Username:   
Password:      

Pokemon Creed Forums < Mudkip's Movies < Movies and Animes
Movies and Animes
Favorite Thread Post Reply
Movies and Animes
April 20, 2013 4:46:52pm
    Post: #1 
[-]
Movies and Animes
In the world we have many films, TV series, etc..
In recent times, has emerged based films and anime series.
I wonder in the opnion of you, what is the best movie based on anime has been released which has not yet been, more would be nice to have.

Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 21, 2013 12:09:19am
    Post: #2 
[-]
I don't know any upcoming movies that are based on anime at the moment, but, The live action of Rurouni Kenshin was great, I think it was released last year.
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 21, 2013 12:21:09am
    Post: #3 
[-]
yes ,,, i also think that there is any upcoming movie that is based on the anime..

[you must login to view images]
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 22, 2013 10:39:49am
    Post: #4 
[-]
anime are also marvel movies right.

then i know iron man 3 is comming soon. and i have heard from some of my work mates the jonny cash is comming also :D
if you dont mean this then i am sorry. i dont know any more film that are soon to be released.

Click below to take a wish!
[you must login to view images]
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 29, 2013 5:23:21pm
    Post: #5 
[-]
The Gaia hypothesis, also known as Gaia theory or Gaia principle, proposes that organisms interact with their inorganic surroundings on Earth to form a self-regulating, complex system that contributes to maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. Topics of interest include how the biosphere and the evolution of life forms affect the stability of global temperature, ocean salinity, oxygen in the atmosphere and other environmental variables that affect the habitability of Earth.

The hypothesis was formulated by the scientist James Lovelock[1] and co-developed by the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 1970s.[2] While early versions of the hypothesis were criticized for being teleological and contradicting principles of natural selection, later refinements have resulted in ideas highlighted by the Gaia Hypothesis being used in disciplines such as geophysiology, Earth system science, biogeochemistry, systems ecology, and climate science.[3][4][5] In 2006, the Geological Society of London awarded Lovelock the Wollaston Medal largely for his work on the Gaia theory.[6]
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 29, 2013 5:24:53pm
    Post: #6 
[-]
st not impossible to regard the earth's parts—soil, mountains, rivers, atmosphere etc,—as organs or parts of organs of a coordinated whole, each part with its definite function. And if we could see this whole, as a whole, through a great period of time, we might perceive not only organs with coordinated functions, but possibly also that process of consumption as replacement which in biology we call metabolism, or growth. In such case we would have all the visible attributes of a living thing, which we do not realize to be such because it is too big, and its life processes too slow.

— Stephan Harding , Animate Earth.[35]

Another influence for the Gaia theory and the environmental movement in general came as a side effect of the Space Race between the Soviet Union and the United States of America. During the 1960s, the first humans in space could see how the Earth looked alike as a whole. The photograph Earthrise taken by astronaut William Anders in 1968 during the Apollo 8 mission became an early symbol for the global ecology movement.[36]
Formulation of the hypothesis
James Lovelock, age 91

James Lovelock started defining the idea of a self-regulating Earth controlled by the community of living organisms in September 1965, while working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California on methods of detecting life on Mars.[37][38] The first paper to mention it was Planetary Atmospheres: Compositional and other Changes Associated with the Presence of Life, co-authored with C.E. Giffin.[39] A main concept was that life could be detected in a planetary scale by the chemical composition of the atmosphere. According to the data gathered by the Pic du Midi observatory, planets like Mars or Venus had atmospheres in chemical equilibrium. This difference with the Earth atmosphere was considered to be a proof that there was no life in these planets.

Lovelock formulated the Gaia Hypothesis in journal articles in 1972[1] and 1974,[2] followed by a popularizing 1979 book Gaia: A new look at life on Earth. An article in the New Scientist of February 15, 1975, and a popular book length version of the hypothesis, published in 1979 as The Quest for Gaia, began to attract scientific and critical attention.

