Rien

Thanks, Gandorf. The stats have been corrected, and you've been credited for the fix. :thumbup:

Heya. :) Thanks for the information you've gathered! You've both been credited for your contributions. More research is needed, however, if anyone reading this would like to help out a bit; the TzHaar-Mej and TzHaar-Hur entries in particular could use some work. This is what we have now: TzHaar-Ket TzHaar-Xil TzHaar-Mej TzHaar-Hur Please let us know of any additional information that could be added/corrected in the above entries. Thanks again!

Heya. Forum Name: Rien_Adelric FunOrb Name: Rien Adelric F2P/P2P: F2P I have read the rules and accept them with no argument: :thumbup:

Great find. :thumbup:

Ahh, I see. Thanks for pointing that out. :oops: Well, it seems that defeating the Leprechaun champion still won't unlock a banner, at least. Also, the champion scrolls have had a graphical update (but don't look quite as good, in my opinion).

Hmm, there's no more space available on the walls for additional banners (I have 9 banners, and there's only space for one more - the Skeleton banner, in my case). Also, defeating the Leprechaun Champion does not unlock another banner, nor is there an option for the imp follower to display one for defeating it.

As Joe said, narrow your search if ever you have difficulty in finding a certain entry in the database. 'Enjoy your Slayer task. :)

There's plenty of evidence available to combat a number of religious beliefs. It's a different story, though, when the nature of God is called into question. Will we ever find evidence to disprove God's existence? Most likely not, and this is simply because the so-called 'supernatural' cannot be studied through our strictly natural means. However, it's important to note that an extraordinary number of religious/superstitious beliefs have been debunked through the application and development of scientific processes in the last several centuries; much of what was once attributed to deities, spirits, and the supernatural has now been proven to fall under the realm of science, and this trend can only continue as our knowledge waxes. You're mistaken. Science is founded on solid evidence derived from rigorous experimentation; the Bible and many other religious writings are not accredited and were written by (as I believe someone has already said) superstitious bigots thousands of years ago. Where's the logic is ascribing to the latter? Concerning the 'intimidation' you mentioned, can you expand on that? I'm curious (honestly) about what you mean by that. Both of these statements are grossly incorrect. :???: Transitional fossils HAVE been discovered - a great many of them, in fact. There may be gaps in the fossil record here and there, but what can you expect? After all, organic material normally decomposes completely, so we're fortunate to have uncovered all that we have. Anyway, and despite the dilemma of having to search for the remains of ancient organisms, our knowledge of evolution continues to grow, so I can't understand how you can possibly claim that no 'missing link' has ever been found. As for the second statement, I have to wonder where you heard that? It really couldn't be further from the truth - according to the Law of Conservation of Mass, matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Evolution has long been proven to occur. And yes, we can study it; bacterial cultures, in particular, have been especially useful subjects of study, as several generations of bacteria can cycle through in a matter of minutes (accelerating evolution and greatly increasing our ability to study its long-term effects). The Big Bang is another matter, granted, since we cannot replicate the effects (and not because it's impossible - it's simply due to the fact that we do not yet have the means to do so). However, even without being able to recreate our 'own' Big Bang, there are still many avenues of research into the theory that are still available to us, and these are being explored systematically. There's a tremendous amount of evidence lending credibility to the Big Bang theory, and I'll remind you here that a 'scientific theory' is quite different from a conventional 'theory'.

There are two different types of guards in Falador, but neither entry has charms listed as drops right now: http://www.tip.it/runescape/index.php?rs2monster_id=626 http://www.tip.it/runescape/index.php?rs2monster_id=740 If you could post a picture confirming the drop, I'd be more than happy to make the appropriate correction(s) and credit you, though. :) Thanks!

It's true that rune full helms are more valuable than rune maces, but there is only a very loose correlation between the rarity of an item drop and its value in gp, so you can't expect monster drop tables to always make logical sense. I can tell you from personal experience, however, that I've received every drop listed in the Greater Demon bestiary entry except for the rune spear. If you don't want to take my word for it, you can always check our information against that of other fansites as well. I appreciate your concern, but I am certain that the entry is correct.

Oooh, thanks. Confirmation is always appreciated. ;) To tell the truth, I actually did a bit of research awhile ago and had already edited the waterfiend entry with a new max gp drop, but I forgot to post back here afterward. I've gone ahead and credited you both for good measure, however, since I would have never recorded my coin drops if not for this topic (so this is why, if you check the entry, you'll see the max as being '668' gp). :lol: 'Cheers.

Heya. I recently went out to test this (and maybe collect a few shells on the side :P ), and I was able to confirm the Mithril(10) drop. Anyway, thanks for the information! I've made the correction and have credited you for it. :)

Asimov's? If so, then I have to say that the series is fantastic. All of his fiction works are well worth reading. :thumbup:

Can other people trust you, seeing that you already got AIDS from the HIV+ partner? So, it's best to stick with the HIV+ partner so you don't spread it to other people. No offense intended, but you're missing the point. The gross breach of trust is the significant aspect in this hypothetical situation (not so much the fact that one partner was HIV+ to begin with). If someone were to intentionally withhold such important information from his or her partner, then what else might they be willing to do? It would be an irreconcilable betrayal, and, because of it, there could be no trust between the two afterward. If you've ever been in a relationship, then you should be able to understand what we're trying to convey.

