Internet arguments. I mean, a lot of the people who argue on the internet sit in their parents' basement with nothing better to do, so there's no point in arguing with them especially if you try to make yourself sound like a James Bond villain.
Printable View
Internet arguments. I mean, a lot of the people who argue on the internet sit in their parents' basement with nothing better to do, so there's no point in arguing with them especially if you try to make yourself sound like a James Bond villain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecco
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Honey the Cat
And so that wraps up the stimulating discussion of atheism and other philosophies (assuming that Honey's post is in response to mine).
I didn't see any arguments here, but sure, internet arguments must come from people in their parents' basements.
James Bond villain? Surely I have no idea what you're talking about!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...phet_Kotto.jpg
Now keep your hands where I can see 'em and no sudden movements!!!
But are we talking *good* James Bond villains, or bad ones?
Because being compared to Red Grant is not a bad thing.
Or this guy from the alternate universe of villains that James Bond just laughs at.
And by the way, what I really meant to say is that I respect others' opinions and don't take them as a personal insult or reason to insult others, which is basically every internet argument I've ever seen.
Good Bond villain = Red Grant "From Russia with Love"
Bad Bond villain = Elliot Carver "Tomorrow Never Dies"
You do realize that 55% of what I say is a joke right?
But aren't jokes supposed to be funny?Quote:
Originally Posted by Honey the Cat
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/9627/badumtish.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
http://i674.photobucket.com/albums/v.../VW-OhSnap.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17daysolderthannes
Wow, it's fun watching people act like they know what they're talking about, when in actuality they haven't the slightest clue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecco
On what points are you talking about Matthews?
Generally I disagree with every point they are trying to make.
Specifically:
1. That 17days and Ecco know how educational or noneducational these shows are.
2. That 17days and Ecco have even seen first hand a child watching either one of these shows, not to mention ascertained how much information said child was getting out of them.
3. That 17days and Ecco know how mindful parents are of what their kids watch.
But hey man, the kid just fucking sits there doing nothing man. They're not learning nothing man. Look, the iPhone is more educational than all those shows. But what do I know, I'm just a engineer.
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
But yeah, you're right on it.
Just because you aren't learning anything from Dora the Explorer does not mean a four year-old isn't learning something. My son is obsessed with Diego, and I have in fact sat down and watched it with him. And sure enough, when Diego "quizzed" him on the information given about the animals in the episode, my son responded with the correct answers.
Does this mean that I'll be pulling my son out of school and letting Dora & Diego educate him full time? Not at all. Nor does this mean I turn up my nose at non-educational programming.
It does tell me that there are a few members around here who could use some experience as parents before they toss blind judgements around.
note to self: Mr. Matthews is a writer for both Blue's Clues and Dora the Explorer.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
They are both terrible shows and teach children nothing. Even though it may be for an older audience, Bill Nye blows those no talent hacks out of the water. THAT is how you make education fun.