EPTNeil D Tyson Portrait - Page 2
| Blogs > Glider |
|
InspiredFrog
Finland522 Posts
| ||
|
LRM)TechnicS
Bulgaria1565 Posts
| ||
|
Ero-Sennin
United States756 Posts
| ||
|
SpeaKEaSY
United States1070 Posts
Awesome work though, as always. | ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
| ||
|
CrazyF1r3f0x
United States2120 Posts
| ||
|
Kuni
Austria765 Posts
| ||
520
United States2822 Posts
| ||
|
KING CHARLIE :D
United States447 Posts
On July 15 2013 11:46 Artax wrote: Should have been Sagan or Hawking or something... Still, amazing skill warrants 5/5 I'm sorry, but why SHOULD it have been Carl Sagan or Stephen Hawking as opposed to Neil Tyson? Was the title of the drawing, "The most influential astrophysicist that has ever lived" ? Why is NDT not worthy of being drawn to you? You've manufactured this hierarchy of people who are more deserving to be the centerpiece of Glider's art...what metric are you using to determine who is more deserving? Did you bitch at him when he drew Rihanna, saying that he SHOULD have drawn Britney Spears? Did you bitch at him when he drew Bryan Cranston, saying that he should have drawn Robert DeNiro? I don't understand why you have to run your mouth at all, even if it is qualified by a compliment afterward. This is amazing work, and there was no obligation he had to fulfill with this drawing other than to do something that interests him. So why SHOULD it have been someone else? It's like you study the cosmos and have a high level of knowledge about it, but have an axe to grind with people that only know about Neil Degrasse Tyson. So by pointing out two other extremely mainstream brilliant people that you feel are more deserving of a picture, you somehow discredit NDT and assert yourself as the intellectual alpha male of this random subforum of a computer gaming website. I think it's really cool you pursue knowledge with your free time, but you don't need to shit on others to look better in comparison to them. | ||
|
Artax
121 Posts
| ||
|
bjornkavist
Canada1235 Posts
| ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
| ||
|
canucks12
Canada812 Posts
 I was looking through your older videos, but I couldn't find the one of Bisu. Did you have to remove it for some reason? | ||
|
Inertiaddict
United States126 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
 . There is variation on how you interpret "should" - it either means "you really should have done something else, i'm disappointed" or "it would have been nicer had it have been something else". Its just a personal opinion, don't get worked up about it! | ||
|
thezanursic
5498 Posts
| ||
|
Bommes
Germany1226 Posts
On July 15 2013 16:30 GhandiEAGLE wrote: I think you got more star-stuff than the rest of us, Glider. Amazing work You mean he's fat? His hand/arm doesn't look fat. | ||
|
Zenatsu
100 Posts
On July 16 2013 02:40 KING CHARLIE :D wrote: I'm sorry, but why SHOULD it have been Carl Sagan or Stephen Hawking as opposed to Neil Tyson? [...] I don't understand why you have to run your mouth at all, even if it is qualified by a compliment afterward.[...] The reason you don't understand why he shared his thoughts of his own personal "hierarchy" of influential minds, is the same reason why you felt you SHOULD have exploded unnecessarily on him. Who Artax feels are the most scientific influential people, and who you feel are the most, are completely subjective and opinionated. Look at it as Artax sharing who he feels are his own hero's, as glider shared his hero. I don't understand why you ran your mouth at all, there was no hostility within those words. | ||
|
LuMiX
China5757 Posts
| ||
|
BisuEver
United States247 Posts
On July 16 2013 02:40 KING CHARLIE :D wrote: I'm sorry, but why SHOULD it have been Carl Sagan or Stephen Hawking as opposed to Neil Tyson? Was the title of the drawing, "The most influential astrophysicist that has ever lived" ? Why is NDT not worthy of being drawn to you? You've manufactured this hierarchy of people who are more deserving to be the centerpiece of Glider's art...what metric are you using to determine who is more deserving? Did you bitch at him when he drew Rihanna, saying that he SHOULD have drawn Britney Spears? Did you bitch at him when he drew Bryan Cranston, saying that he should have drawn Robert DeNiro? I don't understand why you have to run your mouth at all, even if it is qualified by a compliment afterward. This is amazing work, and there was no obligation he had to fulfill with this drawing other than to do something that interests him. So why SHOULD it have been someone else? It's like you study the cosmos and have a high level of knowledge about it, but have an axe to grind with people that only know about Neil Degrasse Tyson. So by pointing out two other extremely mainstream brilliant people that you feel are more deserving of a picture, you somehow discredit NDT and assert yourself as the intellectual alpha male of this random subforum of a computer gaming website. I think it's really cool you pursue knowledge with your free time, but you don't need to shit on others to look better in comparison to them. Thanks man | ||
| ||
