Can be tough to make singing in a midi, a wave uses a ton of space and a short mp3 or similar sequence would be annoying to listen after a while of the repeating.

But I don't really know my basic audio stuff so well. You may even be able to make a midi sound like it has chanting.

The song '3-173 Great Beast Ganon' might fit well. Maybe better if there's a boss, but still.
Obviously though, it's Ganondorf's 2nd phases bgm from TP, so we can't use it. But it's a good song. Listen it=D

I like this idea. I want it.

I might help with some of the tiles, for once.

I love it too.

I edited one of the castle tiles because...well I can't really make tiles. You know that...well maybe you don't but whatever.
Here it is! In it's...orange...square...scribbled...edited...glory?


I think I have to fix the parts around later.

Oh and megaman, I listened to '3-173 Great Beast Ganon'. I loved it. Just what I imagined but I would like to be the chanting more...noticable. So I don't really want many instruments blocking the chanting. You can hear it but...not much. Some points was only chanting which is nice. If I get anything wrong here, it is because I only watched the first minute. =P

Actually, I kind of want to make the tile darker.

Well, whaddya know, I looked up vgmusic for a midi of that, but as you can see from http://www.vgmusic.com/music/console/nintendo/wii/index-classic.html there isn't one.

Yeah, I like it as a song, but I didn't really suggest it for a song to this place.

Oh, and is chanting even possible with a midi? Wave takes a lot of space for even short clips and a short mp3 might get really annoying after a while of the same chanting voice.

And then there's the thing that I don't know what formats Shockwave supports.

Alright, this isn't much right now, but I've got two tiles- both would be for a hypothetical walls. The walls would be tall, like, three tiles tall, so these would go in the middle. This would help narrow the ground a bit, leaving you without a lot of space around.

Plain Wall


With Ghost Graphic


I'm not all too happy with them, but they are starts. I think they may look better either redder or yellower.

Those would be pretty awesome for the outside walls of it, but I think it should be darker when you enter; kinda cave-like.

I like the tiles.

I love the tiles alot! They need to be a little darker and browner as you and ♪ said. The ghost wall tile is awesome. I love it. So I guess there is two more to do, which is the torch_wall_tile and the lighted_up_tile. The lighted up one will show that the torch is actually giving the light to the tiles near it. Obviously we need edit the ones we have made though still. We could also make a few obstacles. Like sar...forgot what's the name and also crumbled rocks and maybe gold.

Nah, if we made the torch make light to nearby tiles, it either would be a square or we need eight different lighted up tiles.

I'd say to keep the light in the torch tile and make the torch quite small.

Did you mean: Sarcophagus?







P.S: I hope it worked.

Ugh. I don't like the image I made. I kind of want to make the tile like from Super Mario 64. In the desert level, there is a pyramid which has nice tiles.

Oh, those.

Well, decide on it yourself and if you make a new tile, just post it..

Btw, random question, how old are you?

P.S: The google imitation worked great! If you want to check, you can get the text by searching 'sarcophags'.

P.P.P.S: Oh, I forgot the underline after all. It was supposed to be perfect on the first try.

Oh bum. Well, it's teh awesome enough. But I really need to learn using PHP and CSS soon, or I can't really call myself a webmaster=P

How would you like it if they were made very steep? This would make the lower walls be the exact flip of the higher walls. The rest could be filled with black, to signify that you are indeed in a dungeon.

another(little) suggestion: more contrast, it might be kinda difficult to see the bricks in game.

It could be very steep. That would be quite nice and yes, higher contrast would be...wonderful. :)

Agreed. All of that would be teh awesome. :)

I am almost finished make my tile. I might change it a little because the tile which I made looks to dark. The lines that show the bricks are too dark so I will have to change that.

I have already made some tiles for the temple.
The first one, Splattered Orange.


The second one, Chocalte Bar.


The third and last one, Fudge.


Choose the one you like most. ;)

First one is very nice.

Ahhhhh, the splattered orange. It is an edit of one of the castle tiles. :)

Great tiles Phoenix! I kind of like the third one.

Omg I wanna eat themm..... *** goes into chocolate frenzy *****

Ummm, where are the tiles?

crazymerlinman321: "Great tiles Phoenix!"
crazymerlinman321: "Ummm, where are the tiles?"

