Sheikah

Oh my god, make your mind up you indecisive pratt. First you state that it would be destroyed; I then call you out on you being ridiculously OTT, to which you state that there'd just be cuts, only for you to now say it would be 'destroyed' again. Like you said, small minority. Therefore, never going to happen. Well well, the opposition had something bad to say? I'll never. Well done in regurgitating the word of others and trying to pass it off as your own opinion (sure sign of a media brainwashed person). Btw - there are many ways to go about making money go further rather than taxing people more just because you think you can (borderline communism here). Blowing money on stupid things is not one of them.

You said public services would be destroyed, not worsened. So, yeah. Well I'm sure you can add up better than economic experts. They should have you on board.

I strongly doubt that. So what you're saying is that in 2 years time, if the Conservatives had been in power for a while, you wouldn't be able to call an ambulance if you'd hurt yourself or a fire engine if your house is on fire? Really, that's one of those statements that you can't really disprove since it requires a lot of time to pass, therefore it's hard to call you out on it. But we all know that's bullshit; if that ever happened, Conservatives would never be voted in ever again.

First off, you never want to get into the level range that would mean maxing both - getting to such a ridiculous level would mean that you'd be excluded from interacting with almost anyone online (due to level restrictions). Secondly, you'd most likely not want to max strength and dex...you'd probably want to put your points in other things like VIT and END, while keeping high strength. It's just a waste to go balancing yourself with what little stats you ideally want to have (hopefully not past L130) so that you're a jack of all trades.

I find it odd that people seem to 'know' that most people voted conservative did so because the papers told them to. I must ask them to teach me their methods of mind-reading, sounds like a riot.

Doesn't matter what you say, your post was still just silly bullshit. His policies could have been to mine the moon for cheese; it doesn't really matter, he was never going to get elected. lol :p

He doesn't act posh though. Which means many people easily forget it.

Just hate bitter poor people who spite anyone with money. Seriously, there are people who won't vote for Cameron simply because he has money and a good upbringing.

It's great to see regurgitated media/word of mouth opinion. Lemme guess; they eat poor people, amirite? Course they do. Your father says so.

Truer words never spoken. They're all arseholes. It's amazing that people think one party is better than another (BNP aside), or that certain parties are just automatically 'so bad!' because the supporters enjoy going around hitting poor people (Conservatives). Really, really; they're all going to lie, cheat, be sleazy and steal your money. It's the same with every politician; so I can reassure people that you shouldn't feel disappointed with whoever comes to power; they'll be just as capable of being a moron as anyone else.

That table surely shows you how much better crushing is. 99 dex for a measly slight improvement? No thanks. Use those points in something better.

Crushing is better...you obviously need to pump strength but it's far better in the end. No point in stat balancing in this game. Btw, 2-handing weapons (triangle) works wonders.

If you really do, at the start of 4-2 you can kill the first reaper (spawns ghosts) without dropping down using a bow, then walk back to the archstone/evacuate spell to repeat.

Sorry, I won't be making a meat cleaver with the adjudicator's soul since I'll be using it to buy spells this time round. Maybe one day, or on your next playthrough. :p I have most of the good weapons, although you could try a crushing miridan hammer (people say it's amazing) - scales with strength, so get good strength. Or try the blessed phosphorescent pole (regenerates MP and stacks with fragrant ring).

Sorry, I won't be making a meat cleaver with the adjudicator's soul since I'll be using it to buy spells this time round. Maybe one day, or on your next playthrough. :p I have most of the good weapons, although you could try a crushing miridan hammer (people say it's amazing) - scales with strength, so get good strength. Or try the blessed phosphorescent pole (regenerates MP and stacks with fragrant ring).

1 point if a Royal, so you have 8. Then leave it there forever. Apparently at 8 luck you have less chance of getting items but a much higher chance than people with higher levels of luck at getting better items. So it's basically worthless investing points in luck. Strength, Vit and End

Yeah, Yurt did kill them. Definitely get the meat cleaver. Unequip some stuff if need be in order to maintain your rolls. It's great because it knocks things down. The heavy (R2) attack is great, especially against phantom NPCs and against real players. You can basically knock them down, and strike them down as they get back up. And it's mega strong. You know, you could have just completed the game to start new game plus. Which would have retained your levels/equipment but reset all NPCs and worlds. But go for Royal.

That wouldn't be possible. You're basically correcting a limited number of mutations in any particular disease, and since we know how most genes should be sequenced anyway (human genome project) you know what to correct. It's not a case of correcting a mutation to result in the generation of inbred stocks of human beings. People are changing the human race. Themselves. These people then go on to give birth, passing on their DNA. Obviously you would only be removing genetic mutations in a fraction of children being born in this case, but we continue to tamper with 'god's template' every time people smoke. So the whole 'we're tampering with his work' line you often hear is sheer bollocks. Happening on a daily basis, by the very hypocrites who object to it. Life as in living; doing what many are unable to due to illness, but would probably love to try. Not life as in having a beating heart.

