of flying bats, they're mammals, and their bones aren't like birds' bones. So why would an "intelligent designer" (aka god(s)) do that, if bats had liter bones they could fly like birds. The only way this is explainable today is with evolution. I was just thinking of how I could find more of these stupid questions, and guess where? "Dr" Hovind's article of course!!! Take an example of a man that doesn't know difference between quantum physics, evolution theory, general physics, big bang theory, abiogenesis and much more. "Great" man claiming he has been teaching highschool science for 15 years yet he apparently couldn't even pass today's tests! I stopped reading after a while, since it kept getting more and more stupid, here's a small quote: "Creation science"!!! that kept me laughing for a long looooooong time! Let's answer, shall we? 1. That's not about evolution you idiot! 2. uhh... stupid people in this world... 3. This guy apparently does not understand what evolution is about. 4. Matter isn't perfectly organized, it is, however, organized which is caused by the laws of physics and again, has nothing to do with evolution. I saw this man other day on youtube asking why planets are round, he didn't know/understand so god must've done it. How stupid can people be? GRAVITY, I commented, yet he didn't accept that, perfect example of idiocy. 5. *SILENCE* 6. Read your textbooks or just google abiogenesis. The idiot who wrote this also wanted to include a "why" question. The truth is that we don't know, and that is a better answer than "god did it", because god did it means that we have already decided why and we are not gonna search for one and not even look at the evidence. "I don't know" is better because we are still searching. And I could also assume that when this person asks why, he probably is searching for inner meaning and purpose of life, which doesn't apparently exist. This person can not accept the fact that he/she isn't above the nature. This person can't accept that after death, there's simply nothing. No human being can, at least I think so. Trying to even think about complete zero is impossible, because human beings don't understand complete zero. I'm sure I can't, at least not if I actually start thinking about it and try to explain it. We can't accept that there is not much to life than a bunch of chemical reactions, not invisible energy. 7. DNA can reproduce without magic dust because sea floor contains amino acids. It has been proven that amino acid chains can make copies of themselves when there is material available PLUS the sea floor that had some of chemicals I can't remember right now that makes chaining process possible. This again, isn't about evolution, but I was nice enough to answer. :angel: and yet again, a "why" in the question... This is getting boring. 8. I don't personally know, but I found that there are some suggestions. Find about more in wikipedia: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ But I would like to say that it couldn't be "a cell", since cells just divide into 2 cells. So it would've been a multi-cellular organism. Or maybe not, it could be possible that a cell could leave its duplicating RNA inside another cell, which would mess things up a bit and because I'm not a biologist, I'll leave this to biologists. 9. Because I'm not good at answering this, I'll mine a quote here Evolution is for explaining the diversity of life, not this crap. 10. In this sentence our "hero" doesn't realize that according to evolution, "letters" could change their shapes and form chinese letters which would then produce a chinese "book". 11. It is, but the "creator" would be an idiot! Incapable of producing quality stuff, and just changing the existing design when it could design anything!. I will quote another answer too: 12. Kinda funny, because one of the primitive living organisms has much more DNA than human; Amoeba. Human genome also is not suuper-dooper-complex like they say, it's the same amount of data as 10 000 kilobytes. Back to the question, our hero, wannabedoctor Hovind doesn't apparently know anything about mutation and natural selection. Most of people debating against evolution don't even understand it, and they don't even want to. Even if they did, THEY IGNORE THE FACTS. Please reply! It would be fun if you shared your own ideas too.

So, the testing1 and testing2 are text fields? If yes then I understood you wrong, sorry. So what you need to do is change testing1 to field1 in the script. So first you insert the textbox contents to the cell, then you insert data to the next cells depending on the selection field values using the method in the script I wrote.

You use radio buttons/dropdown menu in html form. After the info is sent to processing script, you could use if and elseif statements to check which options are chosen. This is the html form: <form action="script.php" method="post"><select name="testing1"><option>Select</option><option>option1</option><option>option2</option><option>option3</option></select><input type="Submit" /></form> <?phpif ( $_POST['testing1'] == "option1" ) {/* insert data to database */ }elseif ( $_POST['testing1'] == "option2" ) {/* insert data to database */ }elseif ( $_POST['testing1'] == "option3" ) {/* insert data to database */ } else {echo "Don't be boring, just choose one...";?> That's how I would do, but note that I'm not a genious when it comes to php. You can try this one out on a local server to see if it works(put whatever you want on the "/* insert data to database */"), I can't try it out right now, sorry.

