-Firethings-'s profile at Help.com

User Involvement

Last 7 Posts Authored

• Vanity posted (1 week, 1 day) ago
  I realized something a while ago. it isnt really what we achieve that makes us great. its not unt…

• AnImAtIoN InClInAtIoN - the rise of the avatars. posted (3 weeks, 2 days) ago
  hello, help.com, welcome to the center of death by animation of avatars. i will be your loyal host…

• i need to know how to get my computers IP address. posted (2 months) ago
  NOT my routers which occurs when going to sites like whatsmyipaddresse. can anyone tell me how i c…

• just a little test posted (2 months) ago
  [wiki:help] i wanted to know if this functionality was ever implemented.…

• rockband is now available for the wii. posted (2 months) ago
  i wonder if its worth buying……

• help me give this game a name… posted (2 months, 1 week) ago
  just open it in IE!! http://www.freewebs.com/youthfuljavascript/startit.hta open this in IE only. …

• im making a game in javascript, and i need a little help with the AI of the computer player. posted (2 months, 1 week) ago
  most of the code is ridiculously complex for such a simple game, and takes far more resources than …

• All Claimed Posts »

-Firethings-'s Top (5) Replies by other users' votes

• (2 votes) how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
  

  let us dissect this statement.
  the question:
  how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
  and the answer:
  a woodchuck would chuck all the wood he could if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
  
  now if we look at the question being asked, it seems that we are questioning what a woodchuck would do, and we are predicting what is likely. as this is the case, the answer may be fuzzy, but we might arrive at one nonetheless.
  
  in order to know this, we first must know the motives that may push a woodchuck to chuck wood, so let us look at possible causes for such.
  
  first know that a woodchuck should not be misunderstood, the do not wear a hood, and gardeners think them not good. now that you know that, learn the following.
  
  a woodchuck is a Marmota monax, and was given the name most likely because of the habitat that the indians observed it in, whenever english settlers came over to ammerica. it was a translation of an indian word, appareantly compounded in order to make sense.
  
  most people know the woodchuck by a diffrent name though: groundhog.
  
  woodchucks can eat bark, and other grasses, so it is concievable that a woodchuck could chuck wood for bark substinance.
  
  however, woodchucks tend to like to stay in their borrow, in the day. it would not likely wish to take the effort to chuck wood if it could find other food.
  
  because the “Hibernacula (are) preferentially constructed in soils with good drainage in hedgerows, woods, south-facing inclines, rocky areas, and even haystacks.” we can see that it is likely that a woodchuck would live within range of woods, and hence is not limited by this facilitation from its possible chucking.
  
  so now that we know something about the behavior of the woodchuck, we can further analyze the question.
  
  the next important part of the answer is “would chuck all the wood he could”
  if we examine the implications of this, it would be as if saying the woodchuck had no life. i mean, what self respecting wood chuck would sit around all day chucking wood? it would be reasonable for it to chuck some wood, simply because it could.
  but to chuck all the wood would not be good. dont let me be misunderstood, but one must think of what else the woodchuck should do, and not neccessarily what it would do. you need to remember that woodchuchs hibernate. he needs to go and find a misses woodchuck for goodness sakes.
  
  finally, we come to the final part of the answer: “if a woodchuck could chuck wood”
  
  this is implying that a woodchuck currently cant chuck wood. but woodchucks have teeth, and teeth can naw and chuck wood fairly well enough… but it only specifies the answer and as such will be left out of our analysis.
  
  so, based on the reasons provided i suggest this alternative:
  
  a woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck should chuck, but only as much as is good for the woodchucks need of wood.
  
  does anyone find any reason to dispute this?
  
  works cited:
  “woodchuck.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton     Mifflin Company, 2004. Answers.com 19 Mar. 2008. http://www.answers.com/topic/woodchuck
  “woodchuck.” Grzimek’s Animal Life Encyclopedia. The Gale Group, Inc, 2005.     Answers.com 19 Mar. 2008. http://www.answers.com/topic/woodchuck
  
  - written 5 months, 3 weeks ago – voted for by MittensInSummertime, Hohenheim of Light

• (1 vote) i was wondering why my user name says sarah_galinde and not sarah_galindez
  

  i really dont suggest using your real name.
  but whatever suits you.
  
  just think though, if you ever say anything personal, or someones looking for what you said, all they have to do is search for your name…
  
  so dont say anything you dont want people that know you in real life to find out about…
  
  - written 18 hours, 13 minutes ago – voted for by hey...iknowyou

• (1 vote) I can’t take it no one here helps me and i’ll
  

  i currently dont have your well being on my mind. the truth is, a lot of people dont get help, cause there isnt really enough true people that help to go around… despite many good intentions. the only way that you can really get help is just to help others.
  
  because when you help others, you make friends, and friends (sometimes even “online friends”) are what will in turn help you the most.
  
