NationStates Jolt Archive

In order to receive this you must fully

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world by God. In other words, I want to see God create the world first hand with my own eyes.

2) Reproduce the world flood. You need to flood the world and prove that the fossils and sediments organized as such.

3) Physically build an ark and gather all the animals with the access to materials that Noah had in that time period. This means you must gather every animal on the planet with Noah's technology and get them onto the boat.

4) Physically 100% unquestionably discount radiometric dating as false, and provide explanations of past success in this area by nuclear physicists, etc.

5) Physically prove each line of the Bible creation account with scientifically backed evidence that can be observed and tested.

gogogogo

i so hope god comes here and totally makes you look bad. then donates the money to baby seals, cause that would just be nice.

This is so unfair to non-Christians. What about FSMism? I want meh money! >_<;

Noes, FSM is banned.

Also, this isn't Intelligent Design it's creationism and believe me there's absolutely no discernable difference between them anyway whatsoever that can be observed by the naked eye.

FSM? I missed that reference.

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world by God. In other words, I want to see God create the world first hand with my own eyes.
Someone's bound to point out that scientists can't do the equivalent with their theories. You've made a damand whose equivalent in any creation theory (religious or scientific) could not be met.

Have you ever heard of Kent Hovind, sir? I think you'll get the gist of the thread then...

Kent Hovind... Offering $250,000 to evolutionists who can prove to him something that he calls evolution, but isn't. Real piece of work.

Have you ever heard of Kent Hovind, sir?
No. *looks in Wikipedia* Oh, now I get it... I had thought you were just one of the many fools to frequent NSGeneral. It seems I was mistaken.

there is no god.

snip

i suppose i should be serious for once.

i have my own offer for infinity billion dollars.

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world. Period. In other words, I want to see how the world started, proving there is no god, first hand, with my own eyes.

2) Reproduce a massive fucking rock hitting earth, killing everything just right for new stuff to live.

3) Physically build an ark and gather all the animals with the access to materials that Noah had in that time period. This means you must gather every animal on the planet with Noah's technology and get them onto the boat. (didnt change that.. i just want to see it done.)

4) Physically 100% unquestionably prove radiometric dating as true.

5) Physically disprove each line of the Bible creation account with scientifically backed evidence that can be observed and tested.

point being, we cant prove much of anything to a 100% level. and im an athiest. just believe what you believe, for whatever ever reason. no need to prove anything, as it cant be done.

FSM? I missed that reference.
The church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has compelling videographic evidence of creation by His Noodly Appendage.

Obviously.

FSM? I missed that reference.

Flying Spaghetti Monster.

point being, we cant prove much of anything to a 100% level. and im an athiest. just believe what you believe, for whatever ever reason. no need to prove anything, as it cant be done.

It's never really been about proof. That's why, while Richard Dawkins mused to the contrary, there existed atheists before the advent of modern cosmology and evolutionary biology. It's not a matter of having answers and explanations for every mystery which religion credits to some manner of deity, but of accepting the limitation of our current knowledge and focusing our efforts on clarifying the many obscurities in our understanding of the universe, instead of thoughtlessly concluding that the explanations are beyond our comprehension.

This is so unfair to non-Christians. What about FSMism? I want meh money! >_<;

But everyone knows that FSMism is true so it isn't really a challenge.

A $250,000 offer for creationists

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In order to receive this you must fully

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world by God. In other words, I want to see God create the world first hand with my own eyes.

2) Reproduce the world flood. You need to flood the world and prove that the fossils and sediments organized as such.

3) Physically build an ark and gather all the animals with the access to materials that Noah had in that time period. This means you must gather every animal on the planet with Noah's technology and get them onto the boat.

4) Physically 100% unquestionably discount radiometric dating as false, and provide explanations of past success in this area by nuclear physicists, etc.

5) Physically prove each line of the Bible creation account with scientifically backed evidence that can be observed and tested.

gogogogo

Nice. But at least the Creationists allow for the intervention of the Supernatural to do these things. The atheist model, by definition, must explain questions like first life and all without the existence of the divine. If one carries a pre-supposition of anti-supernaturalism, then one will never discover the truth if the supernatural was indeed involved in some way.

