Favorite team:LSU 
Location:
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:2677
Registered on:5/15/2009
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
quote:

As this is an attraction in the physical sense, yes. Part of the definition of attraction is something take evokes pleasure, which is what physical attraction is. So in this context yes, yes it is.


Who said anything about this attraction being strictly physical?

It seems like you’re trying to force the words to mean the same thing by stripping the word “attraction” of its actual meaning applying some context that you yourself made up.

I agree that lust is a sin whether it’s same sex or not but being attracted to someone isn’t lustful.

quote:

Obviously that guy has no clue what he’s talking about because if they were nobody would get married and reproduce.


Yea that’s what I was getting at lol
quote:

While this is a nice sounding platitude, designed to offer conscience easing compromise, it is false. To look with lust upon someone is a sin. Jesus spoke about this. If I look lustfully at a woman I sin in my heart. Same applies with homosexuals.


are attraction and lust the same thing?
quote:

Mathematically speaking 1000 guys in 12 hours…is difficult. 60 minutes per hour = 720 minutes for 12 hours That’s less than a minute per man. In fact that’s 43.2 seconds per man. Now utilizing multiple partners will somewhat improve the probability. For instance if she was getting double teamed for the duration of the 12 hours, that would still only give 1 minute 26.4 seconds per pair. And if triple teamed, that would be 2 minutes and 10 seconds per set of males. The odds really improve if handjobs are included. But that level of coordination over a 12 hour period is unheard of outside of Fortnite gamers


This is why I come here.

quote:

Holy shite if I ever get this dramatic about anything I hope someone puts a bullet in me.


I mean he went somewhere completely surrounded by evil. Somewhere most of us will never go. I appreciate the description.

re: The Larson PH for Frey

Posted by The Ostrich on 4/19/25 at 4:23 pm
quote:

Now tell me what those numbers were entering SEC play….Braswell is prob the only dude that’s even arguable. He was also benched for Reaves. Then Reaves started doing poorly and Braswell replaced him. You also have to consider the positions these guys play. We have a ton of OFs. You can’t compare two third basemen jockeying for the same position. Or a catcher when his backup can’t hit either. The only spot you can put Larson is RF or DH. He’s competing with 4 guys for 2 spots. And with a 17 game sample size, that weekend against Auburn where the whole team shite the bed (.188 team BA) is going to make everyone’s numbers look much worse than they’ve actually been


I don’t care about either side of this argument. Just pointing out you don’t know what the word “objectively” means.

re: The Larson PH for Frey

Posted by The Ostrich on 4/19/25 at 4:21 pm
quote:

OBP was used as the sole reason that he’s been more effective than Milam, Hernandez, Braswell, etc. which obviously as pointed out was a pretty poor stance to take.


Again, my comment had nothing to do with either side of said argument and was strictly commenting on the posters ability to understand what the word “objectively means”

re: The Larson PH for Frey

Posted by The Ostrich on 4/19/25 at 3:30 pm
quote:

On that note. John Pearson is at ,471. He should be starting over everyone.


I don’t remember making any claim that OBP should be the determining factor….just funny how someone can so blatantly be wrong while attempting to mock someone.

re: The Larson PH for Frey

Posted by The Ostrich on 4/19/25 at 2:35 pm
quote:

that’s objectively false


Milam 402 OBP
Hernandez 336
Braswell 391
Reeves 382

Larson 410

What exactly is your definition of objective?
quote:

Curiel’s birthday is in May. If he would stay for three years, he would be turning 23 one month into his first full season of pro ball. That’s not something a lot of guys are going to want to do.


I think we’re seeing a shift away from this. MLB in recent years have been fast tracking guys outta college to get to the big leagues. Hell the Angels have a guy from DBU that won’t pitch a single minor league inning before making his MLB Debut. I think players are noticing this are more willing to go to college, especially with NIL and less concerned with starting their pro career asap.

I don’t think Curiel stays for his Jr year though.

re: Unearned runs?

Posted by The Ostrich on 3/22/25 at 7:34 pm
quote:

That’s not how that works. If that wouldn’t have happen how do you know the rest would have played out like that?


That’s exactly how it works.
quote:

Arrambide is unplayable defensively at the college level right now. He gave up 2-3 runs by himself last weekend defensively

Which is why you let him catch the midweek and when we’re up late.

How do you expect him to get better if he never plays?

re: LSU vs Missouri spread/total

Posted by The Ostrich on 3/14/25 at 3:33 pm
This on FanDuel? Didn’t see it
Too lazy to do a full lineup rn but haven’t seen Ryzleman mentioned. He’d be in my pen.
I’m a little more than half way through and this game is an absolute masterpiece. I haven’t had this much fun playing a game in a very long time. I wish there more were game developers that put this much work into their games.

Also significantly more challenging than It Takes Two, doesn’t hold your hand nearly as much.

re: Worst date that turned out well

Posted by The Ostrich on 3/11/25 at 3:54 pm
quote:

never said another word to me the entire time. Just watched the game


Shoulda put a ring on it.

re: LSU -4.5 vs Sam Houston…

Posted by The Ostrich on 3/2/25 at 11:00 am
I don’t think there’s much thought into it. The line for the K-State game was identical. The over the same at 13.5 too.

re: Aranbide. Struggling l

Posted by The Ostrich on 2/24/25 at 7:39 pm
quote:

We had issues with this last year. There were times we couldn’t catch strikes.


Only when certain guys were playing.