From: @   
      
   On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 21:00:53 +0000 (UTC), Alexander Cain wrote:   
      
   > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:06:37 -0500, Vinnie Yasay wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:21:20 -0800 (PST), Rats wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> The Elder wand is supposed to be a wand that cannot lose in duels yet   
   >>> Dumbledore beat Grindewald in a duel to win the elder wand off him.   
   >>> How could this be?   
   >>   
   >> I think Dumbledore used an emotional appeal. He cared about   
   >> Grindelwald and wouldn't have wanted to duel him, particularly if he   
   >> knew Grindelwald had the Elder Wand. And he knew that Grindelwald felt   
   >> as guilty as he did about Ariana's death. Rita Skeeter said that based   
   >> on eyewitness accounts of their confrontation, it seemed to be more of   
   >> a surrender on Grindelwald's end than a duel. I know that taking Rita   
   >> Skeeter at her word is risky, but I'm willing to believe Dumbledore   
   >> won this one with only his words.   
   >   
   > I really beleive a huge amount more to Rita than Albus. Even if that   
   > amount is infinitesimal. tongue.gif   
   >   
   > What is a wand but a magic channeler for the wizard/witch's   
   > spellcasting?   
   >   
   > Wandless magic is well-known. So there are wizards/witches who are   
   > powerful enough to channel magic withoud a prop.   
   >   
   > Is wandless magic more powerful than wand magic? I guess so, it's (at   
   > least) faster. In a duel reflexes can be decisive. So our "unbeatable"   
   > wand can be defeated by wandless magic.   
      
   I think spontaneous child magic is quite different than adult wandless   
   trained magic.   
   --   
   If you wind up with a fucking boring, miserable life because you   
   listened to your mom, your dad, your teacher, your priest or some guy   
   on TV telling you how to do your shit, then YOU DESERVE IT. ~ Frank   
   Zappa ~   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)