But everyone knows that FSMism is true so it isn't really a challenge.
Have you renounced your Chuckianity then?

Nice. But at least the Creationists allow for the intervention of the Supernatural to do these things. The atheist model, by definition, must explain questions like first life and all without the existence of the divine. If one carries a pre-supposition of anti-supernaturalism, then one will never discover the truth if the supernatural was indeed involved in some way.
The Non-Creationist Explanation != Atheistic Method
Your treating this like a binary

you know what you deserved to be shot for being so dumb i dont have to prove anything to you you should just give me the money... no give me double the money because i took time out of my life to write this :mad:

Nice. But at least the Creationists allow for the intervention of the Supernatural to do these things. The atheist model, by definition, must explain questions like first life and all without the existence of the divine. If one carries a pre-supposition of anti-supernaturalism, then one will never discover the truth if the supernatural was indeed involved in some way.

Look up abiogenesis. Then look up Miller/Urey experiments and Sideny W. Fox.

This is severely off topic but I started writing it and no sense in deleting a good three minutes worth of work:

One thing I always wondered about, if there is a God, why don't animals follow the bible? Of course they can't read it but you would think that animals with intelligences lower than ours would carry more of an imprint of God's Handiwork. He designed them to his tastes and if we know so much about him from the bible, we should be able to look at animals as a sort of direct line to what runs to his taste. Such as, you'd never see a racoon stealing. Or a cat kill a mouse for fun.

I've supplied pictures.

http://www.saint.org/images/bible.jpg
http://www.katzenwelt.at/images/smile/cat_mouse.jpg
http://www.neoperceptions.com/fauna/mammals/images/raider.jpg

Two things:

1] If all you believe the Universe to be is that which you can smell, taste, and see, then I pity you.

2] If mind were brain and brain were mind, the bear would be poking my behind.

Keep your money. It's all you've got.

1] If all you believe the Universe to be is that which you can smell, taste, and see, then I pity you.

:(

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world by God. In other words, I want to see God create the world first hand with my own eyes.
Then it wouldn't be God you were watching, as he's a supernatural being, not a natural one.

2) Reproduce the world flood. You need to flood the world...
Difficult, but do-able. Point me at the polar caps with a big flame torch.

...and prove that the fossils and sediments organized as such.
Heck, not even science can do that. :) Science can only support its theories.

3) Physically build an ark and gather all the animals with the access to materials that Noah had in that time period. This means you must gather every animal on the planet with Noah's technology and get them onto the boat.
"Physically build an ark" as opposed to what...? Conceputally building it? :) But still, do-able. It might be too large to float now, but after the polar caps are melted... Good thing you didn't mention I had to do this alone. But it sounds like fun. And do we actually know what "all the animals on the planet" were at that time? I'd need an itemized list, please.

4) Physically 100% unquestionably discount radiometric dating as false...
LOL. That's the easiest one of all. I can easily discount anything. I'm human.

...and provide explanations of past success in this area by nuclear physicists, etc.
Ah. You got me here. I don't think I would be able to provide any explanation for why nuclear physicists in the past might have successfully discounted radiometric dating as false.

5) Physically prove each line of the Bible creation account with scientifically backed evidence that can be observed and tested.
I like how you put these items (or any, at all) after the flood one, which would undoubtedly destroy you as you wouldn't be included on the ark that I build to save myself.

(PS I'm not really a Creationist.)

Then look up Miller/Urey experiments and Sideny W. Fox.
Weren't they drummers for the Beach Boys?

Have you renounced your Chuckianity then?

Chuckianity? :confused:

When I was younger, I read Cat's Cradle, and although I believe in God, I believe in evolution, the big bang, etc., I found a section that had a good observation on people who think that they know what God did.

Folly

Nowhere does Bokonon warn against a person's trying to discover the limits of his karass and the nature of the work God Almighty has had it do. Bokonon simply observes that such investigations are bound to be incomplete.

