Durakken
-
Posts
2381 -
Joined
-
I'd rather get a professionally treated dub/sub than the hacky crap that those supposed professionals are doing. The show is unwatchable, at least for me, with almost nothing subtitled/dubbed. It's sounds and looks like a fun show, but I won' be watching that version of it.
-
If you were to buy all 52 issues you'd spend $156... even over 4 weeks that is still $39 a week... That's a lot of money for their target audience. The majority of their audience makes like $1000 a month or less and that is 1/5 of their monthly amount.
Even if someone were to buy all of one family of books...
Batman
Batman & Robin
Nightwing
Red Hood and the Outlaws
Batgirl
Teen Titans
Detective Comics
Batman: The Dark Knight
Batwoman
Catwoman
Batwing
Birds of Prey
That's still $36 a month which is insane...
But whatever...
I think...
Green Lantern ended well, but many of the things in the issue is out of character and just lends itself to a "if this is how they are going to proceed I don't want that"
Red Robin ended crappily after a nice set up for future stories in the previous arc.
Batgirl had a good ending with what one could perceive as foreshadowing and a great little 5 woman team up.
Detective Comics ended great with a nice set up for Nightwing.
Personally I think it's stupid to end Red Robin and give Nightwing and Red Hood their own titles and giving Batman 3 titles that are unneeded now. Batman & Red Robin works better than Batman and Robin... I think Nightwing should take Robin with him... while "The Dark Knight" title and Batman titles are good for him. I think the main character of Detective Comics should be Red Robin with secondaries of The Question, Stephanie Brown, Proxy, Cassandra Cain and a few others...
Also I'd hope that Misfit becomes a sidekick to Barbara -
This is not about the reboot itself or the following issues... I'm asking for opinions about the final issues being released
Like Red robin's last issue, Batgirl's last issue, Detectiv Comics last issue, GL last issue... have they been good bad or have they bee half good half bad... -
So since we've seen the first issues of last issues of the titles... do you think that the Modern Age is ending well or are the titles overall bad?
Oh and I'm calling this the end of the modern age...and the beginning of the DC Post Modern Age -
it's just a mangy canine of some sort.
Chupacabra would have an entirely different look to it. People are seeing all these stupid claims of seeing one and capturing one and all like that that are just mangy dogs, but much more convincing than that that they've lost the plot and have started calling regular dogs chupacabras now v.v
Also, what an idiot, "I think we have a very mysterious creature that people hav been looking for and has ben terrorizing the area...oh and it might be extremely dangerous to us... I think I'll let it go" -
HO come on, they're going to need slav... I mean a labor for... I mean a middle class!
-
Now I remember where i've seen this guy before... all the UFOlogy "philidelphia experiment" nonsense...
Still saying lets wait and see as i haven't seen anyone out right say that what he is saying is not true and in fact thee are reports of people having seen his device in action... And i also know of similar research...
But at the same time I wouldn't be all that surprised to see this as one big sham, especially with connections to the UFOlogist nonsense... -
Go ask these people who he is...
"Marshall Barnes has done some important research".
- JEAN CLAUDE BA, PhD, Professor of Physics COLUMBUS STATE COMMUNITY COLLEGE March 1997
"To prove his invention Barnes took me with him on an experiment, along State Route 104 from Route 56...We made the trip...without the STDTS turned on in 24 minutes. Coming back, he turned his machine on and I watched the speedometer closely...Back at Route 56 Barnes cheered when we checked our watches. We did it in 22 minutes.
- MIKE PRATT, THE CIRCLEVILLE HERALD March 2002
"I think there's something wrong with the way we view time. I like
Marshall's approach and have no problem with it."
- BERNARD MULLIGAN, PhD,
Professor of Physics THE
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Feb. 2004
"I would like to thank Marshall Barnes for taking the time to talk
to my CS 201 course on Time Machines. His presentation generated a
lot of positive feedback and discussion from the class.
The class of around thirty five students seemed unanimously pleased
and were impressed with his poise and enthusiasm for the topic. The
following class period, we discussed at length his insights into the
use of videotapes and music as a "way back" to the past (or a past).
We compared his work with that of Roland Barthes in his text, Camera
Lucida and with our impressions of photography as a memory aid and
record of the past garnered from a photography exhibit the students
attended at Columbus Museum of Art.
Personally, I have rarely seen someone with the passion that Marshall
Barnes displayed for his work."
