Covenant (Halo) Vs Locust (Gears of War)

The Covenant (Halo) Vs The Locust (Gears of War)

Here’s a match that would be fun to watch – from playing both games, I think I would give a slight edge to the Locust. So, how do you see this fight taking place?

Related Posts:



Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion.

Comments being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion can lead to the banhammer getting used. You can read more about our comments policy here.



1 2 3 Next »

206 Comments on "Covenant (Halo) Vs Locust (Gears of War)"

  1. AlphaCommando January 5, 2009 at 1:22 am -      #1

    The Locust are one race on one planet…

    The Covenant not only have far greater access to better technology but also have numbers far excelling anything the Locust can field.

    I’ll give this to the Covies hands-down…

  2. Space marine January 5, 2009 at 1:47 am -      #2

    Ok Im Just gonna copy And Paste something from a random website and slap it on here since i don’t have a clue about the locust.
    _________________
    Meet the Locust
    The Locust Horde has emerged from the bowels of the planet Sera. Here’s what we know about the foes that will be pitted against Marcus and his fellow Gears.

    Drone
    Height: 2+ Meters (6.5+ ft)
    Weight: 120+ Kilograms (260+ lbs)

    Tactical: Tough hide — use shotgun at close range to terminate. Contray to the “mindless horde” rumors you might hear, they’re capable of setting up ambushes, lures, and sniping. When ordered they’ll throw their lives away by the hundreds to kill one entrenched Gear. Never seen one lose morale and bolt.

    Special Formation: Troika cabal. Three-part team operating a high-rate-of-fire pulse-projectile gun that makes our .50 calibers look like pea shooters. Avoid.

    Theron Guard
    Height: 2+ Meters (6.5+ ft)
    Weight: 120+ Kilograms (260+ lbs)

    Tactical: Drone Commanding Officers. Capable of even more advanced battle tactics than the Drones, they are deadly foes in any circumstances.

    Boomer
    Height: 2.5+ Meters (8+ ft)
    Weight: 200-250 kilograms (500 lbs)

    Tactical: Larger versions of the standard Drone. They carry powerful weapons, have great physical strength, and are even more resistant to harm than the smaller versions of their own species.

    Corpser
    Height: Unconfirmed
    Weight: Unconfirmed

    Tactical: Massive creatures used by the Locust Horde to dig tunnels through the soil, allowing the other members of the Horde to move about undetected. The tunnels also allow the Horde to come up out of the dirt behind the lines of the COG. The Jacinto plains, which are positioned on a huge slab of granite, are the only place on Sera that the Horde cannot-yet-dig through.

    Brumak
    Height: 12+ Meters (40 ft)
    Weight: 10,000 Kilograms (22,000 lbs)

    Tactical: Gargantuan monstrosities. DNA analysis indicates these were bred by the Locust Horde from smaller native apes. Extraordinary thick hide. Deadly at close range. Recommend blasting them with high-yield explosives from a safe distance.

    Special Note: Drone-mounted armored variations have been reported. Rumors of Brumak carring energy cannon(s) cannot be confirmed, though there have been sightings of Brumak wielding massive arm-mounted ballistic cannons.

    Berserker
    Height: 4+ Meters (13 ft)
    Weight: 360 Kilograms (800 lbs)

    Tactical: Genetic analysis reveals this to be the female of the Drone. Uses scent and vibration to detect enemies. Slow, but can build sufficient momentum to smash through walls. With their fused fists they can obliterate armored Gears with a single blow. Usually pissed off — hence the name. Run.

    Wretch
    Height: 1.5-2 meters (6 ft)
    Weight: 60-80 kilograms (150 lbs)

    Tactical: Small, man sized members of the Locust Horde. They are able to climb on almost any surface, like insects. They are very dangerous to Gears that forget to look up.

    ___________________
    There you have it.

  3. Only the nose knows January 5, 2009 at 4:09 am -      #3

    I can’t even really call this one.

  4. Tim January 5, 2009 at 5:06 am -      #4

    It really depends on whether the covenant are allowed use thier spaceships and weapons of mass destruction against the locust(for fairness reasons), if so they would probably win without too much difficulty. Otherwise i’d probably say that the locust would win this one.

  5. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 5, 2009 at 8:46 am -      #5

    I gotta go with the Locust Swarms here, they have corpsers and beserkers although the covenant have more advanced weapons tech so I dunno…

  6. Tim January 5, 2009 at 11:02 am -      #6

    Great post Space Marine.

  7. Matapiojo January 5, 2009 at 11:30 am -      #7

    The Locust will have the advantage of a defense battle, though. The superior Covenant numbers will mean nothing in the narrow tunnels that might take them to the front lines at the core of the earth.

    Should they decide to glass the planet, the Locust will be A-OK beneath several hundrer meters below the surface.

    If the Locust decides to leave the safety of their home, they will be obliterated.

  8. hotshot January 5, 2009 at 12:21 pm -      #8

    The covenant will win easy
    they space ships and outnumber the locust ,the covies will even win on ground

  9. The One Sin January 5, 2009 at 6:23 pm -      #9

    The locust have this. If the scrarabs dig underground like when they mine, the only thing they will face is a hail of bullets and being caught in the middle of the whole horde. If this occurs after the lightmass bombing the locust will not even need to come out most of the time thanks to things like razorhail. The locust could dig holes as traps and sink any bases or installations the covenant could set up. scarabs and wraiths when corpsers are sinking their positions or their path is loaded with tickers. . not to mention the locust themselves pawn covies any day, all the different breeds and the head honchos like skorge or Raam couls bring the own in pretty much any fight. I would like to see brute armor or elite shields stand up to a guy tough as nails, using kryll as a shield, and carrying a heavy machine gun turret like an assault rifle. And if skorge can hack right through a tank, wraiths and covenant armor are no proplem

  10. swifterdeath January 5, 2009 at 7:28 pm -      #10

    “Ok Im Just gonna copy And Paste something from a random website and slap it on here since i don’t have a clue about the locust.”

    so what your voting for locust without a clue about them? do you have the covies that much or something?

    anyway the only thing in there that would be at all a big threat would be the brumaks…oh yes i remeber playing GoW 2 for that short bit…they are tough no doubt a single scarab could win if they where not that close…possible even if they where close.

  11. L-W January 6, 2009 at 4:09 am -      #11

    Uh, what? Am I seeing what I think I’m seeing?

    The Locust are a semi-sentient, semi-intelligent, horde like race of insectile mammalians limited to comparatively archaic kinetic projectiles, armor plating and contested control (It’s not like they’ve even cleared out the Humans occupying the surface) of only ONE planet.

    The Covenant are a space faring Empire, controlling multiple star systems over the entire expanse of the Orion Arm, harboring not only hundreds of billions of denizens committed to an all out Holy Crusade.

    Superior technology, far greater numbers, resources and an expansive territory that greatly dwarfs the efforts of the Locust hordes. Coupled with uncontested naval and aerial superiority and a capacity to commit a multitude of specially designated ground troops and vehicles via aerial insertion; and the Covenant practically own the fight.

    If a scant Human military force can withstand the Locust force with nothing more than a few Delta squads, conventional small arms and limited access to an Orbital Bombardment array; the Covenant should experience no extreme extinction threatening hassles in even heated ground engagements.

    The Locust can only ever stand to be on the losing end in this match.

  12. Matapiojo January 6, 2009 at 8:08 am -      #12

    Again, out in the open the Covenant will decimate the Locust. Underground, the advantage is too great on the Locust favor.

    It all depends on the scenario.

  13. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 6, 2009 at 9:46 am -      #13

    The Locust aren’t as stupid as you seem to make out there L-W, for one they are clever enough to have managed to create there own projectile weapons and appear to be capable of tactical even strategic planning in the deployment and use of their forces.

    Also, if you look at pictures of COG troops it becomes clear that they have been augmented, although whether this is due to changes in their genetic code or simply the intake of various stimulants and other compounds I cannot say at the moment

  14. Space marine January 6, 2009 at 10:08 am -      #14

    Agree’d. If they were underground It would be a different story.

  15. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 6, 2009 at 10:41 am -      #15

    Upon further reasearch I have discovered that the prevailing theory is that the augmentation is due to a genetic changing injection.

  16. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 6, 2009 at 10:43 am -      #16

    Badly phrased, should have said “an injection that alters there genetic codes”

  17. WTF OMG ITS A SPARTAN January 6, 2009 at 10:48 am -      #17

    for once i agree with L-W the covanent have way superior forces and tech
    and knowing the covanent they would probly ceate somthing to defeat them, like say the light mass bombing except on a scale 100 times more powerful.

  18. WTF OMG ITS A SPARTAN January 6, 2009 at 11:28 am -      #18

    oh and a few stats on the covanent

    grunts
    1.62 meters 118 kilos
    pop. 320 million
    Small race. fights in fear and will often run away when the leader of the group is killed. travels in large groups from 10 – 35

    brutes
    2.8 meters 510 kilos
    pop. 12.5 billion
    Large race. fights in packlike formations and very warlike. travels in packs of 5 – 15

    jackels
    1.9 meters 88 kilos
    small race. pirate type race. used for support, travels in groups of 5-9

    drones
    1.9 meters 127 kilos
    pop unkown?
    Insect-like race. often use for cannon fodder or weakening enemys. travels in groups of 40 – 70

    hunters
    3.65 meters 4762 kilos
    pop Unkown?
    worm race. millions of worm like creatures form together under armor. mainly use as heavy tank like units. travels in pairs (2)

    Elites
    2.2 meters 144 kilos
    pop. 8.135 billion
    Large race of holy warriors. very intellgent, usually leaders of groups.
    travels in groups from 5 – 25 (depending on the mission given)

    All species have access to tier 2 tech
    meters=height
    kilos=weight

  19. hotshot January 6, 2009 at 2:06 pm -      #19

    You mean elites are 2,58 m as stated in halopedia

  20. The One Sin January 6, 2009 at 7:03 pm -      #20

    Don’t let the limited vocabulary usage of the locust let you jump to conclusions about their intelligence (L-W). The locust are not just a highly pissed off horde of meat with eyes carrying guns. They have their own religion, as displayed by the Kantus monks and their high priest, Skorge. They have military training and a rank system, The name “Drones” is truly unfitting, not to mention they have an elite force, the theron guards, and their leader, Raam. I’m sure when you made your assumption that they were semi intelligent you must have been thinking of the single purpose types like the boomer, grinder, and possibly berserker. The boomer and grinder are dumb as a box of shit, but I don’t know enough about berserkers to tell you about them, their few appearances and absence in gears two makes it anyone’s guess. But seeing how you have told us that a xbox was the worst financial decision you have made in recent years I am guessing that you may not have played gears 2 and saw the locust society revealed, not to imply that you know nothing about gears, but your assumptions were a bit misguided. The covenant have not the technology to destroy planets, only glass the surface, a lot of good that will do. Having a galactic empire doesn’t help much when you can’t even get to the enemy. Even if they dwell on one planet. Through having home field advantage and using simple but sound strategies like funneling the enemy in tunnels and luring heavy armor and scarabs to weak spots that have been dug under will give the covenant so much more hassle than you may have thought.

