non-contradictor

If I remember correctly, Amazon delivers UPS. I remember hearing that Amazon will deliver early on the 16th. Maybe that was the last release... Anyway, I remember when I ordered book 4 through Amazon it got delivered by a UPS or Fed Ex truck. The Croatian translation is not available until October 15th. All the release dates are listed here.

8 days 9 hours and 41 minutes. I like puzzles as well. Congrats on becoming a junior member.

Yeah, none of them are all that interesting though. The best stuff is behind the mysterious door. It only opens once in a while though. I don't think it's been open since winter when the release date was behind the door.

Only if you believe me, which many people don't. So I haven't really told you anything solid, only a "hunch".

Okay, to answer my own questions: 1. book 5 because it is more complex than the others. I also enjoyed Umbridge's character. 2. Yes. I enjoyed them, though I wish JKR would write Hogwarts: A History. That would be something. 3. I have read The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter by David Colbert. It's pretty boring. I particularly enjoy Galadriel Water's books: The Ultimate Unofficial Guide to the Mysteries of Harry Potter New Clues to Harry Potter Book Five The Plot Thickens (actually written by fans) These books are clue books and point out "oddities" in the Harry Potter series such as the fact that the Potters are killed at night and a whole day passes before Harry is delivered to the Dursley's (again at night). This gives rise to plenty of speculation. I'd recommend these for people who like to figure out mysteries for themselves. In any case they're the only Harry Potter related books not written by JKR that are any good, in my opinion. 4. I liked the first two movies much better than the third one. I think they were fairly well done, but I doubt I'd ever be completely happy with them unless they were four hours long and screenwritten by JKR.

BOOK 5 SPOILERS Yes, I didn't like the scene much either, but my personal opinion on the matter is that JKR did it so that there was room for doubt. It's widely debated whether he is actually dead or not. It's highly likely that he'll be back in one form or another.

Well, not really. I wouldn't for example post book 6 spoilers here, as those have only ever come out of JK Rowling's website, so you pretty much have to seek them out. Some of the even required you to solve puzzles and questions to get to them. However, this book 5 spoiler was on the news, in the papers, etc. My point is that I'm quite suprised you didn't know it already. But you're right about me seeking out the information. I loved solving those riddles on JKR's website. For anyone who doesn't mind small spoilers that don't really tell you anything, I'd definitely recommend poking around jkrowling.com. If nothing else, the flash animation is really cool. Just watch out for peeves. Okay, since this is supposed to be a book review (I think) I'm sort-of off topic. So some questions for everyone that are review-ish. 1.What is your favorite book of the series? 2.Have you read Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and Quidditch Through the Ages? What did you think? 3.Have you read any Harry Potter related manuals, clue books, etc. and did you like them? 4.Do you think that the movies were well done?

That's not really a spoiler. That bit of information has been available since before book 5 came out. *small spoiler warning* It is my impression that JK Rowling intentionally let it be known that someone was going to die in book 5. Before the book was released, she did an interview on TV where she said that she was distressed after killing off the chracter.

Okay, Okay, you know what I meant. He will be 16 in the next book. Good job with the dates though. What are the points that contradict his age?

I agree with you, I don't consider it a "children's book" either. That label simply doesn't work. There's so much more to it than that. Kids can read the books from the surface, enjoy the characters and adventure, and love them. People my age grew up with Harry. We like seeing bits of ourselves in the characters, using Rowling's many clues to guess what is coming next, and imagining Harry's world. I don't know what the books are for adults, but I know lots of them read them. The point is, they aren't merely "kid's books." They are an epic mystery, they are a childish fantasy, they are something my generation will remember for the rest of our lives. Ok, now that I'm done with my two cents on that. *cough* I'm not obsessed, really... Ok I am, oh well. In order for me to discuss Harry Potter, it is entirely necessary to tell the story of how I became obsessed with the books. They have been a big part of my childhood. Anyway, I read the first book when I was ten. I'm now nearly 16. When I read the first book, it was a novelty. My step-dad got it for me because it was very popular in Britain, but I hadn't yet heard of Harry Potter. I was quite skeptical at first. I had never read a story about wizards before, and I found the idea sort-of funny, because I had never liked the wizardy type fairy tales very much. After the first few chapters, I was hooked. It was on to book two, and then book three. But alas, book four had not yet been published. So I bought the books on tape and played them every hour of the day. Then, the release day parties weren't as publicized as they are now. However book 4 was the first book I remember waiting for. I went the Amazon.com route that year. I got it delivered and read it in about a week. Shortly after that there was a headline in Yahoo! news that the title for book five was going to be Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Two years later I didn't know too much more about the new book. I knew someone important was going to die in it and I had read the jacket insert. This time though, I wasn't messing around with Amazon. I went to Borders at midnight. It was so crowded that if you left, you couldn't come back in because the store was over the legal capacity. The reason I am telling this whole big story is to show that though a lot of time has passed, there is something about those books that keeps me interested. So to continue... After Order of the Phoenix came out I started getting into the Harry Potter internet fandom. My favorite, as with any good HP fan, is Mugglenet. I became particularly interested in debating clues with the "Super Sleuths" on the New Clues board. It became apparent how much older I was than when I had read the first book, because of how much information was suddenly available. JK Rowling started her own flash website which she uses to tease fans with clues about the new book. It was there that the title was released. I went from hearing about the series on the news to reading an internet headline, to debating with "muggles" in distant countries about whether Mark Evans was the Half Blood Prince. I love Harry Potter doesn't really cover it all that well. While Atlas Shrugged will probably be the book of my adulthood. Harry Potter will always be the book of my childhood. But they aren't kids books to me anymore, because I'm not a little kid anymore. Harry will be sixteen and so will I. I'll be going to the midnight release again with two of my friends. I'll be finished reading by the time half the fans get their books. I love the wonder of the stories and the heroic epic tale. But I also love how Harry and I have grown up together. Each book gets progressively darker, heavier, and more complex. I'm glad that I could read the first one when I was close to Harry's age, because I think many people might be turned off by the simplicity of the first novel. But it's not really that simple at all. Okay, that's my sappy obsessive story. I hope you liked it. Sorry it's so long. I couldn't resist. See you at midnight on July 16th.

Okay, I don't remember anyone here saying that these were "objective" reviews. Objectivists beleive in objective reality (which by the way, is contradictory to this movie). That doesn't mean that Objectivists are going to Objectively portray something they hate. People seem to use the term objective in place of "open-minded." Objectivists are NOT open-minded. They have active minds. I for one can think about whether an argument is valid without hearing its counter argument. The truth of an idea should not be dependent on the ideas that disagree with it. (bold mine) If you think that, you won't get very far here. Ideas are not harmless. If I have the idea that it is ok to kill someone, then I become very dangerous. I don't know what you are implying by the phrase in bold. Just because you believe something does not make it true. "Believe" also implies that you aren't really sure, so how can you be sure that it is "truth?" Just as a friendly tip, some of the people on this forum (myself included) tend to get cranky when a newbie decides to criticize them in his/her first post without knowing who they are talking to. You might want to start with an Introduction. Do you know what Objectivism is? What do you mean by "objective?" Do you think Objectivists are supposed to be objective? Also please note that there are spelling and grammar rules on this forum. The rules can be found here.

Awesome, thanks!

For myself, I have read AS, WtL, ARL, RotP, Anthem, The Fountainhead, P:WNI, VoS, and the first chapter of ItOE. Kira in WtL is my favorite character. I love her passionate speech to Andrei at the end of the book. How about you?

Something else interesting I've noticed. There appears to be a problem with the "friendly url's" Sometimes the link works, and sometimes the page comes up incorrectly. (ex. Only half of the header appears, none of the "boxes" around the posts show up, some of the pictures have lines in them.) This has happened twice, and both times the problem was corrected by unclicking "friendly url's" in my blog settings. It isn't a matter of great importance to me that this problem be fixed, I don't mind the "non-friendly url's." I don't even know what makes them "friendly." I only checked the box because the "friendly" url is easier to give to friends. Haha, maybe that's why it's "friendly." I was just interested in what causes the problem.

Hey! I'm fifteen and a high school sophomore. I think you'll find that there are a fair number of high-schoolers here. What are your interests? I like science, particularly chemistry, soccer, philosophy, and a lot of other stuff. Welcome to the forum!

It's like Spano said. Try this example: In a court of law, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. It would be absurd for the prosecution to *arbitrarily* (randomly) decide to prosecute someone, and tell them to prove that they didn't do it, whithout having any evidence that they did. Imagine the existence of God being put on trial. The people who believe in God are the prosecution. They are the ones making a claim. They have to back up that claim before it can even go to trial. There is no solid evidence suggesting that God exists. So, it never goes to "trial" (debate/discussion). Since there is no trial, there is no case (for God). "innocent until proven guilty"

I'm not ready to give up on this country yet. I like it too much. If I got drafted, I'd be ready to give up. I'm not living someplace where I have no right to life. That's impossible anyway.

Does Bush really care about that anymore though. I mean, he doesn't have to worry about re-election anymore. If he was really all that opposed to the draft, why hasn't he started legislation to get it abolished, forever. It would probably get less opposition than his social security plan anyway. Is anyone actually for the draft besides politicians?

*gulp* That is an extremely frightening idea. However, if I advocated the draft, I suppose it would make sense to indiscriminately violate everyone's rights since that is what the draft does. But I don't so it doesn't. If they reinstitute the draft I think we Objectivists need to buy our own island and start our own country.

Fair enough, I just thought I'd ask.

I get it. I usually say that I am a "student of Objectivism." However, the use of the term Objectivist has sparked a couple of threads, and I don't really wan't to go into it here. You've read pretty much all the same stuff I have. That's awesome. Enjoy your stay at the forum. You may even find some good discussions on the things you disagree with. edited to remove unecessary quote

Hello. Realize that what you are disagreeing with is an of Objectivism, not Objectivism itself. You don't have to think homosexuality is wrong or volitional to be an Objectivist. I do not know much about Miss Rand's stance on homosexuality, but did she ever say she thought that it wasn't volitional? Most people now think it isn't, but did she? It isn't necessarily a contradiction. In any case, you don't have to agree with Miss Rand on everything to be an Objectivist. You only have to agree with the philosophy. In this particular case, you are disagreeing with an application of philosophy. Okay, I'm done hijacking your introduction. Welcome to the forum. BTW~ what Objectivist books have you read?

Hehe, there are a lot of spell checkers here. curious_student~ I'm in 10th grade. I recommend Tales of the Otori by Lian Hearn, and of course, Harry Potter. If you get into the Potter series, I'd check out some of the guides by Galadriel Waters. So, you're a writer? What do you write?

Lauric Acid, please use the normal quoting style. Your posts are harder to read when you don't. It is simple to do. You add to the end. - to mess up the code so the tags show up I don't really understand the argument against using the bombs. A lot of people died in Hiroshima, true, but more people died on Okinawa--the first and only invasion of a Japanese island-- than at Hiroshima. It is entirely probable that many civilian, not military, lives were saved by dropping the bombs. They decimated the populations of those two cities, but they did not kill 1/3 of the population of Japan. If we had invaded Japan, it would have turned into another drawn out bloody battle just like Okinawa. In the meantime, civilians would be left to try to survive, and many more than died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have failed.

It was an essential component of America's self-defense because: 1) Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, implying that they intended to "beat us into submission." 2) Japan refused America's terms of surrender, meaning that they would continue to kill Americans by maintaining a state of war. 3) More American lives would be lost by a land invasion, not to mention more Japanese lives as well. 4) Therefore, America needed to end the war for her self-defense (nobody is disputing this, I hope) and the best way to do this with minimum loss of life was the Atomic bombings. What other options were available? I'm going to take the word of trained military professionals over yours I'm afraid. The plan, up until the point of the Atomic bombing, was to invade Japan using Okinawa as a launchpad. That is why that battle was so important to the military. Your analogy doesn't mean anything. For one thing, the train isn't endangering you, so it's not self-defense. Second of all, Japan had no *off-switch.* There was no easy fix. Japan made it clear that we would have to kill every last one of them if we tried to invade Japan. There was not going to be a quick way to end the war, until the Atomic Bomb. Basically, provide some evidence that there were other *options* available and very good evidence that they were better options, or cut it out, please.