- SABRA WEBER, PhD, Associate Professor Anthropology Department, THE
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY May 2004
"An ongoing, online experiment created by Dr. Peter Naish of the Open University, in conjunction with BBC Science, and hosted at OPEN UNIVERSITY has been cited as being flawed with "worthless results" by researcher and conceptual theorist, Marshall Barnes...The initial hypothesis of the test is that extraverts will see the cube flip more times when asked than introverts, and introverts will see it flip more when asked to just passively view it than extraverts. According to the results online so far, this doesn't seem to be the case. Marshall claims to know why."
- NANCY R. FENN, THE INTROVERTZ COACH August 2004
"Later this month, Marshall Barnes will present a scientific paper at the 7th annual International Mars Society Conference in Chicago...Marshall Barnes...truly thinks outside the box...The unique mix of creative thinking and science has enabled Barnes to come up with some interesting technological theories.
- A.M. WHITAKER, COLUMBUS COMMUNICATOR August 2004
"Marshall Barnes has proven himself to be a bright, enthusiastic, and
ever-inquiring mind. Time and time again, he has come up with inventive
ideas that take us all to the edges of our imagination. Any program
initiated by him will be well worth attending."
- FRED ALAN WOLF, PhD, physicist, author (TAKING THE QUANTUM LEAP, others), cinema star (WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW? , AMERICAN VIDEO DIARY) March 2005
"Marshall was able to engage and involve the students in the
SuperScience presentation despite their being antsy about the near
close of the school year".
- LINDA LEE KENNEDY, Science Teacher, Briggs High School MAY 2005
"Students were excited and had many questions throughout his
presentation. Marshall encouraged them to ask a question when it came
up instead of waiting until the conclusion - students took him up on
it.
- JACK MINOT, Physics Teacher Bexley High School May 2005
"Marshall has an excellent physics background and was able to adjust
his explanations and answers to student's questions at the
appropriate level that students can understand".
- CRAIG KRAMER, Physics Teacher, Bexley High School May 2005
"Barnes...believes bringing his presentation entitled "SuperScience for High School Physics" will get students interested in areas of physics they never thought possible."
- SHANNON DILLMAN, WESTSIDE MESSENGER June 2005
"Marshall Barnes shows off a photograph of the Santa Maria that he took...bending light to cause the ship to appear to disappear. The photo will be a part of an exhibit at the Santa Maria Visitor Education Center in downtown Columbus."
- TRI-VILLAGE NEWS August 2007 -
Quote:really? I just typed in STDTS into google >.>Originally Posted by Rush_Bolt
"Spacetime Dilator Transmitter System"
Took a lot of digging to finally find a spot where it was fully spelled out. Take that however you will. -
Quote:You are talking to Ironik, not me. You agree with me.Originally Posted by White Hot Flash
Obviously you've never taught before.
If you're not entertaining and engaging, you're not a GOOD teacher. Teaching is nothing more than presenting information to people that haven't heard it before, and showing them what to do with it.
Bad teachers come in all sizes. They can be horrible presenters, they can be great. If their students aren't learning and replicating (testing) well, the teacher is bad no matter how well they presented.
Writers shouldn't be scared to write in such a way that people will figure out the ending before everyone else gets there. That's just gonna happen no matter what. People are wired different ways. Tell a good story, and it doesn't matter that you figured out the ending by the second chapter. Just don't blatantly tell me, via poor plot exposition, or via spoilers, the one fact ("The Butler Did it" or "She's a man") that the entire story hinges around. I'd rather figure it out myself than be told before I see it. It's no different than watching a movie with someone that's already seen it, and they're telling you to get ready for everything that's coming, or saying all the funny lines a half second before the actor does.
You want to say someone is a bad teacher... a bad teacher doesn't teach and thus isn't a teacher in my book. I don't consider someone something just cuz thy have a job title or something that says they are that. I go by if they actually are doing what that title implies they are doing.
But yeah that's only thing we disagree on in that post you call them bad, i call them not teachers. -
Quote:Hate to break it to you but some of us like to be in control of our own ****. Heck there are people we know of on this site who are skilled in various places and DON'T work for some big name place and don't care to. And others that have problems with their work because they did.Originally Posted by Alpha-One
I said Skunk Works. Maybe you haven't heard of the branch of Lockheed Martin that's responsible for some of the biggest technological breakthroughs in aviation history, all for the benefit of Uncle Sam? Creators of the SR-71 Blackbird, U-2 Dragonlady, F-104 Starfighter and F-117 Nighthawk? Why isn't he working for them?
