No, I've been watching Paranoia Agent.
So far the opening is easily the scariest thing about it.
Lil' Slugger is a bro though. What a cool dude.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I never said there weren't other places in the wizarding world I said he dominated and usurped rule over the wizarding world. We don't know how many nor have we ever seen anywhere near the numbers we see in Deathly Hallows part two from the other parts.We don't know the numbers so they don't have to correlate to the populations of the muggles.
Voldemort dominated the wizarding world.
How exactly did he dominate the wizarding world if he did not in fact rule over the majority of the wizarding world? We do know the approximate numbers for the other countries simply from the number of students who came from Durmstrang and Beauxbatons. Each are about as large as Hogwarts, which itself has about a thousand students. Therefore we can safely say theres about as many wizards in France and where ever Durmstrang is from as there is in Britain.
You're being thick as hell here. Theres enough in other countries for schools to be set up, theres enough for them to join under the International Confederation of Wizards, theres enough for them to matter.
Riddle did not, end of discussion. He didn't control the world.
Originally posted by BloodRain
As far as Britain is concerned, yeah. Going to tweet this to the Queen, get you all beheaded and such.
I'm referring to the British wizards here.
Originally posted by NephthysFalse. You are making assumptions without any proof. Voldemort was clearly the baddest wizard in the entire wizarding world aka the filmmakers said it as well. It makes no sense if he didn't rule the wizarding world and there is no proof he did not. Everything you said cannot be supported with any numbers at all.
No, I've been watching Paranoia Agent.So far the opening is easily the scariest thing about it.
Lil' Slugger is a bro though. What a cool dude.
How exactly did he dominate the wizarding world if he did not in fact rule over the majority of the wizarding world? We do know the approximate numbers for the other countries simply from the number of students who came from Durmstrang and Beauxbatons. Each are about as large as Hogwarts, which itself has about a thousand students. Therefore we can safely say theres about as many wizards in France and where ever Durmstrang is from as there is in Britain.
You're being thick as hell here. Theres enough in other countries for schools to be set up, theres enough for them to join under the International Confederation of Wizards, theres enough for them to matter.
Riddle did not, end of discussion. He didn't control the world.
I'm referring to the British wizards here.
Now crawl back under your rug.
Lets finish this, shall we?
The Quiddich World Cup Stadium was built to house 100,000 and was stated to be packed. Rowling has said that she thinks theres about 3000 wizards in Britain, which is a little low but basing off of the Hogwarts figures the maximum amount of wizards in GB is about 15,000.
Which means at the very best Moldevort dominated 15% of the wizarding world. Assuming that every wizard in Britain came to the World Cup, which we know to be false.
This is further backed up if we look at the list of competitors in the World Cup:
Argentina
Australia
Bulgaria (runners-up)
Brazil
England
France
Germany
India
Ireland (tournament winners)
Japan
Luxembourg
Morocco
The Nordic Team
Peru (semi-finalists)
Portugal
Scotland
Spain
Transylvania
Uganda
United States
Wales
I think its a safe assumption that having a Quiddich team is indicative of a sizable population, especially when coupled with the figures of the stadium.
Riddle was the baddest wizard in the world, but you're wrong. It makes no sense to think that he did rule the wizarding world, as supported by the numbers. 😉
Now get on your knees and give me the Kiss of Submission. On my cock.
Originally posted by NephthysWe see USA and other countries rep soccer teams with the population not correlating at all. This is just awful on your end. You have no proof and are just making things up at this point.
Lets finish this, shall we?The Quiddich World Cup Stadium was built to house 100,000 and was stated to be packed. Rowling has said that she thinks theres about 3000 wizards in Britain, which is a little low but basing off of the Hogwarts figures the [b]maximum
amount of wizards in GB is about 15,000.Which means at the very best Moldevort dominated 15% of the wizarding world. Assuming that every wizard in Britain came to the World Cup, which we know to be false.
This is further backed up if we look at the list of competitors in the World Cup:
Argentina
Australia
Bulgaria (runners-up)
Brazil
England
France
Germany
India
Ireland (tournament winners)
Japan
Luxembourg
Morocco
The Nordic Team
Peru (semi-finalists)
Portugal
Scotland
Spain
Transylvania
Uganda
United States
WalesI think its a safe assumption that having a Quiddich team is indicative of a sizable population, especially when coupled with the figures of the stadium.
Riddle was the baddest wizard in the world, but you're wrong. It makes no sense to think that he did rule the wizarding world, as supported by the numbers. 😉
Now get on your knees and give me the Kiss of Submission. On my cock. [/B]
Listen bro you need to sit back and just leave all these complicated matters to me. Rowling had input but wasn't the director of the film.
