becerra95 : Confirmation:
You'd like an x/x/x/31/31/x Female Calm Happiny
That will cost only 500 Viz.

Does the ability matter to you at all? I can breed a Happiny with Serene Grace, Natural Cure, or Friend Guard. You may also want to consider that I could breed you a 31/x/31/31/31/31 Happiny for only 1,000 viz, and that one would be considerably more useful in battles. Let me know what you decide, and I'll PM you when your Pokemon is hatched and ready to be traded.

Razor-987 : Confirmation:
You'd like a 31/31/31/x/31/31 Male Adamant/Jolly Charmander with Outrage
You'd like a 31/x/31/31/31/31 Male Modest/Timid Charmander
You'd like a 31/x/31/31/31/31 Male Timid Piplup with Aqua Ring
That will actually only cost 7,500 Viz total

Do you care about the abilities at all? I could easily breed your Charmanders with Solar Power or Blaze, but I'm not sure if I could get my hands on what I need to breed a Defiant Piplup... I could try to make it happen but it would definitely take a lot longer. Let me know what you think, and then I'll PM you when I've finished breeding your Pokemon to arrange a time to trade.

Mega Mewtwo X : Just to confirm with you, you're asking for a 31/31/31/31/31/31 Male Prankster Sableye with Recover and Flatter. That will cost 5,500 Viz, as outlined in my original post.

Flatter is a weird choice to want on any competitive Pokemon, but I guess I can put that on there. You forgot to tell me what nature you want your Sableye to be, though. Once you tell me what nature you want, I'll start working on your Sableye, and it should be done within a week or two, depending on my schedule. When I've bred the Pokemon, I'll PM you and arrange a time to trade him to you. You don't need to pay me the 5,500 Viz until I trade you the Pokemon.

That's what I get for trying to use a Monotype Bug team that I built for gen 5. Good game, Gamin' Gal.


So what exactly is going to happen now? Do I go to a losers bracket, sub in for someone who isn't being active, or am I just done for good?

   As some of you may have noticed from chat, I know a lot about Pokemon and I'm pretty good at battling them. I'd credit a lot of that success to a pathological determination to breed and train Pokemon to have the best stats possible. I breed my Pokemon to be the very best, and if you want, you can pay me to do the same for you!
   I am willing to breed you just about any (breedable) Pokemon with egg moves, natures, gender, and IVs that you want, hopefully within a week of when you request it. For those of you who don't know what IVs are, they are basically the "genes" of Pokemon that cannot be altered after hatching. If you are interested in using a Pokemon to battle competitively or if you just want your favorite Pokemon to be the strongest possible, I recommend looking into it.

If you request that I breed a Pokemon for you, post or PM me the species of Pokemon you want, the gender, the IVs, the nature, the ability, and the egg moves. If you don't know or care about any of that, I can just give you what I think would be best. Here are the prices and services I offer (they may change). Some options are more expensive because they are more difficult to do and take more time. It's based largely on gender ratios. It's also much more difficult to breed a 6 IV Pokemon than a 5 IV one, so I wouldn't usually recommend that. 
Breeding
I'll want 1,000 viz for breeding a 5 IV Pokemon with less than half males. (1:0, 7:1, 3:1, or 1:1 ratio of females to males)
I'll want 2,000 viz for breeding a 5 IV Pokemon with more males than females. (1:3 or 1:7 ratio of females to males)
I'll want 3,000 viz for breeding a 5 IV Pokemon that can only be male, or has no gender.
I'll want 5,000 viz for breeding a 6 IV Pokemon with less than half males.
I'll want 10,000 viz for breeding a 6 IV Pokemon with more males than females.
I'll want 30,000 viz for breeding a 6 IV Pokemon that can only be males, or has no gender. (this one is ridiculously hard to do)

I'll want 500 Viz extra if you want a specific gender of Pokemon, because that takes more time.
I'll want nothing extra for getting the nature, ability, and egg moves that you want in the Pokemon. I can nickname it whatever you'd like for free, too!

