All Posts by xpowderx

lol, love dems thinking they know what operation chaos is. Shows how good of a success "Operation Chaos" is. Even now, Dems have not a clue!

From the beginning, most republicans knew that Obama would win the democratic nomination. But putting a token"Hilary" in his place was not our objective. The objective is to make a long lasting democratic nominee process at least til June. Which has been successful.

Watching democrats have in-fighting is much more preferable than having the democratic nominee actually work on the General Election. We appreciate the effort by the democratic candidates of making this possible.

Honestly , republicans do not care which candidate is the democratic nominee. On a personal note I prefer Obama. He is easier to tear apart in the general election than Hilary. But this whole time many dems actually think Operation Chaos was to place our choice of a democrat nominee. We would prefer none. But operation chaos goals have far succeeded our wildest expectations. Now tthe democrat primary will last at least to June 3rd. Which is really nice.

Get to watch  Obama and Hillary fight over each other. While our candidate just goes on without being talked about. Love dems, especially the stupid ones!

hehe, I am on the same server as TOG... Order of Narya here.. I love LOTR. Hope everyone gives LOTRO a good solid effort. The game gets very interesting when you level high enough to visit the Great Barrow. From that point on the pve of the game gets pretty unreal.

I think death penalties should be like the original EQ. deterioration of items over time and to get them back you have to do a corpse run to it! Would give encounters a bit more respect than many players these days tend to have a lack of.

Originally posted by Hvymetal

Originally posted by Zindaihas

I find it interesting that more people tend to associate EQ with fond memories than any other MMO, myself included.  They really did hit upon a magical formula and did back before anyone else (save perhaps UO).  I wonder, will people be longing for the good old days of WoW when its well past it's prime?

QFT

I miss killing Holly Windstalker!! I miss going to Freeport and smacking a guard or two!

These are just a few things I miss.There will never be a game like EQ. But I am sure there will be a game eventually that will bring that first time enjoyment!  I also know that some may actually have fun with a different game that was just like my EQ!

Happy Gaming!

Originally posted by CactusmanX

By commander I assume you mean Rush Limbaugh?

How exactly is it voter fraud if you vote for another party's primary to make it go to the convention, I mean you voted as yourself, not like you used IDs of dead people, your reason for voting for whoever you did is your business.

I voted in the NC primary, my ballet was sad I voted against a tax increase and that was it the rest was blank because there were no good choices on anything, not national, local or state.  And they didn't even give me one of those "I Voted" stickers, guess I didn't vote enough.

Voting is a constitutional right. no one should be forced to intimidation if one choose a candidate the harasser does not want voted on.

Operation Chaos was fun. Libs and Dems accuse my commander of intentionally setting up the vote! On behalf of my  commander. It is not us who have disfranchised the democratic election. But rather you libs and dems who still deny millions of voters from voting. Florida and Michigan! Obama is just a toad on a toadstool, with Dean, Kerry and Nancy holding it up. As a operative of Operation Chaos we will continue to do what we are doing! Also who is really committing fraud?

I personally have lost faith in the election. If riots do occur similar to the ones of 1968 then they occur for a real reason! Obama and his sidekicks are some of the most unconstitutional politicians I have seen in my lifetime!

Originally posted by DailyBuzz

Congrats! You are now even farther behind in delegates and popular vote! Keep getting those 1st time voters registered though, maybe Obama can come out 60% in the general election

Wonder how it would feel if some democrats actually knew they got played!

Dittoheads Unite!

I am a casual mmorpg player. I have only been playing LOTRO for a couple weeks now. IMy main is a levl 20 Champion. I have not had issues finding a group. Just finished the Great Barrows quest line. Not a easy feat. I did not have a issue finding a group. I think you need two things. Dont be a stranger and find a decent Kinship.

There are always people who want to group. There are always higher levels who do not mind helping you. There are people around your level that would be happy to help you. I think being social would help you considerably.

Originally posted by Elikal

 

Originally posted by xpowderx

Originally posted by Elikal

Orcs, unlike todays Greenskins, in Middle Earth have dark to black skin, animalistic faces, they are all weakened by sunlight and were made by Melkor - one of the dark Middle Earth gods - from Elves who were tortured and mutilated. They werent intelligent enough to speak the Black Laguage of Mordor made by Sauron, so they spoke Pidgin-Westron, a bastard version of the common language of the free people.

There are two types of Ocs

1) Snaga: small Orcs from the North, Snaga means "slave" in the Black language of Mordor, they are relatively weak but reproduce fast, they were usally pressed into Saurons service

2) Uruk-hai ("Ork-People") They were created by Sauron in the 3rd Age, almost as big a man, fast, strong and resistend against sunlight damage. Many tribes of Snaga were ruled by some Uruks, since they had more intelligence and loyalty to Sauron. Unlike in the movies, in the books Sauron bred the Uruk-hai, but Saruman made his own Uruk-hai breed, which you may think of as Half-Orcs, since he crossed them with wild human tribes.