  21. L-W January 6, 2009 at 7:23 pm -      #21

    The Covenant once fought a an inter-planetary war with an Ape like species culpable of utilizing and creating projectile based weaponry, despite the best efforts of their opponents experimentation with nuclear and plasma based weaponry, the Covenant still managed to destroy most of their colonies and land forces with enough zeal as to corrupt their home world, destroy their fleet and SEVERLY decimate their population.

    The only difference this time is that the Covenant have no opposing fleet to concern themselves with, or multiple colonies or planets to which they should extend their supply lines.

    “Also, if you look at pictures of COG troops it becomes clear that they have been augmented, although whether this is due to changes in their genetic code or simply the intake of various stimulants and other compounds I cannot say at the moment”

    Pure infantile conjecture, considering nothing has been stated in either GOW 1 or 2 to prove such a statement. All we can gather is that COG soldiers seem to have a severe Testosterone imbalance bought on by performance enhancing drugs designed to primarily promote aggression and muscle growth. Gene therapy doesn’t do that to a Person.

    What most here to lack an understanding of is attrition. The Covenant have uncontested control of the air space, they have ground superiority and to an extent, total planetary control. They have access to materials, supplies and numbers that the Locusts cannot match in a thousand years, including the one true advantageous resource they have over the Locusts hordes, time and patience.

    The Covenant are the ones who can perform bombing raids, they are the ones who can destroy infrastructure and cripple the Locust tunneling efforts with surgical strikes. The Covenant fleet has the option of unearthing entire tracts of land with their orbital laser weaponry, they can perform Spec ops missions to map tunnels and perform raids, deny necessary resources, undermine and decrease the Locust ranks with impunity and generally do everything to the Locust that the enemy cannot return from.

    Even in subterranean infantry combat the Covenant are not as disadvantaged as most claim them to be, they after all now control the surface, stretching their supply lines further and further with each proverbial flick of the wrist. Even in the most heated of close engagements, Covenant equipment is still superior and the strength of individual Brutes, Hunters or Elites would make any serious hand to hand combat a chore at best. Grunts would certainly be the first to panic and flee, but when has that been an issue in the past?

    Even if infantry engagements were considered too costly, the covenant have a myriad of other options that the Locust would struggle to contend with.

    I wouldn’t use the words cake walk, but if I *were* to use a simile, the Covenant are armed with a hundred cannons, all of which are pointed at a locked box which is quickly shrinking. The Locust inside that box know that with every shot the box is growing weaker and smaller and that it’ll eventually become too difficult to sustain themselves for much longer.

    In essence, the Locust advantage and success against Humanity was determined by the element of surprise and overwhelming numbers. In this fight, the Covenant have no means of being surprised and they are certainly not outnumbered, outgunned or displaced in any shape or form by the Locust Horde. In this fight, the Covenant hold all of the cards and none of the disadvantages.

  22. L-W January 6, 2009 at 8:19 pm -      #22

    Assuming I haven’t played Gears of War 1 & 2 and then forming a nullified argument on the basis of which = Win.

    Either I miscalculated or my sarcasm button is not working again.

    Either way, I’m just waiting for the Vietnam analogy to pop up so I can finish this debate off once and for all.

  23. WTF OMG ITS A SPARTAN!!! January 7, 2009 at 2:00 am -      #23

    i got the covie facts from the beistarium on halo specail so you are wrong and im right oh and L-W you make great points sometimes great job here.

  24. L-W January 7, 2009 at 2:48 am -      #24

    I usually await a rebuttal before posting again on a topic, but since I’ll be traveling to Sydney for a lecture tomorrow, I thought I would post in bulk as to maintain the momentum of the thread and assure that everyone has something to think about.

    My previous post was also less than substantial due to my previously hectic schedule, so I’ll just get to it.

    – – –

    What most of you here fail to grasp (And I mean fail in the strictest sense possible), is that the Locust are in no position whatsoever to harm the Covenant. Even if the Covenant were to attempt subterranean combat and hypothetically sustained heavy casualties…So what?

    Is the Covenant Empire going to roll over and play dead? Are the colonies going to revolt and overthrow the rule of the Prophets? Are they going to descend into all out anarchy that allows the Locust to get away with their actions?

    – – -(Congratulations, you’ve just undergone a test that you were unwillingly participating in. If you happened to believe in any of the above scenarios occurring, then you are an idiot. You don’t have to openly admit your test performance, but take into account your lack of intelligence and brilliantly low cognition when participating in future discussions.)- – –

    What must be made clear is that in every way, shape and form possible, the Locust are always going to be on the losing end of this war. The Covenant have an almost limitless amount of options in how they dispose of their enemies, only one of which that the Locust are ever going to be able to openly oppose or resist. The Covenant are essentially a giant Wrench, potentially capable of putting the squeeze on the Locust in whatever way they should so choose at any conceivable moment, the Locust themselves being nothing more than victims to the mercy of the Covenant.

    A good a strategist knows how to win a battle, the best strategists know when a war can be won before it starts. If this is the case then I’m practically Rommel and Genghis wrapped up in one.

    1) It is true that the Covenant have no direct full-scale Planetary destroying weaponry in their arsenal (Death Star caliber), but for those who believe that a covenant orbital bombardment would have no effect on the Locust, you are incredibly wrong in almost every respect. Glassing would in fact be a highly effective means of annihilating the Locust population in one fell swoop.

    In the instance of a minor (Localized area of a continent) glassing, the temperature and biosphere of the Planet is irrevocably damaged, with debris and ash not only poisoning and intoxicating the immediate environment. The impact of glassing is similar to intense volcanic activity in some parts of the world, except exponentially increased to a larger scale. Subsequently, the atmosphere is inundated with soot and ashes, subjecting the planet affected to a nuclear winter. In short, the planet’s surface is covered by extensive affected areas of lava (molten soil at the impact of orbital bombardment or plasma bombardment), depending on the extent, also leaving the planet unable to recover to its former state, whilst combating freezing temperatures that subjects even the equator to an Arctic like environment.

    In the case of Harvest, only a portion of the planet was glassed, yet during the second ground engagement for the planet, entire areas were subjected to polar conditions despite the fact that Harvest has always been too typically humid for ice to form, even during the depths of ‘winter’. In this case, the Locust would still struggle to survive within such an ecosystem.

    If the Covenant escalated a full-blown planet wide glassing with the intent of destroying everything, then say goodbye to the Locust and anything else living on Serra. A total Plasma Bombardment is known to be capable of evaporating all water on the surface of a planet and reducing the atmosphere to nothing within a matter of days, leaving the planet barren.

    With a reduction of atmosphere:

    A) You have no water, most of it would have boiled beyond the point that it could no longer form as vapor; and eventually even leave the planet all together. This alone would kill all Locust.

    B) Without Oceans the Tectonic plates would shift dramatically, causing Earthquakes and magnanimously increased volcanic activity.

    C) The most obvious downside for the Locust is the loss of Oxygen, which despite how resilient they are, would still require Oxygen. Even the most isolated of unicellular organisms existing at the very depths of the Earth still require Oxygen to some degree, so don’t tell me that large complex organisms such as those who compose the Locust forces DON’T need air.

    I will not only call your bluff, but I’ll beat you down repeatedly with the hammer of Science itself.

    D) The Planet would suffer an almost continuous (Borderline accelerated) bombardment of Meteors and other debris.

    E) Without a protective atmosphere, Solar Rays would immediately soak the planet and quite literally toast it. Imagine a temperature of up to three hundred degree Celsius in daylight (300° C), whilst experiencing a frosty minus two hundred degrees Celsius during the night (-200° C); couple this with the immense solar flares and cosmic radiation that would strike an unprotected Serra and raise the RAD count of the background radiation of the entire planet itself by 100,000 times. Essentially irradiating the whole damned thing.

    Conclusion: A minor glassing would make life very hard for the Locust hoard at best, a total glassing with the intent of destroying all life in, around and underneath the surface of the Planet is guaranteed to kill everything; and I mean everything. If not, then I ask you to volunteer your life in aid of doing a space walk in nothing but a T-shirt and jeans.

    2) Believe it or not gentlemen, but having a significantly larger Empire than your opponent does give one a massive advantage in combat. Not only does it allow you to call upon more men and resources than your opposition, but provides a suitable buffer between you and your enemies, in which case the Locust are not a threat.

    “Having a galactic empire doesn’t help much when you can’t even get to the enemy”

    *Snort* Hahahaha!

    You make it sound like they have an immense shield around the Planet protecting the Hollow itself. Utter Bull. The strength of the Locust was that they could produce large numbers of soldiers to rapidly overwhelm COG forces from safety whilst suffering no immediate retribution from the weakened human forces. As shown in GOW2, COG forces could quite easily go on the offensive against the Locust Nexus with minimal resistance even in the heart of the Hollow itself.

    Given that Human soldiers were in limited numbers; and their weaponry and equipment was equal to that of the Locust warriors, they performed an outstanding job during the offensive. Logically, well trained, physically superior (In the case of the Elites, Brutes and Hunters) and better equipped squads in even greater numbers are going to do wonders. The Locust may be fighting on home territory, but that is the only advantage they can ever hope to attain in direct subterranean engagements.

    Especially when you can practically employ an army of Drones to map the tunnels, scout ahead and generally create a reliable readout of the various tunnel structures running through Serra.

    3) “funneling the enemy in tunnels and luring heavy armor and scarabs to weak spots that have been dug under will give the covenant so much more hassle than you may have thought.”

    Considering that most armoured vehicles use repulsorlifts instead of conventional tracks, and even relatively clumsy Scarabs can violently topple, revert themselves and exit almost any crevice using their prehensile leg structure; the tunneling efforts of the Locust would be less of a hassle and more like a brief nuisance.

    You think the Covenant, after assuring surface dominance, would continually deploy the same structures each time if they felt they were at risk from continuous breakdown? Heck, they can organize the entire invasion from the safety of their total air dominance, with nothing but the occasional Nemacysts and Reavers to occasionally shake their fists at the skies in futility, like angry peasants.

    – – –

    Once again, I must reiterate that the Covenant not only have superior numbers, technology and resources, but they are the proverbial wrench, capable of becoming tighter with each passing whim of the Covenant forces…

    Going as far as to destroying the biosphere of the Planet itself if they should so choose.

  25. hotshot January 7, 2009 at 8:19 am -      #25

    l-w has again finished a debat
    the covenant have also the engineer(huragok)species, the engineers where created by the forunners and their function is repairs things and gain acces to unknown technology like forunner technology and the covies don’t need locust technology

  26. admin January 7, 2009 at 9:40 am -      #26

    @L-W – another excellent post – Sorry for the late reply – thanks for the New Years greetings – I’m sure your 2009 will be action filled as well!

  27. Matapiojo January 7, 2009 at 9:50 am -      #27

    I think I got righteously served for giving the Locust a fighting chance.

    I shall play Devil’s Advocate no more, I tell ya. NO MORE!!!