Lol.

Steve, is everything alright? D:

We could use the CandyLand blocks for a great oppertunity to use cute spirtes :D
Like guys wit :3 faces,on a whip cream head :D

well once global warming kicks in it will be soon tooo hot and all the choclate will melt.

Please tell me that was a joke. Global warming is so bogus... it has snowed in Texas every year since they really started talking about global warming. Not to mention how cool it's been in Florida.

lawlz.

The tiles aren't really made out of chocalate...I just gave em' nicknames.

It aint bogus the artic is actually melting and the governments around the world including DEFINTLEY the united states of a america want to continue its melting so people can use the arctic to their advantage.

Also as a side note global warming can make it snow in very hot normally locations and make a desert out of very cold locations

I'm glad I live between those locations

and merlin you might want to tell that to steve he looks like his eyes are going to break out in tears of pain also his teeth dont look so good either

Hey steve wheres your gold tooth XD

Well I think it is bogus. CO2 is actually too heavy for it to rise all the way to our ozone and cause the greenhouse effect. It is actually mostly caused by water vapor.

Glaciers in Greenland have recently been shown to be getting thcker, not thinner. Same with antarctic ice, which is never mentioned by warming alarmists.

Did you know NASA was faking their global warming data? Yeah, I know. Very weird but true. They actually copied the temperature from September and put it on October. They then said that that October was the hottest October in decades.

Volcanoes and the ocean are bigger CO2 sources than us. Our air is actually better than it was in the 80's.

People are always trying to come up with ways to scare us. Ozone is a greenhouse gas, it traps heat that would otherwise radiate into space. If the ozone layer is DECREASING, then why do people say the temperature is rising? Ozone traps heat! If there's less of it, there's less heat being trapped!

Wait, a full-grammar, long and a very factual text overall, from Crazy? Cool.

So yeah, that's one way of thinking, with arguments which look like they are copied off from somewhere.

Anyway, personally, I think that it's not bogus. I mean, I believe it's somewhat too alarmed, but I also think that it DOES effect, in the long run, and is overhyped to actually get more people to do something.

Still, there also are a lot of bogus with it, and false stuff, and even some marketing revolves around getting people to buy their stuff because it's 'more energy efficient' - while generating a ton of more profit.

I'm not exactly sure where you're facts are coming from, however, I would take issue with a number of them, or at least put a different perspective on them.

For one thing, glacial ice has been *very obviously,* shrinking. Based on satellite photos compared between last year and 2000. Furthermore, the North West Passage has been becoming increasingly traversable(one of the reasons why Canada is getting so uppity about owing our section of the North)

I can, however add another testament to the poor data collection. (Anecdotally, at least)
Me fathee runs a diamond surveying company, which often involves some rooting around in the north. He's noticed that around many(if not most) of the weather stations that are up there, little settlements/towns have popped up.
Naturally, the area becomes warmer, because of these towns, skewing the results.

I'm not sure how much of that should be trusted though, nor how much of a heat difference being near by a small town would generate.

Fact check on O3: It only functions as a green house gas at low altitudes, whereas the depletion is occurring at higher ozone layer. Furthermore, the stuff that's been killing the upper-layer ozone is a potent green house gas as well(aerosol propellant, which was also used for refrigeration at some point), likely compensating for whatever is lost. (the upper ozone also reflects energy back out into space, if I remember right, which decreases the amount that reaches the surface/that turns into heat)

As for air being "better" than in the 80s. Its more likely referring to SOx and NOx (where x is 1, 2, 3 or 4, if I remember my chemitry) which cause acid rain, and were/are the focus of clean air acts. Those two families of gases actually contribute to global cooling, btw.

As for volcanoes, they release lots of those gases, along with CO2, again, I would suggest some cancelling(though I'm no biologist/chemist) ... and the oceans are generally considered to be carbon *sinks* rather than carbon *sources* being that they take it out of the air(where it then becomes carbonic acid). I do remember reading somewhere that at some point, the ocean will take in an excessive amount of CO2, and start evacuating like crazy, at which point they probably will release more than industrial activity(I can't source that though)

For the first point, that a) CO2 only acts as a green house gas at high altitudes, and b) that its too heavy to reach such altitude would require some research on my part, though I have a feeling that its not true...

some googling suggests that this might be a good place to start reading: http://www.iseis.org/jei/fulltext.asp?no=200400030

Even more googling suggests a different another likely story with the ozone. It traps heat in the stratos, preventing it from reaching the rest of the atmos.

