Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Something i've noticed that could use clearing up
  • Subject: Something i've noticed that could use clearing up
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Something i've noticed that could use clearing up

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Posted by: Rakdos
Posted by: SweetTRIX
after reading all of the posts here i just wanna say one thing. how can any of you clear anything up for anyone when everything your saying is specualtion or your own interpretaions of story that could have been taken way out of context. the point i'm getting at is don't trash people for there ideas and theories (within reason mind you) since your view is and idea and theory of your own.

my personal take is that the "foreunners" (whether by name or "role") created the halo's after stumbling across a race of parsites that were otherwise unstoppable. thus the only conclusion they could come to was to destroy anything sufficient enough to sustain the flood. the halo ring was fired, the forerunners died, which is devulged in both halo (guilty spark mentions that halo had 1 actual firing) and halo 2 (guilty spark explains the true use of halo to the arbiter and tartarus). how or why the arc got to earth is up in the air. the idea of the humans being put in the arc and being protected from halo's blast is PURE speculaiton with no base whatsoever. please feel free to correct me, but include proof. not something some website said, but proof by quotation from either book or game please.


Yup yup. Except theories aren't involved here. He just doesn't like the idea of calling the Forerunners the Forerunners. He's saying that we think "Forerunners" is the actual name of their species, and that we shouldn't call them that. Using his logic though, we shouldn't call Army generals by that title, since they're humans not generals. Instead we should call them "humans that lead vast amounts of combat troops".
His logic is flawed, and he won't accept the fact that their name is the Forerunners, whether their real name or not.


o i know, i was mostly responding to the vast amounts of theories that were thrown around to combat his view point. i like the point about the generals though.

  • 05.30.2006 12:16 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4