Now he just needs a Loc-Nar and he's ready to become a cyborg demon from Doom.

You are not hearing things....heard it, too ...that and, 'nar-nar.'

Excellent cover Jordan, putting it on the ipod now.

Those buildings are almost 50 feet apart; that is not narrow man not by ANY sense of the word.

You know why those photos look dark? Someone is using a flash!

The trees? You mean the trees with no leaves? Cmon dude!

Before I thought you were just using hyperbole but now I can see you are clinging to this idea so desperately because you just want to believe it. You are welcome to believe whatever you want. That's the beauty of living in a free society!

Unfortunately I'm still keeping my cookies

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/imagecache/textarticle_640/2013/06/13/sanford_florida_police_dept..jpg

http://www.craigboyce.com/w/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Trayvon-Martin_George-Zimmerman_Crime-Scene-Photos_038.jpg

You can't even SEE the other buildings and that has to be at least 20 feet right there end to end.

narrow  
Use Narrow in a sentence
nar·row [nar-oh] Show IPA adjective, nar·row·er, nar·row·est, verb, noun
adjective
1.
of little breadth or width; not broad or wide; not as wide as usual or expected: a narrow path.
2.
limited in extent or space; affording little room: narrow quarters.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by therealblankman.

@Sketch

There are quite a few reasons that the resurrection should be taken to be valid, or in your case, much more carefully considered..now, the problem with your view is that you give the bible absolutely no credit at all for having any truth in it, because you're caught up on things like the miracles. That is your primary objection, yet you have to realize that the evidence for the gospels is much greater than a great deal of ancient history. We have more evidence for the life of Jesus Christ than we do for Julius Caesar.

However, there is plenty that has been confirmed as true, some of which I've already mentioned..such as the fact that 50 people in the NT alone are confirmed to be historical, including two of the most major figures in the resurrection narative, Pontius Pilate and Caiaphas the high priest. Or the fact that the bible has been proven to be 100 percent reliable archaelogically. So your utter dismissal of the bible as having any fact to it puts you at odds with pretty much every practicing historian and bible scholar today.

I'll give you a few reasons..First of all, you have the empty tomb, a fact acknowledged as accurate today and undisputed even by the Jewish authorities at the time of his death. You have the fact that women were the first witnesses. In those days, a womens testimony was not considered valid. In fact you had pagans agruing for centuries that the resurrection wasnt true simply on the fact that women had seen it first. If the disciples invented the story, they never would have used women as witnesses, because it severally undermined their case in the eyes of jew and gentile alike. The fact it was left in greatly enhances its credibility.

You have all of the eye witnesses who saw Jesus, over 500 in number. Eye witnesses who were still alive at the time the gospels were written. You have the fact that the disciples were brutally tortured and ultimately martyred for preaching the gospel of the resurrected Jesus. They were direct eye witnesses of the fact and so they would never go to their deaths refusing to recant for something they knew was a lie. You have external sources confirming the resurrection. These are just a few reasons to at least investigate further.

As far as the discrepencies go, they were eye witness accounts. If this was all made up, don't you suppose the accounts would be harmonized? That fact that they're not harmonized makes them more reliable for testimony. Here is a good website to answer some of your objections:

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/num9.htm




>> ^Sketch:
Good evidence that He rose from the dead!? Oh, this ought to be good. Please, do tell exactly how there is any evidence at all for the truth of the resurrection myth, when the various gospels of the infallible bible don't even agree on the specific details of what even happened during the resurrection. But PLEASE don't once again use biblical passages to tell me that the resurrection happened anyway!>> ^shinyblurry:
It is possible to prove it. It all comes down the resurrection of Christ..If He rose from the dead, if it is indeed a historical event, then God does exist and everything the bible says is true. Anyone can claim to be the Son of God, but no one but the Son of God could prove it by rising from the dead. There is plenty of good evidence to suggest He did rise from the dead. It is reasonable to conclude from this evidence that what Christ said is true..and therefore, if you honesty seek Him, you will find Him..and He will show you He is real. >> ^Sketch:
You've got to be kidding me! Of course it's impossible to prove it either way! That's the entire damned point of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! You can't prove it except to assert that because people wrote a book to worship, it must be true!
You expect me to accept that there is some all-powerful, perfect, magical, interdimentional being that created everything at a whim, yet somehow never had to be created Himself, is eternal, demands that I live my life a certain way, is supposedly all-loving despite all of the suffering that He causes, and the only reasons that you can give me to believe such a cockamamie story are that a lot of people really believe that it's true (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum), and that there is a book that says that it's true (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning)! Forgive my crass interjection, but that is complete and utter horse shit!
Moot my ass, it's exactly the point! If you want to stick with Santa, then let's! It's the same thing! You don't expect me to believe that there is a Santa as the mythical, magical figure that we know him now just because there are a lot of kids that believe in him and he's an important cultural figure, do you? And he was at least based on a real person!

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by geo321.

Thanks for the heads-up, nar. Fixed!

This movie short called B-11 was from the original Heavy Metal film but originaly had the music of Don Felder (Take a Ride).

"It is Based on original story by Dan O'Bannon. A World War II B-17 bomber nicknamed the "Pacific Pearl" makes a difficult bombing run with heavy damage and casualties. As the bomber limps home, the Co-Pilot goes back to check on the crew. Finding nothing but dead bodies, he notices the Loc-Nar trailing the plane. Informing the pilot, he heads back to the cockpit, when the Loc-Nar rams itself into the plane and raises the dead crew members as zombies. The co-pilot is killed by the zombie ball turret-gunner leaving only the pilot - who barely escapes in time, only to land on an island populated by zombified airmen."

The music featured here, although from the same movie was from the short: Harry Canyon featuring John Candy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Metal_%28film%29

>> ^budzos:

I take offense to using this music with this clip. Sacrelige!

Thanks NAR!

In reply to this comment by notarobot:
*Promote

The surf music is perfect. That bridge catches some tubular nar-nars on a few zaboobs.

Molyneux is one of the biggest shit talkers in the games industry,

I can almost garentee when u play this you could say annything u want its probably all bassed on tonality of voice , and miloes responses will always be the same , so get ready for you tube videos of people slagging of milo and the game playing out as normal.

all the desissoins the player has to make that will change the outcioem of milo will be compleaty neglagable , i bet there are probably a maximum of 5 outcomes and anny macro veratoins will be totaly benile on add vertualy nothing to the exsperance.

What this game is , is a onrails shooter / minni game , presented within a scripted narative . Thats not a bad thing , but all the shit molinue spews and all the bullshit about how much of a technaligical achivment and how revalutoinary this is ist compelaty retarded.

Peter Molyneux - is effectively a used car salesman for games , He is a good sales man but his products never amount to the talk.

Molyneux realy anoys me , he has made some gr8 games and milo as a game is just fine and quite intresting i just wish Molyneux would stop talking shit

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Congrats on passing the Turing test NAR and thanks for your contributions to the Sift!

HOW do these people get the money to protest everywhere with such narly signs?

Narly.