In this game you play as young boy by the name of Yumi. You are 14 years and are one of Orochimaru's experiments. After surviving the procedure you have to now train to become strong so that you can fulfill your purpose.

The a numerous ways of dieing here if you don't use sense. You don't have to know the anime to understand the game for everything will be explained here.

This my first game and I really (like really) hard on this so please be kind on the comments. If you a fan of the anime than you'll enjoy this game

I don't think so. That is a topic for a another day, not that I advocate bashing of religious people.

@Drakoblare, sorry I didn't mean to offend you. When I said "most religious people", I wasn't specifically pointing  at Protestants, after all Christianity (and again, not all Christians reject evolution) is not the only religion that has some negative attitude to evolution and common descent.

I see... so the issue is that creationists and many Christians takes the chapter Genesis literally and not symbolically, after all it was not meant to be science textbook. It is said that ignorance is bliss and one of my favorite quotes from Aldous Huxley that I think is meant for Intelligent Design advocates and "history-deniers" (as Richard Dawkins calls them) goes:

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

While you are correct about Intelligent Design being pseudoscientific, you have to applaud its political movements. For those seeking desperately for evidence of God, it is quite persuasive even though it commits a number of fallacies. What I find most interesting about the God question, is that while religious people are happy to question the first cause of the universe, and try to lead it to God, rarely do they question the first cause of God.

Now don't get me wrong, asking who created God is pointless (looking at all atheists who use this argument) because one will be simply creating a straw man of God, after all he is meant to be eternal and also will lead to an infinite regress of explanations. But also 'Goddidit' is a poor explanation of anything: we can't test it, provide no predictive novelty and is usually is a product of ignorance.

This is why Intelligent Design is not science, it flourishes where scientific ignorance is present. What scientists can't explain today, Intelligent Design advocates see it as if it will remain unexplainable. Irreducible complexity is equivalent to irreducible stupidity, stating that the eye is too complex and intricately woven shows signs of design because scientists can't explain is simple an argument from incredibility.

If Intelligent Design is allowed in a science classroom, we might as well go back into caves.

I have a question for those who believe in God. Why is it that most religious people, especially Christians, have a problem with common descent? Is it really that horrible to accept that humans are distant cousins of chimpanzees and that species can give rise to other species? I ask this because of how creationist (and also Intelligent Design) reject common descent even with the overwhelming body of evidence in support of it, I'm just curious if anyone explain it to me, maybe I'm being ignorant of something.

Thanks for the reply and the warm welcome :), and this time I plan to stay longer.

While you did deviate from the topic at hand, you did raise an interesting philosophical view point of determinism, that all actions including humans are pre-planned and we have no control over them. How boring will that be, that murderers and rapists cannot be held accountable for their actions since they were meant to happen in the first place.

The worst part about it is that we cannot really verify if determinism is true, and will also raise the question who planned all the events to occur. Is free will an illusion? Who knows but I live my life as though I do have free will. It will be quite hard to prove in court that somehow it was my destiny to steal a box of chocolates in a shop.

But Ford, doesn't it frustrate you that you may never know the 'true' reality, only after death (if there is life after death).

Hi everyone, it has been a while since I posted anything in this forum. I came here to ask your views on Intelligent Design whether or not it is science, and also if their arguments are valid.

For those who are not familiar with Intelligent Design, it is the view that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection". So in other words, the natural laws that govern the universe are not enough to take into account of the world around us and that a Designer must have intervened.

One particular argument that stands out is the fine-tuned argument also known as anthropic principle, it is stated that since the fundamental physical constant lie in a very narrow rage to allow for life, such as if the strong nuclear force was just 2% stronger life will not occur, so this is evidents for an Intelligent Designer. There is as many as 30 physical constants that have been discovered by scientist.

To me the fine-tuned Universe argument is pretty solid but there is this one criticism of it that makes me think otherwise and that is that it is impossible for life to observe a universe that is not finely tuned. For example if we take two scenarios, one where an Intelligent Designer designed the universe and the other where it just randomly appeared. The first scenario where an Intelligent Designer created the universe, the intelligent life that will formed such as humans will observe the universe that is finely tuned and may conclude a designer must have been at work.

The second scenario where there is no Intelligent Designer, the universe just randomly appeared (multiverse) and it just happened that this universe had the right physical constant to support life, the intelligent life formed such as human will still observe a universe that is finely tuned and also can conclude that a designer was at work even though there was no designer.

So I wanted read your opinions about this fine-tuned universe argument, whether it is valid and your views on Intelligent Design.

Thanks in advance :)

Naruto takes place in the shinobi (ninja) world. It has a really deep storyline and when I say deep I mean deep. The fighting style there is more on the borderline between realistic and just plain fantasy, its actually a mixture. For example the taijutsu is kind of realistic, meaning its not like Dragonball Z where someone kicks his opponent across a huge boulder and causes it to explode to million pieces. 

The unrealistic side is where you have ninjutsu (ninja techniques), its not as you would think like ninjas using stealth to attack enemies from behind but more of producing,... kinda like Harry Potter stuff without the wands.

You really have to watch it to grasp it, hope I was helpful though. And I will take you up on your offer on helping me writing close combat scenes.

Nah, I don't wanna get kinky with a swine. I'll stick to my two legged human counterparts. Besides rape is extreme to be doing it on the day of love, don't you think. I'll rather stick to consensual.

Thanx Ford

Happy Valentines Day to all. For all those lonely souls who are feeling the love blues today, don't fear. Put that frozen yoghurt down because your "soulmate" is around the corner waiting for you. LOL, seriously people. Are we still stuck on Greek Mythology to explain the meaning of love.

And I thought everyday was suppose to be Valentines. It is not like one day you wake up loving the person next to your bed since it is a 'special day'. Not being pessimistic or anything, I wish all of you had a good day today with sweet hearts. lol