    *wimpers in corner*

  28. The One Sin January 7, 2009 at 4:57 pm -      #28

    Well ,that’s what I get for f#cking with the champ. But hell, I tried. But then again, If I were the sci-fi oracle, sat here with a dictionary and stretched my arguments to the point where most won’t read them, and then proceed to call each and every one of my fellow users a complete idiot and lower form of life, I would probably win a few of these discussions.

  29. WTF OMG ITS A SPARTAN!!! January 7, 2009 at 6:56 pm -      #29

    nice L-W hey sorry for being such a dush to u
    We need to make a BankGambling hall of fame for users and i nominate L-W for it and i nominate the covies for the BankGambling award
    oh and i nominate the Locusts for The BankGambling Teabag

  30. admin January 7, 2009 at 8:13 pm -      #30
  31. Matapiojo January 8, 2009 at 8:05 am -      #31

    And the “On a Pale Horse” award goes to…..

  32. WTF OMG ITS A SPARTAN!!! January 8, 2009 at 9:18 am -      #32

    L-W for the BankGambling award of supreme si-fi master
    master of all things si-fi

  33. asd January 9, 2009 at 6:05 pm -      #33

    I definitley think dat da covenant will win. dey have cool weapons and dere pink!
    da locust r ugly feces nd dere ugly s.o.b ‘s !!!

  34. AlphaCommando January 9, 2009 at 8:28 pm -      #34

    The English language just died today…

    Weapon of choice: asd

  35. L-W January 11, 2009 at 2:56 am -      #35

    I wish I actually had the time that most people here claim I have.

    Two words: Red Eye. When you spend most of the Christmas holidays on overnight flights between Australia, America and Europe whilst lacking the actuation to sleep during twelve hour flights, you have the time for ridiculously elongated posts.

  36. The One Sin January 11, 2009 at 7:29 pm -      #36

    Who said you have nothing but time, L-W? If I was really into long posts, I would need the following:
    .15 minutes
    .a tab open on wikipedia
    .some seriously screwed up posts to slam

    That said, I don’t imply that this is your hobby consuming your time, all of us could drop a long post but some of us don’t like to. I, for example, don’t have the organizational skills meaning I can’t effectively make my points in a logical order, some don’t have the patience, and some can’t seem to get their head out of their favorite character’s ass long enough to think. My dictionary remark was probably wrong, but seeing as no one knows anything anyone else on this site except their opinions I truly don’t know how much time you have to kill, but

    I was pretty mad at you when I made my post. Why? you might think. Well, I usually get a kick out of you demolishing the ignorant posts that sound a tourette’s episode, but reading my first two did you not at least acknowledge that It was at least a thought out or decent attempt? Most of the people you dish out the insults to usually have it coming, but now I’m convinced that simply winning a debate is not enough for you. I can acknowledge defeat on this, but you had to add insult to injury, didn’t you? I am starting to think that you aren’t going to stop until you are the only user with their dignity left.

  37. L-W January 12, 2009 at 4:25 am -      #37

    “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” – J. Robert Oppenheimer

  38. The One Sin January 12, 2009 at 7:35 pm -      #38

    yeah, you know what, never mind.

  39. The One Sin January 12, 2009 at 7:38 pm -      #39

    Wait, what is that quote from, L-W? I have heard it somewhere but I can’t remember, the name rings a bell too.

  40. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 12, 2009 at 9:03 pm -      #40

    gearsofwar.wikia.com/wiki/Gear states the following: “Gear soldiers are considered to be extremely strong and described as “walking tanks”. Their true strength is unknown but many actions point out their tremendous strength is their ability to do a number of acrobatic stunts, the ability to move car frames as mobile cover, able to carry enemies as mobile cover, and take long falls without serious injury. What may be the cause of their strength is possibly a genetic injection given to them once they join the COG, however, this is only rumor and speculation.”

    If the Covenant landed its troops, because they wanted the Lightmass tech which needs Imulsion then the Locusts would be able to fight them using the same tactics the employ against the humans, however if the Covies just glassed the planet then they win, easily!

  41. L-W January 13, 2009 at 9:13 am -      #41

    It’s a shame that such a historic and memorable quote can lose its relevancy in only a few short falls of the keystroke. History itself will die at the hands of the ignorant.

    – – –

    There are but a scant few handful of posters here whom upon recognizing their user names preceding their posts, I will automatically respect and trust. Alpha for example, whom I developed a strong rapport with during the Star Wars Vs. Halo debate. Mata as well, who I briefly disagreed with on this very discussion, I earnestly trust in almost every respect of this small corner of the internet.

    It must be noted that I was initially apathetic in regards to debating this matter, but I was soon literally flabbergasted into rebuttal; to which was the result of post 24 and my literal torrent of smack down. It’s literally my job to prove others wrong (I developed my University education on the principle), whilst leaving unerring faith in my own methods, so nothing stirs me from my apathy like a steaming hot cup of wrong.

    Did I think that the rebuttal was a decent attempt? Not really. It was such a linear and two dimensional attempt at logical reprisal that it practically begged for my Juggernaut to come crashing down upon it. When discussing mass conflict of galactic proportions, rebutting with extremely minor and meandering issues (The loss of a few Scarabs out of a possible million etc.) does nothing but disseminate the topic. There are too many variables involved to include such minor nuisances, such variables are responsible for the legendary Halo Vs. Star Wars debate going on for over four hundred posts before conclusion.

    Heck, I suspect that Rommel would roll in his Nazi grave upon hearing such matters discussed.

    I must be conclude by saying, enough of the amateur Freudian analysis concerning yours truly. I have no personal interest or stake in artificial “dignity” (Who places personal pride at stake?), and whilst I agree insults are often unnecessary, it is not the case when there is actual substance to the post. I use rhetoric to effectively punctuate my points, which judging from the following responses, was rousing and highly effective.

    – – –

    As for the quote, Robert Oppenheimer was one of the many developers on the Manhattan Project, the United States Military’s plan to develop the Atomic Bomb. The very same bomb that crushed the will of the Japanese war machine and her ambitions in the pacific, whilst deftly drawing a close to both the war and any other potential major conflict that threatened another great war.

    Basically two great punches managed to incapacitate the opposition, the relevance to this thread must now be startling in hindsight.

    Yours Sincerely
    L-W “Laying down Atom Bombs of logic”

  42. The One Sin January 13, 2009 at 6:21 pm -      #42

    A grotesque example of the human love for excess. I should have expected no less. But at least I managed to get you to acknowledge that most insults are not needed. Regarding the post in general, you could have just said Oppenheimer was a developer of the atomic bomb, that was all I wanted to know. I know all about the “Gadget” and it’s significance, I am a history buff absolutely obsessed with war and the tools to conduct it, but I’m not good with names. I’m intrigued, you said you received a university education to prove people wrong, what exactly is your major? I’m a senior in high school applying to college and currently undeclared when it comes to a major, and If it gives me the abilty to bust balls on the scale you do I may look into it.

  43. Baron Somebody January 14, 2009 at 12:10 am -      #43

    Admin!!! Do Tusken Raiders vs Grunts I already suggested it but it has not appeared

  44. L-W January 14, 2009 at 7:44 am -      #44

    1) To lesser minds, a post of substance may be viewed as excessive, in a manner that a banquet may be viewed as too rich or too plentiful to the malnourished. As for the issue over the use of insults, perhaps I should re-direct you to the original quote, to which would see that I was not agreeing with you on such a meandering sentiment.

    “whilst I agree insults are often unnecessary, it is not the case when there is actual substance to the post. I use rhetoric to effectively punctuate my points, which judging from the following responses, was rousing and highly effective.”

    You should first learn to effectively grasp the basics of semantics before applying for a tertiary education.

    2) For the matter of the identity of Oppenheimer, I gave you both the name and quote associated with the information. Wouldn’t the use of a search engine, specifically one named after a large number measured at 10^100 (Rhymes with Doogle), yield a far more efficient means of garnering desired information than waiting up to five hours for a nonchalant response (That’s pretty much a guarantee) from yours truly?

    If you cannot even grasp the use of a simple and wholly accessible search engine, then how do you research the subject matter?

    What a faux pas!

    3) Once again, I must correct you upon semantics:

    “I developed my University education on the principle”

    My education was DEVELOPED on the principle of having to prove others wrong, I did not RECEIVE it on that basis. Not to attenuate the purpose of that minor scholastic correction, but most of the academically successful students I’ve ever known are the ones who actually absorb and dissect what they’ve been taught, rather than merely reflect it when it came to exams. Debate was often a necessary pre-requisite for these courses, as it was always encouraged to argue and oppose conventional science with reason and logic (As I applied in response 24), even if it did occasionally become heated.

    As my Professor once pointed out:

    “A machine can construct a mirror, but it takes an artist to paint a picture.”

    4) I studied Aeronautical engineering, physics, which I later followed with applied Physics (Mostly concerning experimental science specializing in the interactions of gravity and light ranging from the atom scale of things up to the point of astrophysics) and I underwent my minor in War History.

  45. The One Sin January 14, 2009 at 5:25 pm -      #45

    I’m done. I try to be civil but of course I’m greeted with slander and having my intelligence insulted. I know what the f#ck google is. I use it quite often, thanks. Why I didn’t on this occasion god only knows. I know the other historic figures you used, Sigmund freud founder of psychology, Rommel, Erwin Rommel I would say, the desert fox, commander of german forces in africa in ww2. Because the identity of Oppenheimer slipped my mind at the time does not make me one of the ignorant destroying history, I can assure you that. Btw I already knew Freud and Rommel without google(imagine that). I guess What I’m trying to say is that because I don’t quite have the sci fi knowledge you do you don’t have to slam my post in sadistic overkill. I admit I went off half cocked because I don’t fully know the covenant forces, But it seems to me that you could have just proved me wrong without making us all seem like we have the IQ of a goldfish. You may not think so but you have taken it far beyond rhetoric to convey a point, I’m just the guy that finally decided Because things like that I can’t really shrug off and say “f#ck it”.

    As for “Correcting my semantics”. I phrased my statements incorrectly, I know, but thank you answering my question in a civil way. I’m done arguing so don’t trouble yourself with responding directly to this.

  46. L-W January 14, 2009 at 8:50 pm -      #46

    Hey, watch what you’re saying when making such crass comparisons…

    …Goldfish are fairly intelligent animals…

    (You left yourself open to that one)

    Now wash the sand out of your vagina and get ready for the next match.

  47. AlphaCommando January 14, 2009 at 9:13 pm -      #47

    If you are insulted and actually listen to anything you see as insulting then you are weak willed. Maybe its just my ego, but I “know” that I am always right unless faced with information supplied by a source that I respect to a degree that overrides my over-inflated ego. This has worked quite well for me considering I graduated from high school 3 years ahead of my fellows. People need to learn to suck it up and let anything that comes from something “below” them just bounce off. I get sick of all these sob stories about “all people ever did in my life is insult me!”

    If it really bugs you, ignore it; then later in life when you have lots of money or power you can prove us all wrong….

    And if you find rhetoric a problem go talk with people who are on your level…Personally the only way to change people is to break them down and teach them the right ways. If it seems like we are hurting you, its because we love you, and it hurts us more than it hurts you….

    I know none of that was directed at me but I get sick of seeing that mentality freaking everywhere.

