AzureWolf

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Do you mean something that made you actually physically cry, or just feel torn on the inside? I would say that I haven't cried at some of the more appropriate times, but I've physically cried at Naruto's Mist Saga ending, just because of how unexpected the whole episode was. And they were pretty convincing with [SPOILER]Sasuke's death, since they didn't focus on him for a few episodes after his supposed death[/SPOILER]. The most recent time I cried (maybe over the summer? can't remember) was over the ending of Gunslinger Girl. It was just so beautiful, haha. It was incredible, and very touching. There was so much there (including good music). Funny enough, my mood turned foul when I saw the GSG thread here. XD[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='pbfrontmanvdp]I didn't like many of the characters in Lain, espically Lain since she would always question herself left and right.[/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]You didn't like Lain? I thought she was adorable, haha. I liked her behavior. She reminded me of Rakka, but in a different world (and mind). I think questioning one's self was the main point of Lain, but like everyone else on this thread, I'm not 100% sure what transpired.[QUOTE=pbfrontmanvdp]I also couldn't understand where she was getting all the equipment from for her computer after a while. I know the [spoiler] knights were supplying her with some equipment but most of the equipment she had to get some way or another. And i seriously doubt that her father was buying most of it for her [/spoiler'].[/quote][SPOILER]Her dad was buying all the stuff. It's clear from his computer smarts and gear that he could purchase it, and when you find out that it's not her real father, it becomes very clear that money is no object for the "family."[/SPOILER] You mentioned a movie. I remember hearing that there are like four movies or something, but that might have meant four DVDs. I wonder if there are movies for this series, as I would really like to get more information about them then. As for the series, I wasn't all too impressed. Like the Matrix, the ideas and concepts are interesting, but the execution is where it falters severely. While the character Lain was interesting, I don't think there was anything else about the show that I liked. Speaking of the Matrix, was it influenced by Lain, or made before it? I'm wondering because of all the monochromatic and polychromatic atmospheres. I don't think it was just a way to save ink, haha, because everything was extremely white, and then other places would have a rainbow of colors. [SPOILER]Cyberia, where information and material would exist, was highly colored, while other places would be monochromatic, like everything has the same level of significance[/SPOILER]. I think part of the confusion from Lain stems from disagreeing with some of the ideas. You really have to go into the series without imposing any beliefs of your own, as then it creates a cloud of confusion for you. That's my opinion, haha.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Alright, now I follow you, Dagger. Heh, sorry to put you on the spot for a sec, but I was just confused. I didn't even realize the characters said everything I said soon after (or during?) the event, haha. That's good as confirmation, but bad because I obviously didn't figure it out myself, haha. Anyway, seeing as how the show is 51 episodes long, airs only once a week, and has sparked my interest, I'm not going to wait almost a year to see what FMA amounts to. I've started watching the DVD rips, and FMA is hitting all the right chords and with the correct force. It's quite interesting, heh. In less than 10 episodes, it's already easily gone leaps and bounds above Naruto. In fact, it became my favorite action anime, but we'll if it's destined to overtake any of my top 5 favorite anime series (Naruto wasn't in my top 5, btw). Sorry I won't be able to discuss the series with anyone since I'm taking the impatient way out. And Ready Steady Go is the second opening. Bummer, as it still doesn't seem to fit, heh.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]I'm having a hard time understanding the universe and the main character's occupation. Besides that, it seems pretty nice. Does the character have two spirits (guardian angel and evil spirit), or just one that was good originally and became bad? Also, is fighting like some popular universal sport that the main character just has a knack for and can bring in the money? From what I've read here, I think the biggest uncertainty is "Why is the main character fighting?" Aside from that, it sounds pretty nice. Hope that helps.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Altron']But not all n00bs are like the ones in your comic. I mean, weren't we all n00bs at one time or another?[/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Well, from what I can tell, most people make a distinction with newcomers. There are n00bs, and then there are newbs. n00bs are the humorous stereotypes, while newb (newbie) is just a sane, coherent person who is new to the scene. As for the comic, I think the whole look of the n00b and his comment about being on the Dark Side is what makes the whole work shine. It's very true, and yet stereotypical at the same time, and the execution is clever.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Manic Webb][SIZE=1]Really, Azure, I think it's nice how you can so easily omit parts of my post that answer your questions.[/SIZE][/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Really, Manic, I think it's nice how you first include all the people in the US, and then not include all the people on OB, and then ignore the third sentence where I say "Even if not everyone, how would you know who I'm acquainted with here anyway?" [QUOTE][SIZE=1]So to answer your question (again), I didn't expect you to be acquainted with anyone. I expected you to know there were more than 3 religions world-wide, and that a fraction of 13,000 random people from around the world have to subscribe to one of the others. So even if you haven't read the old threads (which, by the way, you don't have to be acquainted with anyone to read), I would've thought logic would take over. Silly me.