Dennis

Ender was practically 'fooled' into obliterating an entire alien species; one of which while initially posed a 'threat' to humanity, according to the movie it was merely an attempt for their species to survive by 'borrowing water'.

Pretty sure the book delved deeper into the conspiracy (have not read the sequels), however what choice would you have taken?

Do you feel that if indeed the aliens did not 'start the war', and it was merely our own defense mechanism to feel something we don't' know as a threat, was warranted to retaliate and commit genocide?

What do you think would have been the right thing to do if such a case happened such as in the movie?

So the latest episode of Walking Dead had Lizzie, who clearly had some mental issues, kill Mica and even threatened Lil '***-kicker' to show Carol n (forgot his name) the walkers were 'friends'.

Would you have offed Lizzie too knowing she's a threat and liability to their survival?

What about before, given there were surefire signs of her mental health yet no one approached the issue as necessary, would you have offed her before she had the chance to do harm, or let her be 'bitten' by the walker so she can still get what she 'wanted' so to speak and not have her as a liability anymore?

Well since the 'interesting' decision by Ryan Bell to 'try' atheism; which is hard to believe really...but I get it, I'm curious what other religious folk could imagine if they were to 'try' atheism themselves.

Questions is simple:

How would you live your life if you were atheist?

What do you think you would do if you were just an atheist FIRST, rather than be raised or deciding to become a Christian?

What do you think you would do if you 'tried' atheism?

Thanks for any answers you provide.

I've heard interesting stories about how nice Oman is amidst the fact it's an absolute monarchy that's predominantly muslim.

Wondering if anyone has been there and what their experience of it was.

Any feedback is appreciated.

Hopefully this dumb link works (if anyone can tell me the simple magic secret to linking websites let me know):

http://www.theonion.com/articles/

scientists-look-onethird-of-the-human-race-has-to,

27166/?ref=auto

I tried to separate it so you could actually get the entire link to copy/paste....normally when I post it cuts half of it out.

Basically it's saying that scientists last year decided that 1/3 of the worlds' population has to die in order for humanity to continue to exist, past 2025 from what I gathered in the article. The article THEN explained the many different ways we should go about killing off everyone to fulfill the requirements. In the article it said if nothing was decided by March 31st that peace corps or whatever should go ahead and take necessary steps to 'off' people. Apparently no one gave that warning with much regard.

NOW, I know 'the onion' may not be the most reliable news source on the planet, not to mention this 'threat' as anything but plausible. HOWEVER, I don't doubt such a subject was discussed, let alone scientist actually professing such a solution to overpopulation and resource depletion.

With that in mind what are your thoughts on this idea? Do you agree with this solution? Do you think it logically feasible to go with such a thing as partial genocide for the greater 'good' of society?

If so then does this not contradict accusations some atheists have proposed against christian's history? Does it also imply a horrible sense of 'control' and or mania that some atheists reject given their free nature to 'think for themselves' according to concepts behind an atheist mindset?

If not, then if such a thing actually gained STRENGTH in its proposition? For example,a said scientist becomes president, talks with United Nations or whatever and somehow decide it's in the best interests of humanity to commit to killing 1/3 of humanity. Then how would you feel about it? How would you feel if they killed off all the homeless, elderly, and criminals? What if it was mandated to 'volunteer' yourself?

Realistically it would be beneficial in terms of economical standards, liveliness of the planet and human society, and more or less even the advancement of society (get rid of all the lesser inteligent, poor, welfare, and criminal minds it would only leave those who benefitted from living the most).

So while it sound ridiculous and atrocious, technically it'd make the most ''logical' sense.....so what say you about it?

Often noobs like myself have deemed those folks who are too good for their own good as no-lifers. But since the word 'noob' has been adopted in the game industry as someone who's a 'newbie' or just someone who SUCKS. Shouldn't the term no-lifer be adapted as someone who plays a game extremely well..to the point it seems the person has done nothing with their life but practice and play a genre to the point of perfection?

Folks who get called no-lifer take it as an insult, almost providing some guilt that suggests they do indeed have 'no-life'. But to be a no-lifer means you've just played that genre for a long time, and apparently have acheived mass skill from such a long period of time playing it.

Like in C.O.D., no-lifers have probably played first person shooters for DECADES, all the way back to the wolfenstein/doom days, so when they play the new age games like C.O.D., it's easy for them to piss off everyone in the lobby with their 190-2 K/D every game. So wouldn't it suggest to be called a no-lifer means you just have a lot of skill?

Would it be the new term for the gaming age? Your thoughts folks...it's greatly appreciated.

So a man rapes and kills another man's wife and kills his son as well. Gets off on the crime because of no conclusive evidence and a great lawyer (or paid the judge; whatever). The victim (husband) plans over the course of a few years to pay this guy back.

He ends up capturing the guy cutting off his arms/legs, puts bleach in his eyes, cuts off his tongue/genitals and then takes him to the hospital to get professional care before dying (this is assuming he closed the wounds before he bled to death, and put him on some sort of pain killer so he wouldn't die from shock). Then he leaves the state and moves on with life.