  48. Matapiojo January 14, 2009 at 11:47 pm -      #48

    All that’s left to say is…

    Thicker skin, buddy.

  49. L-W January 14, 2009 at 11:55 pm -      #49

    “If it seems like we are hurting you, its because we love you, and it hurts us more than it hurts you….”

    As a rule of thumb, I never willingly do anything if it requires me to inflict more misery upon myself than any other person, as they say, misery loves company.

    So in this respect, I’m genuinely enjoying myself here. I could have left the debate after I destroyed it with a single fell swoop (I personally enjoy using such colourful similes when describing the destruction of others), but where would be the fun in that?

  50. AlphaCommando January 15, 2009 at 1:18 am -      #50

    I was sorta mocking that parental tone where your parents try to help you by hurting you…I’m the same way, I almost will never make myself suffer for the sake of other, I will sacrifice a few things for others but I have limits. However; I don’t really take pleasure in insulting others I just do it to get them out of my face.

    Also i get angry when people think I’m wrong and I’m not.

  51. L-W January 15, 2009 at 2:10 am -      #51

    Hey, you know me Alpha. I’m ALWAYS on board for the mocking parental tone, especially if it ruins the resolve of a person attempting to correct me.

  52. AJN January 16, 2009 at 1:09 pm -      #52

    Dude, L-W,
    You’re absolutely right, about the actual topic, I rooted for Covenant all along.

    Now, for another matter:
    I’m not here 2 judge, but you’ve got one hell of an attitude.
    Don’t get me wrong, it’s good to have an attitude, especially when u’re right but man, you’re acting like a prom queen who’s thinks that she’s already Miss Universe.
    You have to remember man, humility is a sign of greatness.

    And also, not to burst your bubble, but the quote:
    “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” Does NOT belong to Robert Oppenheimer

    Robert has no relation other than using this quote once in his life.
    The origin of this quote is the Hindu Bhagavad Gita. It is proclaimed by Lord Shiva, one of the Hindu trinity and the conquer of Death.
    Not just Oppenheimer, but many individuals have used this quote. So this next time you post this quote on any site, use the origin “Bhagavad Gita” and not Robert.

    Seriously, would love to provide you with all the history but all you have to do is search the phrase in Google and you’ll get your answers.
    Seeing that this was the beginning of all the trash talk, I seriously hope that this is the end of it.

    And oh yes, “STOP BEING A F**KING JERK TO EVERYBODY!”
    Au-revoir….

  53. The One Sin January 16, 2009 at 1:36 pm -      #53

    Oh damn. My apologies to you guys for being such an ass. But you see I am by nature a very passive person, just ask alphacommando how many people try to insult me on mc vs snake. But some things just won’t fly with me.

    “To lesser minds, a post of substance may be viewed as excessive”

    Like that, you have directly implied that I must be completely retarded when you should no damn well that I’m not a “lesser mind”. I refuse to let people judge my intelligence, I just can’t. You proved me wrong about the battle and I let you know more about the locust, lets leave it at that. All in all, if you can admit that you were wrong about my knowledge we can end this now, thats my only request of you.

    Now I’ll let you have fun with this AJN guy.

  54. Matapiojo January 16, 2009 at 3:03 pm -      #54

    “And oh yes, “STOP BEING A F**KING JERK TO EVERYBODY!”
    Au-revoir….”

    Brace yourself…

  55. Marche January 16, 2009 at 5:03 pm -      #55

    “Brace yourself…”

    lol,this might make L-W’s day.

  56. The One Sin January 16, 2009 at 6:28 pm -      #56

    Lol. I can’t wait.

  57. L-W January 16, 2009 at 7:16 pm -      #57

    Who can spare time for humility when so many others are being repeatedly wronged (By me) on so many occasions:

    1) Actually the quote I used by Robert Oppenheimer was a MISTRANSLATION of the original verse from the Hindu holy book, the Bhagavad Gita. The actual quote he intended to use (But incorrectly recited by the man himself) was:

    “I am all-powerful Time which destroys all things.” – kalo ‘smi loka-ksaya-krt

    Therefore, the quote originally cited by J. Robert Oppenheimer is more commonly associated with his reaction at the trinity test site; and not the verse he mistakenly misinterpreted from the original source. Thus you’re incorrect about the citation of the quote, epic fail.

    Your entire pretext to correcting me not only just just failed, it returned like so many horrid ventures and smacked you clean across the face. I just it funny that somewhere in your small mind, you thought you ascertained some meaningful trump card that I would have no knowledge of.

    2) There is no hyphen (This symbol ‘-‘ for the simple folk) in au revoir, to use one would be a contradiction of expression in the French language, much in the same way as if I were to type “How are you?” in English as “How-are you?”.

    – – –

    Some may say that I have been particularly light-handed with this individual, but if you examine the context of my post you’ll see that I effectively slammed the breaks down on his entire tirade; bringing his carapace slamming head first into the dashboard.

  58. The One Sin January 17, 2009 at 4:31 pm -      #58

    Wow, I don’t feel sorry for that guy in any way. Why? He provoked it. If you pull a lion’s tail the lion will claw you. You, L-W are prove that newton’s idea of every action having an equal and opposite reaction does not apply to the art of debate.

  59. AJN January 18, 2009 at 2:07 am -      #59

    Respected sir, L-W,

    As you are so inclined to display your higher intellect which so clearly surpasses all mortals, I would like to congratulate you on reprimanding me on a topic that so clearly has no relation to my post.

    Well, you had to cling to something that would help you to sleep at night.
    “Finally, I have shown that mortal the dust.” – You must have said to yourself happily as you slept in an unknown plane, traveling far so many times that the names were just a blur.

    Unfortunately, you have saddened me by correcting a mistake which had no relation to the actual comment. Even with all of my mistakes, the fact that you clung to the “goodbye” which was located far away from the body of the comment proves to me that indeed you’re desperate for any kind of slip on the other man’s part. Perhaps it provides you with a form of sick pleasure. I do not know and I’m not here to judge.

    Well, moving on towards to the actual comment,

    –“I am all-powerful Time which destroys all things.” – kalo ’smi loka-ksaya-krt–

    This is, what I believe, you wrote.

    Now, first of all, I’d like to say to you that never in your right senses should you ever try to write the Sanskrit language in English form. First of all, it’s an insult to the language which is far more older and also far more complex and beautiful.

    Secondly, whatever you wrote made no sense whatsoever. Sanskrit has more pronunciations than the English language could ever achieve. It is easily possible to pronounce each and every word of the English language in Sanskrit but the English language could never pronounce even half the words in Sanskrit.

    Thirdly, you’re wrong.
    To further, sink your face into excreta, here’s an excerpt:

    In an interview from 1965, Oppenheimer describes the initial reactions as the fruit of their labors, the very first nuclear bomb (the Hiroshima bomb was the second one), detonated early in the morning of July 16, 1945:
    “We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed… A few people cried… Most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita; Vishnu is trying to persuade the prince that he should do his duty, and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form, and says, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” I suppose we all thought that, one way or another.”

    The quote was something he thought, but he didn’t claim it as his own.

    The quote is indeed from the Bhagavad Gita (“Song of the lord”). Some suggest it’s a misquote, which would explain the peculiar grammar; but “am become” is not an error but a (poetic) archaism, as in “I am become a name, for always roaming with a hungry heart” (Tennyson, Ulysses). Which in turn might be a trace of French; “Je suis devenu la mort”.

    Since Oppenheimer was proficient in sanskrit he read the original text, and the translation is his own.

    Here’s the verse with a little context, from a translation by Ramanand Prasad. Prince Arjuna hesitates to attack the enemy with his army; Vishnu, in the incarnation of Krishna, encourages him, and motivates him by explaining how the world works, with reincarnations, Brahman, Maya etc. Arjuna asks to see Vishnu in his “cosmic”, i.e. real, form, a wish that is granted. The overwhelmed Arjuna asks:

    Tell me who are You in such a fierce form? My salutations to You, O best of gods, be merciful! I wish to understand You, the primal Being, because I do not know Your mission.

    The Supreme Lord said: I am death, the mighty destroyer of the world, out to destroy. Even without your participation all the warriors standing arrayed in the opposing armies shall cease to exist.

    Therefore, get up and attain glory. Conquer your enemies and enjoy a prosperous kingdom. All these (warriors) have already been destroyed by Me. You are only an instrument, O Arjuna.

    Bhagavad Gita, chapter 11, verses 31-33

    Here’s another description of the event, where…

    …two pages from the Bhagavad-Gita, the sacred Hindu poem, flashed through Oppenheimer’s mind: “If the radiance of a thousand suns / were to burst into the sky / that would be like / the splendor of the Mighty One” and “I am become Death, the shatterer of worlds”.

    Current Biography Yearbook 1964

    The first verse (rather than page…) mentioned is a part of the description of the cosmic form of Vishnu, and is found in verse 12 in the same chapter as “become Death”. The citation from 1964 is the oldest found with it. The two verses are often erroneously combined into a single one.

    If the splendor of a thousand suns were to blaze out at once (simultaneously) in the sky, that would be the splendor of that mighty Being (great soul).

    Bhagavadgita 11:12 (Sivananda)

    In one translation, there’s a negation:

    If the splendor of thousands of suns were to blaze forth all at once in the sky, even that would not resemble the splendor of that exalted being.

    Bhagavadgita 11:12 (Prasad)

    Since I haven’t found any older descriptions with verse 12, and it isn’t in Oppenheimer’s own description I draw the conclusion Oppenheimer didn’t think of it when the bomb went off.

    He grew tenser as the last seconds ticked off. He scarcely breathed. He held on to a post to steady himself . . . When the announcer shouted ‘Now!’ and there came this tremendous burst of light, followed … by the deep-growling roar of the explosion, his face relaxed into an expression of tremendous relief.

    The reaction of Oppenheimer, as described by Brigadier General Thomas F. Farrell.

    “It worked!”

    This is Robert Oppenheimer’s actual quote.

    I believe I have answered all your queries heartily. So, now, the next time you feel obliged to correct someone’s mistakes or point out their flaws, please, go right ahead and slap yourself across the cheek strong enough to create a good impression.

    Let me just add that the only reason I was so hard on you, was because I feel a natural grudge against people who enjoy insulting others. And even while doing so, we should always have a polite demeanor so that the least bit of grudges are harbored.

    And oh yes,
    Au-revoir.

  60. Space marine January 18, 2009 at 8:35 am -      #60

    JESUS CHRIST!

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  61. The One Sin January 18, 2009 at 2:46 pm -      #61

    Ajn:”Let me just add that the only reason I was so hard on you, was because I feel a natural grudge against people who enjoy insulting others. And even while doing so, we should always have a polite demeanor so that the least bit of grudges are harbored.”

    Don’t you get it? People like us with “lesser minds” aren’t allowed to have credibility, know you place.

    Sarcasm button [ON] OFF

  62. L-W January 18, 2009 at 10:05 pm -      #62

    Instances and sources proving the entirely trite copy and paste of yours to be utterly wrong.