I can't find any graphs of CO2 concentration vs height, nor reliable descriptions of how CO2 concentration changes with respect to height.
(There were two, contradictory, pretty well-sourced explanations on a yahoo question... and by that I mean that I couldn't see them without subscribing to something or another, which is to say that I can't see them) The internet seems more concerned about plotting CO2 vs time, and height vs Temperature :(

Oh! I know another mass media stupid thing. 2 actually.

1. The world will end May 21, 2011. Some chuch dude said he examined the bible, and found the date hidden in. Likely forgetting the Gregorian calender didn't exist when the Bible was written.

2. The solar flares. I imagine companies will start selling mini Faraday Cages for people to put their data in.

Oh, the media.

Oh noes!

That means I don't get my epic, end-of-the-world birthday come 2012!

"No man will know the day or the hour"

Depends upon the cause. If it's naturally, it can very much be predicted.

@Megaman4ever, some of the stuff was copied but alot of it was just put in my words.

I remember hearing that here in Ireland and Britain we would experience very cold conditions due to global warming. We are kept warm by the Gulf stream apparently, and if that got diverted by melting ice floes we would get the temperature appropriate to our northerly latitude. ie. about the same as Moscow.

We've certainly been getting more snow these last two years and everyone here are suddenly rushing out and buying jeeps and other 4wd drive cars. Although in fact, cold weather tyres maybe all we need.

I'm thinking(speculatory me, here) that the Gulf stream will be a sudden change, where after a tipping point in temperature(or whatever after effect of the temperature change affects the currents) the stream will suddenly divert in a different direction.(fast change being over weeks or months, rather than years)

On then other hand, it could just slow down to a halt?

IMHO, Global Warming does exist to a certain extent (But the way they put it out there like it's never happened before is bogus).

I think the earth goes through cycles, ( E.g. warm, cold, warm, cold).
Remember all the talk about the Ice age?
Well then, Tell me why the "Ice age" ended, I don't think any one really knows.
In the 60's when dad was a kid they were talking about global cooling.

Kinda weird isn't it, now all you hear is "Oh noes, the polar ice caps are melting!!!! We're all gonna die if we don't fix it!".
I personally believe that we don't have as much to do with it as we would sometimes like to think.

I think here in twenty years or so they be talking about global cooling again, but before that, when the Ice caps start increasing in size again, they'll probably go on and on about how awesome we are and how we "saved the polar bears and the world".

There's my two cents. What's yours?

Best reasons for buying energy efficient stuff.

1.Save money 2. Fuels that contribute to global warming are also in limited supply.

22 Feb 2011 [comment_41221]

♪

you forgot to close something.

Woops. I meant [br /]. Forgot the r.

What Hobbes said is basically what I've been thinking. You have to take into account that the earth is not just a self-contained system- It is part of an infinitely larger whole. Think- not only are the planets in motion, but so are the stars (suns) that we orbit, and that grouping of stars (galaxy) is sailing across the universe as we speak.

If there is a big...really hot collection of stars, and our galaxy gets even mildly close to that, wouldn't the whole of the Milky Way increase in temperature a bit? We get close, then we move away. Global warming and global cooling? Or how about "you're sitting on the mantel/in the fridge"? Distance is cyclical, so we shouldn't be surprised when things start heating up a bit.

Now, I may be a little off with this thinking, but have we tested the other planets around us to see if they have had this sort of temperature change?

I shouldn't have linked the gulf stream and our recent snow like that. I think you're right ♪ it would presumably be a sudden change. Our recent weather was due to a temporary shift in the trade winds that come across the north Atlantic. Usually they come straight across, bringing warm air with them (see how blessed we are here ?) but this year and last they got temporarily diverted so they went north into the arctic and then turned south towards Britain and Ireland, bringing snow and ice with them. Whether this has anything to do with global warming is unclear to me.