I'd say the biggest difference is about two thousand years. Perhaps not, but reduced to the extent that this would be allowed? Entirely possible. It would also depend on changing attitudes of people towards genetic research, so they don't all grow up to be ignorant (it's badz!!). Really? An act of god? We can reconstruct these genetic conditions; hell, often we know exactly why a condition has transpired. Yet, in this day and age, must we really allow children to be born with serious problems due to the stumbling block of god? It's incredibly selfish for religious people, typically perfectly healthy (at least without genetic abnormalities) to have their say on why it's wrong. I'm guessing if you ask people with serious genetic abnormalities if they would have liked to have been born without their condition they'd say HELL yeah. It's those people that such a system would benefit. Ash, I want you to tell me right now what people are doing to their DNA when they smoke cigarettes. You and I know the answer, really. But I just want to hear it. And yes; many of the people doing it hold religions that do not condone genetic research. It's all a load of hypocritical, festering bollocks. We can freely fuck around with a DNA, so long as we don't know exactly which base pairs we're screwing with. That's much better than altering DNA to save lives of children. Yeey. If there's a nuclear fallout, or an asteroid collision...possibly. Otherwise, I don't see us going back the other way.

XD ......:p

Your tone is that of an irritable old woman. Nevertheless, opinion should not be a factor when combating a disease. I could have coined my own religion where we all showed disproval over modern medicine and human intervention; and my dreams would have been utterly shattered when they wiped out smallpox (assuming I had been around at the time). The important thing is, and here's the kicker - some people's opinions aren't meant to be considered in order for advancement (and I don't mean the evil kind; I mean the advances in modern medicine kind) - and no, especially not Jehova's Witnesses. Woah, woah, woah. Spin doctor alert. I think you know full well that I am referring to the fact that the vast majority of the world was religious centuries ago, and now many developed countries are either largely secular or contain considerable numbers of atheists. Support for religions will no doubt decrease in terms of percentages (rather than figures, as populations continue to increase). It could be defined as a car, but that's neither here nor there. The fact is, the genetic diseases of today are diseases. We have biological methods to illustrate gene mutations and people have reconstructed the diseases in animals. There's absolutely no question. And the diseases I would hope to be wiped out are the ones that affect people to the extent that they are mentally disabled or suffer long-term, painful symptoms that could have been (oh so) very easily nipped in the bud before it ever became an issue. Yes, due to sheer ignorance and lack of any real understanding at the time, homosexuality was considered a disease. But that's completely bypassing the fact that the Nazi's were wrong (as were others at the time) in definining a disease, yet we are beyond any reasonable doubt, correct. Again, it will take an extremely long time, but it seems entirely possible. Consider how our society has changed in a thousand years; it's only likely to change a hell of a lot more in another thousand.

Without any implications of God existing, the phrase has no meaning. Some people believe modifying DNA to be a sin against something our 'maker' created. It was a 'never been so sure in my life', 100%, categorical straight response. Doctors intervene and save life, except they don't alter the genetic code. Instead they alter other biological matter (usually tissue); what's the fucking difference? We can thank lady luck herself that we don't go to Jehova's Witnesses for medical advice on how to treat patients, then. As in, the way we treat people in society completely bypasses their beliefs. I think we've hit a slight roadblock until you differentiate genetic disease and a characteristic. Homosexuality is not, and never has been, a genetic disease. Not only does it never impede the ability for a person to live a normal, healthy life, it's not even (almost certainly) a genetic disease. The causes of genetic diseases are often attributed to problems during alignment of chromosomes during gamete formation or mutations in the starting genetic material post fertilisation. The diseases I'm referring to are definitely diseases; you've decided that some people may consider such diseases affectionately but this really is nonsense. That is...silly. Really. For millenia we have attempted to combat disease, and have even successfully wiped out Smallpox. Therefore, not only can we choose to wipe out disease for everone; we have actually done it. We have gone from a religious society to a now mostly secular one. In time, support for religion can only dwindle further; undoubtedly the largest sect of resistance towards this area of research. It seems entirely plausible that something like this will eventually be implemented.

Undesirable characteristics and disease...there's a monumental difference. Which is one of many reasons as to why the Nazis were so loathed. Actually, we're not, because god doesn't exist. And if he does, I'd like you to prove it. :p By the same logic, doctors are playing god each time they save the life of a patient Whatever way you mince your words, having a serious genetic disease is never preferable to being free of the disease. What we're talking about is in most cases correcting a few DNA base pairs in single cells prior to division to produce all the cells of the body. People continue to alter their DNA negatively with carcinogenic substances such as those in cigarettes, yet should we willingly alter DNA for the better we're brandished with all sorts of names. Silly world.

You're not preventing it from occuring, you're preventing and therefore correcting the genetic abnormality so it's born healthy. Which is pretty much the opposite of taking the life; rather, it's giving the child a real life. Myself, I'd say it's pretty obvious what constitutes genetic disease versus selecting for characteristics such as blonde hair and blue eyes. But alas, the typical ignorant public response would be to compare any such thing to the Nazis. It's just like how the public think that GM food is bad for us; put simply, they're morons and important decisions like these should be left solely to healthcare professionals.

Never said that. What I'm saying is, that for people who are confirmed be seriously at risk / 100% likely of passing life-debilitating diseases (for instance, two partners with recessive traits) should (once technology has been advanced) be lawfully obliged to be screened. And when it's possible (in future), these mutations corrected. Failing to do so would invoke complications associated with breaking other laws. It might sound harsh, but this is the only way to easily eliminate several genetic diseases. You might think this is an incredibly authoratitive and invasive stance, but it's really no skin off anybody's nose. And the benefits of such a system; prevention of serious genetic diseases, clearly outweighs the negative.