In the autobiographical section of The Books of Bokonon he writes a parable on the folly of pretending to discover, to understand:

I once knew an Episcopalian lady in Newport, Rhode Island, who asked me to design and build a doghouse for her Great Dane. The lady claimed to understand God and His Ways of Working perfectly. She could not understand why anyone should be puzzled about what had been or about what was going to be.

And yet, when I showed her a blueprint of the doghouse I proposed to build, she said to me, "I'm sorry, but I never could read one of those things."

"Give it to your husband or your ministers to pass on to God," I said, "and, when God finds a minute, I'm sure he'll explain this doghouse of mine in a way that even you can understand."

She fired me. I shall never forget her. She believed that God liked people in sailboats much better than He liked people in motorboats. She could not bear to look at a worm. When she saw a worm, she screamed.

She was a fool, and so am I, and so is anyone who thinks he sees what God is Doing, [writes Bokonon].


Science is just better at explaining some things. I find that religion is better at explaining other things.

"Physically build an ark" as opposed to what...? Conceputally building it? :) But still, do-able. It might be too large to float now, but after the polar caps are melted... Good thing you didn't mention I had to do this alone. But it sounds like fun. And do we actually know what "all the animals on the planet" were at that time? I'd need an itemized list, please.

Incidently it took Noah 120 years to build his ark so if anyone wants to take up the challenge I'd recommend starting early.

Who keeps raising this dead thread!

*Grabs a mallet and stake*

WACK WACK WACK WACK

In order to receive this you must fully /snip

Ok, you're on. I've got proof of everything you need.

But first, you show me the money.

What? You don't have $2.50 much less $250,000. I guess I'll wait till real money comes along ;)

there is no god.

say that on your death bed!

hehe

In order to receive this you must fully

1) Physically demonstrate the creation of the world by God. In other words, I want to see God create the world first hand with my own eyes.

:rolleyes: I have a 10yo sister who would call you immature and that is saying something.

2) Reproduce the world flood. You need to flood the world and prove that the fossils and sediments organized as such.

And here I thought that Muslims and jews believed there was a world flood as well. Not to mention they believe that they did fine the ark on ararat but is having a hard time getting to it.

3) Physically build an ark and gather all the animals with the access to materials that Noah had in that time period. This means you must gather every animal on the planet with Noah's technology and get them onto the boat.

According to the bible, the world will be destroyed by fire and not by water.

4) Physically 100% unquestionably discount radiometric dating as false, and provide explanations of past success in this area by nuclear physicists, etc.

:rolleyes:

5) Physically prove each line of the Bible creation account with scientifically backed evidence that can be observed and tested.

Correction! I think you are crazy. It is untestable. Not to mention the fact that even christians bicker over if its a literal day or not. I believe somewhere in the bible it states that a year to us is a 1000 years to God. I could be wrong though.

that's worth so much more than 250 grand, don't be stupid

-snip-

He's parodying the Creationists who claim that they'll give $250,000 to anyone who can prove evolution.

you know what you deserved to be shot for being so dumb i dont have to prove anything to you you should just give me the money... no give me double the money because i took time out of my life to write this :mad:

If you are a Christian, the bible states to love thy neighbor. I hope you pray to God for forgiveness.

Two things:

1] If all you believe the Universe to be is that which you can smell, taste, and see, then I pity you.

2] If mind were brain and brain were mind, the bear would be poking my behind.

Keep your money. It's all you've got.

I agree with Keruvalia.

He's parodying the Creationists who claim that they'll give $250,000 to anyone who can prove evolution.

So I saw when I finished reviewing the thread.

I guess its a little to point out to him that it took about 3 centuries or so to build the Ark in the first place?

Nice. But at least the Creationists allow for the intervention of the Supernatural to do these things. The atheist model, by definition, must explain questions like first life and all without the existence of the divine. If one carries a pre-supposition of anti-supernaturalism, then one will never discover the truth if the supernatural was indeed involved in some way.

