2461
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: November 06, 2002, 12:40:37 PM »
Oh! I'm quite familiar with the Nelson Monument in Trafalgar Square - I never made the connection.
News:
"Magic is what makes fantasy fantastic," someone says, "you can't apply rules to them or else it loses wonder!" I respond, "Sure, but if you want to write them you will certainly want to know how they work." Writing is all about execution, and I find applying some basic laws of physics to magic systems make them more understandable and realistic. Here, I'm going to outline my basic method for developing a magic system.
Column by Chaos2651
Discuss it in our forums.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2462
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: November 05, 2002, 10:52:13 AM »
True. Several lists like this have popped up on the forum about the greatest this and the worst that, but no criteria is ever given. I guess that's so the lists will incite argument.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know who Horatio Nelson is? I have a vague idea , but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know who Horatio Nelson is? I have a vague idea , but I'm too lazy to look it up.
2463
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: November 01, 2002, 02:42:47 PM »
Okay. I admit that there are many scientists that are more important in the grand scheme of things than Brunel was or even Shakespeare. But Newton and Darwin aren't.
Darwin: Because someone else came up with it at the same time.
Newton: Because it didn't immeadiatly affect anything. He was not the "right man at the right time." He died thinking that some experiments he did with light were his greatest acheivment. Anyone else could have come along and figured out gravity and things would be pretty much the same.
As far as Brunel, my point is that he needed to be there at that specific time. He pushed and developed railroads at a time when they were vitally important. Here's an example: Most historians believe that the Civil War was won because of the vast industrialization of the north compared to the south. Imagine if both sides were on equal footing, industrially speaking.
Or, what if the Orient Express wasn't there to join western europe with the middle east? What would things be like in Turkey and Israel today if they hadn't been dominated for a century by britain and france?
Brunel changed the world single handedly, whether for good or bad. If he hadn't been there, there would have certainly been other railroad industrialists, but would they have had the same drive and inspiration?
The same argument works for Shakespeare - what other plays from the 1600's are even performed, let alone shaped a language?
Darwin: Because someone else came up with it at the same time.
Newton: Because it didn't immeadiatly affect anything. He was not the "right man at the right time." He died thinking that some experiments he did with light were his greatest acheivment. Anyone else could have come along and figured out gravity and things would be pretty much the same.
As far as Brunel, my point is that he needed to be there at that specific time. He pushed and developed railroads at a time when they were vitally important. Here's an example: Most historians believe that the Civil War was won because of the vast industrialization of the north compared to the south. Imagine if both sides were on equal footing, industrially speaking.
Or, what if the Orient Express wasn't there to join western europe with the middle east? What would things be like in Turkey and Israel today if they hadn't been dominated for a century by britain and france?
Brunel changed the world single handedly, whether for good or bad. If he hadn't been there, there would have certainly been other railroad industrialists, but would they have had the same drive and inspiration?
The same argument works for Shakespeare - what other plays from the 1600's are even performed, let alone shaped a language?
2464
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: November 01, 2002, 01:03:29 PM »
I have to argue with you Pleasington, but it's pretty much the same argument I made against Slant.
You yourself admit that if Darwin had been a little bit slower, somebody else would have beaten him to the punch.
My thinking is that, since Natural Selection is a law of nature, and since Darwin didn't invent it, he just was the first to figure it out, he can't be the most influential Britton.
If it wasn't for Oliver Cromwell, the Glorious Revolution (the reults of which greatly influenced America's founding fathers) may not have been so Glorious. If it wasn't for Brunel, the colonization of the corners of the world would have been greatly slowed. They were the right people at the right time and they changed the face of history.
Darwin figured out some really neat things, but they would have been figured out eventually.
You yourself admit that if Darwin had been a little bit slower, somebody else would have beaten him to the punch.
My thinking is that, since Natural Selection is a law of nature, and since Darwin didn't invent it, he just was the first to figure it out, he can't be the most influential Britton.
If it wasn't for Oliver Cromwell, the Glorious Revolution (the reults of which greatly influenced America's founding fathers) may not have been so Glorious. If it wasn't for Brunel, the colonization of the corners of the world would have been greatly slowed. They were the right people at the right time and they changed the face of history.
Darwin figured out some really neat things, but they would have been figured out eventually.
2465
Role-Playing Games / Re: real world vs fantastic worlds
« on: October 31, 2002, 12:31:16 PM »
The other way to win Tic-Tac-Toe is to play against a stupid person.
2466
Movies and TV / Re: oooooooh, scaaaaary
« on: October 31, 2002, 12:24:37 PM »
I have no idea of the actors in Lady in White, and I'm not even sure of the plot except there was a little ghost girl that had been murdered and some crazy lady that wore white, who may or may not have been a ghost - I can't remember. But it was freaky. It gives me the chills just thinking about it.