Pokemon Advice
I can also answer any questions anyone has about Pokemon, competitive or otherwise, for free. I highly recommend asking me questions about how to best use a Pokemon or what would be good on a team before you ask me to breed it for you, or else you may end up not being the very best You can ask me about how a Pokemon could be used competitively, or how it can be used in-game, and you can ask me how much it might cost to breed a Pokemon for you if you aren't sure.

My 3DS Friend Code is 3969-5148-2184 let me know if you add me!

Davideo7 :  I've got Pokemon Y, and my safari has Nosepass, Magcargo, and Rhydon. My friend code is 3969-5148-2184, and my handle in the game is Mors.

I'll try and add everyone here, but it'll take a while with my shoddy wi-fi. If anyone would like me to add their code sooner than later, they can feel free to private message me or leave a comment on my profile. I'm up for possible trades. I breed Pokemon for competitive battles, so if I'm feeling generous I may be willing to breed something for some of you guys, or at least give you one of my 3-4 IV Pokemon if you ask. If you'd like to trade something or battle, I'd probably be interested. Just make sure you PM me on this site rather than waiting for me to get online in-game, because it's something of a struggle for me to get my 3DS online.

hyperknuckles : Are you certain you want this closed? As far as I can tell, there are still some people who may want to share their stories here, and your thread doesn't need to be closed, even if it's inactive for a while. There's no harm in keeping it open, and you'll get Viz for every post.

That said, if you are sure you want it closed, I can do that for you. Please post or PM me to confirm you want this thread closed if you still do. Until then, I'm staying my hand.

BluemageKyle : I don't know why you would bring that up here and now, but fair warning: I don't like drama spilling into my forum, and it looks like your post is just asking for it.

Varaddude630: This may very well be a duplicate thread, but probably not of a recent one. I failed to find the thread you mentioned you posted in, so unless someone else can find the thread in question, it's probably okay for now. Likewise, since this forum is modded (albeit rarely) by yours truly, I will allow it in this forum. Thanks for your concern.



As for the question... I have only ever gotten in one physical altercation other than just messing around with friends. I was somewhere between 11 and 13 years old at the time, and a kid cut me in line to go to the next area at a Boys and Girls Club. I mentioned it to him, and he told me to shut up. I told him to "make me" and he decided to try. He pushed me into a bookcase, and I tackled him to the ground, ready to continue the fight. Fortunately, the 'grownups' stepped in and stopped it before anyone could really win the fight, but all the bystanders seemed to agree that I had won anyways.

This thread has no purpose. Closed.

Good job. Two years is a long time to waste on this site, but I can't judge. Knowing you've been here that long just makes me feel old, though... Anyways, here's to another year of being a pretty swell guy, and not being a whiny buttkiss like some of your peers! I know I don't tell you often, since I never see you, but you are one of the best.

What would I say to Snow?

Take care of yourself, and only come back when and if you're ready. I miss you, and I think a bunch of other people do, too. Looking forward to talking whenever you come back, because chatting is more fun than letters =/. Do your best.

I have moved this to Project Zomboid from the Chat Regulars Forum. The mods here may do with it as they see fit.

Shaedo K : Something along those lines, perhaps. I would argue religious freedom was a sort of fledgling concept when the constitution was drafted, and many people back then may not have even considered irreligion a possible issue. Therefore, I guess modern courts just stretch the definition to keep public policy functionally reasonable. That's my optimistic guess at the motives, at least.

Shaedo K : There are several ways by which I am tempted to respond to that comment. The most sensible is probably something along the lines of "That ruling was made less to establish that atheism is a religion, and more to give it equal protection under first amendment rights." In many religions, the non-belief in certain deities is very important ("Thou shalt have no other gods before me"). To deny protection for people who lack belief in, say Allah, would be to deny protection for the religious views of most non-Muslims. Same thing with Jesus and non-Christians, and a plethora of other faith/deity mix-ups. The legal definition is somewhat different from the standard, and was used mostly to guarantee that each individual can have more freedom of conscience with regard to faith (or lack thereof).
TL;DR: The Supreme Court wanted to prevent discrimination against atheists, and oversimplified by calling it a religion.

