1. absolutely correct
2. it depends on what "it" is.

Now, how about a definition of what "real" is? What makes something real?

Are thoughts, perceptions, emotions, your "self" real? Or are you nothing but your physical body?

Of what value is inductive reasoning?
Where would be be today in terms of scientific achievement without imagination ( which is not real?).

Im not asking these questions just to be a boogersnot, but rather, Im trying to engage with you in thoughtful discussion.

Did Einstien, Newton, and Hawkings cave into consensus reality and limit themselves to what everyone agrees is truth, or did they dare to get messy and experiment with reality? Surely they dared to experiment with seemingly foolish ideas.

As for the cult stuff, I've done quite a lot of reading on the topic and find it quite fascinating. Rick Ross had a very informative site for a long time. Not sure if its still around or not.

Our conventional reality is based on a set of axioms.  We have axioms to support the existence of ourselves, what gives us pain or pleasure, what limits our abilities in some ways, why we are staring at our computer screens, etc. This is what I define as "real" or “rational”. Einstein, Newton, and Hawkings worked within the set of axioms in conventional reality to achieve great feats. It is possible that the reality which I describe is a delusion of some kind, or that there is some greater truth for which we are unaware of, but I contend that we currently have no practical axioms to support these possibilities.

Rick Ross is still around, the site that I linked belongs to him.

Are you arguing for ignosticism, agnosticism, or what?
Are you telling us why something is not “real”, or why you don't consider any of it when you make decisions using your problem–solving, purportedly soulless, brain?

My point is that it would be unwise to seek out paranormal abilities with the methods that Rigwyn was promoting, that his methods have no scientific or proven basis and may result in delusion as it is normally understood.

Seriously… what do they teach in schools today?

Maybe you should find out?

It's good stuff, Volki. The chaos magick facebook crowd is full of idiots with a sprinkling of intelligent and insightful folks, but the book suggestions that you see and the downloadable files are the way to go if you want to learn about it.

I disagree, it's not healthy to believe in unobservable/unverifiable phenomena and such practices can lead to mental illness.

Hi.

I agree. I don't think that a specific PvP resource/currency is suitable for RP reasons.

I like the idea of mineral(s) being in a PvP zone, I think it would add an interesting dynamic to this game by making the mineral "feel" more valuable and enhancing communication between players.  I've played games where there is a similar frustrating element and in the end I think it adds more enjoyment/involvement.

I love the new system, but I think that there are some changes that need to be done.

Currently, these are the most efficient methods of training the basic combat skills:

• Armor: Gather 20+ mobs and go afk in the defensive stance until the npc server crashes
• Weapon: Attack a training dummy with a low damage weapon and go afk in the least aggressive stance, attack again when it respawns and repeat

Perhaps the training dummies could be removed and some changes could be made to prevent excessive afking and make the game play more interesting. The way it is set up now is very uninspiring and encourages players to level up these skills while being away from their screen for long periods of time.