Scientific explanation of lightning: lightning is caused by the flow of electrons.
Theistic explanation of lightning: God

Scientific explanation of sunrise and sunset: these are caused by the rotation of the earth relative to the sun.
Theistic explanation of sunrise and sunset: God

Scientific explanation of the common cold: this is caused by one of a family of viruses.
Theistic explanation of the common cold: God

In every case, the scientific explanation allows for discoveries and inventions, while the theistic explanation is a stopgap that remains in place until the scientific explanation is discovered, and has enough political support to overcome resistance by the forces of obscurantism. "God" can explain anything, if you don't mind that your explanation adds nothing to our knowledge of the universe.

And if you wish to claim that God acts via naturalistic mechanisms, it is then disingenuous to attempt to oppose research into said naturalistic mechanisms by positing--arbitrarily--the "possibility" of a supernatural explanation.

How might one go about discovering the "truth" of a supernatural "explanation," anyway? What sorts of observations, experiments, etc., could lead one to the conclusion that the supernatural is at work?

And don't theists have a huge burden in that, unlike atheists, they have to explain the existence of God?

John 20:24-29

24 But Thomas (who was called the Twin*), one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord.’ But he said to them, ‘Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe.’

26 A week later his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were shut, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you.’ 27Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here and see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not doubt but believe.’ 28Thomas answered him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ 29Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe.’

----------------
Luke 4:1-13

1Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, 2where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.

3The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread."

4Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone.'[a]"

5The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7So if you worship me, it will all be yours."

8Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.'[b]"

9The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. 10For it is written:
" 'He will command his angels concerning you
to guard you carefully;
11they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.'[c]"

12Jesus answered, "It says: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'[d]"

13When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
----------------

Thats my reply...

iTEssen

As a minister I'm tired of these accursed creationist arguements. Its a freakin' allegorical tale to teach about reverence of God and why we should obey him. It also teaches about morality. It is not meant to be taken literally. Silly children.

And here I thought that Muslims and jews believed there was a world flood as well. Not to mention they believe that they did fine the ark on ararat but is having a hard time getting to it.

Argumentum ad populum, appeal to the mob. Just because a lot of people believe it, doesn't mean it is true.

I have a 10yo sister who would call you immature and that is saying something.

Argumentum ad hominem, you are attacking the person not the idea being presented.

According to the bible, the world will be destroyed by fire and not by water.

Fallacy of misplaced concreteness, why should the world follow what the Bible says?

:rolleyes:

You didn't address the arguement.

Lets not give Creationism any weight. Nor its sinister partner, Intelligent Design. What kind of incompetent God do you want? One that has to painstakingly make designs that fail so regulary? (Cancer, Congenital Problems, Disease) Or do you want a God who just poofed in a universe and said "Ah, now it will build itself, I'm so smart."

Also in a scientific sense, Theory means a hypothesis that has been substantiated with evidence and can be falsified. Creationism nor ID allow falsification. Pure BS, from the mouths of misguided sheep.

Scientific explanation of lightning: lightning is caused by the flow of electrons.
Theistic explanation of lightning: God

Angels bowling actually. :D And thunder noise is dependent on how many pins they knock down. :D

Scientific explanation of sunrise and sunset: these are caused by the rotation of the earth relative to the sun.
Theistic explanation of sunrise and sunset: God

I don't think anyone denies this anymore. :rolleyes:

And don't theists have a huge burden in that, unlike atheists, they have to explain the existence of God?

And atheists have to explain why they believe there is no God. It takes more faith to believe in nothing than it does in something.

Angels bowling actually. :D And thunder noise is dependent on how many pins they knock down. :D



I don't think anyone denies this anymore. :rolleyes:



And atheists have to explain why they believe there is no God. It takes more faith to believe in nothing than it does in something.
Ahhh good ol strawman

That or you actualy believe all atheists have an active belief in nothing

That and I would like to see how you quantiativly compare how much "faith" one thing requires as compared to another

As a minister I'm tired of these accursed creationist arguements. Its a freakin' allegorical tale to teach about reverence of God and why we should obey him. It also teaches about morality. It is not meant to be taken literally. Silly children.