    My initial cringe (depression is too strong a word) stems from the fact that so few don’t show actual knowledge of the origin of the quote. This is reflected by their confusion and the questions they ask and their subsequent mistakes in deeming or failing to correctly label a significant difference between the cultural remnant of Oppenheimer’s key to an event of significant historical and the original translation which was famously misquoted.

    See here for more details on the significance and impact of the mistranslations in popular culture.

    (wiki/Romance_languages).

    The actual shloka (verses) from where he (Opponeheimer) picks it up, and (a) mistranslates, (b) violates the context.

    It might be interesting to note that the second translation of the Bhagavad-gita into a European language was into Latin, by Wilhelm von Schlegel in 1825 (the first was by Charles Wilkins, into English in 1785). “I am become death” isn’t a valid English sentence, however “I am” was used in English at one time as the auxilliary to create the perfect with intransitive verbs (like to become). In this case, “I am become death” could be a now-archaic rendition of what would now in English be “I have become death”, referring to the personification of death. In this instance, “I am become death” would translate into Latin as “Factus sum mors”, meaning “I have been made death”.

    The only issue is that the correct interpretation of Sanskrit dictates that the sentence be pronounced (In its original form) as “I am time, the destroyer of worlds”.

    Oppenheimer later recalled that while witnessing the explosion he thought of a verse from the Hindu holy book, the Bhagavad Gita:

    “If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one…”

    Years later he would explain that another verse had also entered his head at that time. It is the famous verse, which begins as “Kalo Asmi” and was quoted by Oppenheimer after the successful detonation of the first nuclear weapon. He unfortunately mistranslated it as “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”. The correct meaning of the Sanskrit words is “Now I am Time (not death), the destroyer of all.”

    “We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, ‘Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.’ I suppose we all thought that one way or another.’”

    I remembered this as I was reading the Bhagavad Gita recently as a part of both my history minor and physics major course (A lot of which involved the study of the famous nuclear physicists of the 20th century), because I couldn’t find these words in my translation. The verse Oppenheimer had in mind was 11:32, which Juan Mascaro (The Bhagavad Gita, transl. Juan Mascaro, Penguin Books, 1962 1st edition) gave instead as follows:

    I am all-powerful Time which destroys all things.

    – – –

    I was annoyed by two things about the translation Oppenheimer used.

    Firstly, and the minor detail, was the grammar. There appears to be no reason to use the grammatically incorrect ‘I am become’, when the correct wording would have been ‘I am’ or ‘I have become’, and which could have been used. It appeared to be a case of translating something incorrectly to make it sound more exotic and foreign – as Edward Said may have noted in Orientalism (I can’t remember where I read it, and I can’t think where else it might have been. Rushdie?), there seemed a touch of suggestion that here was something so strange and foreign and absurd, that it could not even be translated correctly and sensibly.

    Secondly, and the major issue, was the very fundamental one of what the original verse said. To say One is Death has far more sinister overtones than saying One is Time, and certainly while Time is in a way Death – there is a huge difference in idea, intent, and meaning. Was Krishna simply saying he was Time, and Oppenheimer misinterpreting it to Death? Was the most popular quote from the Gita in the western world actually a mistranslation?

    I decided to look into this further.

    Factus sum doesn’t have to be ‘I have been made’. Although passive in form, it supplies the perfect tense of fio and can mean simply ‘I have become’ (or indeed, ‘I am become’).

    Looking at the original to which Oppenheimer was referring, though (Gita 11.32), it actually says ‘I am’ (asmi – not usually equivalent to become, as far as I remember, although all you Sanskritists out there might want to correct me). And here’s another problem – the word Krishna uses is not unequivocally ‘death’, it’s kala (there should be a macron on the first a but I don’t know how to do that) of which the primary meaning is actually ‘time’. The meaning death is possible, but not obvious – although the context, the vision of the Lord consuming the worlds, certainly indicates death. The line continues lokakshayakrt (destroyer of the world) pravrddho, the last word perhaps indicating time ‘matured’, i.e. at the end of each cycle of ages the worlds are destroyed. If so that might be another difference from the Oppenheimer application.

    I looked at Schlegel’s version (Bhagavad-gita, id est (in Greek) thespesion melos, sive almi Krishnae et Arjunae colloquium de rebus divinis, Bonn 1823) and he has ‘Dies sum, mundi eversor, adultus, mortales exstinctus huc profectus’. Dies is perhaps not altogether clear in context, but I suppose he has in mind usages to indicate a period of time, or perhaps the sense of final day, day of destruction. So that is no help in translating Oppenheimer’s version.
    Most English versions of the Gita seem to prefer ‘time’ over ‘death’.

    – – –

    The relevant line in the original sanskrit is as follows:

    kalo ‘smi loka-ksaya-krt
    (source:www.asitis.com/11/32.html)

    As I had no issue with ‘the destroyer of worlds’ = ‘which destroys all things’, I was only concerned with the first half of the line: kalo’smi. This could be translated as I am ‘Kalo’. So what did ‘Kalo’ in this context refer to? Death or Time?

    I decided to see if others had considered this matter. They had indeed, and in some detail. There was a paper called ‘The Gita of J. Robert Oppenheimer’ by James Hijiya, Professor of History at the University of Massachusetts, which explained that Oppenheimer was significantly influenced by Arthur Ryder (a Sanskrit scholar who had taught Oppenheimer), whose translation of the Gita used Death instead of Time. I have reproduced footnote 50 of his paper in full:

    “Ryder’s translation here is a little peculiar but defensible. Ever since the first rendering of the Sanskrit text into English in 1785, most experts have translated this word not as Death but as Time. Cf. Charles Wilkens, The Bhagvat-Geeta (London: C. Nourse, 1785; Gainesville, Fla.: Scholars’ Facsimiles & Reprints, 1959), 93; Besant, Bhagavad-Gita, 116; Prabhavananda and Isherwood, Bhagavad-Gita, 123; S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1948), 279; Eknath Easwaran, The Bhagavad Gita (Petaluma, Calif.: Nilgiri Press, 1985), 154; Barbara Stoler Miller, The Bhagavad-Gita (New York: Columbia University, 1986), 103; Dominic Goodall, Hindu Scriptures (Berkeley: University of California, 1996), 260.

    – – –

    The footnotes answered most of the questions, but I would like to note the following:

    The reasons for the difficulty are obvious for the Hindustani speaker just by looking at words in contemporary usage with the K-L consonant sounds. There are words like Kal, Kaal, Kala, which we associate with concepts of time, but there is also the goddess associated with death, Kali.

    But one can in this instance also look within the Gita to see other instances where concepts of Time or Death are mentioned, and consider the vocabulary employed for them. I am more familiar with Adhyayas (Cantos) 1 and 2, where in 1:1, Sama is used for Time, and where in 2:37, Hato is used for Death. Unhelpfully, Kal is used for neither situation. It is used elsewhere in the book, including Adhyaya 11, but I did not have, well, the time(!) for a thorough review, and decided against an incomplete one.

    In summary, I wondered whether Oppenheimer wasn’t misquoting the Gita. I laid out the reason for my wondering thus, and then found that someone had already done a lot of research on the topic, which revealed that most translators thought so, but there was a minority in support. Since most libertarians and see no harm in minorities taking divergent opinions where there is no harm to others, I will be criticizing Mr Oppenheimer’s choice of translation, as I do not think I agree with it.

    – – –

    Sorry you went to all that trouble, despite being wrong in the first place. Oh well, tough luck. The fact is that despite your best efforts to reprise the lost argument, you were still wrong the entire time. The issue is that Oppenheimer still mistranslated the quote, regardless of the original source, it loses its context as designated by the Baghavad Gita (despite the best intentions) therefore the quote parallels more so Oppenheimer’s own semantics and subsequent errors and not the original verse as stated originally in Sanskrit. Thus the term now culturally applies to the mistranslation of Oppenheimer; and not it’s original counterpart who shall forever remain to scholars as the ORIGINAL citation, but not the Oppenheimer citation.

    Oppenheimer translated Sloka 32 as “Death,” but other scholars believe the more accurate word is “Time”, the issue being that a grave error in translation is not

    On this site, you can hear the passages spoken in Sanskrit with subsequent translation to affirm my original postulation.

    www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-11-30.html

    Grave attempts to use such excrement have apparently hit the proverbial fan and returned to sender. For shame.

  63. L-W January 19, 2009 at 1:01 am -      #63

    Also, to be a continued stickler on the subject of transient meanings in foreign languages, but au revoir is not pronounced with a hyphen. In fact the only places I’ve ever seen it spelled or pronounced in such fashion were tourist based English speaking resorts (Run by foreign ex patriots) or the poorer Muslim and Hindi communities of the Banlieue, many of whom cannot speak in fluent French.

    As an example, “Au-revoir” in an English pretext actually translates as “Fare-well soon”. The hyphen ruins the transitive effect of the verb and instead throws the entire translation out of balance with total fidelity.

    To do so would be as absurd as say, myself saying “Vist-voi domani” as a farewell. I would get a few odd looks from those versed in the Italian language.

  64. AJN January 19, 2009 at 5:36 am -      #64

    You really haven’t understood what the entire argument was about, have you?
    At this point of time I could enter many adjectives proclaiming your stupidity but I shall tear myself from that pleasure and explain the points to you slowly.

    Throughout your ridiculously long passage all that you have ascertained is that the actual word should be “Time” instead of “Death”. What you fail to grasp is that the word “Kal” is used in both senses namely Time AND Death.
    If ever in your life you’ve have even glanced at any Hindu Religious text, you’ll find various instances where The Lords Krishna, Lord Rama, Lord Shiva and various other gods proclaim that they are the “Kal” of their enemies. Now even the most ignorant of the ignorant can grasp that here if “Kal” is substituted for “Time” then that all that they are saying is that they are the time of their foes!
    Need further proof, look up this URL:
    www.gyanamrit.org/?p=7

    Now, read carefully. The argument was about 2 facts:
    1. The quote is actually from Bhagvad Gita.
    2. It was not actually a quote. But a mere utterance of the words.

    1. First of all, I have never said that Kal does not mean Time. From the beginning, I have maintained that “Kal” can mean Time as well as Death. So even if anyone confuses the two, it still has the same origin. Therefore as Oppenheimer has not created a completely new quote, he has simply mistranslated it with what could possibly be another word (possibly!). And unless you’re an adamant fool who cares only to save face, you’ll have to admit that mistranslations are not credited to the translator. That is like saying if I, with my limited knowledge of the Mandarin(Chinese) language, mistranslated an important verse, I could now herald it as my own quote.

    2. Now I shall copy and past something from my last comment(sigh!):
    In an interview from 1965, Oppenheimer describes the initial reactions as the fruit of their labors, the very first nuclear bomb (the Hiroshima bomb was the second one), detonated early in the morning of July 16, 1945:
    “We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed… A few people cried… Most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita; Vishnu is trying to persuade the prince that he should do his duty, and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form, and says, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” I suppose we all thought that, one way or another.”

    Oppenheimer has clearly said that he REMEMBERED the line from the Hindu scripture. The key word here is (Let me spell it out for you, again) R-E-M-E-M-B-E-R-E-D!!
    From all your 491 comments (last time I checked), I gather that you must literate enough to know at least a few important verbs of the English language.
    To remember is the act of recalling something from one’s past memory!!!!!
    If I REMEMBER something I read somewhere, then it doesn’t mean that it is my quote.