In regards to your point, Hobbes, that it may all be part of the Earth's natural cycle. I think the issue there is the rate of change. Ice ages come and go across millions of years, our temperature change is happening across tens of years. So this suggests that it is something more present and direct that is causing it.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's us either. Solar flares, or Roxblaster's idea of closer proximity to other suns may have some effect. But if it is us, that's good news because it means we can do something about it.

Rox: I doubt it would effect anything. Light spreads as it travels, and the nearest star is light years away. The energy would be insignificant.

My cents:
The global dimming from the 60s was one of the fun effects of SO4(or at least, it was a major contributor) At some point(around in the 60s) we figured this out, and stopped using SO4 aerosols. Considering that the dimming effects lasted all the way up till 1990, and extrapolating from the relative ease of filtering out SO4 vs switching away from combustion as a source of energy(not to mention that just stopping carbon output will only stop the acceleration of the acceleration of temperature change(or maybe the 4th derivative?)), I think 20 years would be (vastly) underestimating the time scale until there is any effect of changes implemented in the next 20 years(if any happen...) My guess is that it'll take at least 20 before we start seeing any of the extreme effects of the supposed climate change armageddon proposed by the politicians(of course, like most things, I'm skeptic that such will really pan out at all, on the other hand, the polar bears are [cute]. Empirically, from what I've seen of satellite photos of Northern Canada, an ice-less north seems quite plausible pretty quickly; Id give it another 10 years before its minable, then another 15-20 before there's no ice at all?)...and if I were to guess when the earth might be back to temperate conditions, I'd say we'd all be pushing daisies by that point.

I should really use some formatting.

Well, what you lack in paragraphs you make up for in brackets ;)

hehehe. One day, I will post a comment with
sooooo many brackets...

you don't even want to know.

Steve: I don't really buy into the "millions of years" stuff.

♪: Yeah, I agree. Twenty years may not be quite long enough.

Yeah, they (polar bears) are. lol Click Here

It is a wonder what i can do to get people to discuss a topic completly unrelated to the suggestion.

So since it is the temple of ghostly chanting shouldn't there be music playing in the background that sounds like ghostly whispers or people talking which sounds like mutters to us in some form of music.

May I be quite plain.

The earth is not 6000 years old!!!

I'd imagine the music to be something along the lines of an awkward twist on the general sand music(that I'm pretty sure doesn't exist) It would probably be a bit quieter, with more space.

Super_merlin: in that case, there's never been an ice age!

Super_merlin: I never said it was, nor will I pretend to know the age (as so many do).

May I be quite plain.

We did not evolve from another form of life!!!

Didn't convince you of anything did I...
Making an absolute statement without a way to back it up is not a good way to convince someone of something and unless you can prove an opposing/different point of view, people will continue to believe what they always have.
Can you prove millions of years?

Just because they teach it doesn't make it true.
"A lie believed by millions of people is still a lie."

They used to teach us that the world was flat, we now know that it is not.

The ancient greeks even knew the world is round.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/080925-oldest-rocks.html

Granted the margin of error is millions of years, but, that's still billions.

Well, my basic position on global warming is that I do believe something is happening, I believe it's happening more quickly than the ice age cycle would predict. But I don't know what's causing it and whether there is anything we can do about it. I do think it's probably bad though.

So Hobbes, if you are sceptical about the "millions of years" stuff, are you also sceptical that ice ages happened at all? If not, when do you believe they happened?

Ummmm, is it just me or are the images hosted by Imageshack gone?

They're still there for me.

Super_merlin:It never says they proved how old they were at all. It says...
"Suspecting that the rocks there could be from one of the earliest periods of Earth's history, geologists took samples to try and determine their age. They measured tiny variations in the isotopes (or species of an element that have different numbers of neutrons) of the rare earth elements neodymium and samarium in the rocks and determined that the samples were from 3.8 to 4.28 billion years old."

They "proved" that the rocks were that old with circular reasoning, they basically said "Since we know these elements to be at least 3.8 billion years old that means the rocks are at least that old.".
That's all fine and dandy if you believe billions of years in the first place, but if you don't then it doesn't prove anything.