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]That's some of the poorest logic I've ever heard. Ok, so you graciously assume that I know there are more than 3 religions worldwide (wow, I thought we were restricted to the US at first). Unfortunately, I'm only acquainted with the 3 largest monotheistic ones, and that's what was addressed the first circle around. So regardless of the world's religious make-up, you had no idea the make-up of my acquaintances. Why you would go from the US to OB after thinking of my acquaintances is beyond reason. [QUOTE][SIZE=1]Let the record show that whether or not you acquaint yourself with any other OB members was completely irrelevent to my original point. I never once mentioned your "acquaintances" because you shouldn't have to be acquainted with someone of the world's 5th largest religion to know it exists.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] XD Fifth largest? Really, again, giving you the benefit of the doubt (what, the third time now?), fifth largest sure as hell does not fall into "most." Most people are not Bhuddist, not even in the US if we follow your "around here" logic. So, even if I let you somehow ignore the fact that I mentioned aquaintances, your argument falls apart. [QUOTE][SIZE=1]Did you have to know Buddhism's stance on creation? No, that's what I said it for. I was pointing out that there are exceptions to the idea that religions cannot coincide with Darwinism.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]If I was as anal about your initial reply as you are about my single sentence, then I would have made ridiculously long and boring responses about how Bhuddism isn't the only religion that Darwinism works with and why you decided to omit those out and how illogical that is. Then I would go to great lengths to express how that idea could be extrapolated from your initial reply. But I didn't. And I'll get to why later. [QUOTE][SIZE=1]I'm well aware that you used the word "most" in your sentence. But you know what? I'm not combating that. In case you didn't notice, I was trying to clarify and add on to what you said by saying there are exceptions.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]ALMOST. But no, as you are now just contradicting yourself. See something you said earlier: [QUOTE][SIZE=1]When I read this, I automatically thought you were refering to the United States, a physical place. The location was one of the first things you said. I live in the US (you can tell by my profile), so my "around here" is probably the same as your "around here." So here was my reply...[/SIZE][/QUOTE] So, at first, it was about the entire US, and then it's about clarifying on what I was saying, and then it's about OBers... I hope it's clear why your replies are accumulating to less and less logically sound statements. [QUOTE][SIZE=1']I'm sorry if I thought the phrase "around here" was unspecific, and having to say you don't acquaint yourself with people online is a ridiculous length.[/SIZE][/quote]What? That doesn't even make sense. [QUOTE][SIZE=1]Why not? It's not like you said "around here" only consisted of your acquaintances the first time. What's that? Another ridiculous length? Maybe. But only if you consider writing "my acquaintances" or "people I've met" ridiculous compared to saying "most around here." Really, if you were only referring to people you knew, that's all you had to say from the beginning. And really, I'm sorry if a little specificity is too much to ask for.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] Actually, after your first reply, my reply did consist of mentioning that I was only referring to acquaintances, so everything you just said here is pointless, as I did point that out (and then you decided that I meant OBers). It's really kind of funny how that works: you thought I was referring to the US, and then when I mention acquaintances, you don't stick to the real world and jump onto the internet. Yes, your logic is certainly sound. And secondly, you've contradicted yourself again: [QUOTE][SIZE=1] I never once mentioned your "acquaintances" because you shouldn't have to be acquainted with someone of the world's 5th largest religion to know it exists.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] So, you did know I was referring to people I know, and yet you continued to make a comment... And third, you yourself did not go to ridiculous lengths to list every religion Darwism works with (unless you somehow do believe Bhuddism is the only one). [QUOTE][SIZE=1]Is interpreting "most around here" as "people in the US" really that ridiculous if it's the same sentence where you said "the US population"?[/SIZE][/QUOTE] To put it bluntly, yes, Manic, yes it is. However, we are now beginning to go in circles so I will stop arguing here. You misinterpreted a sentence: get over it. I can't believe how much was written about one sentence (and all of it was pointless anyway), and I frankly could care less about why you misunderstood what I wrote. Sorry to play mod (one of us has to), but this argument is absolutely off-topic and starting to go in circles (as I've addressed almost everything you've said here before). Manic, I can see where this circle of logic is going to head: longer, more useless, and repeated points that will lead nowhere as you are clearly starting to contradict yourself and hoping that, after one post-exchange's time, I'll forget about previously addressed points so you could repeat them once more. I have no doubt that's what your next reply will amount to, as everything above has been addressed before, and with the same responses (save for all the contradictions). Tell you what. Write everything you want, regardless of how many times you repeat things (written in different ways, of course, so it doesn't seem like repetition). Don't post it - instead, slap a title on the sucker, like "Why Manic Interpreted One Sentence Wrong." Then get it published as one of the most circular novels in history. It'll sell millions - no, billions. In fact, everyone in the WORLD (not just the US) will realize why you were justified in YOUR misinterpretation and why I was so wrong for writing such a simplified sentence. But finally, Manic, move on. Please, move on.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] EDIT: No edit. :)

