Originally posted by quanchi112
Sirius is a woman you Neanderthal.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.
The only response to any and all of this is "So F**king what?"
Originally posted by quanchi112
I couldn't care less half the time. Most of you people are so ignorant I'd rather keep you in the dark. It amuses me to look down on you.
😆
Translation: "I can't prove shit, so I'll pretend I'm right I try to fool everyone that there is some big dark conspiracies that only I am in the know about."
You do realise that you are supposed to be over 3 decades old, not 3 years old? Seriously, your lines are some of the most immature and ill thought out posts I have ever seen.
😆
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroI just proved what I said as I rubbed your face in internet poop. Your response was so what. You are a cheerleader. Nothing more. Grab your pom poms and stay on the sideline.
😆Translation: "I can't prove shit, so I'll pretend I'm right I try to fool everyone that there is some big dark conspiracies that only I am in the know about."
You do realise that you are supposed to be over 3 decades old, not 3 years old? Seriously, your lines are some of the most immature and ill thought out posts I have ever seen.
😆
Originally posted by quanchi112
I just proved what I said as I rubbed your face in internet poop. Your response was so what. You are a cheerleader. Nothing more. Grab your pom poms and stay on the sideline.
What you proved didn't address anything I said, so you simply went to your usual circular Quan logic again. I asked "So what" because it literally is meaningless.
Sirius literally proved that for the sword of Gryffindor to work on Horcrux's, it needed to be seeped in Basilisk venom, thus proving that the sword can't do it on it's own, which means your spiel about it being more powerful than any other sword you've debated against (Narsil, Master Sword, ect) due to it being capable of undoing the Horcrux's is a load of horseshit.
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroYou are ignoring the properties of the sword itself.
What you proved didn't address anything I said, so you simply went to your usual circular Quan logic again. I asked "So what" because it literally is meaningless.Sirius literally proved that for the sword of Gryffindor to work on Horcrux's, it needed to be seeped in Basilisk venom, thus proving that the sword can't do it on it's own, which means your spiel about it being more powerful than any other sword you've debated against (Narsil, Master Sword, ect) due to it being capable of undoing the Horcrux's is a load of horseshit.
This caused the sword to be imbued with basilisk venom (since goblin-made items only imbibe what makes them stronger).
If you ignore the properties of the magical weapons you're debating you're basically putting your hands into your ears and saying nuh uh.
Narsil was stomped in half by a bootheel. Leave the Zelda stuff for the Zelda brigade, cheerleader.
Originally posted by quanchi112
You are ignoring the properties of the sword itself.
Which is exactly what you did with the weapons you debated against. Let me guess, it only applies to what you're debating against, not for, right? Hypocritical double standards again.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This caused the sword to be imbued with basilisk venom (since goblin-made items only imbibe what makes them stronger).
Which doesn't do much of anything on it's own. Anyone can lay a coat of poison on a blade.
Originally posted by quanchi112
If you ignore the properties of the magical weapons you're debating you're basically putting your hands into your ears and saying nuh uh.
See point 1. You've been doing that for months, if not years.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Narsil was stomped in half by a bootheel. Leave the Zelda stuff for the Zelda brigade, cheerleader.
The bootheel of a 10 foot tall Maiar known for his corrupting capabilities, but, ya know, context, the thing you lack and all...
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroI have never done such a thing. Speak in plain English and cite examples. You embarrass yourself daily.
Which is exactly what you did with the weapons you debated against. Let me guess, it only applies to what you're debating against, not for, right? Hypocritical double standards again.Which doesn't do much of anything on it's own. Anyone can lay a coat of poison on a blade.
See point 1. You've been doing that for months, if not years.
The bootheel of a 10 foot tall Maiar known for his corrupting capabilities, but, ya know, context, the thing you lack and all...
The blade takes that into itself and is stronger from there on out. The point it always escapes you, cheerleader.
When has the term Maiar ever been references in the movies ?
This is just going from bad to worse for you.
🙂
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
He is being a greed monger until Gandalf scares the shit out of him.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.