2467
Movies and TV / Re: oooooooh, scaaaaary
« on: October 30, 2002, 03:14:56 PM »
For me it was The Lady in White. I saw it when I was twelve and it gave me nightmares for years. I keep thinking that I ought to watch it again to see if it was really as scary as I remember, but I'm too lazy/chicken.
2468
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: October 30, 2002, 01:34:12 PM »
Oh. I didn't know that. He's right out.
2469
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: October 29, 2002, 03:10:08 PM »
I have to argue with you Slant. Not to start a philosophical discussion or anything, but I don't think Newton and Darwin are all that important. They came up with ideas and theories, but never really did anything. Gravity is a solid undisputed fact and evolution (Darwin's version) is almost universally accepted as fact. Evolution and gravity exist whether or not anyone figures them out. If Newton hadn't figured it out, someone else would have sooner or later.
On the other hand, people like Churchill and Brunel and Shakespeare did things that only they could do. Granted, if Churchill wasn't PM during WWII, the allies probably still could have won and if Shakespeare didn't write plays, there would be some other master playwright we would study in high school. The difference is that they did important things at important times. Certainly trains would have eventually crisscrossed the world, but Brunel made it happen at a critical time.
As a side note, I'm not a fan of Churchill. I think he did a lot of good things, but a whole pile of idiotic ones as well. He was obsessed with preserving the British Empire to the point of nearly breaking up the Allies. and outside of the war, he was practically worthless.
I'm not so sure about Benny Hill, but what about Rowan Atkinson?
On the other hand, people like Churchill and Brunel and Shakespeare did things that only they could do. Granted, if Churchill wasn't PM during WWII, the allies probably still could have won and if Shakespeare didn't write plays, there would be some other master playwright we would study in high school. The difference is that they did important things at important times. Certainly trains would have eventually crisscrossed the world, but Brunel made it happen at a critical time.
As a side note, I'm not a fan of Churchill. I think he did a lot of good things, but a whole pile of idiotic ones as well. He was obsessed with preserving the British Empire to the point of nearly breaking up the Allies. and outside of the war, he was practically worthless.
I'm not so sure about Benny Hill, but what about Rowan Atkinson?
2470
Everything Else / My sports topics never last
« on: October 28, 2002, 02:47:19 PM »
So Utah has gone six losses straight and everyone around here is calling for Ron McBride's resignation. He is very concillatory - it almost seems like he'd be happy to leave as fast as possible.
In other news, BYU sucks too, but not quite so bad. I can't wait for the Y v. U game, simply to see which team is worse.
Personally, I'm rooting for Notre Dame this year.
In other news, BYU sucks too, but not quite so bad. I can't wait for the Y v. U game, simply to see which team is worse.
Personally, I'm rooting for Notre Dame this year.
2471
Books / Re: So...what's everyone reading?
« on: October 28, 2002, 02:43:04 PM »
I've just started Tom Clancy's latest "Red Rabbit." Too soon to tell how good it will be, but I think it's funny that Clancy has had to go back in time to write more Jack Ryan books - none of his others sold nearly as well.
And, similar to Tage's, I just read The Magic of Conflict by Thomas Crum. It's practical philosophy extracted from Aikido. Very interesting stuff.
And, similar to Tage's, I just read The Magic of Conflict by Thomas Crum. It's practical philosophy extracted from Aikido. Very interesting stuff.
2472
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: October 22, 2002, 07:21:41 PM »
I agree entirely about Diana and Lennon. Diana was more of a charitably minded celebrity than a truly influential person, and Lennon has greatly influenced culture, but only for a brief period of time. No one can reasonably argue that Lennon has had even a tenth of the cultural influence Shakespeare had.
That said, my vote goes to Isambard Brunel. Without his influence in the engineering of transportation, the face of the industrial revolution would be radically different. Imagine the settlement of the western USA without the railroad. Imagine the Mississippi without steamships. His work on bridges helped cross both Europe and Asia.
Shakespeare may have made more changes to the grammer world but, in my mind, connecting the nations of the world in preparation for the 20th century was much more important.
That said, my vote goes to Isambard Brunel. Without his influence in the engineering of transportation, the face of the industrial revolution would be radically different. Imagine the settlement of the western USA without the railroad. Imagine the Mississippi without steamships. His work on bridges helped cross both Europe and Asia.
Shakespeare may have made more changes to the grammer world but, in my mind, connecting the nations of the world in preparation for the 20th century was much more important.
2473
Movies and TV / Re: Sweet Home Alabama
« on: October 22, 2002, 01:55:22 PM »
Thanks for the change. It doesn't matter at all, but I'm happy to know that my opinions make a difference in this world.
2474
Everything Else / Re: Best of British
« on: October 22, 2002, 01:52:25 PM »
Greatest in what sense? Most influential?
2475
Everything Else / Re: Halloween
« on: October 22, 2002, 01:16:57 PM »
The question is: Are you invited to these elementary schools? Or are you just going to be some oddly dressed person lurking behind the playground equipment handing out candy?