While all Orcs described in the books are male, there is clear indications Orcs reproduce like humans, so they are supposed to be females and children.

The word Goblin is a term Hobbits used for Orcs in general. The notion that Goblins are small (= the Snaga) came AFTER Tolkien. Originally it covered ALL Orcs as the Hobbits called them, since the story of LOTR is basically from the view of the Hobbits, and they had little insight in the details of the Orcs and likely only knew about the smaller Snaga.

Unlike Orcs in other Fantasy worlds, in Tolkiens they are mere monsters, abominations to be slain, something I never liked about Tolkien, tbh.

[edit] Made from the earth

According to the oldest "theory" proposed by Tolkien (found in The Fall of Gondolin, from The Book of Lost Tales, circa 1917 — the first tale of Middle-earth to be written in full), Orcs were made of stone and slime through the sorcery of Morgoth ("bred from the heats and slimes of the earth" — The Book of Lost Tales, Vol. 2).

As contested above, Sauron while a aid to Melkor was not the creator of orcs. Morgoth creator of Orcs.

Please use this source.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc_%28Middle-earth%29

 

 

Melkor/Morgoth created the ORIGINAL Orcs, but the Uruks were a breed of Sauron.

Tolkien had many different theories how Orcs were made, but the one they were made from Elves is the canonical from the Silmarillion. The theory of Orcs being made of mud wasnt widely used, and the Elf-breed is the most common he used. ^^

I do not like Wikipedia in such detail, and refer to the books rather. ;)

Then you would know via the Silmarillion that  Sauron was under Morgoth. And both Morgoth and Sauron had plans laid for the Uruk.

You would also know that there are only a few passages concerning this. As Tolkien died shortly after Silmarillion.

Originally posted by Elikal

Orcs, unlike todays Greenskins, in Middle Earth have dark to black skin, animalistic faces, they are all weakened by sunlight and were made by Melkor - one of the dark Middle Earth gods - from Elves who were tortured and mutilated. They werent intelligent enough to speak the Black Laguage of Mordor made by Sauron, so they spoke Pidgin-Westron, a bastard version of the common language of the free people.

There are two types of Ocs

1) Snaga: small Orcs from the North, Snaga means "slave" in the Black language of Mordor, they are relatively weak but reproduce fast, they were usally pressed into Saurons service

2) Uruk-hai ("Ork-People") They were created by Sauron in the 3rd Age, almost as big a man, fast, strong and resistend against sunlight damage. Many tribes of Snaga were ruled by some Uruks, since they had more intelligence and loyalty to Sauron. Unlike in the movies, in the books Sauron bred the Uruk-hai, but Saruman made his own Uruk-hai breed, which you may think of as Half-Orcs, since he crossed them with wild human tribes.

While all Orcs described in the books are male, there is clear indications Orcs reproduce like humans, so they are supposed to be females and children.

The word Goblin is a term Hobbits used for Orcs in general. The notion that Goblins are small (= the Snaga) came AFTER Tolkien. Originally it covered ALL Orcs as the Hobbits called them, since the story of LOTR is basically from the view of the Hobbits, and they had little insight in the details of the Orcs and likely only knew about the smaller Snaga.

Unlike Orcs in other Fantasy worlds, in Tolkiens they are mere monsters, abominations to be slain, something I never liked about Tolkien, tbh.

[edit] Made from the earth

According to the oldest "theory" proposed by Tolkien (found in The Fall of Gondolin, from The Book of Lost Tales, circa 1917 — the first tale of Middle-earth to be written in full), Orcs were made of stone and slime through the sorcery of Morgoth ("bred from the heats and slimes of the earth" — The Book of Lost Tales, Vol. 2).

As contested above, Sauron while a aid to Melkor was not the creator of orcs. Morgoth creator of Orcs.

Please use this source.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc_%28Middle-earth%29

Enjoy!!!www.cnn.com/

Early results are in, Hillary is winning state of Indiana! Once again CONGRATZ Miss Clinton!

My favorite fantasy authors outside of Tolkien are "The Deathgate Cycle" by Margaret Weiss and Tracy Hickman. Who could not love Haplo!