    READ THIS:
    He grew tenser as the last seconds ticked off. He scarcely breathed. He held on to a post to steady himself . . . When the announcer shouted ‘Now!’ and there came this tremendous burst of light, followed … by the deep-growling roar of the explosion, his face relaxed into an expression of tremendous relief.
    The reaction of Oppenheimer, as described by Brigadier General Thomas F. Farrell.
    “It worked!”
    -THIS IS HIS ACTUAL QUOTE!!!!!!
    Like the quote: “It’s alive!” From the famous movie Frankenstein(1931)

    Now, the Au-revoir part. Seriously, I for one, thought that you, with your unrelenting knowledge of sarcasm would be able to catch the hint, but it seems that you only pretend to understand true sarcasm. All the while, you kept blabbering that mistranslations are also quotes. But they are not! When I wronged the french language by including the hyphen, you were quick to pounce at my mistake like a rabid dog. Idiotically, you kept trying to justify Oppenheimer’s mistake as a quote. If that were to be considered true, then my “mistake” is not actually a mistake but a quote that I have created.
    So, all your attempts to slander me have landed flat on your face and are stinking of regurgitated vomit. You have dug your own grave (metaphorically speaking!)

    Now, let me explain to you what has happened here.
    You, with all your immense knowledge and blown up ego, made a mistake. One of the few times in your entire life, I’m sure, but you did make one. I caught you for it and used your face as toilet paper, rubbing it in sticky, smelly and gooey excreta. Now, after forcing hundreds of people to admit their shame, you yourself are afraid to do so. You’re afraid that all the ones you have wronged will laugh at you and this incident will haunt you for the rest of your life. I seriously thought that you were different. I though that you were an opponent to be proud of. With great anguish I have to admit that I ranked you far above what you deserved.
    I never did this to be heralded as a white knight of all those you had done wrong. I did this so that no one would make the same mistake again. And for god sakes, remember to put the origin Bhagvad Gita instead of Robert Oppenheimer.

    And yes,
    Au-revoir

  65. LaSt s0n 0f KrYpToN January 19, 2009 at 2:23 pm -      #65

    wow to think this started as a real thread. why don’t we just make a L-W vs all comers thread

  66. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 19, 2009 at 5:08 pm -      #66

    I can’t wait for the next post from L-W, this is hilarious!

  67. L-W January 19, 2009 at 7:51 pm -      #67

    “Now, read carefully. The argument was about 2 facts:
    1. The quote is actually from Bhagvad Gita.
    2. It was not actually a quote. But a mere utterance of the words.”

    – – –

    Actually this initial argument was about two points that you have so far failed to grasp:
    1) Your disapproval of my demeanor.
    2) The origins of the exact quote. (Note the term: Exact)

    1) The point you fail to even grasp is that this is not a popularity contest, the issues you may or not have with me are inconsequential to my operation. If you feel that I should change, express so. If you disagree with my actions, state it so. You have the freedoms (Sans the swearing, which the admin promptly edits) necessary to say as you will, as you choose and no force greater than a total eradication of all liberties would ever change that fact.

    But my problem is, I just don’t care about your feelings. Feelings are unnecessary in such mediums, and for those who allow such mortal artifacts to permeate into their avatars; I have no pity.

    Alpha really said it best:

    “If you are insulted and actually listen to anything you see as insulting then you are weak willed. Maybe its just my ego, but I “know” that I am always right unless faced with information supplied by a source that I respect to a degree that overrides my over-inflated ego. This has worked quite well for me considering I graduated from high school 3 years ahead of my fellows. People need to learn to suck it up and let anything that comes from something “below” them just bounce off. I get sick of all these sob stories about “all people ever did in my life is insult me!”

    If it really bugs you, ignore it; then later in life when you have lots of money or power you can prove us all wrong….

    And if you find rhetoric a problem go talk with people who are on your level…Personally the only way to change people is to break them down and teach them the right ways. If it seems like we are hurting you, its because we love you, and it hurts us more than it hurts you….

    I know none of that was directed at me but I get sick of seeing that mentality freaking everywhere.”

    I would have condensed where I felt it was necessary, but every ounce of that post spoke an undeniable truth. Grow some thicker skin, clean the sand out of your vagina and if I’m the worst archetype you’ve encountered thus far, then you clearly must have spent only five minutes between your first post and the activation of your first internet connection. I am by far not the worst thing out there, as much as I would love to be admittedly.

    2) I’m going to read this part out you really slowly now, marking each individual point within its own segregated area just so you can easily return back to each individual point once mummy has stopped to clear the globs of saliva gathering on your mouth.

    A) Look at the previous post again (Something I doubt you did in the first instance), not only do I agree and state that Kali (Despite the continuous translation errors) represents a malevolent deity, but the instance of the scriptures clarifies her as an avatar of the one supreme Brahman. Why you would continue to argue this point is beyond me. Although I would disagree with the statement regarding time and death…

    B) Whilst Kali represented time and inevitable death of the mortal body, the deities specific modus operandi was change and transformation. Kali represented the constant metamorphosis of the human body, from birth to death, from anger to love and to conflict and peace; continuously expressing grief at the changing heart of humanity. Thus we have the mortal effects of time and change, which (Unfortunately for us) death is also a fragment of.

    It was the second avatar of Brahman, the lord Shiva (Husband of Kali) that represented death and dissolution. Although his almost symbiotic, yet unpopular, partnership with Kali and Shiva’s almost phallic symbolism; makes them both the progenitors of birth and rebirth (Since Shiva is literally the death of death himself). In this instance they become the ultimate nullifier. Ergo, becoming a double-edged deity of creation.

    C) Although the personification of death takes a different form throughout the scriptures. Hindu scriptures dictate that the lord of death is called Yama, or Yamaraj. Yamaraj rides a black buffalo and carries a rope lasso to carry the soul back to his abode called “Yamalok”. There are many forms of reapers, also some say there is only one whom disguises itself as a small child. It is his agents, the Yamaduts, who carry the souls back to Yamalok. Here, all the accounts of the person’s good and bad deeds are stored and maintained by Chitragupta, which allow Yamaraj to decide where the soul has to reside in his next life, following the theory of reincarnation. Yama is also mentioned in the Mahabharata as a great philosopher and devotee of Supreme Brahman.

    D) But on a personal note unrelated to the debate, if I had to associate a deity with a nuclear weapon, Shiva would seem an apt deity to choose. Unless you get a kick out of calling a nuclear device Ganesha or Jesus.

    E) Here we come back to the original point. Now there is a general agreement that regardless of your feeling towards time itself, Oppenheimer mistranslated the original verse. Regardless of whether he uttered it, wrote about it, thought it aloud or painted it against the wall of the Trinity test chambers; the translation was incorrect.

    It may seem like semantics 101, but the issue is that when you incorrectly use a citation, it becomes a paraphrased remark. Now whilst the original verse was inspired by Hindu texts, of which Oppenheimer, myself, my history and physics professors and all other parties are more than aptly aware of; the issue is that when he incorrectly referred to Time (Change) and Death (Dissolution) as interchangeable pretexts, it was no longer a quote from the scriptures. Instead it became a poorly framed paraphrased remark in lieu of the original source.

    Now whilst on any other occasion it may seem as nothing more than a Freudian slip, a historic event such as the trinity detonations and the subsequently significant audience that Oppenheimer received for his words earn him a suitable relevance in popular culture as receiving “Inspiration” but not directly or correctly quoting the true translation of his source.

    Not to accuse Oppenheimer of iconoclasm, but there is no doubting that his mistranslation was of significant standalone iconography that it almost remains separate to the reference he incorrectly cited. Try to spin it all you want, but Oppenheimer was wrong (But not deliberately).

    F) Context: If you weren’t so busy trying to recuperate from the fact that you were crusading for the feeling and emotions of BankGambling users (Boy, what a sensitive person you are), you would notice that the following line was used later to describe the usage of the quote “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”:

    – – –

    Basically two great punches managed to incapacitate the opposition, the relevance to this thread must now be startling in hindsight.

    Yours Sincerely
    L-W “Laying down Atom Bombs of logic”

    – – –

    Not to sway your opinion in any way, but knowing how you:
    – Ignore what has been written for you.
    – Have an illogical Pre-disposition to care for all the hurt feelings and brittle sensibilities of the world.

    I may have to be more overt that usual. Now onto the context at hand:

    “Basically two great punches managed to incapacitate the opposition” – Could
    I be implying the name of Aurele “Al” Couture, who knocked out Ralph Walton with only two punches in the 1946 Slam Sports fight?

    “Laying down Atom Bombs” – Laying down atomic bombs? Two punches? Wait a sec-

    Could I be referring to the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki that signaled the defeat of Imperial Japan?! Developed in the American race to create the first atomic bomb, the Manhattan project, in which the Trinity test was the first known successful detonation of an atomic bomb; one month before the first official usage upon an opponent in an act of war?!

    Holy crap! Everyone join me in saying “WTF?!” now!

    Sorry to put words in your mouth (And to breech my normally cavalier demeanor), but if I didn’t do it, I would have little faith in you grasping it.

    – – –

    As for the inclusion of a hyphen, there is vast difference between the use of a Romanticism based language that so many often misquote (As you have proven) between a modern language that has a direct English based translation that is commonly known. You were wrong on both occasions unfortunately. In both the respect of “Time and Death” and saying “Fare-Well soon” in a modern language out of context.

    There are only a few more point I must quickly express before posting this:

    1) I don’t quite get the impression of “rabidly” doing anything. In fact, between the both of us, I have shown the most stoicism in respect to individual discussion (Whether or not my cavalier stance has slipped to appease a lower denominator on occasion).

    2) Sarcasm is the use of an inflection in a voice. Unless you specifically state the use of sarcasm, then most likely it will not translate. Example:

    “Yes, that was an entirely reasonable approach”

    “Yes, that was an entirely reasonable approach”

    Guess which one contains sarcasm? Well, when reading the second verse, I placed a deliberately higher inflection of the words “Entirely” and “Reasonable”. Within the context of web sarcasm, it requires the deliberate use of the sarcasm button, which despite lacking subtlety, is more than a necessity.

    3) Oh dear, I had no idea I was here to impress?! Jesus, where’s my comb, I have to look my sunday best today! /Sarcasm.

    Oh, there I go again. Silly old me.

    4) I love this impression you’ve created of me based on actual zero evidence, are you so devoid of personality that you must project icons onto other users and their avatars? You don’t have to answer that, I (Like you) have already made an unfounded supposition.

    – – –

    Well, as always. Replace your Tampon Mary-Jane, and keep up the Poo and vomit jokes, the internet can always some more.

    – Ciao.

  68. L-W January 19, 2009 at 8:19 pm -      #68

    “I can’t wait for the next post from L-W, this is hilarious!”

    What I find even funnier than goading this individual is the constant attempts at character assassination. It’s as if people believe I do anything other than wake up late, go swimming, masturbate to big tit porn and head off to my classes/place of work; sometimes not even in that order.