Never committed a crime in his existence except that one, and he does eventually get caught by the cops and it's on the news everywhere. Yes it's like the movie law abiding citizen but the difference is the man LET the man LIVE. AND that was the only manslaughter he committed, he left the judge and police advocates alone, he just wanted to ensure the bad guy never hurts/kills another innocent again.

SO with that said.....how would you respond to the incident if seen on the news? Do you support it? Should he be free from prosecution or should he do time?

If he should do time, what are your thoughts about the REAL LIFE story of the man who beat his relative to death after he witnessed him attempting to rape his daughter? Should THAT man be prosecuted?

Your answers are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

So a man rapes and kills another man's wife and kills his son as well. Gets off on the crime because of no conclusive evidence and a great lawyer (or paid the judge; whatever). The victim (husband) plans over the course of a few years to pay this guy back.

He ends up capturing the guy cutting off his arms/legs, puts bleach in his eyes, cuts off his tongue/genitals and then takes him to the hospital to get professional care before dying (this is assuming he closed the wounds before he bled to death, and put him on some sort of pain killer so he wouldn't die from shock). Then he leaves the state and moves on with life.

Never committed a crime in his existence except that one, and he does eventually get caught by the cops and it's on the news everywhere. Yes it's like the movie law abiding citizen but the difference is the man LET the man LIVE. AND that was the only manslaughter he committed, he left the judge and police advocates alone, he just wanted to ensure the bad guy never hurts/kills another innocent again.

SO with that said.....how would you respond to the incident if seen on the news? Do you support it? Should he be free from prosecution or should he do time?

If he should do time, what are your thoughts about the REAL LIFE story of the man who beat his relative to death after he witnessed him attempting to rape his daughter? Should THAT man be prosecuted?

Your answers are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

So I'm curious, does anyone know how the match system on multiplayer works? Does it match folks based on their k/d , or objective score?

Because if that was the case, I had intentions of just jacking up my k/d record so I can FINALLY get into some decent games with noobs of my own calibur rather than get stomped on by these no-lifers because my k/d is 1.04 (it was 1.46 at some point). I moved recently and had to 'downgrade' my internet, probably the cause of the *ss whippins. But among the noobs like myself I have pretty decent games.

So with the constant 4-25 scores i'm getting now with these no-lifers, i'm wondering if it's possible to get into better matched games with a lower k/d score?

Any feedback helps alot thanks.

SO you cheated (or ARE cheating), fine...well not really, but for the sake of the question; WHAT were the reasons for not just leaving the relationship?

Why did you decide it was better to shack up with someone else, and rather than leave the other person, you STAYED with the other person?

Were you aware of the fact that this cheating will land you in the 'bad person' realm?

What were you thinking that you needed from the spouse to stay in the relationship?

Did you care if the spouse was now not going to get any sex or love from you?

Inevitably what are the reasons you DIDN'T leave the marriage/relationship and just get with the lover?

Your feedback is appreciated...thanks.

It's a classic tragedy that's existed for decades (probably centuries....hell millenia), that the subservient, or dedicated, or foolish....whatever you want to call it wife/girlfriend stays with their abusive husband/bf regardless of the obvious.

But WHY? What goes on in your head when you clearly see the man beating you, verbally abusing you, CHEATING on you, threatening your children, YOUR LIFE...and yet out of this delusion of love, this volatile infatuation, you cling to him as if the abuse is a form of love to you.

So explain what goes on in your head, what are you really thinking? What is your heart TRULY saying that makes you want to stay like some masochist?

I dont' need the 'well i know I should leave, i dont know, i just love him' answers....I want some DETAILS on WHY you love him....where is this love coming from...where's the source?

Your answers are GREATLY appreciated on this matter. Thanks in advance.

So in the future we have FINALLY ventured off to another planet, let's say the recently 'discovered' ones on the news as of late. And there's humanoid, some kind of alien life on there like us. Just think of Star Trek/Avatar or whatever.

So after figuring communications out with each other, say the whole religious subject comes into play with some of them. And come to find out, they have religions themselves, and they have atheists as well. Only thing is their 'bible' is different, pertaining to their planet obviously, and maybe even their God is perceived differently.

So how would some of you radical christian folks take such an interaction in the event it happens? How would radical atheists perceive this, given you blame a book for the massive amounts of death and destruction and devise that if religion never existed the world would be more 'sane'. Yet in some other planet THE SAME happenings occured elsewhere? (I use the word radical because there are folks who take their religion, or lack thereof to the extreme...full of bias, and contempt for those who disagree)

Granted the whole Star Trek concept has been overplayed all the time in novels and movies, but on a serious 'what if' note, because such a thing as 'planet travel' is NOT impossible, and i'm pretty sure there will still be plenty of christians and atheists running around if and when that event occurs, so how would you imagine (yes imagine please, I know it's difficult given the need to play the part, but give it a try) taking in such information revealed?

Often on family &relationships sections have there been folks who asked questions like "I'm with a married man/woman, will they leave their spouse and get with me?" or "I'm in a terrible relationship I dont' know what to do he beats me/cheats on me/doesn't care about me." or even "I'm cheating on my husband/wife, what are great ways to avoid getting caught?"