Lol, he used it against Smaug, long after that scene with Gandy.
Nope, we don't. He used it against Smaug, despite Gandalf's warning. Your lies are pathetic as usual.
They both have different functions. The Ring is an artifact of power primarily while the Horcrux is an artifact of immortality. One is not the same as the other.
Prove that Sauron's power is his soul. You're making an awful lot of assumptions without any proof to back it up.
You said he resisted it. My video clip clearly shows that he died:
YouTube video
You lied and made up stuff as usual. Admit it and I may pardon thee.
What greater destruction feats? It couldn't even kill Harry Potter for crying out loud. Awful showing. The tears of a dodo like Fawkes can negate its affects. At least with the lava you can't be saved once in it as we saw with the Gollum.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I have never done such a thing. Speak in plain English and cite examples. You embarrass yourself daily.
Bullshit, it's the ONLY thing you ever consistently do.
Originally posted by quanchi112
The blade takes that into itself and is stronger from there on out. The point it always escapes you, cheerleader.
Bullshit. According to your logic, any blade coated with the venom would do the job.
Originally posted by quanchi112
When has the term Maiar ever been references in the movies ?
When has it ever mattered. Surely even you are not stupid enough to claim Sauron is an ordinary human being... Oh wait, I forget whom I speak to... 🙄
Originally posted by quanchi112
This is just going from bad to worse for you.🙂
Originally posted by EpicurusThat has nothing to do with my point. My point wasn't that he never used it. Try and keep up here, dork. My point was Gandalf used scare tactics which knocked the greed over the ring right out of him. Fact. For all its bluster fear takes the oomph right out of the ring. 🙂
The point is that he used it, and you can't say whether he won't do so again in the next movie.Lol, he used it against Smaug, long after that scene with Gandy.
Nope, we don't. He used it against Smaug, despite Gandalf's warning. Your lies are pathetic as usual.
They both have different functions. The Ring is an artifact of power primarily while the Horcrux is an artifact of immortality. One is not the same as the other.
Prove that Sauron's power is his soul. You're making an awful lot of assumptions without any proof to back it up.
You said he resisted it. My video clip clearly shows that he died:
YouTube videoYou lied and made up stuff as usual. Admit it and I may pardon thee.
What greater destruction feats? It couldn't even kill Harry Potter for crying out loud. Awful showing. The tears of a dodo like Fawkes can negate its affects. At least with the lava you can't be saved once in it as we saw with the Gollum.
Both are objects of power. They aren't exactly the same in every regard but have enough similarities to draw comparisons.
I never said his power was his soul. I said he put a portion of his soul into the ring. Once it is destroyed he loses any chances to return to his body.
You don't even understand what I said and started posting clips showing an extreme lack of intelligence on your end. Laughable. Gollum lasted about as long as the ring. 😂
Yes, the tears or another magical plot device can negate it. Scare tactics can take the power the ring exerts over an individual. 😂
Destroying the Horcruxes. Are you this dense ?
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroComplete and utter lie.
Bullshit, it's the ONLY thing you ever consistently do.Bullshit. According to your logic, any blade coated with the venom would do the job.
When has it ever mattered. Surely even you are not stupid enough to claim Sauron is an ordinary human being... Oh wait, I forget whom I speak to... 🙄
Incorrect. This sword permanently upgrades itself. These are the properties of the sword. The sword took into itself the power of the basilisk fang to make it stronger.
This is the movie versus forum where only movie feats apply. Just don't come back to this thread. You ignore the rules and just cite hyperbole unusable in this forum to assist your incompetence demonstrated throughout this thread.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Complete and utter lie.
See if anyone honestly agrees with you.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Incorrect. This sword permanently upgrades itself. These are the properties of the sword. The sword took into itself the power of the basilisk fang to make it stronger.
That still does not dissuade from the original claim now does it? The question is, why do you think any ordinary blade dipped in the venom couldn't do the job? Because apparently the venom is all that is required to destroy a Horcrux, not the sword itself.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This is the movie versus forum where only movie feats apply. Just don't come back to this thread. You ignore the rules and just cite hyperbole unusable in this forum to assist your incompetence demonstrated throughout this thread.
