Anyway i'm not going to list any of the old wizards like the founders etc. cause we really don't know anything about them.
1. Voldemort - Dumbledore knows he can't defeat him
2. Dumbledore - He took out 4 powerful wizards in about a second
3. James Potter/Sirius - probobly equals
4. Snape
5. Bellatrix - got lucky with sirius, but probobly the most powerful death eater.
6. Moody - Legendary Auror
7. Dumbledore's Brother - If he's related to dumbledore he must be powerful.
8. McGonagal - old but still very powerful.
After these, the rest of the death eaters, Auros/Order members are of about the same ability. Harry has the potentila to be as powerful as Voldemort but has not nearly reached it yet. This is shown by the way Snape is able to toy with him.
Gender: Female Location: every which way but loose
7. Dumbledore's Brother - If he's related to dumbledore he must be powerful.
That doesn't make sense, after everything Rowling has referenced with regard to blood not making a difference, you can't say Dumbledore's brother must be powerful just because they're related. I'm not saying he isn't, but blood is NOT a guarantee.
ye blood isn't a guarantee, but he is a member of the order which is further proof. I also think he may feature in the last book, as there would be no other reason to introduce him into the story.
I'd like to point out that there are many fewer Squibs then Muggle-borns, purely because the more wizards you have in your family, the more likely you are to have the "Magic gene".
Once you have the "Magic gene", it's and equal playing feild. all your other natural talents kick in, and you have a certain natural ability with magic.
The only thing that having muggle parents does islowers your propencity to have the "Magic gene".
Gender: Female Location: every which way but loose
'Magic gene'. Never was there a mention of this in the books.
My point was that Hermione is a witch. She's not a Muggle. She's not simply a Muggle who has a grasp on magic because she's intelligent. She's a witch. Why is there even an argument over this?
The fact that the girl can perform magic (in her case, bloody brilliantly) makes her a witch.
My comparison was simply to show that Filch's genes were filled with the potential for magic and yet he cannot perform even the simplest of spells. So he's more of a Muggle than Hermione will ever be.
How could you possibly say there is no magic gene? It's quite clear that the only ones who can do magic are those with the genetic propensity to do so.
And by what means are Half bloods the most powerful? Voldemort was one, and he was certainly powerful... But what else would lead you to this conclusion?
KMC Community Forums
Oct 5th, 2006 11:54 AM