Congratulations once again, Jagex. :P 'Thanks for creating a great game.

I believe failing (intentional or otherwise) a random event increases your chances of encountering another soon after, so you might want to take that into consideration. 'Good luck, at any rate.

'Nothing like a good bit of mischief. :lol:

Debating is a form of art. 'Winning' or 'losing' really don't matter so long as the participants can better themselves in the process.

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/1737/2kqcp.png

A vital component in any successful relationship is trust. If your partner were willing to betray that trust (and especially in regards to a life-endangering condition), then why bother with the relationship in the first place?

Basically, you can't accept that the universe has always existed? Must it have been created at all, though? Christians, in general, don't seem to have a problem thinking that their supposed supernatural creator has always existed (being without cause, essentially), so what is it about the nature of the universe itself that makes you incredulous? You might want to read into Occam's razor.

I'm surprised you've never heard of it, honestly. I assure you that it's not something I made up on the spot. Rsautohater explained it well; even if plant matter is "dead", it's still composed of astoundingly complex compound chains and more. The degenerated material I was referring to would comprise mostly of varying forms of radiation (energy) and individual elemental atoms/simple compounds (matter). I state again that matter and energy can never degrade into "useless" material; even on the most fundamental of levels, chemical reactions can still occur and form increasingly complex products. I'm well aware that no war has ever been fought over a single issue; there have always been ulterior motives at work. However, can you deny that the vagueness of biblical (and other religious) writings has, time and again, contributed considerably to many conflicts both in the past and present? If the Bible was divinely-inspired, then why does it cause such strife (even amongst fellow believers)? I maintain that if God created us with full knowledge of the future, then our actions are not truly free, as nothing we can do can 'break the mould' or otherwise change what is to come (destiny). Personally, I believe 'free will' exists, but, then again, I don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God (or any other defined deity for that part). I can't see how an omniscient, omnipotent creator and free will can coexist.

^ Is awesome < Is a real pikachu, srsly v Probably not a pikachu, so isn't awesome :P

The "Big Crunch" is an integral part of the Big Bang Theory. All matter exhibits some small amount of gravtitational force which attracts other matter (although the force is generally so small that only objects of very large mass can exert enough gravity for us to recognize this (e.g. planets, stars, black holes, etc...)). Now, the reason why the entire universe doesn't collapse in on itself suddenly (due to gravity), is because there are a myriad of other forces currently at work as well (two significant examples being general electron repulsion and the ongoing, outward repulsion caused by the Big Bang). However, as time passes, energy/mass will be progressively broken down (second law of thermodynamics), which will greatly decrease the effects of electrin repulsion (matter in a lower-energy state would not have as many electron shells, hence the shielding would be lessened). Additionally, the force caused by the Big Bang (essentially inertia) would decrease over time as well (since the force of the inertia would continue to lose energy). Now, time would cause for the expansion of the universe to gradually slow, and the forces working against gravitational attraction would one day decrease to the point that they would no longer be able to continue to override the attraction. Once this happens, the process would begin to reverse itself as matter would start attracting other matter - forming "clumps" throughout the universe of increasing large mass which would exert more potent gravity (attracting yet more matter to each clump). In time, these clumps would become so massive that their own forces of gravity would cause them to collapse into themselves and create black holes. In turn, these black holes - scattered across the universe - would begin converging on each other into a singular point consisting of all of the mass and energy in the universe (Big Crunch). Subsequently, a Big Bang would occur, as the effect of having all available energy and mass in the universe compressed into a single point instantaneously would be quite volatile (I'm sure you can imagine). I do believe, in my own way, that the universe is "God". The only difference (in my thinking) is that the universe is not conscious. As for your challenge, the answer is quite simple: Mass and Energy are eternal, as they can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted/transferred. Concerning the underlined section, mass and energy cannot decompose into something "useless". They can degenerate into lower-energy states, but all that is needed for this to change is to reintroduce the degenerated material with other degenerated material so that they may share/transfer electrons and bond (covalently, ionically, etc...). The universe is eternal; its individual incarnations are not. And yes, the nature of God isn't exactly something that can be debated, but I would think that a supernatural being (by definition) would exist "outside"/be "incompatible" with our natural world. I understand your meaning, though; it was probably just a bad word choice on my part. At any rate, it all seems like supposition to me (there existing an almighty, supernatural being paradoxically part of, and yet transcending, the universe), but that's strictly my opinion. I respect that there are many others who disagree with me. Because God created us to love Him. And you can't truly love something unless you choose to love it. This is why God gave us free will. If the Bible had been written in such a way that no one could ever possibly hope to argue against it, how would that be choosing to love God? I don't understand your point here. Wars have been fought simply because certain passages in the Bible are vague and the opposing factions interpreted them differently. Would it not have been better if God had written out everything literally or had at least provided defined explanations for the metaphorical passages? People could have still "chosen" whether to believe the Bible or not, and it would have had the added bonus of not instigating bloody conflicts amongst the believers. <--- This was the point I was trying to make in that quote. Also, at the risk of opening another can of worms ( :lol: ), if God is omniscient and is our creator, then how can 'free will' exist?

You provide no support for your argument, so why should I bother to find it for you? And besides, I'm more interested in this to begin with: Earlier, you claimed: If this is true, then why would you hesitate to reveal them (since you seem confident that nothing can be done about them anyway)? That's lovely.