Lovelock called it first the Earth feedback hypothesis,[26] and it was a way to explain the fact that combinations of chemicals including oxygen and methane persist in stable concentrations in the atmosphere of the Earth. Lovelock suggested detecting such combinations in other planets' atmospheres as a relatively reliable and cheap way to detect life.
Lynn Margulis

Later, other relationships such as sea creatures producing sulfur and iodine in approximately the same quantities as required by land creatures emerged and helped bolster the theory.[40]

In 1971 microbiologist Dr. Lynn Margulis joined Lovelock in the effort of fleshing out the initial hypothesis into scientifically proven concepts, contributing her knowledge about how microbes affect the atmosphere and the different layers in the surface of the planet.[3] The American biologist had also awakened criticism from the scientific community with her theory on the origin of eukaryotic organelles and her contributions to the endosymbiotic theory, nowadays accepted. Margulis dedicated the last of eight chapters in her book, The Symbiotic Planet, to Gaia. However, she objected to the widespread personification of Gaia and stressed that Gaia is "not an organism", but "an emergent property of interaction among organisms". She defined Gaia as "the series of interacting ecosystems that compose a single huge ecosystem at the Earth's surface. Period". The book's most memorable "slogan" was actually quipped by a student of Margulis': "Gaia is just symbiosis as seen from space".

James Lovelock called his first proposal the Gaia hypothesis but has also used the term Gaia theory. Lovelock states that the initial formulation was based on observation, but still lacked a scientific explanation. The Gaia Hypothesis has since been supported by a number of scientific experiments[41] and provided a number of useful predictions.[42] In fact, wider research proved the original hypothesis wrong, in the sense that it is not life alone but the whole Earth system that does the regulating.[7]
First Gaia conference

In 1985, the first public symposium on the Gaia Hypothesis—Is The Earth A Living Organism? -- was held at the University of Massachusetts August 1–6. The principal sponsor was the National Audubon Society Expedition Institute. Speakers included James Lovelock, George Wald, Mary Catherine Bateson, Lewis Thomas, John Todd, Donald Michael, Christopher Bird, Thomas Berry, Michael Cohen, and William Fields. Some 500 people attended.
Second Gaia conference

In 1988, climatologist Stephen Schneider organised a conference of the American Geophysical Union. The first Chapman Conference on Gaia,[25] was held in San Diego, California on March 7, 1988.

At the conference, James Kirchner criticised the Gaia hypothesis for its imprecision. He claimed that Lovelock and Margulis had not presented one Gaia hypothesis, but four -

CoEvolutionary Gaia: that life and the environment had evolved in a coupled way. Kirchner claimed that this was already accepted scientifically and was not new.
Homeostatic Gaia: that life maintained the stability of the natural environment, and that this stability enabled life to continue to exist.
Geophysical Gaia: that the Gaia theory generated interest in geophysical cycles and therefore led to interesting new research in terrestrial geophysical dynamics.
Optimising Gaia: that Gaia shaped the planet in a way that made it an optimal environment for life as a whole. Kirchner claimed that this was not testable and therefore was not scientific.

Of Homeostatic Gaia, Kirchner recognised two alternatives. "Weak Gaia" asserted that life tends to make the environment stable for the flourishing of all life. "Strong Gaia" according to Kirchner, asserted that life tends to make the environment stable, to enable the flourishing of all life. Strong Gaia, Kirchner claimed, was untestable and therefore not scientific.[43]

Lovelock and other Gaia-supporting scientists, however, did attempt to disprove the claim that the theory is not scientific because it is impossible to test it by controlled experiment. For example, against the charge that Gaia was teleological, Lovelock and Andrew Watson offered the Daisyworld model (and its modifications, above) as evidence against most of these criticisms. Lovelock said that the Daisyworld model "demonstrates that self-regulation of the global environment can emerge from competition amongst types of life altering their local environment in different ways".[44]

Lovelock was careful to present a version of the Gaia Hypothesis that had no claim that Gaia intentionally or consciously maintained the complex balance in her environment that life needed to survive. It would appear that the claim that Gaia acts "intentionally" was a metaphoric statement in his popular initial book and was not meant to be taken literally. This new statement of the Gaia hypothesis was more acceptable to the scientific community. Most accusations of teleologism ceased, following this conference.
Third Gaia conference

By the time of the 2nd Chapman Conference on the Gaia Hypothesis, held at Valencia, Spain, on 23 June 2000, the situation had changed significantly in accord with the developing science of Bio-geophysiology. Rather than a discussion of the Gaian teleological views, or "types" of Gaia Theory, the focus was upon the specific mechanisms by which basic short term homeostasis was maintained within a framework of significant evolutionary long term structural change.