    Waking up late in the middle of class, or masturbating whilst swimming are not uncommon practices for me…Wait, forget that last one.

  69. x on January 19, 2009 at 11:16 pm -      #69

    Lmao wow man that was funny

  70. AJN January 19, 2009 at 11:34 pm -      #70

    Your lines, L-W,
    “Actually this initial argument was about two points that you have so far failed to grasp:
    1) Your disapproval of my demeanor.
    2) The origins of the exact quote. (Note the term: Exact)”

    Now my lines from the post before you:
    –I never did this to be heralded as a white knight of all those you had done wrong. I did this so that no one would make the same mistake again. And for god sakes, remember to put the origin Bhagvad Gita instead of Robert Oppenheimer.–

    If your reading skills are adequate then you should be able to properly ascertain that even though I am indeed uneasy at you and your mindless bashing of other unfortunates, that is NOT my motive.(A secondary mission, yes, but not primary.) I am not popular throughout this forum and I have no intention to be. For all I care, you could…(reading your lines) “wake up late, go swimming, masturbate to big tit porn and head off to your classes/place of work; sometimes not even in that order.”

    Your words:
    I would have condensed where I felt it was necessary, but every ounce of that post spoke an undeniable truth. Grow some thicker skin, clean the sand out of your vagina and if I’m the worst archetype you’ve encountered thus far, then you clearly must have spent only five minutes between your first post and the activation of your first internet connection. I am by far not the worst thing out there, as much as I would love to be admittedly.
    —Yes, you are not the worst out there, but you are the best among your kind (mindless bashers). Most of them are simply content only with repeating the word F**K and something that rhymes with maggot. And even though I am perfectly able to return it in kind, (as I have, on many occasions), I refrain myself to be content with more, classy insults (Read shit, vomit, excreta, and what not)—

    So, two-fourth’s of your entire earlier post is useless.

    Now, have you even looked at the link in my post,(let me paste it again for you, www.gyanamrit.org/?p=7) cause if you have, then you’ll realize that Kal (and not Kali) means Death AS WELL AS Time. Kali is the goddess of war and Kal means TIME AND DEATH! There is no argument about Kali, the argument’s about “Kal”. I really don’t understand why are you bringing “Kali” into all this? (Another one fourth gone. Just one more left.)

    And now, for the hundredth time, HAVE U READ OPPENHEIMER’S INTERVIEW? (Oh god how do I stress it enough?) If you are too damn retarded to even search it, here’s the actual video: www.atomicarchive.com/Movies/Movie8.shtml
    Let me AGAIN spell it out for you (sigh!) R-E-M-E-M-B-E-R-E-D!!!!
    Oppenheimer has clearly said that he (repeat after me) REMEMBERED lines from the Bhagvad Gita!!!!!

    If I were to say that I REMEMBERED a line from Hamlet(Hope you know what it is) “To be or refuse to be”. (I know, wrong lines) But it does not become my quote.!! (Damn you, L-W, for making me repeat everything again and again)
    Had Oppenheimer not used the word “remembered”, it would actually have been a quote, in spite of the mistranslation.

    Now, the Au-revoir part.
    My sarcasm was never regarding the mistaken hyphen. My sarcasm was regarding the use of a mistake in emphasizing my point. I made a mistake! Just as Oppenheimer made a MISTAKE while translating the Bhagvad Gita!!
    This almost ends the last part. (“Almost” because a large part of it was just gibberish)

    Now, I shall once again copy and paste something from my last comment:
    “What has happened here is, you with all your immense knowledge and blown up ego, made a mistake. One of the few times in your entire life, I’m sure, but you did make one. I caught you for it and used your face as toilet paper, rubbing it in sticky, smelly and gooey excreta. Now, after forcing hundreds of people to admit their shame, you yourself are afraid to do so. You’re afraid that all the ones you have wronged will laugh at you and this incident will haunt you for the rest of your (miserable) life.”
    (Some other lines are deleted so if you want to see it again, please, be my guest and read my last post again.)

    So please, embed it in your dysfunctional brain that the next time you use the phrase, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds” use the origin Bhagvad Gita instead of Robert Oppenheimer. (It’s your choice, whatsoever. I’m just providing logic and the facts.)

    And the next time you want to add a ridiculously flimsy post in order to save face, read my earlier posts, from the point that this debate started (even your own posts). You’ll find many more (actual) mistakes to rip on. And just maybe, something might possibly sink in that that thick skull of yours.(possibly)

    And yes,
    Au-revoir

  71. The One Sin January 20, 2009 at 7:26 am -      #71

    “1) The point you fail to even grasp is that this is not a popularity contest, the issues you may or not have with me are inconsequential to my operation. If you feel that I should change, express so. If you disagree with my actions, state it so. You have the freedoms (Sans the swearing, which the admin promptly edits) necessary to say as you will, as you choose and no force greater than a total eradication of all liberties would ever change that fact.”

    I’ll express. I’ll put it in simple terms so that none of us cold possibly fail to grasp it.

    You have gone far beyond rhetoric to reinforce a point and have become a monolithic asshole.

    Read that four or five times so it will sink in.

    You have tried to judge my intelligence and you know you were dead wrong and I will not let it stand

    Read that four or five times so it will sink in.

    So. We have our problem. You get off on destroying the credibility of others, as a true debater I had hoped you were above that but I see you are not.

    I mean seriously, it slipped my mind who Oppenheimer was so that makes me one of the ignorant destroying history? Wrong.

    Your posts ARE excessive. Your idea of substance is some information followed up by simple insults mixed with a large vocabulary, and I am a lesser mind? Wrong

    Clean the sand out of my vagina? How about you do it for me?

    There we have it folks. A man who is not satisfied with just being intelligent but must also be THE intelligent guy on this site and will sink to any low to establish that.

  72. The One Sin January 20, 2009 at 7:27 am -      #72

    BTW there is a paradox alright on mc vs snake, after this you were looking for an excuse to buck horns with me and you know it.

  73. marche January 20, 2009 at 2:48 pm -      #73

    @The One Sin

    dont you mean
    a Time pparadoooox!!!!
    sorry couldn’t resist.

  74. The One Sin January 20, 2009 at 4:08 pm -      #74

    @Marche: lol I was thinking of that when I first made the statement and finally someone got my wordplay.

  75. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 20, 2009 at 7:34 pm -      #75

    ““I can’t wait for the next post from L-W, this is hilarious!” [me quoted by L-W]

    What I find even funnier than goading this individual is the constant attempts at character assassination. It’s as if people believe I do anything other than wake up late, go swimming, masturbate to big tit porn and head off to my classes/place of work; sometimes not even in that order.

    Waking up late in the middle of class, or masturbating whilst swimming are not uncommon practices for me…Wait, forget that last one.[L-W]”

    I hope your not trying to insinuate something there! Oh, yes, I do have better stuff to be doing, for example going to bed. Its just that I merely enjoy a quick post, not for lack of things to do. Also, just as long as you don’t masturbate in class what you do is your own busisness and I’ve never even mentioned your life outside beyond BankGambling, maybe you have one, maybe you don’t, to be honest I couldn’t care less! However from what I’ve seen you post in othe topics you do appear to have at least the vestiges of a fairly intresting life, maybe even bordering on enviable if you do travel as much as you seem to suggest. However, like I said, since it is unlikely, to say the least, of us ever being personally aquainted then it is of no importance to me what so ever! All that matters is that we can have a good, intelligent, debate which I think you’ve already proved you’re more than capable of. I think I can honestly say no one doubts your intelligence but that doesn’t give you the right to treat people like lesser organisms, unless they deserve it in which case that’s your perogative! To be perfectly honest, even with the abuse that you’ve sprinkled in my direction from time to time I don’t harbour even the slightest fraction of a grudge against you, it’s not exactly difficult to get over a few words somebody posted on an internet forum! So if you get insulted, well, here’s a very simple suggestion, get over it you big girls blouses!

    Oh, just to confim something, this arguement is for all intents and purposes null and void because werther the quote is attributal to Oppenheimer is a matter of opinion, yes that’s right, OPINION, and personally, due to the mistake in translation, which I happen to believe was not a mistake but that it was deliberatly paraphrased for dramatic effect, hence the reason I would give the source of the quote as J. Robert Oppenheimer and not the Bhagvad Gita. The only way to otherwise convince me would be a direct quote from Oppenheimer himself, retracting the statement and replacing it with the correct version which I don’t believe ever happened. Prove me wrong, that is what debates are for, are they not?

  76. AJN January 20, 2009 at 10:14 pm -      #76

    Firstly,
    @The one sin
    @=[BF]=JimmieRox

    This is not your fight. Whatever grudges you may hold against L-W, reserve them for another time. Whatever insults L-W has written, are all meant for me and not you people.

    @=[BF]=JimmieRox

    Oh my god, man, don’t make me do this all over again!!
    Have you even read my comments before you?
    I know that I speak as a counselor or something, but I thought I was finally getting somewhere with this L-W and then suddenly you show up.
    The only reason I attacked L-W in the first place, was because of his mistake.
    And now you are making the same one.
    Please, man, go read all my comments from post 52. Check out all the facts (All the insults are directed towards L-W)

    And guys, please stay out of this debate.

  77. The One Sin January 21, 2009 at 10:08 am -      #77

    @AJN: With all due respect it was my battle before you showed up. I had been sitting it out while you and L-w hashed out the details regarding oppenheimer, seeing how you have finished that I was steeping back in to finish my business with him.

  78. Tim January 21, 2009 at 12:10 pm -      #78

    It doesn’t seem like anyone even cares about the actual topic this disscussion was originally about anymore, which I think is a shame as I thought it was more fun discussing who would win in a fight between the Locust or the Covenent then it is watching you guys fight and argue.

    P.S. L-W you can come across as a bit of a jerk at times, just because people aren’t or at least don’t seem as smart as you doesn’t mean you should critisise them so harshly or be so rude.

  79. =[BF]=JimmieRox January 21, 2009 at 1:24 pm -      #79

    @ AJN-Dude, read what I said- “werther the quote is attributal to Oppenheimer is a matter of opinion.” So, pal, you gonna tell me that it isn’t a matter of opinion? You show me a retraction of the ‘mistake’ by J.R.O and I’ll accept that the source of the quote should be given as the Bhagvad Gita. Until such time I shall still consider this quote as Oppenheimer’s because it only paraphrased the Bhagvad Gita and not acctually quoted it. So, yes, it is a matter of opinion, that’s correct OPINION! That means its up to the individual as to who they attribute the quote to.

    Just to clear something else up, my first post is the fifth one down, yours was number 52, so yes, I was here first! Also, if you read my post, you may notice I said I dont hold any grudges against L-W and you posted this on an open forum, that means it’s a free-for-all! Anyone can post what they want, within the constraints set by the admin!

    Lastly, I stayed out of the whole Au-Revoir debate, but as someone who is if not quite fluent then at least fairly profficient in French it really makes no sense at all and should be au revoir. Mais si vous voulez dit “Au-revoir” je ne voudrais pas dit que vous ne pouvez pas, mais neanmoins c’est faux car le mot c’est “In Review” en l’Anglais. Basically, what that says is: but if you want to say “Au-revoir” then I don’t want to say you cannot, but nevertheless it is wrong because the word is “In review” (it is acctually a pretty simple translation but this is the most likely meaning) in English. (There’s probably some gramatical errors in the post but hey, so what?) So sorry mate, but your wrong! The word means either ‘in review’ or to ‘review’, depending upon the use of capitals.