[quote name='Manic Webb][SIZE=1']When I read this, I automatically thought you were refering to the United States, a physical place. The location was one of the first things you said. I live in the US (you can tell by my profile), so my "around here" is probably the same as your "around here." So here was my reply...[/SIZE][/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]*sigh* You know, even if you had the benefit of the doubt, the generalizer "most" is there, so I'm sorry for not putting that in bold for you as well. I should have put everything in bold and said, "read carefully." Secondly, if you didn't pick up on it on the first go-around, how the hell couldn't you get it the second go-around when I mentioned acquaintances? Why didn't you just mention that you first thought I meant in the US the first time around anyway? [QUOTE][SIZE=1]There was no reason for me to think you were refering specifically to New Jersey or your home town, so I could only guess you meant "around here" to be OtakuBoards.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] Acquaintances! How hard is that to grasp?! And again, even if I was referring to OB, how could I be acquainted with everyone? Even if not everyone, how would you know who I'm acquainted with here anyway? [QUOTE][SIZE=1]Frankly, I thought the use of the word "around" was more of your fault or lingual habit than mine, but I felt no reason to bring it up.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]Yes, I did not realize I had to be extremely specific to be politically correct, but realize that what I said has held true, and your misinterpretation is [B]your[/B] misinterpretation. But yes, it's my fault for having faith in certain members to easily pick up on things such that I would not have to flesh statements out to ridiculous lengths to get a simple point across. [QUOTE][SIZE=1]So if you bolded "around here," there must have been a good reason. Were you refering to somewhere [i]other[/i] than the US when you said that? And if so, don't you think it would've been a good idea to say so?[/SIZE][/QUOTE]I thought by making it bold, it would have become apparent. The mentioning of acquaintances should have sealed the deal. Sorry for the confusion. Next time I realize I will have to discuss anything with you, I will make sure to write everything, and flawlessly as possible such that other (ridiculous) meanings cannot be (ridiculously) reasoned from my posts.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Chabichou][SIZE=1][COLOR=#004a6f]But gene splicing is done by humans, do you know what I mean? It does not happen on it's on accord, unless you count. The theory of evolution does not depend on gene splicing, it depends on [B]random[/B] mutation. A random mutation is very very rare. And so far there has been no random mutation that is beneficial to a creature. If you repeatedly try to force the mutation of a gene, that is [B]not[/B] random. Mutation would occur much faster and many more times than usual, and therefore the probability of a "good mutation" arising would highly increase.[/COLOR'][/SIZE][/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Again, what does gene splicing have to do with Darwinism? And what splicing is done by humans, because when I started talking about bacteria, you demanded something else. Also, just because you increase the occurrence of a random event doesn't make it "unrandom" all of a sudden. It's a hit or miss phenomenon where they "screen" for a desired mutation after allowing the random mutations to occur at a scale that will guarantee at least one of the desired mutations. [quote name='Chabichou][SIZE=1']As for entropy, it doesn't have to do with evolution because it disproves it :) ... What I am asking is how would a cell randomly form if it does not have the mechanisms to use energy to achieve a highly ordered state in the first place?[/SIZE][/quote]How does entropy disprove evolution? And evolution has been proven, if only on a micro scale. I thought we were talking about Darwinism, as evolution is simply a scientific fact. How would a cell randomly form? The data is in the DNA. I'm lost as to what you are asking, and why cell formation is relevant at all, since it happens regardless of the reason. [quote name='Chabichou][SIZE=1]Can any of you possibly imagine DNA and proteins forming and phospholipids actually lining up to form a cell membrane? They cannot come together with out a source of energy to keep them from falling apart during the formation.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]Yes, I can imagine it. You yourself can create micelles and see how phospholipids work. Soap works with micelles, and the formation is due to Brownian (i.e., random) motion. DNA and protein formation is also somewhat Brownian. [QUOTE=Chabichou][SIZE=1']As for plant mutation Azure, I thought new species of plants are made simply by cross breeding different species together. Broccili for instance, is a mix of cauliflower and peas. That's not mutation, that's just reproduction using very different sets of genes. The other species are made when scientists splice the genes with traits they want into another plant's genes. No one has actually left a plant alone and come back to find it's offspring a different species than it. That's just ludacris.