While some are trolling I know, others i'm sure are dead serious. But what happened after getting their answers from folks and they made their firm decision regarding the situation?

So my question for those who have seeked yahoo answer guidance and then embarked on their 'situation' is what was the end result? What happened after you asked? Did you decide to disregard folk's advice and divorced the spouse and get with the homewrecker or stayed with the spouse? Did you listen to people's advice and lose the homewrecker? (i'm assuming the majority reply to questions like this. It's generalizing but meh, just making the question clear I suppose).

For the abused did you leave the abuser and are happy now? Did you stay and somehow a magic ending happened?

Your answers are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Okay, so i'm trying to make a 'search engine' in excel. I have a huge list of names for lodging and i'm trying to make a formula where you type in their name and the vlookup will reveal that name's lodging information in the designated cell.

I have it functioning with EXACT values...meaning if I type the name EXACTLY as it looks in its cell on the left (i.e. column A), it will reveal the information in column B adjacent to the name in column A.

But if I type in just part of the name, say for samuel i just put 'sam'. The information won't show, it'll show #NA. I tried using the 'true' function for the 'range_lookup' portion of the formula, but then it will find the highest/lowest (dont' know which oen) value in column B which obviously won't match the matching name.

Is there a different formula I could use or anything I can do to make this easier? I just want it to where I type something close to the name (like a search engine) and I can find that person's information with that approximate information.

Is it possible to actually link both software so that if I input data into a formula in excel it will input that information into MS word? Like say I put the sum of cell A:1+A:2, and the SUM would show up in MS word rather than a designated cell in excel?

I'm trying to create a formula to shorten the time it takes to input names into a nametag-like template.

I want to put names into a table in say sheet 1, and that information will transfer into another cell in sheet 2 in a different text format and position.

SO say I put in the name don wilkins in a cell in sheet 1, then in sheet two, there's a template for a nametag that has a picture and text in say old gothic that will utilize the text information 'don wilkins' from sheet one and apply it to the template. So the text from sheet 1 will be in old gothic and in a certain position in the template in sheet 2 from the formula applied.

Anyone know how to do this?

Do you think that maybe the reason why so many folks can either NOT find love or can't KEEP a relationship is because they're in reality 'bad' people?

So many ask on here "why can't I find love? I'm a good person!" or "Why did that person leave me or treat me bad." or "Giving up on love cuz nobody wants me." And you find often the ones that DO maintain good relationships are the ones that are genuinely patient, kind, and honest folks. While those who can't you most often find are self-absorbed, selfish, impatient, or cruel.

Sadly there are the exceptions where good people get with BAD people and become heartbroken. But again the key figure in that fail of the relationship was that they were with a BAD person.

You dont' have to rob, steal, kill, or break a law to be a bad person. Wouldnt' you consider a selfish person, immoral person, abusive, cruel, heartless, apathetic, and shady or a liar a bad person?

So in the end many folks who CLAIM they're nice/good people because they haven't done anything unlawful or truly cruel, could be misguided in their definition? Where the fact they may be selfish, impatient, or have traits not akin to maintaining a good relationship?

Your thoughts folks...thanks for all who answer.

Seems like, whenever I read these questions regarding us Pisces folk (sounds country I know can't help it) it always seems like we're the worst type of folk to try to date, or be around. Reason like we suck in bed, or too sensitive or emotional (probably showing just that by asking these question ironically enough), or just too high maintenance emotionally.

Does ANYONE like us Pisces folk? Are we really that horrible? Least in the yahoo answers community? Feel kinda sad we really fit our place as the LAST on the astrological chart and most 'uninteresting' of the whole lot.

Ah well, I have my Pisces wife that enjoys me.....how about anyone else? Pisces folk do you feel this way? Other signs are we really that bad?

Thanks for the answers.

So you had plastic surgery...okay that's cool whatever. You probably got breast implants, butt implants, changed your face, changed your nose...all that.

So does it affect you at all when you have children and realize your 'REAL' look is inherited gene wise? Or how would you approach that subject if a child asks you why something's 'amiss' in the genetic pool?

Like for example...okay you changed your face..like Heidi Kloom did, maybe very distinctive features like your nose or chin, something that would be genetically strong if you had children. SO when your baby gets older and has those same features that you abhorred and wanted to get rid of, what would you say to your child? Would you force them to have plastic surgery too? Would you not care and be like "Well I got rid of it because I didn't feel comfortable in my body, if you want to do that too it's okay dear." How would you go about it?

Or say in a situation you had breast implants because you had A cups, and your daughter goes through her teen emotional/social crisis and realizes she doesn't have the C cups like you do. How would you go about that situation?

OR...my final example, how would you play out a situation where you date a guy, he doesn't know about the surgeries (although some can still tell) somehow, and when the child is born of course there's a miss-match in the outcome when the traits are noticeable (if they are that is)? Granted i'm sure the baby will have his features but...work with me here on the scenario. How would you go about it?

Nothing against the whole plastic surgery thing, could really care less...but was always curious how one would approach these scenarios if confronted with them.

ANSWER AWAY! thanks.