Crimson Editor all the way!!! I love it, and you should too :(It supports all kinds of syntax types from C to Javascript. I use it because when I code with it, the code is easily understandable and I can easily use the padding in the code to see which element is in which(It keeps the padding of the previous line when you move to a new line, so you can just press tab to move it a bit more to right and then it looks like it's "inside" the element, makes working with divs a lot easier). It has small features that make coding CSS a lot easier, you can notice typos easily 'cause only correctly written stuff gets coloured. PHP is also highlighted with a red background and the functions and all other stuff are coloured. You can also choose your own colors for the code, I forexample didn't like the variable highlighting so I changed it.I would also recommend notepad++. It's good too.

You seem to have enough ram for normal computer use with win xp. You should be fine, but there are some stuff that may slow you down.Get a anti-spy/adware program. Antivirus programs don't usually protect well enough against spy- and adware so get one of these. When you enter a site, the unwanted software gathers information and sends it to a remote server, which leaves less bandwidth and resources to load the site.YOUR BROWSER. Make sure you have a good browser up to date(not MS Internet Explorer crap, more like firefox, chrome or opera browsers). I have noticed it takes a long time to load some sites with IE.Or maybe your internet speed has reduced. This can occur if your ISP is under traffic or the ISP doesn't provide the bandwidth it promised to you. Notice it can also be that the sites are heavy to load. Many news sites are even heavier 1 MB. Another cause for lack of speed is that you have other programs using internet, so there's less BW available for the browser.That's all I got, hope I helped.

I just found it interesting that you weren't against lesbians, but you were against male homosexuals.

Hello, asomormridul. Welcome to Xisto forums. I see you want some advice about making websites and such, so here they are. First learn some xhtml, there are tons of tutorials in the web out there. This is a markup language, xhtml is used to code the elements in a webpage for the browser. It's easy to start with. After you've learned xhtml, you can start learning CSS, which is used to style the elements in xhtml, for example set colors, position, margins and paddings etc. This also is easy. Now you that you know how to bring style and content to your website, learn javascript to bring usability. Javascript is a scripting language to run "stuff" on the client side(in the browser). Don't try to learn them all at the same time, you'll get confused. After you've learned the important 3, you can move to programming on the server side(code is run before the content leaves the server). The language I suggest you to learn is PHP. You can create dynamic sites with this language and a database. After or while you're learning php, you should learn sql(mySQL), this is used for the database. You use MySQL with PHP to create dynamic content. As you can see, there's lot to learn. There are also things regarding the forums that you should know. The rules What you should know

Lesbians ARE homosexuals, you ARE homophobic. And I'm NOT going to kill myself, and no I'm NOT gay... It's just stupid to be against homosexual men but not homosexual women. Your reply is just... stupid. Those that are actually against homosexuality should at least have some kind of explanation, like religion or other stuff. And those people are against homosexuality in both genders, not only in one. The only thing here showing signs of stupidity is your post.

WHAT?! Gimp doesn't have undo option? where you heard that? it does, just press ctrl + z

I missed this and this is kinda late reply but whatever Well you need lots of content, lots of users and lots of traffic. You should have the kind of content people are actually looking for (YES, I'm talking about search engines). You'll have SEO your forums if you haven't already done so and advertise your site in the right places, for example you're offering "free computer support", join a forum about computers and stuff like that and link to your site in your signature. I have to admit, there are few people in this world that actually sign up and stay active in any forums if they don't get anything in return(hah!). So you need interesting content to keep people coming back. It's also important what kind of content you have on your site, if you have content in multiple categories and not just one, you'll attract more people with different interests. For example: If you make a whole forum about computer hardware, it's probable that you won't get many members, but if have different content, even people not interested about hardware will come and post replies and about let's say software. Anyway, if you got my point, it's all about the content, without a lot of content you'll not attract users.

The only one of those I have tried is ice cubes. I would have to add this one: GO SWIMMING!!! That's the best thing you can do if you ask me, it feels soooo good to jump in the water after you've "overheated" :angel:

Iphone is just a brick with a touchscreen, a toy as you already kinda proved with your lightsaber comment. N97 is for someone who actually does something important with their phone.

Note that this topic was made in 2007, we are using myCent system now.

Don't be lazy, if the employer wants someone with more advanced coding skills, then you just have to learn more to get to that level of knowledge in php. But I'm kinda shocked that you know java and you're not hired yet, but many employers want to see what you have learned on a school paper.I think w3schools has a service where you can get you degree on something by doing their test through your computer.Anyway, try to learn more about these languages you know, basics isn't enough for an employer, he/she wants someone with the skills to code what he/she wants.