[/SIZE][/quote]See, yet again you have changed what you demanded. I hope this is the last time you change your mind. However, I should point out that a seed that has been changed by outside DNA is indeed considered a mutation (hence the name trans[B]mutation[/B]). Hell, that's how viruses work, and that's how quite a few mutations work. I'm not sure why this doesn't address your question. While we are on the topic of viruses, different species of viruses appear all the time, and they can even be spontaneously formed. Secondly, what you are asking for would, in theory, require millions of years (what with mutations being so rare, and could flop at any point). That is, of course, assuming Darwinism is even true.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]O_o Whoa, are you for real?! Hey, if you really are part of the biz, are you planning on sticking around on these forums? Insider info would be quite nice, heh. ^^; And Geneon of all companies! My favorite! w00t.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[QUOTE=Manic Webb][SIZE=1]If you look back at some of the older religion threads, you'd find that there [i]are[/i] Buddhists here on OtakuBoards. I wasn't speaking for myself, but I was saying that there's a chance a Buddhist could very well reply here and give an entirely scientific opinion with no religious contradictory. Did it happen? No. Could it? Yes. Now I'm going to quote [i]myself[/i]: I understand what you meant the first time, but you made a statement that generalized the members of OB (with a religion, of course) to be wrong in assuming their religion can coincide with Darwinism. I clarified.[/SIZE][/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Forgive me, as this one is my fault. I told you to pay attention to the second emboldened words and so the first emboldened words were clearly ignored. So, I have to quote myself yet a second time. [quote name='Me... again...][SIZE=1]and most [B]around here[/B'] have an ill-concieved notion that Darwinism can somehow coincide with their religious beliefs.[/SIZE][/quote]"Around here" is a very broad term, and any logical person would see that as a reference to an actual region rather than a definitive internet site. If I was referring to OB and not where I live, then I would have simply stated "here at OB" (notice the lack of the generalizer "around") Secondly, my acquaintances would not be online persons. "Around" is just not a logically sound term to use when referring to any website. Even if I gave you that amount of freedom, how the hell would I have any idea every OBers' religion? Congratulations, you aren't Buddhist. Thank you for emphasizing that. Unfortunately, I see little relevance to making note of that.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Altron][SIZE=1]Before I start, Azure, you're one smart dude. In all the threads I read, you seem to bring the hard facts to the argument. Good job.[/SIZE][/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Haha, you flatter me. Seriously, it's very appreciated that you actual see me for what I am: a guy. Oh, and thanks for the compliment. :p [QUOTE=Manic Webb][SIZE=1]It can if you're Buddhist. It's a religion with no exclusive belief in either divine creation or evolution. Actually, I think it leaves a door open for either one. I'm not Buddhist, but I just thought I could put that out there.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]I'm going to quote myself, the same exact quote you took, but I'm going to embolden two parts (emphasis on the second bolded words): [QUOTE=Me][SIZE=1]and most [B]around here[/B] have an ill-concieved notion that Darwinism can somehow coincide with [B]their[/B'] religious beliefs.[/SIZE][/quote] At first, I did not think it was necessary to list every single religion that my acquaintances did not emcompass. However, if it really is necessary to create some kind of generalization that you can try to find a real exception to, here goes: [i]The three major monotheistic religions (i.e., JudeoChristian Islamic) cannot be made complementary to Darwinism, ever.[/i] Hope that clarifies things. [quote name='Baron Samedi][SIZE=1]I believe in Intelligent design...or rather, a more appropriate term would be that I think Intelligent Design is the best theory I've seen put forth. I don't believe in God. I see flaws in Evolutionary Theory.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]But you see, that's the beauty of Intelligent Design: the "force" involved isn't specifically defined as God (otherwise it wouldn't have been [STRIKE]accepted[/STRIKE] partially accepted as a scientific theory). Intelligent Design isn't the belief of God changing creatures for the better, it's the belief that an incalculable force plays a role in evolution (one which isn't random noise). [QUOTE=Chabichou][SIZE=1']First of all I'd like to point out that gene splicing is different than mutation. Scientists have decoded the human genome, so they would know where to find a defective gene. They could splice a working gene and put it in it's place.[/SIZE][/quote] Explain to me how gene splicing is different than mutation. Aside from the fancy words, there's very little separating the two. In fact, the ONLY difference (and you can quote me on this) is that one is deemed natural (or popular) and the other a mistake of nature (or man). In other words, it's a huge ethical debate as to what defines a mutation and what is just a polymorphism (or allele). I don't see where you can abitrarily come here and call the shots as to what's what. To illustrate, Swedes make up the majority of the 1% of the human population that is immune to HIV. The mutation (or polymorphism) is actually a faulty gene that codes for a unusable protein receptor that HIV normally uses to enter the cell. So, there's a dual nature about this mutation/allele: clearly, loss of protein function is bad, but at the same time, it's provided a means to immunity against a particular disease. So, using HIV as an example, you can understand why scientists have to question whether or not something needs "fixing" or is actually a benefit. In all honesty, I have no clue why you even brought this up, and how at all, this is relevant to the discussion. But to play it safe, I still wrote a rebuttal.