User:Ninjalemming/archives/RandomRants

Wikipedia: User fame
Surely a user may gain a sort of unoffical fame as they edit more stuff, as the more they do the more they will appear on the history of wikipedia (resulting in people checking out their user page or resulting in a bunch of Beethoven addicted turtles to spontaneously jump off the cliffs of Dover), (which would be much like appearing in a film as actors gain people knowledge as to whom they are as they appear in films, but so the do the rest of the film crew), and the more they will be recognised by other users who may give them Barnstars, or just discuss a topic with them; then again they may not do anything at all but they may still recognise them next time they see anything about them and then check out their user page. If more people check out the user's user page the more 'fame' they would have aquired and people may then give them Barnstars or talk to them, they may also become a sort of idle to many new users; of cause the user could be like me and get no recognition what so ever. Other factors are that they may join wikiprojects or become enlisted in certain other active projects like The anti-vandal band or become an admin; people may ask for help from the administrator or they might help new user's get started, other things include people reporting to the Counter-Vandalism unit about vandalism and if they do a good job at countering any vandalism people might recognise them and reward them or thank them. Wikiprojects mean that people who see their 'excellent' editing may thank or (as previously stated many times before) recognise them. Over all most of this stuff will help you be recognised and rewarded, so I suggest that wikiholics may consider this as well as taking the Wikiepediholism test, of course that is if you haven't done so already, but all true wikiholics have taken the test so what are you doing here, TAKE THE TEST NOWWWWWW!!!!!!!!; and if you are a wikiholic then why are you reading this, go and start a new article or something. Sorry, just a random rant.

Wikipedia: why is it used?
Why is wikipedia used? Is it because of recognition amoung people (see Wikipedia: User Fame) or is it something much more sinister. Personally I think it is because of general human instinct and your identification as a human being; this is nothing too phylosofical, just that naturally humans thrist for knowledge (even though some people do not show this in any sense of the phrase (is what I just wrote a phrase it self or did I make it up, oh well)), and we also thrist to spread this knowledge. The main reason for this is proberally to do with how our brain works, or just any brain of any animal as all animals learn and want to learn as this will increase their survival rate; this also means that to increase their survival rate they must teach their young or just anyone or thing they know as no threat that is their same species,m some thimes even other species. As humans we have greater interlect so expand off this and know that if we learn we can learn even more and the way we are allows us to exploit this and make ourselves more powerful and capable of surviving, as we evolved, both mentally and physically we became more dominent (mainly though intelergence and being able to judge better then the rest of what to do in certain situations, like run very fast from giant man eating beast or stand and fight with bear hands, simple really; stand and fight (I was only joking, don't think I am stupid or anything), actually though instinct a human may have more chance then most animals due to ability to climb and effectively fight with just hands, such as against dogs and other such animals). As we slowly evolved we know more and more that knowledge allows us to get above others, such as use of fire and other things and slowly make us the most dominent species on the planet; and many more things, I will slowly add on to this second random rant, along with my strange comedy. Won't that be lovely!

Wow, I blabered on here about nothing, now to do the same with the | other thing.

God
Now I beleive in God so I am not trying to be antireligionist person, if such a thing excists; but does God have to be exactually how the bible portrays (I will mostly be covering Christianity). He might be a mass of power and not have a physical form at all. I think God is there to do good and you don't have to follow a set path of religion as miricles happen in all religions so he might not care how you worship him, if he even cares about worship, as long as you do good; which is where all these rules come into place. I don't know all the religions in any real detail but I know pretty much that nearly all religions believe in some type of God and/or a place to go after death (mainly if you are good) some even support a place to go if you are evil, and why is God always refered to as he, he (yes I know I just said he but oh well, I will refer to God as he for the purpose of this....thing) may be a she, or maybe a mix of both or he may have no gender at all. I think (but am most proberly wrong) we refer to him as 'him' as he controls everything which when it was translated or written (which I only have a slight clue as to when it was written for the New Testament), maybe both men where in control; or could be as I just realised it is because he is refered to as the Holy Father, emphisis on father. So most of what I said is now completely redundent, sorry I foolish. Also though can God only exsists as long as the Devil does, is it like some balance of good and evil; if so as God can commit sins on siners (see Noah's Ark) can the Devil be good to good people, and if there is no balance like that then does the Devil still have some good in him as you can always have evil in good places and you can also always get good in evil places. Other things along the Balance line are that is there a neutral entity of some kind or some thing else higher (or completely different that displays both good and evil, actually this second entity sounds like Humans, so if we are this middle thing, then this may explain why at birth you are innocent and display no good or evil but as you age and change you can tip to one side and go to Heaven or Hell when you die. There are many things to say God exsists but I think the main argument to prove he exsists is by saying can people prove he doesn't, many things say he does exsist such as many cross referencing of religious events and storys, and again Noah's Ark which they belive they have found . and the flood really happened as more then 500 different flood-myths exsist incultures all over the world, Human beings evolved in the last ice age and the story of Noah's Ark is thought to discribe when the ice caps melted, which would explain where the flood came from and 'Global Warming' caused this and God proberly caused this. Creationists believe that the Universe was caused by the Big Bang, which it may well could have been, but whos to say the Big Bang wasn't caused by God, and the millions nay billions of years it took for Earth to be created and it only appeared to be severn days to him, and Adam and Eve where (if they were not just an example to human beings of not to disobey him or something) the first humans or something that I just forgot what I was thinking, ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!! I hate it when that happens. I just forgot my whole argument, areeeeeee nuts (I do not wish to swear on my user page, even though I really wanted to, because a bunch of degenerate Camels may complain). I will add onto this when I remmber it, that could take years One thing I do remeber though is that the Old testament was mostly based on stories and would have been biased and some bits forgotten and other bits change in a Chinese Wispers style or to make it better and other things change after it was written down eventually; and then lastly it would have been change modenly by the church to make it more belivable and/or things were unclear so they settled on one thing (such like the birth of Jesus may not have been in a manger, no animals were present and the three knigs may have been female and/or there were more or less of them there; but it stilll makes a good story and a good Christmassy one at that.