Main article: Death Gate Cycle

1. Dragon Wing ¹ (1990)
2. Elven Star ¹ (1991)
3. Fire Sea ¹ (1992)
4. Serpent Mage ¹ (1993)
5. The Hand of Chaos ¹ (1993)
6. Into the Labyrinth ¹ (1994)
7. The Seventh Gate ¹ (1995)

My next favorite author is from a D&D series called Ravenloft. He is also famous for the infamous Drow elf named Drizzt! I put him up there among the best! R.A Salvatores books can be found here. He has writtern a very large collection.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._A._Salvatore

The last of my next in-line authors is the infamous Piers Anthony, his Sagas have taken fantasy to a new height that broke the mainstay of what we considered fantasy. his collection is as follows.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_works_by_Piers_Anthony

For a individual series and single author my honorable mention goes to "Michael Moorcock with his Elric of Melnibone and the infamous sword"STORMBRINGER.

Those are my picks to take the reign. These series and authors have brought me many captivating nights before bed!

Originally posted by DailyBuzz

I certainly hope republicans can find some new smear material before November. It's going to be easy to debate McCain on the wars, economy, education, health care, climate, energy, infrastructure, foreign affairs. If the race issue comes up, there's more than enough material to debate that as well.

Keep rolling on Wright, it won't get Hillary the nomination and it won't win McCain the presidency. But, if that's all you got, might as well go with it.

My republican friends in the next state over do not need smear tactics. They are just signing the democrat ticket(General ballot) and voting for Hilary! Just as I will be when this continues to my state.

Obama is going to lose big today in both N>C and Indiana. Well maybe not big in N.C but Indiana definitely!

And this should be no suprise. in the general election we will revert back to republican and vote for our man Mc.Cain!

Let me rephrase my comment, instead of makeup I should have used the word diversity. My apologies.

Originally posted by nurgles

 

Originally posted by Arndur

 

I dont need help to read post.

 

Giving in to a belief? Becuase i dont think that this universe which we live in that is so complex could have gotten here by chance? Evolutuon had to start somewhere either by ID(anything but a God) or by chance. Pretty sure that a theory needs to have a orgins espicaly with something like evolution. So do you think that a rock is alive? The dirt we walk on? No. Life seems to be pretty clear. It needs to carry out functions of life. Rocks dont do this Viruses do. A seed is alive it carrys out the basic functions of life. Life as defined by webster is this

c: an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/life

A rock cant do all that, dirt cant. They are not alive. That is a pretty clear defention and works well. Its intersting the things that you asked are they alive all follow this model. It seems from the why you post that you would have already know that degention for life.

consciousness

1 a: the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself b: the state or fact of being conscious of an external object, state, or fact c: awareness; especially : concern for some social or political cause

Again all the things you asked expect for turing machine fit. A plant is self aware they dont just sit there when things are happening though they are at a very low level of consciousness. A very advance computer AI would fit here but a ID gave it consciousness it did not just happen.

So your reasoning is that something that is observed to be very complex must have come from supernatural intervention. this is just illogical. the supernatural is not observable so cannot be used to logically  justify anything, but through faith in the supernatural you can justify the WTC bombing. 

 

Evolution never says that there was nothing. It states that in observing the complexity itself we can see that change occurs in organisms over time and that the changes that are beneficial in reference to its environment are selected for. it never says there was nothing.

I will deal with consciousness first. so you do see shades of gray there. a plant is at a lower level than people for example. so what is the lowest level of consciousness, when do you change from gray to white?  is a plant really conscious of its environment or is it simply responding to stimuli.

rocks/minerals also respond to stimuli. the process of crystallisation is a clear one. how a mineral crystalizes is dependant on the environmental conditions at the time. rapid cooling gives small crystals slow cooling gives large crystals. Adding a specific nucleating surface can change the polymorph of the crystal so formed. this is seen a lot in biological systems, take a sea shell for example. calcium carbonate is a very brittle material. It also has many polymorphs, a sea shell is quite robust, it doesn't powder easily. A sea shell is made up of multiple crystaline blocks of calcium carbonate laminated together with an organic substrate makeing the shell very strong and robust. Each of those little crystaline blocks of calcium carbonate assembes very precisely due to the way the mineral crystalises in the presence of the organic substrate. it responds to its environment.

the corollary is also true, you can order organic molecules against a regular crystalline surface.  so if you take a random mixture of organic cjemicals and wash them against a rocks surface, you get ordered assembly of the highly affinative chemicals against that surface. not random, a simple potential well or sink. the energy of cost of binding to the surface is less than the energy cost of being surrounded by water.

then throw in micellular self assembly, molecular bilayer self assemblies and you start being able to have ordered arangements of chemicals inside bubbles.

these are simple experiments that you do yourself. it assembles without your desighn, it is simply a property of the matter itself, some soapy watter and a rock. now for a thought experiment, take the suface area of the earth, and let the experiment run for billions of years and see what diversity of chemical assemblies have formed. now is it possible that even one of those uncountable assemblies have the ability to template the formation of more of itself? to then produce more of itself? mayby with a few changes allong the way the environment it expands through varies?