[quote name='Chabichou][SIZE=1']If a good mutation does happen to occur, it's never actually changed the species. The tubercolosis you mentioned did not change into another pathogen. It simply remained as tubercolosis. Some of us are more resistent to pathogens than others. Even if those with no resistance are wiped out, we still remain human.[/SIZE][/quote] See, good is a matter of opinion (just like most mutations/polymorphisms). While there are things that can be clearly called bad or good mutations, such as mutations leading to death or infertility, most "mutations" aren't black and white. Secondly, I really ask that you watch your fancy words. First you called for mutation, which is very general, and said it can't be good. I supplied you with a good mutations, both naturally and artificially. However, here you are asking for transmutation (or genetic recombination, I'm 100% not sure), in which a new species arises from some genetic change. If you clearly stated what you asked first, then there wouldn't have been a need for the confusion. I'm still seriously confused as to what you are trying to point out/say, but I'll try my best. Again, both naturally and artificially, new species have been made. In fact, almost all of today's plants are believed to have been transmutated from other species. Yes, you heard right: in the plant world, there have been successful (and fertile) creation of new species in what would be considered the equivalent to a elephant and a dog having a baby. It's been found that plants readily express extraneous genes, and a greater number of homologous chromosomes simply equates to a greater number of genetic products. This event happens rather naturally, and can be reproduced in the lab. So, species have been created. Good mutations, as you have put it, have been made, both either changing the species or just a gene. I don't remember all the specifics about the whole plant research, but I think I've elaborated enough.[quote name='Chabichou][SIZE=1']Another thing I would like to point out is this: The law of entropy states that as things are let on their own, they tend to spontaneously move to more and more dis-ordered states, or a higher entropy as you would call it. Organisms however, are highly ordered systems, therefore energy would be required to keep them from become more disordered. How could the first cells have spontaneously, by chance, fromed on their own when they obvviously can't due to the law of entropy? They can't do this spontaneously; this reaction will never happen unless some sort of interference occurs. That's something to think about.[/SIZE][/quote]What does this entire paragraph have to do with anything?! No one ever said that animals don't go against the law of entropy. And really, this whole statement depends on your reference. Animals themselves increase the order within themselves at the cost of an unequal (greater) decrease in entropy in their surroundings. So, [B]overall[/B], animals increase the amount of entropy in the universe, even if they give rise to order within themselves. And I really see no relevance of this to anything pertaining to Darwinism. Most of this post seemed to consist of just fancy words, no offense.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]*reads Sol-Blade's posts* O_o Coming on a little strong, aren't ya? I guess that's none of my business. ANYWAY... I thought Tsukihime was ok the first viewing through. However, a lot of my ideas and perspectives changed the second time through. It was almost like I was meeting the characters for the first time. At first I thought Ciel was an ok character, and I wasn't all too fond of Shiki's sister. In the second sitting, however, I realized what an idiot Ciel was and how awesome Akiha is (she is now my favorite character in the series). More importantly, it became my favorite anime, haha. I liked the first soundtrack, but the second one is really off-beat (in a non-slang, "bad" way). In fact, the two seem very unrelated. There are, of course, one or two good songs in the second OST, but overall, it's a wasted buy. Likewise, the Image Album (I think it's called 7th Moon) is the same song ten times with different pacing or instruments. There's one song that's good in there, though. Last, Ever After wasn't bad at all, but I can't remember anything specific off-hand. There's a myriad of subtleties and little snippets that maintain the story and hold a solid, coherent story throughout that you just can't notice the first time around because you don't know the whole picture yet. I personally got confused near the end about what was going on, but having the big picture in mind the second time around, I was able to see how everything came together. Specifically, [SPOILER]the whole two Shiki phenomenon. They kept switching gears and I did get confused, and then the sister's involvement between the two "brothers."[/SPOILER] I've actually been working on two articles, and while only revision has been left for God knows how long, I'm not satisfied with them, so I haven't submitted them yet, heh.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Dagger IX1']Haha, yeah, that pretty much covers it. I suppose this decision also gives people an extra incentive to go out and buy Funi's DVDs, which will contain all the correct openings with the correct music (they made a statement to that effect a little while back). I don't know if CN ever tried to publicly justify running Ready Steady Go in front of every single episode, but your reasoning makes sense to me.