:eek: And you call yourself a minister? I'm glad I do not attend your church.

Argumentum ad populum, appeal to the mob. Just because a lot of people believe it, doesn't mean it is true.

True however if 3 main religions believe in a flood, I'll bet ya a tithe that it happened. Unless of course you can prove that it didn't then I'll call ya a hypocrite and the Lord frowns on that.

Argumentum ad hominem, you are attacking the person not the idea being presented.

Actually, I did attack the idea. I guess you didn't read all of my post.

Fallacy of misplaced concreteness, why should the world follow what the Bible says?

I believe we should live in a moral world but as my own situation proves, its not always possible. :(

You didn't address the arguement.

Nothing to address really.

Lets not give Creationism any weight. Nor its sinister partner, Intelligent Design. What kind of incompetent God do you want? One that has to painstakingly make designs that fail so regulary? (Cancer, Congenital Problems, Disease) Or do you want a God who just poofed in a universe and said "Ah, now it will build itself, I'm so smart."

And you call yourself a minister? Somehow, I am not believing it.

Also in a scientific sense, Theory means a hypothesis that has been substantiated with evidence and can be falsified. Creationism nor ID allow falsification. Pure BS, from the mouths of misguided sheep.

And yet your not helping the case any with this type of dribble. I guess someone here missed a few lessons at the seminary as well as Sunday School. :mad:

Ahhh good ol strawman

That or you actualy believe all atheists have an active belief in nothing

That and I would like to see how you quantiativly compare how much "faith" one thing requires as compared to another

I actually respect every human being who works hard to make a living be they atheist, muslim, buddist, christian, jew, etc.

I actually respect every human being who works hard to make a living be they atheist, muslim, buddist, christian, jew, etc.
I did not say you did not respect them:confused:

I did not say you did not respect them:confused:

Let me rephrase,

I honestly don't care what religion or non-religious a person is.

Let me rephrase,

I honestly don't care what religion or non-religious a person is.
How does that counter my supposition that you are either un-intentionaly or intentionaly misconstruing what a athiest actualy is

That and was curious how you were comparing them to religion by its weight in "faith"

How does that counter my supposition that you are either un-intentionaly or intentionaly misconstruing what a athiest actualy is

I think I'm doing it unintentionaly. To tel the truth, I don't know any athiests.

That and was curious how you were comparing them to religion by its weight in "faith"

Sorry just something my father said.

So I saw when I finished reviewing the thread.

I guess its a little to point out to him that it took about 3 centuries or so to build the Ark in the first place?

My mistake. I suppose I should've asked to demonstrate a human with the lifespan of 3 centuries in order to construct it.

True however if 3 main religions believe in a flood, I'll bet ya a tithe that it happened. Unless of course you can prove that it didn't then I'll call ya a hypocrite and the Lord frowns on that.You should've read what the man said. Pointing out that a throng of people hold something to be true, isn't the same as demonstrating something is true.

A whole hell of a lot of people believed the Earth was flat, for example.

All you manage by appealing to public belief, is to point out that people are largely ignorant, often willfully so.



Actually, I did attack the idea. I guess you didn't read all of my post.My imaginary 10 year old sister is more coherent than you.

Care to tell me how the above statement points out a flaw in your argument?


I believe we should live in a moral world but as my own situation proves, its not always possible. :(He wasn't talking about people, he was talking about how the universe, planet Earth in particular, operates.

Can you explain why it would operate according to a book?



Nothing to address really.Yet you claim you attacked his argument by belitteling the guy (or girl or whatever). Which is it then? Did he make an argument or not?


And you call yourself a minister? Somehow, I am not believing it.You do realise numerous of Christian variants recognise that IDism & the like, is utter rubbish, right?
Perhaps the Minister here is a Catholic. They recognise the theories of evolution.

Besides, you fail to actually point out how or why he's wrong. All you do is declare he's unfit for his job - for no apparent reason. So, personal attack again.


And yet your not helping the case any with this type of dribble. I guess someone here missed a few lessons at the seminary as well as Sunday School. :mad:See the above comment.
You're not making any argument here, you're just making personal attacks.

