Currently viewing  
 
Eric-Starnes's profile:

Last Online:February 2007
Member Since:2005-11-21

Sponsorships this user has made:$5.23 ($0.47 in fees)
Sponsorships their sites have received:$0.00 ($0.00 in fees)

 Eric-Starnes's most recent sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  Google finds best day ever(now with bunnies)1,91929
(3.62)
?  Google finds best day ever96725
(3.56)
?  test page3045
(1.80)
?  There's no easy way out84730
(3.70)
?  Fox News: Really really balanced2,78077
(3.82)

 Eric-Starnes's highest rated sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  Shocking Human-animal hybrid1,63828
(3.96)
?  Fox News: Really really balanced2,78077
(3.82)
?  There's no easy way out84730
(3.70)
?  Feminist group infiltrated1,06829
(3.66)
?  Google finds best day ever(now with bunnies)1,91929
(3.62)

 Eric-Starnes's most recent comments:
Site When Comment
2006-10-05 08:10:27
 
You are a hopeless individual
+0 [replies: 0]
2006-10-04 00:46:49
 
If i believed you were sincere and if this was almost any other site then YTMND i would 5 this, since it is somthing that deserves to be discussed. However YTMND is possibly the worst place to try to discuss such things and you are obviously not sincere, therefore: 1
+0 [replies: 0]
2006-10-04 00:21:23
 
Pointing to the vastness of the universe to support moral nihilism is the ethical equilivent of dividing by zero. You can stomp your feet and shout that my ethical decisions are equilivent to religious faith all you want but that does not make it true. Demanding meaningfulness on the scale of the universe to justify human scale ethics may be convienent for your rhetorical purposes, but it is not reasonable. For additional information see: Utilitarianism.
+0 [replies: 0]
2006-10-03 07:33:49
 
I didnt think it was possible, but this is more tedious and less meaningful then Cries of the Infidels.
+0 [replies: 0]
2006-09-27 22:08:55
 
I get it :)
+0 [replies: 0]