[/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Also, if I remember correctly, CN starts the episode with the opening, while FMA on DVD has a bit of the show before actually showing the opening. There's actually an interesting thing about FMA's presentation that I would like to point out, but I think it'll be in vain right now. So, does this mean that Ready Steady Go is a regular opening (it's definately not a bootleg opening with random episode snippets)? That still bothers me a little, heh.[QUOTE] It's not so much that I think the brothers are wholly unable to function separately, but I do believe each is driven by his desire to fix/heal the other. Right now it's more or less their entire purpose in life. Without each other, they would not have that to aim for and would be sort of lost.[/QUOTE]Well, I don't think the episode in question really establishes any of that. Them being bound by sin (aka "desire to fix/heal the other") was pertty early on, even before their quest started. In this episode, that theme wasn't very strong - at least not to me. And logically, of course if the other wasn't around, their desire to fix/heal the other wouldn't be there, haha. Without a doubt, their appreciation for just having one another was made clear after the incident. However, this as well, was not established in this episode.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] EDIT: While I think I understand what everyone is saying, I think you are conveying the idea wrong. You can relate to the character better, or you can sympathize with the character better, because you know he is flawed like everyone else. This even, however, is also established earlier on, IMO.

[quote name='Lore][color=#4b4b79]I'm really sorry that I've been "killing" you for so long. I've been kinda waiting for you to post, so I could post again and then talk about what I thought as I watched it with my friend. Anyway, I've seen roughly the first half of the series (there are 12 episodes? I think I saw that earlier in this thread... Anyway, I think the last one I watched was the one after[/color] [spoiler]Kuu disappeared[/spoiler'].[/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]w00t! That's a relief. I don't know if I could write that badly (and in green) for very long anyway... There are 13 episodes (close enough, heh). I actually took a break around the same time as you to let the whole incident sink in and pretty much sort out a few of the events and emotions in my head before continuing. (this seems rather pointless to post, since I'm IMing the same thing to you right now. O_o) [QUOTE][color=#4b4b79]I have to admit, I'm really anxious to know what on earth you've been so desperate to talk about. So...maybe I'd better just hand this over to you.[/color][/QUOTE] Well, to put it bluntly, everything you said is more accurate than you can imagine. It's simply unbelieveable (to me at least) that you were able to derive so many important aspects of HR without ever having seen the series. That's just the start of what I want to say, btw! [QUOTE][color=#4b4b79]Although I wanted to ask--are the Haibane always the same age? Because there were flashbacks of Reki looking small and cute, but it seemed like Kuu never grew into her too-big clothes (how much longer than Rakka has she been there?) So I didn't really know what to make of that.[/color][/QUOTE] The Haibane do age naturally, as do the townspeople. The only people I don't think age are [SPOILER]the Toga[/SPOILER], but that's really my guess, based on a variety of ideas I've gathered. I think you'll come to the same conclusion yourself, though, since you already picked up on and figured out way more than I did at this point. Case and point, you noticed the ages and durations... Again, you have an incredibly sharp mind.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Realism? Realism?! REALISM?! Just a few episodes ago, we saw [SPOILER]Ed take down a guy at gun point, after which he went hand-to-hand against the head boss who was hijacking the train[/SPOILER]. While I know people are free to interpret things in anime as freely as they want (provided that it doesn't contradict or not work throughout the series), I really have to disagree. Anyway, I finally caught up with the series. So, based on the first episode, all of these current events are just flashbacks... That's quite interesting. Getting back to the point, with my newfound knowledge of the series, I don't think the whole panic-stricken scene was meant to build realism. Rather, it was to juxtapose the two brothers once more. I'm convinced, not just because of the hijacking scene, but because [SPOILER]Ed's life was in danger before and he killed the guy[/SPOILER]. Accidentally, but the event still happened and he didn't panic. So what did Ed panic about? It was [SPOILER]the sight of his own blood[/SPOILER]. In my opinion, he would have been fine if he [SPOILER]never got cut or realized he was bleeding[/SPOILER], but that's just speculation now, haha. Still, based on previous events, I'm pretty sure of that. Also, what was the point of [SPOILER]of having the brother come in and take a hit for Ed[/SPOILER]? It was to show that Al won't be able to experience or fully understand what his brother is going through. The first time [SPOILER]you see your own blood in such a situation[/SPOILER] is something you don't forget, and the feeling is very unique. Al, as his sad tone hints at, realized this. So, I think the point was to impress upon the brothers' state and another consequence for their sin.[quote name='Dagger IX1']Overall, this episode got its message across very neatly (although I still think that the title was sort of misleading). Ed and Al clearly need each other, and they are very much an equal team. Though they are both strong by themselves, neither is capable of making it on his own. I like that.