    Personally, I couldn’t care less if you want to call me names, it’s just childish and I doubt you would do so to my face so its remarkably easy to get over!

    Yours sincerly,
    Jimmie

  80. MJSC STARWARS January 26, 2009 at 11:47 pm -      #80

    I just wanna see the war.

  81. Inferno January 30, 2009 at 6:05 am -      #81

    what about the Elites, from Halo, vs the NS-5’s, from i robot?

  82. Naki February 8, 2009 at 8:46 pm -      #82

    New fight in duel! L-W vs AJN! He insulted my intelligence too, diff is, he’s right. Im smart, but do not have much knowledge of many things at all. Anywho, locusts would get obliterated in 5 seconds…

  83. Cpt Olimar February 8, 2009 at 10:09 pm -      #83

    To be fair, I have to say that attempts to decipher people’s intelligence on the internet is pretty silly :(
    I mean, I could make a post that says:
    “WOW ALL YOU GUYS ARE RETARDS. HEHEHEH IM SO COOL AND YOUR ALL SO STUPID. HAHA IM TEH UBER SMARTEST EVAR. MASTER CHIEF OWNS EVERYBODY.” And I’m sure most people would think I was an complete idiot. But am I, no. Personally, it seems both of you are quite knowledgeable about what you are arguing about. Hell, I know a lot less than either of you do about that quote. Does that make me more stupid, no.
    Sure, senseless arguing is always fun to do. But its quite immature. It might be better to just agree to disagree….. (Maybe)?

  84. Thepocalypse February 10, 2009 at 6:57 pm -      #84

    Another “over in seconds” battle. Covies win.

  85. RhythmBeast February 21, 2009 at 2:00 pm -      #85

    Covenant, because they would glass the planet.

  86. Cpt Olimar February 21, 2009 at 3:48 pm -      #86

    would locust vs zerg be fairer?

  87. Spacemarine March 12, 2009 at 6:56 am -      #87

    “Waking up late in the middle of class, or masturbating whilst swimming are not uncommon practices for me…Wait, forget that last one.”

    Eww…

  88. lebolud March 25, 2009 at 10:33 pm -      #88

    The Locust are a pimple on the butt of galaxy. The covenant ARE the butt.

  89. Onesidedfight May 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm -      #89

    My god, did L-W just basically tie an argument? Your slipplong L-W. All it takes is one tie and bam, you lose.

  90. sangheli_special_ops_elite May 15, 2009 at 11:56 pm -      #90

    Covanent would glass the planet burning it from the inside out, cooking the locust inside the planet and leaving the surface as glass.

  91. Pokezilla (guest form) May 23, 2009 at 1:59 pm -      #91

    Dreadnaughts have the ability to cause a stellar collapse. In Halo Wars, the Covenant find a fleet of them.

    Covenant win because of that, and so many other reasons.

  92. Captain Epic September 13, 2009 at 10:09 pm -      #92

    FOR THE COVENANT! I think the space ships will take the win.

  93. AHEM December 10, 2009 at 2:57 pm -      #93

    The Covenant take this without any trouble. They have access to much more numbers, much more advanced technology, and also have the benefit of striking from the air. The Locust won’t stand much of a chance unless they were only fighting an individual faction of the Covenant, like the Grunts, maybe.

  94. Super Ultra November 10, 2010 at 12:33 am -      #94

    I think a lot of people here aren’t comparing this fight based on actual gameplay, they are just taking facts about the halo and gears universes. To be fair, I argue that this battle occurred with the locust surprise attacking the covenant like they did the humans, and also the covies glassing the planet is right out, one because the locust are underground dwelling species, and two, it doesn’t reflect the gameplay of halo. Also, it doesn’t really make sense that the locust don’t have tanks and aircraft, per se, because they would have the tech, but the game was made without vehicular combat in mind, also, they have beasts to deal with this. As for air superiority, it seems most people forgot about those kamikaze flying beasts in gears, as well as reavers. And when it comes to ground fighting, based on gameplay from the two games, drones would easily mop the floor with grunts and jackals, and are physically strong enough to at least fight with elites. Berserkers certainly can compete with hunters, and boomers I could see doing some damage. The covies do have the superior weaponry it seems however, although plasma guns tend to suck at killing people, only good against shields. Also, realistically the energy sword lunge would be impossible, it doesn’t make any sense. Corpsers could fairly easily take out a lot of the covenant ground forces, as well as vehicles, and the Brumak packs a lot of firepower compared to a lot of covie vehicles as well. To top it all off, the locust may struggle with a delta squad consisting of 4 dudes sometimes going higher depending on disposable characters, but the covenant failed to take out Earth mostly due one to one human soldier, so that’s saying something right there.

  95. Carmine August 31, 2011 at 2:25 pm -      #95

    If the covenant don’t have space ships and won’t glass the planet locust win pretty easy

  96. Carmine August 31, 2011 at 2:26 pm -      #96

    If the covenant don’t have space ships and won’t glass the planet locust win pretty easy and remember  the rules the match will be more fair that way.

  97. Whatthecell August 31, 2011 at 2:59 pm -      #97

    A single Supercarrier’s worth of troops could have almost enough troops to overwhelm the Locust on their own. A quick calc I picked up from another site:

    “Assuming every soldier is put up in a ten by ten by three metre apartment(that’s roughly a thousand square feet of space and good headroom for every single goon), with the supercarrier’s approximate 385.6 billion cubic metre volume there will be enough room for 130 million troops if ten percent of it is dedicated troop apartments.
    Note that 1,000 square feet is… fucking huge. In fact, it’s an entire (if slightly small) two bedroom house.
    If each soldier was to be allotted a bunk two metres tall by one square metre(averaged, as this figure includes grunts) then using only 1% the volume of the ship over 1.9 billion troops could be carried.” 

    Both are very conservative estimates. 

  98. Carmine September 1, 2011 at 2:43 pm -      #98

    Locust>>>>>>>Covenant

    Tickers>>>>>Scarabs
    Scarabs are useless since two unsc fraggs can take down the halo 3 scarab then six tickers can and don’t say bull shit that the scarab or brutes will see the tickers, tickers are to fast and I bet my money no less than six can take out a scarab, the halo 2 scarab will be hard but if master chief can do it I bet a bunch of theron locust can as well but of course with much difficulty.
    If a scarab get’s destroyed it’s a big loss but if tickers get destroyed it’s  more resources lost to the covenant than locust
    Tickers are quicker
    Tickers are smart enough to find weak spots.

    Reavers>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Banshee’s
    Reason:
    Reavers can hold two people
    Reavers can shoot at it’s top speed
    Reavers are more agile zig zagging really quick to avoid getting shot
    Reavers are more durable since it take a couple mag’s to kill it
    Reavers can fight on the ground

    Brumacks>>>>>>>>>>>Wraiths
    Reason:
    Brumacks have a faster rate of fire
    Brumacks are slightly more durable

    Boomers>>>>>>>>Jackels
    Reason: We just all know two boomers can take on ten jackels and win

    Locust ect>>>>>>>>>Covenant ect

  99. Nex Enforcer September 1, 2011 at 3:19 pm -      #99

       LOL, dude the Covenant would completely wreck the Locust. Please explain how the ticker would even get on the scarab and just b/c you assume the infantry on the scarab couldn’t kill them doesn’t count as evidence, fact is simple, they will attack any offensive fore trying to take the scarab. On top of this you are using gameplay for statistics which isn’t how things are done here. Oh and where have the tickers ever shown intelligence, I’m pretty sure they just run in and blow up whatever they can. As for the Theron, they would get completely destroyed up close by Brutes or elites and again, how are they getting on the Scarab??                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Now for the Reaver, so you’re telling me that the Reaver is better b/c it needs 2 ppl to reach its damage potential compared to the banshee which needs only the 1 pilot. On top of this the Reaver is a living thing which means it is sustainable to pain where a Banshee is not, a reaver won’t take to much face shots where with the banshee it makes no difference. My previous point also works with your little Brumak argument and can you prove the Brumak’s weapon could severely damage a Wraith where as the Wraith could just lob plasma at the Brumak’s face? Finally, great so a Brumak one of the Locust’s strongest form of base infantry could fight a Jackal……. which I might add the Jackals in numbers could simply once again cover the Boomer in plasma pistol or needler fire… or plasma sniper for that matter. The Locust simply stand no chance, it’s as simple as that.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

  100. Carmine September 1, 2011 at 3:27 pm -      #100

    Scarabs are slow very slow the tickers can just climb up the scarab, if you played gears of war 2 you would know tickers are smart
     
    if a friggin human can wipe out a city load of covenant in one night boomers would stomp the jackels there energy shields are to weak
    Reavers are better than banshees because I can shoot while flying at max speed and you can’t
    Brumacks are more accurate wraiths are like automatic catapult brumacks have better accuracy

1 2 3 Next »

Leave A Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Web Design MymensinghPremium WordPress ThemesWeb Development

The Most Astounding Fact

From the one and only, Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Vincent Cochetel: Held hostage for 317 days. Amazing Message.

Vincent Cochetel: Held hostage for 317 days. Amazing Message. Watch now.

NASA’s Software Catalog

Yes, now you can build a rocket too - Actually, there is an amazing amount of free software and complete documentation on how to make and perform some amazing feats of science. I'm interested to know what Facts would do with it... Click here to get started!

Mining the Moon

It's going to happen soon - there are a ton to rare Earth Metals on that big old rock in the sky! Check out this infographic!

Michio Kaku: The Universe In a Nutshell

Fantastic video that easily explains physics of our universe: Michio Kaku - Universe in a Nutshell

Raiders of the Lost Ark – Conception Transcribed

Raiders of the Lost Ark - This is an amazing read on the thought process between George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Lawrence Kasdan as they talk through the concepts of this amazing film. It's practically peering into the thought process of some of the most influential film makers of our day. And amazingly, shows how creative Lucas was.

Help Out Nepal

Finally a good reason to support Destiny.

Modern Gaming

Sad but true.

Curiosity Rover Spotted by Mars Orbiter on Mount Sharp

Humanity is the invading alien now...

Nope

No way I go here alone

17 Rare Star Wars Pictures

To see them, click here

Comic Con 2013 Cosplay Gallery

Just a ton of pictures of cosplayers from the 2013 Comic Con event

Ancient Aliens Map

If you ever watched the show "Ancient Aliens" and wanted a quick reference to where all the locations they mention are at, this is the site for you!

Fictional Universes Database

Soon to be shut down by Google, but here is a great starting point for Fictional Universes

99 Star Wars Pics

Some are cool, some are a bit absurd, but they are all based on Star Wars

Alternate Movie Posters

Something a bit distinct - Check them out

Epic Swiss Army Knife

Not Really...

Future Me

Write yourself an email letter to the future - Future Me

Neil Degrasse Tyson

Star Talk Radio - As always, keep looking up!