Can the Basilisk fang destroy the Ring ?

Originally posted by Epicurus
What power? Harry resisted the diary's influence. Ginny resisted it as well. Ron overcame the slytherin heirloom's effects.

No, you didn't. These objects have separate functions. The Horcruxes are meant to act as Voldemort's conduits to immortality, while the Ring is supposed to help Sauron in his domination of Middle Earth.

No, we don't. The gollum drowned and got killed. On-screen:
YouTube video

Both act as conduits for immortality. The ring though whenever separated from Sauron killed him. 😂 it also held dominion over middle earth but ultimately was the same thing as a Horcrux.

Yes, the Gollum eventually died just like the ring was eventually destroyed. Awful showing since it can't instantly kill anorexic individuals.

Originally posted by quanchi112
And Bilbo resisted it to give it away to Gandalf's scare tactics. Sam never fell for it either.

Both act as conduits for immortality. The ring though whenever separated from Sauron killed him. 😂 it also held dominion over middle earth but ultimately was the same thing as a Horcrux.

Yes, the Gollum eventually died just like the ring was eventually destroyed. Awful showing since it can't instantly kill anorexic individuals.

Nah, the Ring is supposed to be more of a tool of power while the Horcurxes are supposed to actually extend a wizard's lifespan indefinitely. Prove that it was the same thing as a horcrux. You're making a lot of baseless claims and providing no proof to back up your statements.

It killed him. My video clip shows it. That's not the same as him resisting it. You're as much of a horrible liar as you are a terrible debater in general.👇

Originally posted by quanchi112
When did I say magic didn't matter there.

You repeatedly argued that Ganondorf was hurt by "swords." When it was pointed out to you that both swords were magical, that one hit him before he got his power, and that one is his weakness, you ignored this and continued claiming that Ganondorf was hurt by "swords."

Notice any similarities to what I'm doing here? Horcruxes were destroyed by a sword and the Ring resisted an axe, after all.

It destroyed Horcruxes. The same Horcrux known as Nagini resisted fire as well.

🙂 [/B]

What's impressive about destroying Horcruxes and what impressive resistance feats do they have?

Debating with quan is like debating with a wall

quan, you do understand what lava is, don't you? It's molten rock. Superheated portions of earth in a semisolid state. Gollum landing in Mt. Doom is terrifyingly accurate to what happens when you base jump a volcano, sans convection. If you were to throw yourself in lava, you wouldn't sink. Even molten, it's still rock, which is denser than the average humanoid frame. What would happen is that your body would immediately start to melt away, which can give the impression of sinking, I'm sure, but you'll never really make it past the first layer. Gollum was dead the moment he hit rock bottom, if you'll excuse the pun.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Bilbo used it. That's far from "resisting" its influence. We're talking movies, so when did Bilbo give it to Gandalf's "scare tactics"? The Horcruxes on the other hand were resisted by a prepubescent boy and girl. Awful.

Nah, the Ring is supposed to be more of a tool of power while the Horcurxes are supposed to actually extend a wizard's lifespan indefinitely. Prove that it was the same thing as a horcrux. You're making a lot of baseless claims and providing no proof to back up your statements.

It killed him. My video clip shows it. That's not the same as him resisting it. You're as much of a horrible liar as you are a terrible debater in general.👇

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lKaw5SjeHx0

The moment the Horcruxes were off the resistance left. We see Bilbo clearly resist it as well. These kids had more experience than this hobbit who went through only one adventure.

They both provide the ability to live minus a body or return to the physical realm while these objects remain intact. Sauron dies when he is separated from his ring. His body does making it far easier to kill him by just separating his ring from his body.

A Horcrux and the ring both had a piece of the soul of their maker as well.

I never said he avoided death I said he delayed death. This isn't that impressive at all. Sorry.

Fang has greater feats of destruction of magical artifacts than the Ring has of resistance feats.

Originally posted by The Scenario
You repeatedly argued that Ganondorf was hurt by "swords." When it was pointed out to you that both swords were magical, that one hit him before he got his power, and that one is his weakness, you ignored this and continued claiming that Ganondorf was hurt by "swords."

Notice any similarities to what I'm doing here? Horcruxes were destroyed by a sword and the Ring resisted an axe, after all.

What's impressive about destroying Horcruxes and what impressive resistance feats do they have?

A sword with magical properties against an axe without any other properties. The sword was extremely powerful compared to regular swords.

The master sword could be blocked by other swords but once it pierced its opponent it dispels that characters magic. It isn't a sword which cuts through other swords in TP. That was why the emphasis was placed on skill level.

🙂

Originally posted by Firefly218
Debating with quan is like debating with a wall

Originally posted by quanchi112
And you are like a harmless hairball that lays on the floor and looks dumb.

That has to be the lamest insult I've ever gotten 😆

Originally posted by Firefly218
That has to be the lamest insult I've ever gotten 😆

Originally posted by quanchi112
Whatever you say, furball.

It's scary to think people like you are allowed to vote

Originally posted by quanchi112
Ganondorf has no resistance feats against any swords of any kind. The Master Sword's function dispels magic. It was sharp enough to cut into him and it did its function by preventing Dorfs magic from resisting the piercing attack.

A sword with magical properties against an axe without any other properties. The sword was extremely powerful compared to regular swords.

The master sword could be blocked by other swords but once it pierced its opponent it dispels that characters magic. It isn't a sword which cuts through other swords in TP. That was why the emphasis was placed on skill level.

🙂

Yeah, nah, I'm not going into Twilight Princess again. You argue the same thing every time and it gets boring. Nice try with the off-topic red herring, though.

Prove that the sword of Gryffindor is powerful, please. Also, could you please prove that, say, Nagini, has any resistance to something like an axe?