[/quote] You really think so? I can't say you are wrong, but I think each brother is his own person, and perfectly capable of handling himself alone. It seems to me both brothers are very independent, but are together because they are bound by sin. Anyway, having watched the DVD versions, I'm wondering why the opening is different. It seems that Cartoon Network is airing a different opening than the one that is in the first eight episodes on the FMA DVD. Personally, I think the one on the DVDs works and fits better than the Ready Steady Go one (thank God Godel's internet isn't working). In fact, after seeing this opening, I think the one being aired is very inappropriate for FMA and is just there because the band that made the song is finally getting popular here in the US. Thank goodness Godel isn't around... O_O[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Dagger IX1]The English dub. I haven't gotten all that far, so in this case I may go back and re-watch what I've seen of the series, this time in Japanese. I suppose I can't point to anything truly awful about the English track, but so far it just hasn't clicked with me. The anime itself is calm and seems to be very gently paced, which makes any off-sounding voices more distracting than they would normally be.[/QUOTE][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Heh, you should have mentioned what dub you are listening to in the Haibane Renmei thread. I would like to hear your opinion on the dubbing after you finish watching the series. Also, one caveat: make sure you hate the bad voice acting and not an annoying character whose good voice actor has captured that annoyance. :p [QUOTE]What's funny about Gantz and Pita Ten? *is very curious* o_O[/QUOTE]For Gantz, the whole 2 episode per DVD for a total of 13 DVDs. For Pita Ten, the idea that the overseas people want special, undefiling care (similar to Gantz and Innocence) for the series even though all statistics and trends point to that being unwarranted and unprofitable, so it's taking a while for it to be licensed and to be released. [QUOTE']In other words, I do think this is a bad move. At the same time, I'm confident that almost all newer anime will continue to be dubbed--most fans simply expect dubs. Some older shows (like Urusei Yatsura and City Hunter) have been released in sub-only format, and I think that's probably going to continue.[/quote] While I agree with the rest of your post, I'm wondering why you think older shows won't get dubbed. Aren't they all (both new and old animes) going to be new in the US?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Lore][color=#4b4b79](There was a time a little over a year ago when I drew a lot of interesting "dirty" angels. [url=http://fanart.theotaku.com/view.php?action=retrieve&id=2791]Gabi and Trudi[/url] and [url=http://fanart.theotaku.com/view.php?action=retrieve&id=8337]Carina[/url'] are examples. Carina was actually a character in a story-concept I had. The other two are actually called "Charcoal Angels" in the title, because the medium I used was charcoal, heh. Interesting trivia.)[/color][/quote][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]You have an interesting mind to come up with such ideas and characters, and it is suprising that so much thought of "necessity" is in your artwork. I know when I make banners and the like, I add things "because they look nice," not because they have any interesting backstory, haha. Last time I had a double meaning in anything my professor thought I wanted to room with him. O_o As for the rest of your post... OMG! You are killing me. There's so much to say about your comments that I can't! All I can say (until you watch the thing) is that you are quite an interesting person. Sara, this is an [B]honest[/B] threat: watch Haibane Renmei or there will be...[/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=comic sans MS][COLOR=green]dire consequences. This threat is not as simple as it appears at first, as it much worse dan u expect. yes u wont want wut i have planend for u shud u not finally wach haibane renmei dis iz not an idle threat, and i will do mai best to [B]make it as bad as posibe[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]In hindsight, I wonder if it's wise to threaten a moderator who has the power to ban me...[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]If you did not already, please see the rest of my post. I must have been editing while you were writing your post, so you could have missed it. Otherwise, read the following (or both, haha): [QUOTE][COLOR=#004a6f]Just because one believes in God, that doesn't mean we completely ignore science. We know how DNA works and we know that mutations occur in DNA. The controversial part is how the heck can a mutation be good? How can it give rise to a new species? Sure's it's possible, but what chance does it have of occuring. No scientists have come up with a mutation that is favourable to an organism. They zap them with radiation and even play around with the genes, yet they can only come up with flies that have legs for antenae.[/color][/QUOTE]I never said to completely ignore science. Darwin sure as hell isn't the definition of science. If you don't believe in Darwinism, that doesn't mean you don't believe in science. Secondly, they already have shown how mutations can be good. How do you think genetic research is done? We give bacteria, an organism, a gene that codes for antibiotic formation. Multi-Drug Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR Tuberculosis) arose from continuous mutation and information exchange. Both in the artificial and natural sense, it has been shown how mutations can be good. [QUOTE][COLOR=#004a6f]Another thing is that species are so different from each other. How did organs like eyes and ear come about gradually? If they had a single part missing from them they would fail to function, making them useless, they cannot evolve gradually over time because they have to use a creature. Having a non funtioning eye is no better than having no eye at all. Therefore, natural selection would not favour that specific wierd creature with parts of an eye that don't work.[/color][/QUOTE]Ugh... I recommend reading up on the theory of the mitochondria's origin, then biofilm formation, then... It's going to be hell to explain everything bit by bit, but just take my word, there's a good explanation how it came to be. It's just that most of the stuff doesn't work with Darwin and his friend Brown's ideas.