The major questions were:

"How has the global biogeochemical/climate system called Gaia changed in time? What is its history? Can Gaia maintain stability of the system at one time scale but still undergo vectorial change at longer time scales? How can the geologic record be used to examine these questions?"
"What is the structure of Gaia? Are the feedbacks sufficiently strong to influence the evolution of climate? Are there parts of the system determined pragmatically by whatever disciplinary study is being undertaken at any given time or are there a set of parts that should be taken as most true for understanding Gaia as containing evolving organisms over time? What are the feedbacks among these different parts of the Gaian system, and what does the near closure of matter mean for the structure of Gaia as a global ecosystem and for the productivity of life?"
"How do models of Gaian processes and phenomena relate to reality and how do they help address and understand Gaia? How do results from Daisyworld transfer to the real world? What are the main candidates for "daisies"? Does it matter for Gaia theory whether we find daisies or not? How should we be searching for daisies, and should we intensify the search? How can Gaian mechanisms be investigated using process models or global models of the climate system that include the biota and allow for chemical cycling?"

In 1997, Tyler Volk argued that a Gaian system is almost inevitably produced as a result of an evolution towards far-from-equilibrium homeostatic states that maximise entropy production, and Kleidon (2004) agreed stating: "...homeostatic behavior can emerge from a state of MEP associated with the planetary albedo"; "...the resulting behavior of a biotic Earth at a state of MEP may well lead to near-homeostatic behavior of the Earth system on long time scales, as stated by the Gaia hypothesis". Staley (2002) has similarly proposed "...an alternative form of Gaia theory based on more traditional Darwinian principles... In [this] new approach, environmental regulation is a consequence of population dynamics, not Darwinian selection. The role of selection is to favor organisms that are best adapted to prevailing environmental conditions. However, the environment is not a static backdrop for evolution, but is heavily influenced by the presence of living organisms. The resulting co-evolving dynamical process eventually leads to the convergence of equilibrium and optimal conditions".
Fourth Gaia conference

A fourth international conference on the Gaia Theory, sponsored by the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority and others, was held in October 2006 at the Arlington, VA campus of George Mason University. Martin Ogle, Chief Naturalist, for NVRPA, and long-time Gaia Theory proponent, organized the event. Lynn Margulis, Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, and long-time advocate of the Gaia Theory, was a keynote speaker. Among many other speakers: Tyler Volk, Co-director of the Program in Earth and Environmental Science at New York University; Dr. Donald Aitken, Principal of Donald Aitken Associates; Dr. Thomas Lovejoy, President of the Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment; Robert Correll, Senior Fellow, Atmospheric Policy Program, American Meteorological Society and noted environmental ethicist, J. Baird Callicott. James Lovelock, the theory’s progenitor, prepared a video for the event.

This conference approached Gaia Theory as both science and metaphor as a means of understanding how we might begin addressing 21st century issues such as climate change and ongoing environmental destruction.
See also
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 29, 2013 5:33:39pm
    Post: #7 
[-]
Well i dont really watch anime movies , But series' A LOT , I think i watched over 27 or so Anime series' in the past 6 months , i dont reallly see a point in the movies

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]

[you must login to view images]
^
Thanx For Teaching Us How Dualot <3

[you must login to view images]
^
Thanx LegendaryTamers For Teaching us how <3

My Training Thread (Cheap):
[you must login to view links]
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 29, 2013 5:38:53pm
    Post: #8 
[-]
my favorite mobvie anime is naruto the movues 2 the animation is good i reccomend it to manga lovers

Honestly, reputationn shows nothing for a player. You could have high reputation and be themost mean spririted person on creed or the otheer way around.
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
April 30, 2013 1:12:25am
    Post: #9 
[-]
well yea all the narutos r good :P i really wanted to see the new dbz battle of the gods.. i havent been able to get it yet sadly, but i hear its really good.
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
May 04, 2013 1:58:18pm
    Post: #10 
[-]
I'd say the Bleach movies are good. I'd prefer the first five Pokemon movies too.
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
May 06, 2013 6:18:47am
    Post: #11 
[-]
Besides the Pokemon movies, I think the Dragon Ball movies were also good.
Thank this message
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply


[-]
Board Statistics
Board Statistics
Our members have made a total of 526,181 posts in 39,218 threads (excluding the 'Miscellaneous' forum catergory, deleted posts and hidden forum sections).
We currently have 342,270 members registered on this Online Pokemon RPG.



© 2010 - 2019 Pokemon Creed Forums - Online Pokemon RPG / MMORPG - Server side coded by Alan and theme designed by Azagthoth. [Back To Top]