By this point maybe you've noticed that most of us take his self-published biography with a rather large grain of salt. After all I could tell you that I was offered the position of Supreme Allied Commander of NATO but I turned it down. Does it mean it's true?
Seems to me there's a serious lack of critical thought mixed with a large dose of blind optimism here. Maybe go review the fundamentals of the scientific method instead of praying this techno-messiah has all the answers?
I personally was offered a great deal but turned down what was being offered due to not liking the company or the direction that something i created was going.
As far as a "working prototype" apparently you haven't paid attention but there are several places where he says he does and where it says he's going to make a large demonstration. The fact that you haven't seen or heard of the technology or the prototype is not something that is uncommon. It's actually the norm. I know of things from very credible sources that would blow your mind, but you wouldn't believe me. The reason they are kept under wraps is because you don't want competitors or don't want people pushing a complete invention before you. Showing stuff off and making it known allows people to analyze what you're doing, try to recreate it, and usually push ahead due to new insight.
For example, the moment that it mentioned Electromagnetic field that effects space rather than time I have a general idea of what he began messing with and even know of other scientists that are messing about doing the same thing. I'm sure that if he told the same thing to Neil deGrasse Tyson and Tyson worked on it, he'd probably be in a race with him right now and perhaps Tyson would win.... especially since Tyson has worked on the time part for quite a while now. -
Quote:To be fair that isn't what he shows...Originally Posted by Innovator
Except the refraction of light from an object behind another so that it bends to cause the rear object's light to appear in front is exactly what he's demonstrating to a bunch of kids at an elementary school (who the video was made for). Of course the tip doesn't show as its light is bounced back by the object it is directly behind, but the rest of the shaft that's behind the object does.
You're taking this simple demonstration/experiment way out of proportion and context. Bending waves around an object is also the basis for the invisibility research by other scientists using metamaterials.
He shows a refracted image that is perfectly visible that is displaced over an object that is front of another pat of it.
He's shown that poles and solid background can be used with a visual illusion to make things appear invisible to varying degrees.
Realistically he hasn't shown any more than that... but applying that level of technology would be more than enough to add a significant advantage to any military. Trees = poles. sky = solid color (for the most part). darkness = solid color (for the most part) Assumingly you could use this technology to make a better camo than what we currently use. -
Quote:I prefer to think that he was showing how the concept works with very basic materials that you could get a hold of and play with. Also he mentions the effect works better at different distances and I doubt that anyone is stupid enough to not realize that how however your going to make something invisible it has to be mobile part of the object, and not pre positioned between the object and the camera or on the cameraOriginally Posted by Zombie Man
Umm... that's proof he's a charlatan.
The image we see of the pencil supposedly be made visible through the black cap is just the image of the pencil we can still see overlapping the black cap because of the refraction strata in the overlay. Slow the video down and notice that the image of the *tip* of the pencil disappears completely. All we're seeing is the bright yellow of the base of the pencil supposedly behind the cap.
If he put a marble behind the cap such that no other part of the marble extended past the cap, then there would be no image of the marble leaking through the cap.
He is either so batpancake insane that he doesn't know what he's talking about, or, he's relying on people he's demonstrating this stuff to be be so batpancake gullible or batpancake ignorant of basic science that they can't recognize he's talking gibberish. -
Quote:No >.>Originally Posted by Ironik
Teaching someone something is qualitatively different from entertaining them, though.
The difference is not Teaching vs "enteraining" it's Teaching vs "Art"
If you're not entertaining and engaging as a teacher you are not a teacher. You're an informant... that likely isn't getting your information to whrere it needs to go. -
Quote:An understanding of what warp does...Originally Posted by Sevenpenny
the question is this.....if this guy has come up with a prototype warp engine....what will stop him from being tossed out the craft when it stops? Has he come up with enertial dampners too???
-
I think it was a great movie but it lacked in epicness that it should have had
-
Quote:What you said implies that you can't spoil the experience then ^.^Originally Posted by Lothic
It still doesn't really matter if a story has been "engineered with a twist ending" or not. No matter the story there's always going to be a first time you experience it and a second time you experience it regardless of how well (or poorly) it's written. A person can devive a certain type of enjoyment from both instances, as long as they are not spoiled first. It's not really a matter of a writer trying to favor one experience over the other even if they could.
-
Quote:That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if you are trying to write or create something that will not be predictable and be a huge surprise you will fail almost always and those who can really tell will be the most immune to such trite surface writing. That conclusion/surprise is worthless. it's why M Night sucks so horribly. He thinks adding a surprise is going to make something great what it just betrays how bad a writer is.Originally Posted by Lothic
It basically doesn't matter how "short-lived" the first experience with a story is. Why spoil it? If you always want to rush on to the "experienced" phase of enjoyment that's fine. If a story is good enough I'd rather have BOTH over multiple viewings/readings.