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]You are missing a key point of Darwinism. Change and new speices arise from [B]random mutations[/B]. This is the focal point of Darwin's theory that made him so controversial, and yet so scientifically sound. Random mutation leaves no leeway for the idea that God had any involvement in the creation of man, and so the only kind of belief in God you can have is "Man created God." Trust me, if you think there's something other than random mutation involved in evolution, then you follow either Intelligent Design or Nomogenesis. These two theories arose from the fact that the probability of random mutations to come so far in such a short time (4.6 billion years) is as probable as a monkey typing randomly on a computer and coming up with a Shakespearean Play. While some people do believe Shakespeare is a monkey who just wrote ridiculous stuff, it's still a logical series of words. :p[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Only 55% of the US population believes in Darwinism, and most around here have an ill-concieved notion that Darwinism can somehow coincide with their religious beliefs. What you are thinking of, Chabichou, is either Intelligent Design or Nomogenesis. I personally prescribe to the former.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]I lost my writing muse the other day. I must have written like five complete posts and just deleted them since I didn't like the way they came out. Ugh... Anyway, I finally got around to giving my desktop a new look. Ciel looks cool and all, but I hate her as a person, haha. It's another Tsukihime wallpaper, and the XP style I chose was one that I think blends nicely with it. I really wanted a red theme this time around, but the wallpaper was so cool that I wanted to use it and red didn't match it. Like the last wallpaper, though, this one is plagued with engrish. Bound in Darkness would make way more sense and sound so much cooler. Whatever, there's just a tendency for Tsukihime to have engrish (as one person said, google image Tsukihime, and then google image Tukihime, and you'll get two completely different list of pictures, all Tsukihime-related). Anyway, here it is. I opened winamp to show that I tried to make a lot of programs that let you skin match with the theme as well. Winamp obviously goes the best with the theme since the style is based on this skin of winamp, heh.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]You ran out of characters. The character limit is 1500 and basically, the end of it just got cut off, and it happened to be in the middle of a linking code. Since the character limit is inclusive to both coding and noncoding text, there's nothing that can be done except shortening your intro, heh. (funny)[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Xander Harris, bloody hell, they still aren't getting it. Use Down Syndrome as your example instead of people who gossip, as Down Syndrome is something a person is born with (extra chromosome 21), so according to their logic, since they are born with it, there's nothing wrong with them and nothing should be done about it. I think it'll be clearer then. In the same vein, Ashanti de Silva, who was born with SCID (severe combined immune deficiency) has nothing wrong with her because she was born with it. Of course, that means the scientists who managed to place stem cells in her bone marrow such that she would be given a chimeric immune system and could lead a normal life were doing something pointless (what with nothing being wrong with her). She plays a mean piano now that she doesn't have to live in a bubble, but I guess that's not important, as she was born with SCID and should have just stayed in her normal bubble. The point Xander Harris is trying to make is that, like people with Down Syndrome and SCID (and ANYTHING else you can get prenatally), it may not be a person's fault that there is something wrong with them, but that doesn't mean that they are perfectly normal/healthy. So, just because someone says, "Oh look, there's something wrong with that guy who has Down Syndrome" doesn't mean they are insulting them. And again, it's not wrong to be a homosexual, it's wrong to commit homosexual acts. I'm pretty sure that's Xander Harris' stance on the topic as well.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]Dagger, are you referring to the English or Japanese dubbing of Haibane Renmei? I've only heard the Japanese, but I don't remember it at all anymore. I figured since this is the designated sub/dub thread, I would put this question here (if it should be separate, sorry and separate it - if that's possible O_o): recently, from the Anime News Network apparently, the programming director of The Anime Network said they would air subtitled [B](note: NOT fansubbed)[/B] anime. Do you think this move is a good one? Why? I personally think the move is one of the better ideas as of late. *laughs at Gantz and Pita-Ten* "1337" anime fans will have less to whine about. But what about the whole domestic dubbing process? I've heard that GitS 2: Innocence's DVD doesn't come with the US dubbing, and that other series are sure to follow (yet another bad move, IMO). Lack of domestic dubbing means less expenditure and therefore cheaper anime DVDs. I'm happy with the current prices myself, but this lower cost will make more people buy anime. If elaboration is needed on any of my reasons, don't hesitate to ask. I just see little reason to do so at the moment, heh.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]What possibly could you be stumped on? Wolf's Rain and Cowboy Bebop are similar because they have the same creator and composer. What's there to be stumped about? You just want to find more similarities or something?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]