Says the man who said he only posts here because he can get away with horrendously huge amounts of trolling bullshit.
My question still stands, do you consider Sauron an ordinary human man?
Originally posted by quanchi112
That has nothing to do with my point. My point wasn't that he never used it. Try and keep up here, dork. My point was Gandalf used scare tactics which knocked the greed over the ring right out of him. Fact. For all its bluster fear takes the oomph right out of the ring. 🙂Both are objects of power. They aren't exactly the same in every regard but have enough similarities to draw comparisons.
I never said his power was his soul. I said he put a portion of his soul into the ring. Once it is destroyed he loses any chances to return to his body.
You don't even understand what I said and started posting clips showing an extreme lack of intelligence on your end. Laughable. Gollum lasted about as long as the ring. 😂
Yes, the tears or another magical plot device can negate it. Scare tactics can take the power the ring exerts over an individual. 😂
Destroying the Horcruxes. Are you this dense ?
Both serve different functions. One is meant to be the means to power and domination of the LoTR world while the other is meant to protect its maker from death. Prove that they are similar. You also said that they are basically the same thing here:
Originally posted by quanchi112and here:
but ultimately was the same thing as a Horcrux.
Originally posted by quanchi112You flip-flop worse than an actual flip-flop.
The ring is essentially a Horcrux in theory
You absolutely implied that here:
Originally posted by quanchi112Which basically means that Sauron's power is his soul. Care to back up this ridiculous assertion?
Both have pieces of a soul linked to its creator inside them.
I posted evidence refuting your laughable claims that he resisted the lava. Lava killed him while Harry survived the fang which destroyed a horcrux. Awful showing.
Scare tactics failed to prevent Bilbo from using the Ring, as evidenced against Smaug. You're lying again, not that it is a surprise since that is all you do; lie and make sh1t up.
Which is a feat exactly how? Unless the horcruxes have some uber durability feats which I(your superior when it comes to Harry Potter lore) missed? Fang fails to destroy the ring based on all the evidence posted.
Goblin-made things among wizards are very rare, because the goblins believe that once the intended recipient is dead, the things should go back to the goblins, because in the end goblins made it, goblins own it.
That is why the goblin in "The Deathly Hallows" betrayed the trio, taking the sword once they had the cup. It only reappeared later, when Neville Longbottom pulled it out of the Sorting Hat right before he killed Nagini with it.
So, very few goblin-made items. The thing about goblins is that they make things very intricately, and they also build things that are meant to last for ever. While the objects in themselves are not powerful, they have the potential to become very powerful, because, to put it simply, "What doesn't kill it, makes it stronger." Which is the case with the basilisk venom. After Chamber of Secrets, the sword is officially basilikified because Harry runs it through the head of the basilisk, directly going through the mouth, where ready venom is kept [also why basilisk fangs work so well.] Which is why ONLY the sword of gryffindor worked. Other blades would have just dissolved in the basilisk venom.
And by the way quan, thanks for never answering me directly. I don't mind if someone accidentally misses the gender thing, most of the posters on this site ARE male. Stop belaboring little, nonsensical points, stop calling people names, START thinking before you post. Right now you're just too easy to disprove.
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroYou are honestly pathetic to beg for other people's opinions in a popularity contest.
See if anyone honestly agrees with you.That still does not dissuade from the original claim now does it? The question is, why do you think any ordinary blade dipped in the venom couldn't do the job? Because apparently the venom is all that is required to destroy a Horcrux, not the sword itself.
Says the man who said he only posts here because he can get away with horrendously huge amounts of trolling bullshit.
My question still stands, do you consider Sauron an ordinary human man?
A normal blade can't withstand the power of the basilisk venom nor do normal blades take in that which makes them stronger. That is why this blade is so special, simpleton.
The power of the fangs themselves or the venom is quite powerful which is the point,
That isn't the point. The term Maiar is just a title which implies no power in and of itself. It's also funnier that they don't even use the term in the movies. 🙂