User:Lacrymology
| Wikipedia:Babel | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
| Search user languages |
This is mainly for my personal use, but you're free to check out what links here.
I am a firm believer that people should research before asking and in the concept that asking is the best way to get an answer that fits your problem exactly. Therefore, I am a walking contradiction and proud of it.
One of my favourite wiki articles on vandalism
Later I think I am going to post here a list of doubts I have always had and that would like to see answered in a way or another. Maybe even in articles. Anyways, it would be just a matter of filling up space
Ok, I will start this. Feel free to answer to them below.
I am not talking about the TV series where he has that stupid Bat-phone, but about the old-syled Bat-signal (what the hell is wrong with this encyclopedia that doesn't have articles on these?). How does Batman get called when there is not a cloud in the sky to project the Bat-signal onto?
- They use the bat-phone, silly :p Cokehabit 15:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
- I am talking in the comic books. He doesn't HAVE a bat-phone in those --Lacrymology 11:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- A light projected onto the clear sky will still be visible. It won't be as solid a reflection as on a cloudy sky, but it should be enough. I mean, he's Batman, after all. -VJ 03:07, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Note: The correct answer to this question is: It is Gotham City. It is NEVER a clear night in Gotham --Lacrymology 17:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think this needs further explanation.
The Jedi Dillemma
[edit]Why is it OK for a Jedi to kill hundreds of stormtroopers but if he kills one of the "bosses" he will turn to the Dark Side?
A Little Dissertation
[edit]El equilibrio en las cosas es punto fuerte,
necesidad sin exigencias
dadivosidad sin obligación
La fuerza verdadera se encuentra en el comienzo
pero la continuación
no
puede
ser olvidada
al momento del análisis
y el análisis nunca puede dejar
de ser parte
del fenómeno
Así como el objeto siempre es parte del objeto
y el sujeto no ve sino la parte
del objeto
que puede comprender
comprehender
abarcar
en fin, hacer suya
"y la virgen pasó haciendo
Ala
Δ"
Por eso digo
incluso las cosas mas concretas
abstractas
cosas tan concretas como el amor
abstractas odio
perdón
ciudad
bastón
perro
ignorancia
amor
no son menos que parcialidades
más parcialidades?
Únicas, universales, intangibles, indiscutibles
por eso no se discuten
por eso son verdaderas
y falaces
puedo amar lo que es mío
odiar
perro
lo que pude observar, asimilar, enmarcar
y de lo inmarcable
la inmarcabilidad, nada más
menos?
Ahí está la fuerza
en no luchar contra lo individual sino aceptarlo
usarlo
abrazarlo
comprehenderlo
comprenderlo
aceptarlo
No "crear para todos" generalizando visiones
sino "crear para cada uno"
acercándose a lo que cada visión BUSCA
Así las abstracciones tienen mas significado
significados
para cada individuo
lo concreto para la masa.
en lo abstracto está la fuerza
en lo concreto hay unión
--Lacrymology 13:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
|
Released into public domain |
|
|---|---|---|
| I agree to release my text and image contributions, unless otherwise stated, into the public domain. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under public domain terms, please check the multi-licensing guide. |