When I say, He was dead all along, that ruins that story because that story is built on that surprise and pretty much nothing else... it the least problematic of his works and he got worse with it as it goes on. You "spoil" the twist and his movies and we as viewers recognize this instantly and say it sucks no matter how good or bad the rest of the movie was. Because while the surprise was pleasurable it's relying on being surprising and not so much in WHY it's surprising.
Now on the other hand when you write a story from what you would call the "experienced" phase you write so that the entire story builds and the surprise is not a monster jumping out at you, but rather the surprise is when you figure it all out and see how it comes together. You then read again because you ant to affirm your thoughts and such and as you go you discover new things and start thinking in new ways thus creating a wave of surprises and that increases your understanding and pleasure overall. -
Quote:The eureka moment is pleasurable, but it it is short lived and happens rarely as time goes on. Understanding is an enduring pleasure that sustains and i'd always put my money on and develop that. And if there happens to be a eureka moment while developing that then it is made all that much more pleasurable.Originally Posted by Lothic
As I mentioned in the other "spoiler thread" I think this idea glosses over the point the people can get TWO kinds of enjoyment from a story.
They get the first unspoiled experience that enables a storyteller to have fun establishing the plot and allow for all sorts of misdirection that makes an audience have to engage in trying to "figure it out". And then once a person knows a story they can get a second kind of appreciation of it because they can see how the elements led up to the known conclusion.
Spoiling stories simply ruins the first kind of experience to rush to the second kind. *shrugs* -
It's not surprising at all.
It's long been known when you present something you tell someone what you are going to tell them. Tell them what you are going to tell them. Then, tell them what you told them. In other words, you spoil what your conclusion is, tell them how you got there, and then tell them your conclusion is.
It makes me wonder why someone hasn't invented the better story format than the exposition, build up, resolution format we're used to and use something like.
Resolution, exposition, build up, resolution.
it might be better, given the data ^.^ -
Quote:Looking around the best explanation I found...Originally Posted by Starkweather
I skimmed over the article, so maybe I missed it, but does he actually expain what is going on/how it works? All I see in referance is "electromagnetic effects". What effects is he talking about? How is it powered? It fits in a car, and how did he see the cops expression as he drove by?
Until I see some actuall facts about this technology and/or videos of it working (seriously it's been 11 years testing and he hasn't posed a YouTube video?), color me skeptical.
Einstein implied Gravity links with EM fields in his trying to unify something or other.
He was using an electromagnetic field to mess with time when someone pointed out that it was messing with space too and so he focused on that and he sorta stumbled onto this.
The device apparently doesn't create a full warp bubble.
This is probable because there is research going on in this area with similar effects. There have been alcuberic or however you spell that name drives that are mildly successful and You have experiments where people are using light to twist space and in doing so time to create time travel of sorts.
Light = Electromagnetic field
Time = Space-Time
In other words an electromagnetic field can bend space time. This is just an new method and understanding as to how that's done as far as what I can piece together... and as such is probable
As far as "how did he see the cop's reaction" simply put...If I was a cop and saw someone going at the speed suggested i'd pull em over even if the radar said something else. Also if the radar said something else it implies a space distortion or warping because If you are driving 50mph in a warp field any radar or anything like that will read you as 50mph even though you'd be moving at higher speeds dependent on the warping effect. -
It's either a fascinating ad campaign or real. I don't see why such hostility. If it's an ad campaign then cool, good job in being engaging. If it's real, which is fully in the range of probable, then it's something that is going to be one of those things that will make us have to change how we look at things a bit...like you know, maybe those alien nutters, might be sane after all, or perhaps less fuel to go equal or faster speeds = less of an energy problem... and for the less sophisticated... don't you want to see 400+ mph cars in nascar!
-
Informalscience.org seems to think that it's real or are at least giving him the benefit of the doubt so so will I and say Woot I want to visit Saturn!
-
Mandu is trying to imply that I am trying to justify pirating movies that are in the theater and that I have given good reasons why pirating in every case I pirate is ok. I have no reason to justify it.
Further Netflix has nothing to do with movies in theaters as they don't effect each other. -
Quote:No I haven't.Originally Posted by Father Xmas
Because you've mentioned that in previous threads about movies and piracy.
And even if it were true what does that have to do with this?