Voldemort ruled the wizarding world. Obvious answer is obvious.
Originally posted by quanchi112
You didn't respond to my post. You concede like always, little bitty.Good girl.
👆
I owned you and you failed to respond to my point. I'm not dignifying you with a real response until you do. 100,000 wizards, bro. I'm waiting.
Which I know you can't. Because I'm right and you know it. Get back to sucking, slave.
Originally posted by NephthysThat has nothing to do with organization or anything outside of guesstimation.
I owned you and [b]you failed to respond to my point. I'm not dignifying you with a real response until you do. 100,000 wizards, bro. I'm waiting.Which I know you can't. Because I'm right and you know it. Get back to sucking, slave. [/B]
Voldemort defeated an organized Ministry and dominated the wizarding world what we know without a shadow of a doubt.
So quit with your guesswork shitty answers. Get back on the floor and scrub that floor, slave number two. You could never be my number one slave. Thats scenario.
Making sense doesn't make it feel less strange. Its just seeing '3,000-15,000' in all of GB.
Compared to human populations, lower end due to how I see certain countries hold of wizards, the Wizard count would equal Cyprus or Estonia.
Even if he ruled the wizard world, it'd be like ruling a small but sparse country.
Originally posted by NephthysWell, no shit if there are too many then being a wizard wouldn't be that special at all. As far as the organized world went from what we see on the big screen Voldemort ruled the wizarding world.
Yeah. But it makes sense given that they're a secret society. Any more than that and there'd be too many to hide. Too many wizard villages and such.Plus its consistent with lore. Theres only one bank in all of England, only one hospital, one/two schools etc etc. The population can't be that high.
I don't give a **** about the big screen. I didn't even watch Deathly Hallows. Those movies were shit.
And wizards aren't that special. Rowling has said that a Muggle with a shotgun will beat a wizard in a straight fight.
And yes, humans vastly outnumber wizards. I think Hagrid says so in Philosophers Stone.
Originally posted by NephthysThat is just her opinion which isn't the final say so for the movie versions. I guess you'd rather fire a gun that teleport or fly. 😂
I don't give a **** about the big screen. I didn't even watch Deathly Hallows. Those movies were shit.And wizards aren't that special. Rowling has said that a Muggle with a shotgun will beat a wizard in a straight fight.
And yes, humans vastly outnumber wizards. I think Hagrid says so in Philosophers Stone.
A gun doesn't kill you with one bullet wherever it touches you nor does it cause the collateral damage the wizards blasts did in the movies.
You admit to not seeing them. Perfect.
Great films. You disgust me.
Rowlings opinion is superior to the movie directors.
Collateral damage is irrelevant. One bullet will put down any wizard and you don't need to say or think anything to fire a gun. Also you can't dodge bullets like you can spells. Guns >>> Wands. McClane would beat Voldemort 9/10.
I've read all the books and for half a dozen years I listened to the books in audio book form every ****ing night when I went to sleep. I piss more than you know about Potter.
Originally posted by quanchi112
So quit with your guesswork shitty answers. Get back on the floor and scrub that floor, slave number two. You could never be my number one slave. Thats scenario.
: D
Anyway, yeah. Unless you can prove that Voldemort actually conquered any other wizarding countries, he didn't actually do so.
Originally posted by NephthysHer opinion is superior for the books not the movies as the director has the final say on the big screen.
Rowlings opinion is superior to the movie directors.Collateral damage is irrelevant. One bullet will put down any wizard and you don't need to say or think anything to fire a gun. Also you can't dodge bullets like you can spells. Guns >>> Wands. McClane would beat Voldemort 9/10.
I've read all the books and for half a dozen years I listened to the books in audio book form every ****ing night when I went to sleep. I piss more than you know about Potter.
Depends on where it strikes. Ak puts anyone down when it hits you. Undeniable. Quit being stupid. If someone shoots you in the toe you don't die.
I disagree as did most when the thread was created.
Voldemort owns him.
I like the movies you haven't even seen them all. They are different. Your ignorance is appalling. Quit talking books in the movies you toad.
She created the Harry Potter universe. Hers is the Word of God.
I didn't say die, I said it would put them down. Hitting a wizard in the foot would still incapacitate them and render them incapable of fighting back long enough for a second, more accurate and deadly bullet. AK on the other hand can be dodged fairly easily.
We're not in the movie forum numbnuts. I can talk books if I want to.