Jump to content

GripGambler

Manager
  • Posts

    610
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

GripGambler last won the day on May 30 2011

GripGambler had the most liked content!

About GripGambler

  • Birthday 12/31/1969

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Manager ID
    6100

Recent Profile Visitors

16,872 profile views

GripGambler's Achievements

Brown Belt

Brown Belt (4/6)

53

Reputation

  1. Guard to mount sweeps are very basic BJJ and removing them would be silly and unrealistic. Moves such as the kimura/hip bump sweep are taught very early on and are very high percentage even in MMA. Of course you won't see it often in organizations such as the UFC/Price where most people are at a high level and have trained the move themselves many times... They may need rebalancing, but removing a basic move should be out of the question.
  2. I'm glad I could get through to you I'm here all day!
  3. But helicopter game is so fun! Until you get a bad random placement that forces you to crash, lol. Thanks, but Lance crushed me today... 40!! grats to him
  4. All of these statements are based on current human knowledge and technology limits. You know for a fact that those examples are impossibilities given all possible technology, even those undeveloped or unthought of yet by humans? The question was directly to the point. The point being that science is only limited by the technology and knowledge of its users. Science as a field can explain everything that exists or occurs, past, present, and future. Even a god if one were to exist.
  5. Example of something that wasn't observable while it was happening, along with an explanation of why technology could never exist to observe it?
  6. Yes, it can only explain something that is observable. Luckily, everything is observable. My entire point was that just because we do not currently have the tools to properly observe and test everything, does not mean that it is impossible to observe and test. There are events that happened in the past and the future that humans will never be able to explain using science, regardless of how far we advance technology. Does this mean that science as a process cannot explain these events? Nope, it just means that we aren't prepared to use it to do so.
  7. jacky67: If you are honestly interested in learning/debating the subject, I strongly suggest you research the differences between a theory and a scientific theory. If you aren't willing to step out of your comfort zone and learn then debating really is useless.
  8. You claimed that a scientific theory was just a theory, when in fact, the definition of a scientific theory is absolutely not the same as the definition for the word theory. They are two entirely separate concepts with definitions that do not align with each other. The word theory being a part of the phrase "scientific theory" is rather misleading. This is also false. Science absolutely can explain everything. The knowledge that we can express through science currently is greatly held back by human knowledge/culture. Just because humans cannot yet use science to explain something does not mean that it cannot be explained through science. Even manipulations made by a god can be explained through science if the proper evidence was given. Science itself does not dispute a god, there is simply no evidence to suggest one exists at the moment.
  9. False, albeit a common misconception. Science does not attempt to disprove that a "God" created Earth. Science builds evidence to gain a better understanding of what happened/may have happened, regardless of what the actual outcome may be. Disproving God isn't a possibility as one can always argue that evidence was planted/created, and no matter how far back science is able to "prove," one can always argue that a God was around before that time.
  10. That is why you have received every warning point you have, not just the last one. "Let's be honest," my judgement matters when warning points are awarded, not yours. I let a lot of insulting on the forum slide (as long as it isn't personal or so incessant that we receive complaints about it) because people here prefer to speak in insults I guess. I will not, however, tolerate insulting or abusive language/words/tone/etc... to be directed towards anyone on the MMATycoon staff or moderation team. Whether it's myself, Mike, PBR, or anyone else, proportionate and increasing punishment will be given every time I see it. As far as warning notes, if anyone who happens across this thread is curious.. In previous forum versions, when a warning was given, it required you to give a reason for the warning point and gave you the option to send the offending member a PM about the event if you wanted to with a separate note to them. As we have moved to the newer software version, it has changed the old system and converted the old "Note" to a "Note for moderators" and any PM you had it send to the member was converted to "Note for member" and is now kept track in the warning notes, rather than just being treated as a PM. Given the old way of operation, in that it didn't store your "Note for member" as a warning note, the moderation staff often chose to PM the member outside of the warning interface, tell them in the thread where the offense happened, or simply forego mentioning it (when the member did something they obviously knew they would be punished for, whether they admit to or not). So now everyone is aware, when you see notes from before the software update, remember, if there is nothing indicated, all it means is that you were not contacted through the warning interface. It does not mean that you weren't contacted at all, nor does it mean that the moderation staff isn't aware of the warning. Another quick note: "Notes for moderators" are just that, notes for the moderation staff. No member on the forum is entitled to know the contents of this section under any circumstance, so do not attempt to demand to see this. I'm letting the one in this thread stay for context purposes, but in the future do not expect to see it mentioned.
  11. Hi Grip! Keeping the forums safe these days? Friend me, friend.

  12. Cool topic bro. Stop making them now.
  13. The ref should NEVER stand the fighters up from mount. Too dominant of a position for intervention, IRL or in game.
×
×
  • Create New...