I very much doubt you can back that one up, though I'll be pleasantly surprised if you can.
I don't just make things up for a laugh .
I'm no expert on the subject, but I do know that a lot of research has been done into it and has shown that a good proportion of factors which effect intelligence are genetic. Just a quick google for the subject will get you the info.
Is intelligence determined by nature or nurture? Over the past few decades, genetic studies have convinced psychologists that our genes play a considerable role in determining our intelligence levels -- as much as half of the variation in intelligence among individuals may be due to heredity, research suggests.
That quote suggests that half the variation in intelligence is hereditary, not that half of our intelligence is hereditary, as you originally posted. You also added that intelligence includes talent, which is another debate entirely, as neither are reliably measurable.
Secondly, the article is careful to use the phrases "as much as", "may be" and "suggests". This is a pretty classic way for a journalist to make a point where the evidence is extremely limited, and if you check the papers cited, you'll find this to be the case.
Thirdly, the article is from a magazine run by christians, and they aren't exactly neutral when it come to the nature/nurture debate.
Finally, use google-scholar for this kind of stuff, unlike google, it'll only throw back scientific papers and academic texts. http://scholar.google.com/
I’m not sure I’m getting your point here. I’m not trying to persuade the world that intelligence is genetic, I was only agreeing with squize that its not a matter of anyone can do anything if they try hard enough but rather that we all have limits in different areas. This is my personal opinion and I was simply showing that it is also the general opinion of the scientific community because you asked for me to back up my claims.
I agree that nothing has been entirely proven and these things are very difficult to measure, but a lot of experiments conducted point towards genetics being a factor of intelligence.
Oh, and I didn't notice the Christian connection with that site (I just briefly read through the content), but I fail to see how this causes any bias as Christians have no particular views concerning genetics, so I certainly wouldn’t say they aren’t neutral.
Anyway, as I’ve said, I'm not pushing any views here, I was simply stating mine. You are entitled to believe whatever you like .
...does that look good? i added whatever you call those things (they're those cubes that reside around the perimiter of the tire) so it would look rougher, but it made it a bit too clunky, ill have to redo that part, or try a different approach
i made this in mechanisto, a free, not-well-known 3d renderer for macs...
i´d say its the mix that will make it in the end a good picture,- maybe you need some different tool here because the rendering from a technical side can´t compete much,- that´s why I searched up something else:
povray a openSource 3d model/ rendering language that is available to a lot of platforms including the ancient MacOs 9.
take a look here for some renderings created with it: http://hof.povray.org/
povray never worked on my computer, and therfore i deleted it, meaning i wont be able to download it again (no internet, remember?)
besides, do you really expect me to make something of that quality as shown in the gallery? i find it quite difficult to work with vertices and faces, and most of the looks in a 3d render are in the shaders anyways, video games manage to pull off nice images using a limited number of polygons
the shape of the wheel is good enough, i just need to work on the shaders
EDIT:hell i like it just the way it is already
I dont know about the other programs, but as for making graphics in flash, other thing is that in making animations in flash you have that onion skin and you can drag lines and points each frame, wich makes a lot easier than if you have to draw everything
That running guy, for example(look at the fla) would be very dificult to make without it
meh, ive just used copy and paste for that procedure
god, you guys make me feel like the crappiest animator in the world all of a sudden
i guess its all just a matter of putting some tender loving care into your artwork, which is much easier to do with tools, because if you make a mistake, you dont have to start over
anyone who owns a mac os 9, feel free to try Mechanisto, I actually love it (so simple for me to use, if only macs weren't so slow in rendering...)
meh, ive just used copy and paste for that procedure
I mean, its not like moving,i was talking about make diferent frames, making very little diferences, thats when just distorting a line a little bit and using onion skin helps
Look at the fla i have posted and u will see what i mean, i think noone is looking now, but when you see it in a game you will think it is new stuff
thanks for all the reconmendations, but as I said earlier, im suddenly content with mechanisto (ive got the lower jaw down pat, the body was a bit trickier, after im done making it all finished, ill revise it to look much nicer (which should hopefully be soon))
its bad with shapes, but i love it for shaders (i made an awesome snowball recently), and i already know most there is about it
renderhj: i figured those pictures were above par (who would submit something that wasnt?), but they were so nice, and so plentiful, i automaticlly assumed either:
a. the programs just that good
b. everyones good at rendering except me
zervell: 6 spheres, one with a z+ direction scaled to 0, and a plane; i could do that with mechanisto, most of the spheres are just one basecolor and a finish. only difference is it looks like a vector graphic, and is very shiny!! not to mention odd shadows that dont look like they exist in real life
best be using non-basic geometric shapes in comparison if you want to make swift 3d look good in comparision, its mechanisto's biggest weakness
dont ask me why its in a swf
dont ask me why i didnt do some html so you didnt have to shrink the window
and dont ask me why the car is currently so hideous
just look
http://trogdorffe.tripod.com/omfg.swf
i also put in the snowball for whatever reason
[after waiting for a very long time]
Trogdor458: oh come on its not THAT ugly
[after waiting even longer]
Trogdor458: *sigh*, fine, heres a shrunken version...
http://trogdorffe.tripod.com/cursorblurr2.htm
Last edited by trogdor458; 11-25-2006 at 11:03 PM.
oops, i hit the wrong button
ignore this
[EDIT]i said a few things in the post above
[EDIT]doesnt that snowball look like its been painted on? no help from photshop either
Last edited by trogdor458; 11-26-2006 at 12:26 AM.
i dont know, i respect your guys opinions (i really do)
kindof bugs me that only one opinion has been submitted as of yet (thank you yeps)
i LONG for approval (and perhaps some ibuprofen...my head is killing me)
i wont mind critisicm either, as long as its constructive
"i wont mind critisicm either, as long as its constructive"
If you're showing off graphics, don't have a lot of jpeg compression on them 'cause it defeats the object.
As to the actual images, I'm afraid they look like what they are, someone's first attempts at 3D. Promising start, but nothing great yet, stick with it.
thats exactly what im looking for squize, and i see it as a great compliment coming from someone of your status (and seeing how tough mechanisto is to use, if you look on google, most pictures are of poor quality (there are a few masters though))
not to mention, animation can hide some of the faults and lose them in the action
i see it as a promising start as well, though for whatever the reason, i find it hard to think of improvements that would prove to be beneficial, and expirementing is tough, it took 20-30 minutes just to render that quicktime video (one of the bigger cons of this program)
ps-did anyone notice the threads/treads/iforgetwhattheircalled on the wheels?
Last edited by trogdor458; 11-27-2006 at 07:52 PM.
Originally Posted by lesli_felix
.
Reply With Quote
.