Steve:I do believe there was an ice age, I just don't think it was as long as most people think it was.
If I had to guess when it was, I'd say shortly after the flood, but that's just a guess.

I think I'd use some induction to infer that objects in the universe are very old.

Unfortunately, I just lost my train of thought.
It had something to do with relative sizes and the logarithmic scale. It wasn't a proof of age, but more of a "being really old is pretty reasonable, as far as I'm concerned"

Interestingly, that's an area of Canada we've done a fair amount of work in.

I'm not sure its reasonable to call the dating method circular reasoning. It looks to me like an implication.(You can look that up on wiki, if you'd like)

Also, the images are still there for me as well. I guess they weren't very tasty.

Side note: wikipedia says that the last ice age was 20 000 years ago. Millions not needed, but 6 000 is a bit short.

Thanks Hobbes.

The article above doesn't go into any detail at all about the process of radiometric dating. This one does, and is written by a Christian for other Christians. I've only scanned it, but it seems very well written. See what you think if you're interested in learning more about this process.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/wiens.html

I should revise my earlier comment in light of ♪'s correction.

I think the issue is the rate of change. Ice ages come and go across ten of thousands of years, our temperature change is happening across tens of years. So this suggests that it is something more present and direct that is causing it.

Thanks ♪.

Steve: It may take me a little bit to read the article(because of how long it is).

I did some poking around on the internet, and you may also want to read through, and hopefully get a strong understanding of this: http://www.utc.edu/Faculty/Tatiana-Allen/fundofda.html

paying careful attention to how error changes when you take the log of a value.

Well don't feel obliged Hobbes, I never read things people tell me to - life's too short!

I read this though. I thought it was good, but since it didn't challenge any fundamental beliefs that I hold dear (maybe because I don't have any) I would say that wouldn't I?

All the pictures that I put up has frog in an icecube. It says domain unregistered. To view register at: bit.ly/imageshack-domain

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/7301/ghostlychantingmaintile.png

does this exist?
(what the link points to, that is)

Yep, I see a brown tile.

Quite an interesting link that, ♪. It details the basic methods and practices for recording an reporting scientific findings.

To bring up something from a few days ago (I've been away), ♪, that guy who thinks he discovered the end of the world from the Bible came up with his theories based on the Hebrew calendar, then converted it to Gregorian. And Hobbes, he does have an explanation for why you CAN know the day and the hour.

That said, I don't believe a word of what he's said on any of those points. His logic is massively impressive for its audacity, but not for its convincingness.

whoo physics labs: the place where simple math takes several hours to compute.

Of course, right now, I'm taking a course in uncertainty, which talks about how difficult is to solve any problem without bringing in substantial error(one such case is known as *catastrophic cancellation*)

I like the Mayan end-of-world day better;)
Simply because it will be an EPIC day.

Nevermind, I can see the pictures. Sorry I am interrupting your uh...world conversation.

I agree with those saying Assertion is not a valid form of proof, and am otherwise staying out of this discussion.

You know, I once wrote a few lines of dialouge that dealt with proof and changing someone's mind, etc. Shall I reproduce them here?

"Might I say that even proof, the greatest kind of logic, rarely sways another from an opinion they've held to for most of their life?

Now heart, THERE's something that can change people. But it's hard to get someone to really feel an emotion about a stack of numbers, isn't it?

No, what gets to the heart is what's behind the numbers...a death count, a prisoner's sentence, yes, these are the things that we can care about, but again, only if it is personal. Is a stranger's sentence going to be as jarring as your best friend's?

We cannot change people. There is no way to force anyone to accept a personal change.

The best course of action, therefore, can only be the next best thing, isn't it?

Get them to care."

Food for thought.

Reasons why Quality > Truth. (I again recommend reading some Pirsig)

Anybody wanna talk about planes on conveyor belts?
:P

One Million ... !

Now tell me you're not excited...

I guess nobody was excited?


I was a little excited.
Not as excited as I would be at 1.61803399... though:P



I felt a need to break the silence.

E=mc^2

Energy=Morning x double powered coffee.

I guess not!

Lol to the equation.

But I guess I find numbers exciting - pretty often better numbers mean more freedom.

eg, computer performance, car performance, bank balance