consider that the backbone of DNA is actually a phosphate scaffold, phosphate is a mineral, or a rock.

rocks are a part of all of the life cycles that we know. no, they arn't alive, but without them there is no life.

living is not separable from the non-living as it is dependent on it. Also if you are willing to see that the living goes from being very complex to being less complex until you have  things as small as plasmids  and viruses which are self reproducing, but don't metabolize and are not alive (see below). to me there is clearly evidence of gradual change observable from the living to the nonliving, shades of gray. This is where your faith overcomes your reason as you say the following piece of rhetoric "So do you think that a rock is alive? The dirt we walk on? No. Life seems to be pretty clear." it is not clear at all, the evolutionists know this and it is part of the model. You just persist in faithfully holding up your straw man "evolution says stuff comes from nowhere" when it is clear that we can observe today that there is variations in the living down to the non-living, that there is continous progression of natural systems observable and that there is no visible discontinuity that requires divine intervention. (well there are a number of holes in the models but thats where the fun discoveries are and if you give in to faith you miss out on all the fun)

from wiki

Viruses

The majority of biologists consider viruses to be non-living because they lack a cellular structure and cannot metabolize by themselves, requiring a host cell to replicate and synthesise new products. A minority of scientists hold that because viruses do have genetic material they can be considered organisms.

 

Is glad Nurgles is in school and NOT ME! as to viruses. Viruses in some cases have more genetic makeup than any other organism.  I am the latter. I view a virus as a organism.

Originally posted by Tuor7

[quote]Originally posted by xpowderx
Can tell someone watched the movies more than read the Silmarillion.[/b][/quote]

Wow. Nice refutation. You didn't even have to refer to any books, just make some vaguely worded comment.

Of course, you're WRONG. I've watched FotR and TT each, once. I've never even seen RotK and don't really want to, either. OTOH, I've read LotR many, many times, and Sil probably around 10 times or so. I've also read UT and Letters and much of (but not all of) 'The History of Middle-earth'.

Hell, I used to debate on USENET (alt.fan.tolkien and rec.arts.books.tolkien) with some of the people Jackson got as consultants to his movies.

 

But to go back to the OP's question:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc_(Middle-earth)

That should cover it. You'll note that there is some speculation that Saruman may have created his Uruk-hai, but I, for one, think he rather seduced them away from Sauron rather than created them himself, based primarily on Ugluk's comments in the 'Uruk-hai' chapter of TT. Also, some of the Orcs in Mordor referred to them as "traitors" which could imply they had once served Sauron. But overall I don't have a problem with Wiki's info on the subject.

You never mentioned the Olag-hai. You are  correct that Saruman seduced Saurons or as it is put Morgoths orcs. Since Sauron is actually only a servant to Morgoth.  Olag-hai, the Wikpedia never mentioned them as well. They should be informed.

Originally posted by nurgles

 

Originally posted by xpowderx

Originally posted by nurgles

 

 

Originally posted by xpowderx

 

At work YES, at home No. Also you are wanting published subscription articles from chemistry magazines? Would the ACC be a better choice? I have not been in college other than for a debate now and then in 18 years. But I do work in the research field for polymer synthetics and do subscribe to the NSTI. My work is in this field. As I am not allowed by contract to discuss my work. I can give you a page from the NSTI which is in the realm of my field.www.nsti.org/Nanotech2005/workshops/polymer_nanotechnology.html

 

I cannot distribute or show anything that is subscribed.

P.S Had to add, right now I am on "vacation" but return June 6th.

i have published about a dozen articles in international chemistry journals. i know that you cannot distribute the articles, but you can link to the abstracts, and the viewer can download them if they are subscribers.

 

i don't see how there is anything binary or any mention of binary on that page, nice science though. there is a lot of overlap with things i work on or around.

www.rsc.org/publishing/journals/DT/article.asp

Hi Nurgle, there is actually a  book written with some emphasis on the subject. You can find it herebooks.google.com/books

I would also recommend reading about Stochastic solutions.   If you are sincerely interested in binary coding of chemical processes.

 

i am still having some trouble working out what you mean by things like binary encoding of chemical precesses. also why and how you would limit yourself to a binary system.

those conference proceeding are all well and good about surface modification and interactions. there is a huge range of work in that proceeding book as well, so please forgive me if i don't explore it thoroughly. I really can't see any focus on "binary chemistry". it seems you are working on thin film deposition (nanoscale polymers, periodic copolymers? they are kinda binary in nature ) and the effects when you have a binary deposition. which has nothing to do with encoding. i suspe