Finally, how exactly does no faith require more faith than faith? What kind of self-contradicting nonsense it that?
Or do you by default believe everything, because not doing so requires more belief? For example, do you believe you're currently wearing a big fat immaterial bunny on your head?

It is a clear scientific fact that something cannot come from nothing.

Answer me this:

The Big Bang... Where did the singularity come from?

Even if you don't believe in the Big Bang, where did the universe come from?

It is a clear scientific fact that something cannot come from nothing.

Answer me this:

The Big Bang... Where did the singularity come from?

Even if you don't believe in the Big Bang, where did the universe come from?
Wow one of the worst explinations I have heard in a long time

"Just cause" would have been better

Wow one of the worst explinations I have heard in a long time

"Just cause" would have been better
Since there's no verifiable way to tell what was happenning before the original singularity broke symmetry in such a spectacular fashion, we are all free to speculate on what happened before.

Not that any of us can prove a thing...

We are now discussing abiogenisis, not evolution.

The universe is a brane floating in a multidimensional space that is impossible to concieve outside of mathematics. Now the laws of physics apply in these things with the exception of things that have no energy or mass. Like gravitons, the thigns that cause gravity. Over time as matter spreads out in the brane the gravitons leave our brane for another because the attraction is stronger there. Soon as the protons evaporate the matter will be so spread out the density is zero so there is no matter in the universe. Then the gravitons will be floating all out onto another brane. Attracting it, until it collides with ours and releases a monumental amount of energy, some of it coleasing into matter.

(This is part of string theory, currently a lot of math backs it up and so does quantum observations but it can't represent matter in the large scale sense correctly yet. So there must be thereoms we are missing.)

Lets take the "Lets teach both theories view", ok, fine, I demand Alchemy be taught as a alternative to chemistry, I demand magic be taught as an alternative to physics, I demand astrology to be taught as an alternative to astronomy, and I demand phrenology to be taught as an alternative to neurology. Also the Theory of Gravity currently only works on large scales and fails on the small quantum scales, are you willing to place faith that God will carry you up with heavenly wings if you jump off the Empire State Building? We can't rely on a series of allegorical stories about morality and the Lord to lead our lives in a scientific sense.

Also, thank you UpwardThrust.

Lets take the Romans nad the Greeks, they were pretty significant in their time and one of hte major religions in the world. They believe Zeus/Jupiter created lightening. THat isn't true now is it? My stance of Argumentum ad populum still stands.

I'm a Protestant minister.

And trust me, there are Geocentric (Earth center of universe) people out there who still will not be convinced and believe all the worlds space agencies are in a massive conspiracy against their religion.

Also this proves my point that Western Pennsylvania is a terrible place, first Dover now this guy.

Since there's no verifiable way to tell what was happenning before the original singularity broke symmetry in such a spectacular fashion, we are all free to speculate on what happened before.

Not that any of us can prove a thing...
Yes but this is a thread with rules to the proof (rediculous ones yes) he did not even attempt

I'm a Protestant minister.

Well here's the problem :D

And trust me, there are Geocentric (Earth center of universe) people out there who still will not be convinced and believe all the worlds space agencies are in a massive conspiracy against their religion.

Thiese pepole are just idiots.

Also this proves my point that Western Pennsylvania is a terrible place, first Dover now this guy.

i'm a girl actually. Not a guy.

Well here's the problem :D

i'm a girl actually. Not a guy.

Argumentum ad hominem, I refuse to yeild to your two X chromosomes. I still stand by my sarcastic comment.

Argumentum ad hominem, I refuse to yeild to your two X chromosomes. I still stand by my sarcastic comment.

ok? Did I say you had to yield?

All Praise Be to the One True Shatner. In his image are all things made and unmade. Shatnerites unite!!! In the Begining, there was only the Shatner. And thus he spoke "Let it...be done...now." And it was done. Then he said "Let...there...be light!", and it got brighter. Then he said "I need...a nap. Tell Nimoy...to pick up...from here." And it was good. Except the fifth movie.
:sniper: