Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
  • Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Do you guys think the canceled Bungie announcement was related to this?

  • 08.25.2008 10:17 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Hindsight Halo made a great article about this BTW.

EDIT: WOOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First post on the 117th page!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Master Chief FTW!

[Edited on 08.25.2008 10:19 PM PDT]

  • 08.25.2008 10:19 PM PDT

I would like to say i completly agree with (sorry i forgot the topic starters name) that this theory is a 100% possible and probbaly true.,...

If you look into the weekly update bungie clearly states that

"We’ve of course heard the gums flapping on the Internet that Bungie is making more Halo stuff. We’ve never said that we’re finished with Halo 3; in the Edge acceptance video, we confirmed that the ride isn’t over. Ever since our independence last year and taking control of our destiny, we've been pretty open about the fact that we have three distinct projects underway within Bungie and they aren't all Halo related."

UNQOUTE

Notice it sais they arent all halo related!!!!!! So in that 1 of 3 could be the next marathon game......2 of 3 could be marthon games
1 of 3 could be another halo except another story....

  • 08.25.2008 10:27 PM PDT
Subject: Where in the world is Master Chief?. An extensive scientific theory.

Gamers don't die, they just go offline.

"...and the fanboys will unite to slay the Call of Duty threat for the greater good of gaming."

Sounds logical, but I'm still sticking with the theory that he lands on a forerunner planet, or a planet with a new kind of alien species.

[Edited on 08.25.2008 10:41 PM PDT]

  • 08.25.2008 10:40 PM PDT

I always talk like this. And yes, I am angry.

I'm not going to read through pages to find out, but is it possible that slowly, over time he drifted closer to earth again, near mars. ONLY, humanity had forgotten him over the ages and overlooked the frigate as space junk... Maybe Marathon turned out to be the same universe I mean. And the alien races showed up 180+years after the rings.

I'm sure that I will be insulted shortly due to my lack of knowledge of Marathon.

Oplzgdsparmee
Love,
D1sfunctional

  • 08.25.2008 11:27 PM PDT

this is page 117 it must be a hint

  • 08.25.2008 11:39 PM PDT
Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.

Life is Good :D

Posted by: James OCanis
The Master Chief didn't necessarily have to leave the Halo universe, mind you. Maybe he's still in it, at some uncertain date in the future. Maybe the Halo universe has been a parallel universe of Marathon all along. Something to consider.

[quote]Posted by: James OCanis

This seems true, we have seen thing such as the marathon symbol on MC's Assault rifle and on campaign "the Storm" where near the end the boxes are labled Traxus

  • 08.26.2008 1:41 AM PDT
Subject: Where in the world is Master Chief?. An extensive scientific theory.

Life is Good :D


Posted by: d1sfunctional993
I'm not going to read through pages to find out, but is it possible that slowly, over time he drifted closer to earth again, near mars. ONLY, humanity had forgotten him over the ages and overlooked the frigate as space junk... Maybe Marathon turned out to be the same universe I mean. And the alien races showed up 180+years after the rings.

I'm sure that I will be insulted shortly due to my lack of knowledge of Marathon.

Oplzgdsparmee
Love,
D1sfunctional


Why would they want to overlook a part of a ship they are looking for and believe me the marines would see Cortana's becon with all of those MAC stations

  • 08.26.2008 1:46 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Yay! I'm a troll!
Posted by: Trenty
Trolls are insecure about their own pathetic lives that they act cool behind a keyboard.
Go back to being a failure kid.

I GUESS it's plausible...

I find only one thing wrong with your post (but I only read half)

The picture from the start of the legendary cutscene? That's not actually the legendary cutscene... That's actually just the normal cutscene shown with every diffuculty, the Legendary cutscene is just the part with the end half of the ship and the Big Black Planet (which of course isn't Onyx).

Also, Bungie makes lots of references to previous games so the Com Box may be just a little easter egg, a coincidence or you may be completely right (but I'm gonna just hold on to it being a reference for now...)

  • 08.26.2008 1:50 AM PDT
Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
  • gamertag: omgpop
  • user homepage:

If you have a complaint about the game, just take a step back and remeber how lucky you really are to even be in possesion of it when compared to the millions of people suffering around the world with not even a roof over their heads.

Please Dream, you are obviously a man of intellect, I am of course assuming that you are a man, so please forgive me if this is in fact not the case. Now, having read through some of your posts, you seem to be in favour of the theory, which is fair enough, now what I would ask of you is this: can you refute my arguement? I have posted my opinion on the matter more than once and I would iterate them agan for you, to refresh your memory.


First of all, mars is inside the milky way galaxy.
Master cheif, at the end of halo 3 is not.
Master cheif is in a ship that is travelling at less than the speed of light.
The distance from anywhere outside the galaxy to mars would be several thousand light years.( I do apologise for not having an exact number, but I'm fairly sure I am correct.)
A light year is a measurement of distance, which basicly means how much distance light would travel in a year.
Now if we go back to the point where I mention that Master Cheif's ship is not travelling as fast as light, and we add to that the fact that there are only two hundred years between halo and marathon, it is safe to assume, master cheif would not be able to get there in time, even if the ship was able to maintain power for that two hundred years and was travelling at precise co-ordinates to mars.

Also remember that that thermal image was not just randomly put down by bungie employees, it was part of the halo canon in which the forerunners were gathering data, and I think this was just to add depth to the idea that they were scanning the planets for life to put on the ark.
If this theremal was in fact put down deliberatly in order to give us a clue about a marathon tie in, that would suggest that going into an alternate universe was planned, but, if you remember, the colapse of the portal and the failed lighting of a halo was certainly not part of their plan.
Also consider that master cheif was heading into orbit around a planet which was quite clearly not mars, and I say this because the Mars I rember had other planets nearby and was not covered in gunmetal gray forunner symbols

I also would like to know why this image in the Iris would have anything to do with the legendary ending anyway, I may have missed this part out whilst reading the theory, but I honestly can't see a connection.

  • 08.26.2008 5:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

Posted by: Ogier
Posted by: Dream053
Read above. I am not arguing that it is Mars, and you are still addressing the OP. Please correct this in future replies.
****"Really? Not once in this entire response did you provide any kind of valid counter-argument to the theory that Mars was the planet in Iris, and subsequently, Halo 3. You know what that sounds like? That sounds like you're saying I didn't provide any evidence that it wasn't Mars. By providing the evidence that you ask for, and subsequently defending that evidence, as an corollary to my original counter-theory I AM addressing the OP's theory.

Once again, you argue something I am not arguing.Yeah, yeah, I know. Even though every argument you present is a rebuttal against the impossibility of the planet being Mars, none of this has to do with Mars. See ****.
That is my gripe, because you needn't. I am opposing your reasoning, not your conclusion. For future reference: I am arguing the possibility of the theory, not the factuality. I don't have to believe it in order to argue its possibility. Anyone in pursuit of truth rather than winning the argument should do so. Jodie Foster agrees with me.No one can address you because you are only saying they are "linked," which is nothing but a pile of bs to hide behind and does really mean anything. All I can do to address you is to counter the evidence and arguments that you have brought up, despite how much it indirectly addressing the OP displeases you. If you can come up with an outline to arguing against something so purposefully ambiguous as "they are linked" I'd be happy to argue it!For the sake of your apparent Alzheimer's, I'll say once again, I never said it was floating near MarsYeah, I know. Your purpose in arguing that I didn't have any proof it was Mars has nothing to do with Mars. I'm less than a quarter of the way through your double post and I'm already sick of this bull. See ****. When you repeat yourself - which you often do since 50% of the new material in your posts is "I never said it was Mars" and "address my nonsensical 'linked, but not really' argument or I'll plug my ears and go 'lalalalala'"For the sake of this response, which will be the last I bother writing to you (unless you start providing counter-arguments that actually address my own in their entirety)Fine, good riddance. You the only one who understands your deluded "linked but have nothing to do with each other" argument anyway, so there's no chance anyone is going to be able address your arguments more than I already have - which is pretty exhaustive.Once again, as above said, I'm not arguing for the extra-universal travel theory.In a separate universe, all of these pieces of "evidence" (which, so far, have only been assertions on your part) would not matter.What you say?The infestation/thermal image is connected to the Legendary Ending because of its accurate depiction and intended focus upon the anomalous occurrence in relation to the planetoid. Here is my source/evidence for this claim: The Anomaly.

Excuse me, which dependent sentence?This one. I haven't cut out anything, I address both sentences of the quote directly.*Now you're just blatantly lying, and you didn't even bother covering it up.You responded to me, adding in the second part of the quote which I originally deemed unnecessary. When you made your observations on it, I responded a second time, addressing both quotes directly, as I said I did, which you can re-read here.

I am treating it as such, as opposed to theoretical/hypothetical, astrophysical cosmology which you, uneducated on the matter, wrongfully skew into a basis for your self-created theories on how a sci-fi FPS game's portal technology works.Actually, I'm a theoretical/hypothetical, astrophysical cosmology major, and I would say I am educated enough to write a rough supposition on how the portal works, especially with the evidence at hand, that you so conveniently ignore I've written. Furthermore, how educated is it to simply repeat "anything's possible" every time the blue cloud comes up?
Also, how convenient that you falsely condemn me for cutting something out of my own response (since I did not)See a few quotes above.*
Please point out where I have not addressed evidence you've provided on how Forerunner portal technology operates. Contrarily, you ignored that my "anything's possible" statements regarding the blue clouds are backed up by this quote. Here are my sources/evidence for this claim:
Unknown Location versus The Ark. I superimposed both images, and provided an equally brightened and contrasted version of both images for a Direct Comparison.


yet you cut the majority of my explanations out and simply respond to the opening sentence with a passive, and very out-of-context remark. Great work, your counter-argument is so very credible. [/sarcasm]**You seem to have a blind spot when it comes to the truth. I have responded to everything, and I thought I knew you could read well enough to see that. As I said in my first post in this conversation, I was only going to quote bits in order to show where I was in your post while keeping the size down. I had merged the topic with its other iterations.

I'm not surprised that you missed it, however, as you seem very keen on skipping everything after the first few sentences of my paragraphs.See **.
In cutting down your responses and my quotations, you neglected to address some very important details, some of which were the whole basis behind some of my counter-arguments. For example, I provided a full quotation from Ghosts of Onyx which exhibits the perspective of a crew upon a UNSC spacecraft as they watch Onyx be torn apart. You seemed to have pounced on my quote about the order to "Back off" the magnification, to portray the idea that they were not seeing the patterns with the naked eye. However, you completely ignored the main point of that entire quote (which you can re-read here), which I even clarified was the most important, and was to be noted. A second example could be your purposeful ignorance toward the point of discussion that you originally brought up about the blue magellanic cloud at The Ark being the same as the blue magellanic cloud at the Legendary Ending. As you now should have read above, there is no blue magellanic cloud near The Ark, whatsoever.

I made a clear mistake with radio wave speed, and you made a clear mistake here. The difference is that I'm man enough to admit it. On a side-note: Anyone with a mind is capable of formulating a "rough supposition". However, you are not qualified to claim such rough supposition to be anything more than just that: a rough supposition. You've been parading your forerunner portal mechanics around in this thread as if it were common sense and obviously factual. Your supposition is based on, once again, no citations, novel excerpts, or anything else from the Haloverse. Lastly, yet another example would be your purposeful negligence of how you, rather than acknowledging the clear mechanics and definition of a single English word which in and of itself was enough to discredit your "They're still near The Ark" theory, instead made a broad remark about how I was "nailing the English language down into a science". Reiterating the clear use of a subjective personal pronoun (read: "we") is not nailing a language into a science. Please respond to these details with a proper counter-argument.

That is your response to my calling you a hypocrite, and not responding to why.I responded to you calling me a hypocrite. You can re-read my response here. You asserted that I was hypocritical based upon your idea that my explanation of the word "We" was as invalid as your "horizon direction" theory, and I condemned one and not the other. To begin with, the "horizon direction" theory isn't even a real theory. The only "Horizon Theory" I came upon during my searches has been a scientific paper on the ancient Egyptian pyramids. You brought up a familiarity that humanity shares with Earth and its orbit around the sun, and claimed that media keeps it in the same location (no citation, or even example) simply because that is how our brain works; while I provided an accurate, factual definition of an incredibly easy-to-understand, single-meaning word (which you can check at any online or physical dictionary at your own discretion). There is only one meaning of the word "We". It is not used in the flambuoyantly incorrect manner that you specificed to be "more common than I realize". I challenge you to cite me a single source or literary work with the usage you are implying.

[Edited on 08.27.2008 12:33 PM PDT]

  • 08.26.2008 11:52 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

As for Cortana not recognizing the constellations***Cortana sees what the Chief sees. That is obvious. The Chief looks out of the shattered hull. There're the ending constellations. There is a break between the end of Cortana and the beginning of Halo, during which the MC flies from High Charity, through space, to the replacement 04, and doubtlessly sees the sky a few times during the escape from 04.To start with, Cortana is never inside of John's head while they are in space until he secures himself behind Cortana's "terminal" and faces away from the opening as Halo detonates.

EDIT: Thanks to an image provided by opog, I now see that, Master Chief does looks out of a shattered hull in the ending cutscene (I originally stated he did not) during the normal ending. This only begs the question why nothing was mentioned about the planetoid, as if they were not yet near it at the time. Odd. As for seeing space between Cortana and Halo, their view is extremely limited both by The Ark's extensive size, as well as Halo being incredibly proximal to it. Mapping constellations from there would be pretty hard to do, as you can view here. Additionally, the Chief never glances out into space during the escape from 04. I've already addressed this. None of the constellations matter anyway, as I'll explain in my next response and further along when you bring this up later a second time.

There're the Ark constellations. Cortana is capable of stitching the recordings together into a panorama. The argument that she was too busy is ridiculous, given that she can multitask recording camera feed to a subroutine that would take very little processing power, and an AI would not need commit much thought to something so simple as simply steering into the portal even under the given circumstances - whether they are in a rush or not makes no different to the amount of processing power it takes to accelerate the ship.You are missing the point. I'm not saying she isn't capable, though that can certainly be argued after having just saved her from rampancy, and the possibility of "metastability" (which I'll explain by your human nature argument). My point is that Cortana had no reason to either glance or set a camera feed at the trillions of stars in space (which, by the way, are blocked off both by The Ark as well as the Frigate's walls or hull) and start documenting them when they have only seconds until they either died or made it into the portal. I could use that excuse of yours, that she was simulating human emotion and was too busy worrying, hoping, and doing all she could. However, I'll leave the cop out responses to you.

Secondly, given that even the simple helmets worn by the marines in Halo 1 automatically record what the soldier sees, it is idiotic to assume a Spartan II's helmet cam would not.It is idiotic to not do your research. Yes, the Spartan helmets record to something called an M4 Field Disk, which is the storage device also used in standard-issue marine helmet recorders. However, Nylund's "The Fall of Reach", specifically during Blue Team's mission in Cote d'Azur during the Battle of Sigma Octanus IV, explains that not only are you are wrong in saying that they are automatic, as the helmet recorders need to be manually activated, but the M4 Field Disks also have a capacity limit, hence the reason they need to be turned off and on. The Master Chief, in case you didn't realize, was a little busy facing away from The Ark, and was climbing his heavy butt back up the frigate so he wouldn't fly out, and then sat opposite the view as well. Not only that, but he never reaches to turn on anything on his helmet. Sure, it could be a plot point that wasn't expressed in the video game itself, but as for as deduction goes, as you made clear, idiotic assumptions are not welcome.

Thus Cortana would not even have to devote the slightest thought to recording the constellations, and is perfectly capable of - and has plenty of time to devote to - comparing the constellations after your crazy 100% load from driving the frigate.See above. This should have dawned on you numerous times while writing that paragraph, and I find it amazing that I have to keep writing whole sections of my own to point out the obvious.In order to portray your own theories and ideas properly and effectively, you have to write in depth. I'm sorry you find this method of debate so aggravating, but don't expect that to change. Additionally, this was a brand new concept that you brought up in this post alone, so you didn't "have to keep writing whole sections", since this is the first time. Oh yeah, and I just debunked it. Congratulations.

Lastly, while AI have emotions, that doesn't mean they suddenly become stupid. I'm breaking out the analogies, since you seem to have selective amnesia of human nature. You're lost in the woods. You're crippled and incapable of moving, but by some chance you have a bright, red flag and a tall pole to hoist it up. You know there's a very slim chance of being found, even with the flag up. Do you A: hoist the flag, thereby giving rescuers a better chance of finding you, however small? Or do you B: keep the flag in your pocket, as good as actively hiding from anyone coming to help? I know that the flag can't be seen by anyone 50 miles away in the city. I know that you can't survive more than a few days, as opposed to indefinitely in cryo-stasis. I know the rescuers think you're dead already, and have sent few, if any people to look for you. So you don't need to waste both our time pointing out the surface faults and pretending they invalidate the entire argument. That's your answer.You are assuming that Cortana resorted to human emotion in this situation. AI constructs are created to emulate human emotion for easier interaction with humans, not actually experience it. Your theory would be absolutely wonderful if she was a real human, but alas she is not. Additionally, she clearly believes what she is saying to the Chief, which would otherwise be a lie to both the Chief as well as herself. She is stating that the beacon will be found. Not that she's dropping it "just in case". Your analogy is as pointless as the rest of your responses have been so far (though I will admit you get an A for effort).

I will add to your opposition, however, as this is something new that I just recently read. There is a fourth, theoretical stage (no previous occurrance) of rampancy known as "metastability", in which an Artifical Intelligence actually becomes a "person". What this entails is unknown, but it would most likely be safe to assume that emotion would no longer be emulated, but perceived and experienced. Being theoretical, it is unknown if Cortana has achieved this, but it is a theory. Heh, I just did a far better job of arguing against myself than you did, but I thought it would be worth mentioning.

Light travels faster than sound/electronic/radio signals
First of all, sound is not an electromagnetic wave, and wouldn't travel in a vacuum. Secondly, radio waves are, and they do travel the same speed as light. At least try to know what the hell you're arguing about.
I was breaking down a radio transmission into what we perceive it as, Ogier, which entails the three of those, which is why I used "/" instead of commas. I suppose I should be very basic with my grammar from now on so you can pick things up a little more easily. I will admit that I was incorrect in my assumption, but the original point I was making still stands that you are claiming that Cortana is clinging to a human emotion of hope, so much as to lie both to the Chief as well as herself, despite the fact that it will take 200,000 years. That is absolutely ridiculous, and of course, I'm not surprised that you didn't address this specifically, but rather attacked my irrelevant mistake.

However, keep in mind that astronomical accuracies are not 100% in Halo, either.Given your current track record, I thought you couldn't come up with lamer excuses. I overestimated you again.My "track record" has consisted of backed up statements and claims. Are you claiming that there are no astronomical inaccuracies in the Halo universe?

This isn't the first time I said this. I said this in my original quote to you.The only two instances of "link" on page 114 are used by me. The two times you mentioned "connection" and "related" your statements imply you think Mars and the planet are the same. If it is true you really meant "linked," you need to learn to write clearly. See ****.I wrote clearly enough for a child to understand. You are once again misunderstanding the English language. The words "connected" and "related" are not synonymous with "identical". "Linked" is synonymous with "connected" and "related" in this context, and so my use of the words is perfectly normal. Saying they are connected =/= saying they are one and the same. I mean this in a completely respectful way: You really might want to brush up on your English, as you clearly have a problem with vocabulary.

Every single piece of content we got from IRIS (which, by the way, was written by Bungie/Microsoft, and only produced by a separate company), had an important meaning.This too? I didn't see that in the game.I'm not surprised that you completely ignored the fact that I've already addressed this..

[Edited on 08.27.2008 12:31 PM PDT]

  • 08.26.2008 11:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

What happened earlier in the book does not directly correlate with what happened at the end of the book. It was a new, interlinked pattern specifically because they now held the sole duty of protecting the micro-Dyson Sphere in the center.Yes it does. No matter what alignment they are in, one Sentinel alone cannot break the crust of a planet. As earlier in the book, the Sentinels would combine to fire a stronger beam. Every Sentinel in the structure firing on its own could not break the surface, hence pattern.First of all, the sentinels combined fire. They didn't combine structurally. If they combined structurally to create a single, more powerful beam, it would have been described as such, rather than saying they simply "combined fire". This is made evident by the quote I already made clear to you:

Ghosts of Onyx, Page 377
"The view on-screen blinked and stepped closer--past boilingg air, clouds, tumbling mountains--zooming to ground level, revealing a lattice of three-meter-long rods and half-meter blazing red spheres that hovered between them, forming a crystalline structure."
It states nothing about the sentinels being combined. In fact, it states very clearly that it is a lattice of individual sentinels, as it describes their individual characteristics in the text I bolded. Furthermore, a "lattice", in case you didn't know (since we both know your vocabulary is less than adequate), is an interlinked arrangement or pattern, not a structural combination, such as chain-link fences, polymer bonds strains, etc. etc. The lattice shape itself is what made it form a crystalline structure.

However, you ignored the first part of my quote. They noticed the patterns before they even used magnification, which means that it was visible to the naked eye at a distance safe from the surface's explosion.I did not. As I keep saying, and you keep ignoring, the pattern of the structure is not visible to the naked eye from that distance. The only reason the a pattern was visible was because not every Sentinel was firing individually, but combining beams. I'll say it again: a diamond is a crystalline structure too; a diamond can be cut into a sphere, but do you see the crystalline structure or a curved edge? What does the horizon of a planet look like? A curved edge. Nowhere from page 376 to 378 does it say they saw the Sentinels themselves with the naked eye. "'We've seen that before,' Lash said. "Combined drone fire.'" Combined "a blazing pattern emerged beneath: crosses and lines and dots." Sentinels themselves do not blaze, their beams do. You are suggesting that the crew saw three-meter-long rods from the moon with the naked eye? Redundant question! You're nuts!I never once said or suggested that the crew saw three-meter-long rods with the naked eye. I said that they saw the pattern with the naked eye, which is what is explained in the quote, as I've said I don't know how many times already. Also, it is not a pattern of blazing beams, it is a pattern of the sentinels themselves. Here is yet another quote for you unattentive mind to digest:

Ghosts of Onyx, Page 377
"--a lattice of three-meter-long rods and half-meter blazing red spheres that hovered bettween them, forming a crystalline structure.
There you have it. Blazing pattern = the blazing red spheres of the individual sentinels. The crosses and lines are the descriptions of the lattice, while the dots are the clusters of sentinels that gather into a group intermittently to combine fire. Also not so coincidentally, a lattice also consists of crosses, lines, and dots. To add to this, the sentinels do not even fire a second time until the next page, from which I quote:

Ghosts of Onyx, Page 377
Clusters of drones heated; culminated beams shot forth again, targeting more distance Covenant vessels and vaporizing them.
Nowhere is it stated that the sentinels fired another time after the surface was destroyed and the beams caught a few Covenant ships, until after they have noticed the "blazing pattern", which means, Oh My, that the beams don't even play a part here in the pattern we are discussing. Nice try, though.

Mars aside, as well as your ill-advised, against-the-grain assumption that they did not make it into/through the portalYour interpretation of the voice acting is no more valid than mine, so cut the ill-advised crap. The purple cloud behind the Ark is seen in a bunch of cutscenes and levels, but the problem is that the player never clearly sees what's in the direction the Ark is facing. Sure, you can see the Milky Way, but half the sky is obscured by cliffs and clouds in every level and that's all you can see. I didn't see a sun during the arrival cutscene, but The Ark is played in daylight.So you now admit that your "blue magellanic cloud in both locations" theory was completely false and based on no facts since we do not ever see such a thing near The Ark, yes? Also, I provided much more than just an argument about her voice acting, but you've already tried and failed to argue my other points (different cloud, context of speech and unchangeable mechanics of the English language, the beacon, Mendicant Bias' promise to atone (though this could be argued easily), and a slew of evident opposition to all of your claims), so I don't blaim you for mentioning just this one. My other points aside, however, voiceover performances mean a lot... not just for the emotional experience, but for psychological and subconscious musing. She wouldn't sound confident if she wasn't confident. She wouldn't sound lamenting if she wasn't lamenting. Speaking from experience, as I myself am a voiceover talent, productions as in-depth as the world of Halo do not leave anything to chance. If there is something to interpret, it was meant to be interpreted, especially a performance of all things. It's not hard evidence, but it was anecdotal, which helps fortify my other evidence. In response to The Ark being in daylight despite no sun: So was Halo. The Forerunner have the ability to create artificial atmospheres and natural lighting, apparently without having a natural or artificial sun. Don't ask me how it works, since I have no clue, but Delta and Alpha Halos were both lit with no bright star nearby to do so. Before you say Threshold, that was a gaseous planet.

I never said they put it in his hands.By hard-linked, I really mean hard-linked. As in, MB is not going to be able to access the portal through software or build a connection to it so he can. I'd offer an explanation, but you'd attack it, and then I'd have to spend more time and character count defending it. I won't address anything you say on this, since we'd be going in circles.So be it. For the record, I know what you meant. Be advised though, that I only "attack" things that are attackable. I think if something is discreditable, it should be discredited (including my own evidences that I've brought forth here), because attaining the truth is more important than being correct.

They may not have had time to ensure such security measures.So the portal can be tampered with because the Ark was a rush job… and my argument doesn't make sense? (It's a race to see how many rhetorical questions I can sensibly fit in a post now.)It is a plausible theory. The Librarian had the portal constructed days before the Halos were fired. Additionally, who is to say that they would have created such security measures against their own AI constructs to begin with? Librarian didn't know at the time that Mendicant Bias would betray them. It is just as plausible as any of the crackpot suggestions you've brought up (Foldspace, blue magellanic cloud in both locations, helmet recording of constellations, lattice blazing pattern being the beams rather than the sentinels themselves, etc.). The only difference is that I'm not asserting it to be true.

Once more, speculation.Did I say it was fact? I said I didn't care. I don't know how I can spell it out more obviously that it isn't I point I'm arguing. I swear I could argue that the Ark and Earth are linked by a piece of spaghetti and you'd waste five minutes attacking it.If you're not arguing it, why bring it up?Also, I've removed and ignored a lot of your pointless, excess dribble that had nothing to do with our discussion and will continue to do so.

The difference here, however, is that I am considering both sides, as you should. You are not.No, the difference is I considered both sides a long time ago, and chose the one that made sense, and was therefore true. And you're just coming up with things on the fly.I'm not, but even if I was, I still back them up with evidence and sources, so regardless of how fast I come up with a rebuttal, as long as it is supported, you shouldn't be against it. Also, even if something makes sense to you doesn't mean it is true. Facts depict truth. Not your personal idea of what constitutes ideas as sensible. This is clearly your hugest drawback here. I am ignoring what is sensible, because I was presented with an arrangement of facts from the novels, the game, IRIS, and other mediums that make all of these things possible. I am being as objective as possible, and as such, am defending theories that haven't been proven false. I would not defend a spaghetti theory, because that is plain ridiculous. I'll admit that this theory is slightly ridiculous as well, but it really isn't that ridiculous.

  • 08.27.2008 12:03 AM PDT
Subject: Where in the world is Master Chief?. An extensive scientific theory.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I've been thinking this as well actually.
Great proof; I hope to see what Bungie releases.
I hope it's true but who knows but Bungie.

  • 08.27.2008 12:07 AM PDT
Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

Some actual evidence and citings would be spectacular,It will be done. Classes start again this week so I don't have much time for reading, but it will get done.I hope so.

Because all I've read is a bunch of misinterpretations as well as theories you've seemed to spawn with no basis from the game at all. So, please, provide some sources just as I have.Now you're just throwing that word around like you're getting points for it. Blue cloud? Never saw it, just speculation. "Some of us made it?" She didn't say that either. Dropping a beacon near Mars and taking years to reach Earth? Of course, science be damned! The only source you've provided/cited is the chapter that we'd both already read, so get off your high horse like it actually counts.You're right, it clearly doesn't count as you've refused to read it in its entirety. I've cited IRIS images, Terminal quotations, Legendary Ending quotations, GoO, and the English dictionary for crying out loud. Do you want me to link you to each from now on despite your claims of being fully knowledgeable of them?

Yes you did. Foldspace is a perfect example.I provided half a paragraph of background from the book and the game, where were you?You provided nothing that mentioned or implies anything about foldspace, or its mechanics of being manipulated in such a manner. You deduced it by mentioning that the portal was an instantaneous transportation, which does not indicate anything that would constitute "foldspace". I provided an adequate opposition to this crackpot theory as well.

My point was that fiction has no bounds. Luckily for us, Bungie has decided to set some realistic boundaries for themselves, but that hasn't kept them from breaking them now and then.You also clearly implied that it was possible Bungie had moved an extra-galactic object for no reason at all. Yes, that's true, and since you're so diehard to accuse me of taking everything you've ever written or will write out of context, let me spell that out for you: I said there was no blue cloud in our solar system, you said implied anything was possible, which in turn implies it's possible that blue cloud could be in our solar system. Since there is no story-driven reason why a blue cloud that greatly alter the orbit of every nearby planet (that's an understatement) would be randomly moved to Sol, it must be there for no other reason but to confuse people who would use it to discount the planet being Mars. Lame excuse again. If all you're going to say is that we should be lucky the Pillar of Autumn didn't run on steam power, don't bother at all. (That's a hyperbole, shut up.)I never implied that they moved extra-galactic objects, blue magellanic cloud, frigates, or otherwise into our solar system. I stated that in another universe, anything is possible because any number of things could be completely different, which, considering our lack of knowledge on the topic, is actually 100% true. My point, let me spell it out for you is that: No one, including you or myself, can know for sure. I'm sorry you gave up on considering both sides, but that means you're giving up on the science of investigation and turning to personal belief. Good for you, but don't come here asserting like everything you come up with is factual because it makes sense.

She didn't miss entering the portal1. If she thinks they made it back to Sol, why again does it take years to find a beacon? I guess one of these random "anything is possible" things Bungie altered out-of-the-blue is make radio waves travel at human walking speed?Everyone who entered The Ark did so right above the surface of Africa. Since Master chief is still floating in Zero-G, and the unpowered frigate didn't go crashing to the ground, it would have been realized that they have not exited into the planet's atmosphere. According to her, the portal closed just as they made it through, which could also be used to say that it placed them in a completely different location, which is actually what I am asserting to begin with in that they didn't make it back to Sol, and are not back near The Ark. There are holes in this, however, and I'll admit that it isn't the most credible.

2. Duh. These are counterpoints to your argument.Actually, they are counterpoints to your assertion that Cortana would have realized being suddenly dropped out of slipspace too early. I suggest you re-read. 3. See ***. As for having no explanation for that: it's because your argument is wrong. That she couldn't see the damage to the Ark if they actually entered the portal carries more weight as evidence than your interpretation (and misconception) of hearing relief in Cortana's voice does. You fail to invalidate the argument, nothing new.Actually, I've succeeded in invalidating every argument you've provided so far, and even though I had no argument for it then, I have one now. I was watching the ending in order to pull some stills for reference above in this response, when I realized that the Halo detonated and damaged The Ark while they were headed toward the portal. Going by your logic that she could have somehow documented the whole of constellations on her way out, I could say that she took a single glance out into space and saw the explosion happen, which is actually much more credible as it would take significantly less time to analyze rather than the whole of space in order to stitch constellations together. The explosion happened as she was facing the Chief, out toward The Ark. Very easy to see and notice, hence her quote of how it "did a number on The Ark." Voila, I've invalidated it. Hurray for you and me.

Cite your source on this, please.If I find it, it will come with the terminal citations. I don't have time to go digging through Friday updates right now.In time, I'm sure.

It was asserted that Frankie wrote the majority of IRIS.Cite your source on this, please.I shall as well, though this might take me a bit longer as this was anywhere form June of '07 until September.

With how in-depth I Love Bees was (handled by an entirely different company altogether), you should rethink that one.See spaghetti.I ate some, does that count?

In a separate universe, all of these pieces of "evidence" (which, so far, have only been assertions on your part) would not matter.Ignoring the basic laws of physics (slipspace ∉ basic physics) that would make a dwarf galaxy in our life-sustaning solar system impossible seems to be what you do best.Though it is likely possible, I'm tired of the assumption that the "cloud" even is magellanic cloud at all, let alone a dwarf galaxy (which do not coincide 100% of the time). Both small and large are made up of, respectively, several million and several billion stars, yet as we clearly see, only a handful of stars are present in the stills I've provided. Also, the laws and physics of slipspace, considering it has no correlation to anything in our world except for possibly a "wormhole" (an inaccurate comparison anyway), can not be understood by you or anyone else outside of the Bungie writing team until said laws are explained. As for physics, the only thing you could possibly apply this to is the portal (theoretical astrophysics, mind you), which I've already addressed. I haven't ignored any "basic laws of slipspace or physics", because I never addressed them nor did I have to. They don't exist yet, and won't until the writers decide to stick it in one of the novels. Saying that a separate universe could exist, and that blue cloud (magellanic or otherwise) could be elsewhere in the universe does not defy physics either. I don't know why you're even mentioning it.

It's not a copout to say that the image and the Legendary Ending are connected. Whether or not the image itself has meaning behind it aside from corresponding to where the light emanates from, they are connected nonetheless.*pop* YARG! (Excuse me a moment, my eyes rolled so hard one of them popped out of the socket.) See ****.See this response.

Overall, you're presenting yourself in this debate very poorly.I would judge by validity of reasoning, and you're losing.You've been arguing based on your own definition of sensical deduction, based feverishly, if that, upon both barely related as well as unrelated content. You've also tried to turn several of my arguments against me, failing to do so.

If you don't start addressing my points in their entirety, rather than leaving huge portions of them out, I'm not going to bother responding to you anymore.I swear you could ask me a yes-or-no question, get a single word answer, and you'd say I'm still somehow off-topic and out of context. See **, see ****.I'm not sure I would want to ask you a yes or no question. You might confuse their meaning. As I said above, if something is worth discrediting for the sake of pursuing a blunt truth, I will do so. I'm only cutting thing apart because you seem incapable of taking things at face value.

For the record, unless you can abide by my request for you to address my points as a whole, rather than nitpicking, I will not bother to read, and you needn't bother to write it."Address every little thing I say." "Stop nitpicking." Make up your mind.Another vocabulary problem, yes? Nitpicking means you are picking out specific things. I am telling you to STOP doing that, and to instead address EVERYTHING. Understand now?

[Edited on 08.27.2008 3:23 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2008 12:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

I never said there was. Additionally, if you actually took the time to read a few posts over the last few pages, which you clearly haven'tLet me stop you there. opogjijijp is one of the few people who've actually been paying attention to this thread.He clearly did not pay attention to our conversation. I will not deny his wealth of knowledge, however, as I was incredibly impressed with his Johnson is a Spartan I theory, which is now pretty much considered factual. I remember people attacking him similarly to how you're attacking me now. Nobody wanted to consider such a crazy theory, because it had evidence that could have been taken any which way, and was a bit far-fetched. However, after others started contributing, and Contact Harvest was released, it was no longer some crackpot theory. The same could happen with any theory you consider non-sensical. Many did of his back then. So, as I said, I am no longer going to debate these issues with you as you refuse to respond to all of my number of extensive pieces of evidence, analyses, and oppositional responses. You respond to some, but others you have given me single-sentence responses in a failed attempt to belittle my topic sentence/opening statement. You didn't even bother replying at all to others. For future reference, building credibility for yourself does not include being extensively disrespectful to someone who only wished to validate your intellect by sparking a friendly debate. Additionally, you are expected to admit when you are wrong, or simply give up rather than digging yourself in a hole. I've had to restate several points of mine because you refuse to accept English grammar and vocabulary definitions, for example. I find that ridiculous, and a huge waste of my time.

I will read your next response, if it ever arrives, but only if you have provided an adequate response to everything I have put forth. That does not include "Oh so Bungie pulled this out of their butt?", "See spaghetti.", or focusing on the fact that I used the words connected and related rather than "linked" (which all mean the exact same thing), rather than actually commenting on the fact that the IRIS image was given to us. Posting another random single-frame picture from the video also does not constitute an approriate counter-argument, as I made clear in both this response, and my previous one. Also don't bother responding if you're not going to have your citations on-hand, as you said you would.

Here are my final thoughts, as we've learned through our debate:

Comments:
One huge contradiction I find somewhat amusing is that you argue frivolously that Cortana is still near The Ark, outside of our galaxy, yet can somehow still be drifting toward Onyx, which is within our galaxy. Overall, I'm generally tired of your rude demeanor, down-looking comments, and half-assed responses. I'm somewhat peeved by your lack of knowledge regarding the English language as well, but if you're actually ignorant to some of these things rather than simply trying to avoid admitting that you're wrong, I suppose I shouldn't respond as I have.

Some of your arguments are clever, but in the end I found a way to counter-argue them, and so I did so and backed them up with facts and evidence. Despite this, however, you still belittle them indirectly with passive responses, incredibly disrespectfully. If you were more humble, and willing to accept your mistakes, we might have actually had a more pleasant and informative discussion than what transpired here. I'm sure you can agree, though for different reasons, that this entire ordeal was a complete waste of time. As such, I refuse to waste any more, and am concluding my participation with you.

Personal Deductions:
:::-The sentinel lattice depicts a pattern of individual sentinels in orderly-linked rows (speculation: perhaps several hundreds of thousands or even millions per row), resembling a grid-like, chain-link fence, or polymer chain made up of crosses, lines, and dots. This "blazing pattern" is viewable due to the huge number of blazing red spheres at the center of each sentinel. This, combined with the fact that Onyx is within the Milky Way Galaxy, exponentially decreases the plausibility of Onyx/the sentinel lattice, being a candidate for the Legendary Ending planetoid.

:::-Due to the literal translation of her statement that some of them made it through just in time, as well as her decision to drop the beacon, Cortana believes that their half of the frigate made it through the portal in time, while the Arbiter's did not, but is incorrect.

:::-The frigate, as seen in the Legendary Ending heading toward a mechanical-looking, pattern-laden planetoid, is in an entirely new location, away from both Sol as well as The Ark.

:::-The infestation image which includes a diagram of a planetoid with an anomaly emanating from beyond it as well as the thermal image of Mars holds a connection with the Legendary Ending based on their uncanny visual similarities.

:::-Mendicant Bias' statement of guiding Master Chief, keeping him safe, atoning for past sins by making him an example holds more significance than simply delaying the Portal's closing, or halting Halo's destruction. It is my belief that he has purposefully sent their half of the frigate to another location, as per the above quote.

:::-The Halo/Marathon Crossover Theory, while incredibly unlikely, unethical, and a bit lame, is still a possible theory that has not yet been factually debunked.

Closing thoughts:

I'm tired and literally sick of dealing with this discussion. Good riddance.

Edit: omgpop, if you make it this far, yes I will, though most likely not for awhile.

[Edited on 08.27.2008 3:09 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2008 12:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?

this theory doesn't hold up at all. it's possible he ended up on the other said of the galaxy due to the shield world's presence which should be in the galaxy. and im with dream

  • 08.27.2008 12:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag: opog
  • user homepage:

Secondly, Master Chief never looks out of a shattered hull in any cutscene in the entire game

Yes he does. He wakes up, moves through the Dawn, and as he looks out of the ship Cortana explains what happened.

  • 08.27.2008 10:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I do not appreciate B.Net Group solicitation. If you ignore this and send me an invitation anyway, I will block communications with you.

Posted by: opogjijijp
Secondly, Master Chief never looks out of a shattered hull in any cutscene in the entire game

Yes he does. He wakes up, moves through the Dawn, and as he looks out of the ship Cortana explains what happened.
Thanks for the image. I never noticed that. Editing my post to reflect this.

  • 08.27.2008 11:37 AM PDT

"We're surrounded, that simplifies the problem."

-Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller, USMC

Interesting, great thinking there!

  • 08.27.2008 1:30 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Very enthralling theory, Solid points.....we will see.

117....

  • 08.27.2008 3:13 PM PDT
Subject: Where in the world is Master Chief?. An extensive scientific theory.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

HALO 3 IS TERRIBLE .. BUNGIE HAS ALOT OF MONEY N THEY FORCE PPL TO PLAY A HORRIBLE GAME .. y CANT BUNGIE PAY FOR A SERVER MAKING IT BETTER FOR EVERY1 .. NO THEY WANNA MAKE PPL PAY MORE N MORE FOR A GAME THEY BARELY UPGRADE, THE SHOT SYSTEM IS TERRIBLE, THE BEATDOWN SYSTEM MAKES NO SENSE, SOMETIMES U CAN JUMP AT PPL N HIT THEM N SOMETIMES U CANT, SAD COMING FOR A COMPANY THAT MAKES MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, NO WONDER UR LOSING CUSTOMERS TO CALL OF DUTY, THE GAME SUXS BUNGIE SUXS, HALO 1 AND 2 WAS GOOD THIS SHYT IS HORRID, N Y THE -blam!- DID U MAKE THE GAME BOXED OFF SO PPL GET STUCK ON STUPID AS CORNERS, MAKE A -blam!- BETTER GAME WORTH PLAYING, PPL ONLY PLAY THIS SHYT CUZ THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO N THEY WANNA BE PRO SO BAD, YOU MAKE MILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS MAKE A -blam!- BETTER GAME N ET A SERVER FOR IT U CHEAP BASTARDS

  • 08.27.2008 9:45 PM PDT
Subject: I have 100% Proof of where master chief is.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Don't you trust me?'
"No, I can't say that I do."
"Good, you'll live longer."

YAY 117 PAGES NO1 ELSE POST

  • 08.28.2008 12:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Juice Box = Instant WIN

Hi.

  • 08.28.2008 5:00 AM PDT
Subject: Where in the world is Master Chief?. An extensive scientific theory.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

wow the only thread ever that i actually read through....nice theory i like it alot

  • 08.30.2008 4:56 PM PDT