On an easier-to-explain note, I would point out that the Supreme Court has made innumerable flawed rulings. They are rather clever people, usually, but they make plenty of mistakes that other people (even if they are less intelligent) might not. Their rulings certainly have no bearing on whether a statement is factual or not.

Singelli : The answer to your question is, essentially, no. Sexual reproduction is advantageous over asexual reproduction in many cases, genetically speaking. Asexual reproduction just about always results in the genesis of an organism which is genetically identical to its parent, or a clone. Sex provides a means for more genetic variation, and therefore more opportunity for useful traits to be passed on. With asexual reproduction the only opportunity for change is mutation, but with sexual reproduction the information is mixed more thoroughly and often. The more genetic variation there is, the more likely it is that a few of a species will be more "fit," as it were. I'm no biologist, so perhaps these links can help you find answers, if you would like. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/sex/advantage/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction
I would be interested in seeing this Hovind video if you can find me a link.

As for the creation of the universe... The Theory of Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with that. In fact, the Theory of Evolution doesn't even cover the origin of life. The current consensus on those topics are the Big Bang Theory and the idea of abiogenesis, respectively.

You really should watch the video that soxfan849 posted. It will address some misconceptions one may have about Evolution (including the idea that "velociraptors evolved from birds" is the same thing as "a bird can become a velociraptor.)

tRIUNE : I agree that sometimes translations change the meanings of verses, but I'm afraid I fail to see a significant difference between our two versions of Ecclesiastes 3:19-20. It seems to me that in both cases the idea is that man is destined to die and decompose at the end of his time, no differently from any other creatures.
You could argue that isn't what it means because other parts of the Bible contradict it, but I fear we would be entering a very long thread if we decided to try and pretend there aren't contradictions in there. It's a very old and oft-translated book, whose pieces have been continually altered and occasionally removed by men who do so because they thought they could better express the will of God.

TheFadedWarrior : If you ever find out what your acrostic Bible verses were, let us know. I am interested in seeing them. It stands to reason that both of those verses only work like that after some translation, since none of the Bible was originally in English. In fact, most of the books in the Bible didn't use the same letters we do.

As for the topic at hand... I'm not religious, but there are a few verses I'm genuinely fond of, so I might as well address the 'prompt' with one of them.

Ecclesiastes 3 "(19)For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. (20)All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again."

Some people find that thought disturbing, but I no longer take issue with it.

warmaker : Etymologically speaking, and according to most academic sources, the term "atheism" is literally the lack of belief in deities. It is important to notice the difference between the two ideas. "I do not believe in any gods" is not quite the same as "I believe there are no gods." It should also be pointed out that Agnostic Atheism is not a term Awesom3Gamer created himself, but is actually a very common label among people who identify as atheist.

As for the alleged sillyness of the idea of the creator/creators of humanity being aliens... I would argue that if any being had created our entire planet, then it clearly did not originate here. By that logic one might argue that even the Judeo-Christian God is an alien, seeing as how he did not even come from this universe.
Similarly, if you were to suppose an extra-terrestrial race or individual had the means to create a planet such as Earth and subsequently evade human detection indefinitely, then I think the being or beings in question would be very difficult to distinguish from what humans have historically considered gods.

Which one sounds sillier really depends on whether you think it's more likely that unexplained entities from an unknown planet created us, or that unexplained entities which existed completely outside the structure of our universe created us.

In fact, it's not out of the question that both of those are true. What if a completely incomprehensible being created the universe and then a race of aliens arose which later became responsible for life on our planet?
Nah, that'd be silly.