  - written 2 months, 3 weeks ago – voted for by Mas1st

• (1 vote) christian aimed post, once again.
  

  whoever said that it was a fight? weve already got the winner, hands down. i mean, think about it. i think that the 2 things that make god so powerful are 1, hes outside of time (of course satan is too, so this isnt the deciding factor)
  
  and 2, he can speak things into existence, and out of it. no matter how powerful satan is, he cant speak things into and out of existence.
  how do you fight someone who can speak you out of existence, is immortal, and infinitly powerful, as well as all knowing(aka infinite intel.)? versus satan who is strong, intellegint, and powerful, but not infinitly so on any account(and satan cannot speak us out of existence based on what we know).
  
  This is why there really isnt a fight, and why christians know that God will win.
  
  - written 5 months, 2 weeks ago – voted for by Silverwings

• (1 vote) the question:
  

  your options arent options. you insult those that would hide, and force them to answer stay and fight. who cares if your right, you never gave us a real question if you force the answer on us as well.
  
  - written 5 months, 2 weeks ago – voted for by ThinkMindThink

Last 5 Replies – All 2,248 replies »

• An invention that might save the world…
  

  if such a device worked, then if you built a working prototype would be the best way to get the word out.
  
  of course, many people have built fakes.
  
  your ideas may seem to work for you in theory. but until they are applied, thats all they are. theories.
  
  not to say it cant work, but build it, and they will listen. of course, you would force the world to listen if you could start producing then selling them. and then you could give them out for free even.
  - written 10 hours, 40 minutes ago

• Darwin’s theory of evolution is a very powerful concept.
  

  err, by ordered society i meant to say an ordered universe…
  
  society can be anything but ordered…
  - written 12 hours, 37 minutes ago

• Darwin’s theory of evolution is a very powerful concept.
  

  okay, so you have insulted religions everywhere, simply because there are a few crazy people that choose to follow them.
  
  but you still really haven’t shown me anything new.
  
  those who have to fall back to insulting the opponent rather than actually keeping on the issue… i find i learn less from.
  
  i will not insult you now, nor attempt to impress you with the use of a thesaurus.
  
  in the end, i really don’t care to be the smug winner of an argument, whether the issue is ever addressed or not.
  
  but, i do want to know the truth. i wont claim that what im saying is the truth for you Prisca, but understand something.
  
  i am not dogmatically presenting my view here, but only trying to explore weaknesses in current theories. if you can shoot down any of them, im only the happier for it (the weaknesses that is).
  
  unlike other intelligent opponents you must argue, i wont be discouraged by your incessant insults. most likely because i can read every word and understand them, like i doubt many of your opponents can.
  
  a wise man once said that the best words are the short ones, because the general population can read them. … i guess thats pretty smart, because words are like sparks that can start fires in peoples hearts. but they need to understand them…
  
  anyways, thats off topic.
  back to what i have to say, and the reason that im actually writing this.
  
  please prove me wrong. i beg you to. show me logic, without insulting me that i can figure out what really is true. ill tell you right now though that many a christian has done a far better job than any athiest at that.
  
  until that day comes, ill go with what i see as the most logical thing at hand. because it actually makes sense… and that will be that there must be something to have set up such an ordered society. something.
  - written 12 hours, 39 minutes ago

• i was wondering why my user name says sarah_galinde and not sarah_galindez
  

  i really dont suggest using your real name.
  but whatever suits you.
  
  just think though, if you ever say anything personal, or someones looking for what you said, all they have to do is search for your name…
  
  so dont say anything you dont want people that know you in real life to find out about…
  - written 18 hours, 13 minutes ago

• Darwin’s theory of evolution is a very powerful concept.
  

  okay, ill humor you with a response.
  
  i just want to see if i understand your logic.
  
  so, what your saying is that because an idea does not follow a potentially flawed system set up by flawed humans, it therefor cannot be true?
  
  …
  really, im trying to understand this. i mean, just because they didnt arrive at the idea by a set system, does that make it false?
  
  thats your argument right? … i really dont see the logic.
  - written 1 week ago

-Firethings-'s conversations are tagged:

life, friends, Love, god, computer, Person, Find, Internet, game, post, Film, question, Mind, guy, school, Uploading and downloading, e-mail, Great, Adolescence, Wrong, faith, Pain and nociception, Year, play, world