Originally posted by Firefly218
It's scary to think people like you are allowed to vote

Originally posted by The Scenario
Yeah, nah, I'm not going into Twilight Princess again. You argue the same thing every time and it gets boring. Nice try with the off-topic red herring, though.

Prove that the sword of Gryffindor is powerful, please. Also, could you please prove that, say, Nagini, has any resistance to something like an axe?

This was covered the movies with the what can destroy Horcruxes. Not looking all this up for you.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Well I explained the difference and you brought it up initially.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The movie is entirely different and the fire didn't destroy it. The fang did. This is the movie forum not the book forum.

The magical sword destroyed it whereas the regular axe resisted.

Magic matters, sport.

Funny how it doesn't matter when Dorf isn't in the thread.

🙂

This was covered the movies with the what can destroy Horcruxes. Not looking all this up for you.

So the sword is powerful because it can destroy horcruxes, fine. Do you have anything that proves horcruxes are resilient?

All known methods of Horcrux destruction are as deadly as the murder needed for its creation. For example, the earliest known method is administering basilisk venom to the Horcrux, the only cure for which is phoenix tears, an extremely rare substance. Other known methods are Fiendfyre (as evidenced by its destruction of Rowena Ravenclaw's Diadem), which requires extreme skill to control and the Killing Curse which seems to be capable of destroying a Horcrux if it is animate, given that part of Voldemort's soul contained in Harry Potter was destroyed when he was struck with the Killing Curse in 1998.[5] However, Harry Potter was never an intentional Horcrux and so it may not work on a proper, animate Horcrux (like Nagini), probably having unforeseen side effects.

Harry Potter was not destroyed as a Horcrux in the Chamber of Secrets because Fawkes' tears saved him and hence the "receptacle" (Harry) was not then destroyed beyond repair.[2]

Albus Dumbledore,[4] Ron Weasley, and Neville Longbottom[5] used Godric Gryffindor's Sword to destroy Marvolo Gaunt's Ring, Salazar Slytherin's Locket, and Nagini respectively. This was only achievable as the sword is a Goblin-made artefact, which can absorb qualities that strengthen it. When Harry Potter slew the Basilisk in the Chamber of Secrets,[6] the sword was imbued with Basilisk venom and became capable of destroying Horcruxes, as Basilisk venom by itself is destructive enough a substance to destroy a Horcrux.

Harry Potter and Hermione Granger used Basilisk fangs from the Chamber of Secrets to destroy Tom Riddle's Diary and Helga Hufflepuff's Cup, respectively.[5]

[http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Horcrux]

[bolds mine]
So, the only reason that the Sword could destroy a Horcrux was because it was dipped in Basilisk venom. Oh, and Fiendfyre DID destroy the diadem Horcrux.

It helps to get the actual facts.

Originally posted by The Scenario
So the sword is powerful because it can destroy horcruxes, fine. Do you have anything that proves horcruxes are resilient?

Originally posted by siriuswriter
All known methods of Horcrux destruction are as deadly as the murder needed for its creation. For example, the earliest known method is administering basilisk venom to the Horcrux, the only cure for which is phoenix tears, an extremely rare substance. [b]Other known methods are Fiendfyre (as evidenced by its destruction of Rowena Ravenclaw's Diadem), which requires extreme skill to control and the Killing Curse which seems to be capable of destroying a Horcrux if it is animate, given that part of Voldemort's soul contained in Harry Potter was destroyed when he was struck with the Killing Curse in 1998.[5] However, Harry Potter was never an intentional Horcrux and so it may not work on a proper, animate Horcrux (like Nagini), probably having unforeseen side effects.

Harry Potter was not destroyed as a Horcrux in the Chamber of Secrets because Fawkes' tears saved him and hence the "receptacle" (Harry) was not then destroyed beyond repair.[2]

Albus Dumbledore,[4] Ron Weasley, and Neville Longbottom[5] used Godric Gryffindor's Sword to destroy Marvolo Gaunt's Ring, Salazar Slytherin's Locket, and Nagini respectively. This was only achievable as the sword is a Goblin-made artefact, which can absorb qualities that strengthen it. When Harry Potter slew the Basilisk in the Chamber of Secrets,[6] the sword was imbued with Basilisk venom and became capable of destroying Horcruxes, as Basilisk venom by itself is destructive enough a substance to destroy a Horcrux.

Harry Potter and Hermione Granger used Basilisk fangs from the Chamber of Secrets to destroy Tom Riddle's Diary and Helga Hufflepuff's Cup, respectively.[5]

[http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Horcrux]

[bolds mine]
So, the only reason that the Sword could destroy a Horcrux was because it was dipped in Basilisk venom. Oh, and Fiendfyre DID destroy the diadem Horcrux.

It helps to get the actual facts. [/B]

Originally posted by quanchi112
Fiendfyre did not destroy that Horcrux in the film. The fang did. Clearly you're not capable of understanding a simple scene. Your rants are comedic as well.

Considering there is one poster in all these threads who refuses to back his own claims, this debate is worthless, as is every other argument and counterargument he has ever made.

Can you guess who that is? It is YOU Quan.

Sirius here made quite a few things apparent, and you simply ignored most of what he said. That has literally shot what little credibility you had left straight into the crap pipes.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Considering there is one poster in all these threads who refuses to back his own claims, this debate is worthless, as is every other argument and counterargument he has ever made.

Can you guess who that is? It is YOU Quan.

Sirius here made quite a few things apparent, and you simply ignored most of what he said. That has literally shot what little credibility you had left straight into the crap pipes.

5:15 in.

Fang destroys Horcrux. Soul is released which comes into contact with the Fiendfyre. Eat it.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OGtMGiqJRYw

Don't call girls guys. K.

🙂 🙂

Dancing all over your weak soul.