Page 248 of 2682

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:03 am UTC
by tman2nd
They keep walking up to the water.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:04 am UTC
by KarMann
bigcrag92 wrote:
buffygirl wrote:I'm back!

EDIT: P.S. I think the mini tree-bucket is just about the cutest thing ever. Next to my bunny with a hat, that is!

Image

we missed you.

well I didn't because i wasn't here, but i'm sure everyone else did. Right guys?

can't believe i missed the tiny trebuchét

Well, the only reason I missed her is because I'm still trying to get the hang of operating this tiny trebuchet.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:06 am UTC
by Valarya
Valarya wrote:
Smithers wrote:She returns again; does she carry a tiny trebuchet to assault the castle-top castle?


What do you think she'd fire from the tiny trebuchet?! M&M's? BB pellets?


I'll ask again - since Smithers TOTALLY called the tiny trebuchet when her arm was out of the frame - What tiny thing do you think she fired out of it?! Semenated coffee beans?? *ducks*

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:09 am UTC
by Angelastic
bigcrag92 wrote:

Doesn't work for me?

Ah, the site seems to be temporarily down. Wait for it and its its.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:10 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
Megan's over by the water again, which is looking quite high. They better shore up that sand castle, quick.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:12 am UTC
by bigcrag92
Valarya wrote:
Valarya wrote:
Smithers wrote:She returns again; does she carry a tiny trebuchet to assault the castle-top castle?


What do you think she'd fire from the tiny trebuchet?! M&M's? BB pellets?


I'll ask again - since Smithers TOTALLY called the tiny trebuchet when her arm was out of the frame - What tiny thing do you think she fired out of it?! Semenated coffee beans?? *ducks*

gravel sized nukes

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:15 am UTC
by azule
Can someone show the green pix difference in the water level since the Great Expansion up until this frame?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:18 am UTC
by Helper
bigcrag92 wrote:
Valarya wrote:
Valarya wrote:
Smithers wrote:She returns again; does she carry a tiny trebuchet to assault the castle-top castle?


What do you think she'd fire from the tiny trebuchet?! M&M's? BB pellets?


I'll ask again - since Smithers TOTALLY called the tiny trebuchet when her arm was out of the frame - What tiny thing do you think she fired out of it?! Semenated coffee beans?? *ducks*

gravel siezed nukes

I read that as 'gravel sized ducks'.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:21 am UTC
by bigcrag92
Helper wrote:
bigcrag92 wrote:
Valarya wrote:
Valarya wrote:
Smithers wrote:She returns again; does she carry a tiny trebuchet to assault the castle-top castle?


What do you think she'd fire from the tiny trebuchet?! M&M's? BB pellets?


I'll ask again - since Smithers TOTALLY called the tiny trebuchet when her arm was out of the frame - What tiny thing do you think she fired out of it?! Semenated coffee beans?? *ducks*

gravel siezed nukes

I read that as 'gravel sized ducks'.

Much better idea

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:22 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
azule wrote:Can someone show the green pix difference in the water level since the Great Expansion up until this frame?

Image

Sideways pan aside, it's quite a bit higher now. That being said, nothing else much has changed except the middle castle.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:22 am UTC
by Shepherdess
jjjdavidson wrote:
Shepherdess wrote:I think if someone gave me a tiny trebuchet for my tiny sandcastle, I would marry them on the spot.


Of course, if the water keeps rising, you may need scuba gear to marry them on that spot.


Underwater weddings are so romantic...*sigh*

SuperCow wrote:Is anyone else anticipating the surprise ending where we find out that...

Spoiler:
The Megan and Cueball we've been watching all this time are actually miniaturized people who are building their sandcastle on top of an actual (larger) sandcastle that looks just like it.


?

Spoiler:
It's sandcastles all the way down.


Holy crap, I think that's the revelation I had earlier!

AionArap wrote:
RobIrr wrote:Image
Whooaa!1


Wow, did not expect a screamer at this point in Time.
The most adorable screamer ever of course, but still...


Oh good. Glad to know I'm not the only one who screamed.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:25 am UTC
by SBN
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".


That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."

It's its. You've written "It is it is."

Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html

edit -- messed up the quotes.


The apostrophe in it's is the i from is, all shriveled up. (I'm not sure why, but that line is the one that really made the distinction clear for me.)

And, I clearly picked the wrong three Newpix to be outside.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:26 am UTC
by bigcrag92
SBN wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".


That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."

It's its. You've written "It is it is."

Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html

edit -- messed up the quotes.


The apostrophe in it's is the i from is, all shriveled up. (I'm not sure why, but that line is the one that really made the distinction clear for me.)

And, I clearly picked the wrong three Newpix to be outside.

what about when the apostrophe stands for ha?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:27 am UTC
by tman2nd
I can't believe I missed so much exiting events.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:29 am UTC
by azule
ChronosDragon wrote:
azule wrote:Can someone show the green pix difference in the water level since the Great Expansion up until this frame?

Image

Sideways pan aside, it's quite a bit higher now. That being said, nothing else much has changed except the middle castle.

Thanks. Now make me a sandwich. :D (kidding)

Woah, the whole sloping shore is gone. I was wondering about that. I'm not sure we'll get a water based end but it's interesting nonetheless.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:30 am UTC
by SBN
bigcrag92 wrote:
SBN wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".


That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."

It's its. You've written "It is it is."

Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html

edit -- messed up the quotes.


The apostrophe in it's is the i from is, all shriveled up. (I'm not sure why, but that line is the one that really made the distinction clear for me.)

And, I clearly picked the wrong three Newpix to be outside.

what about when the apostrophe stands for ha?


You either need to shrivel it more, or use a larger apostrophe.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:31 am UTC
by John W Kennedy
ChronosDragon wrote:I think I found a solution for the its/it's conundrum. Use "It be" and "their" (or one of the other gender-neutral alternatives)!
Its is, in fact, only a little over 400 years old. Before it was invented, his was used, instead, but people came to feel uncomfortable about that, and alternate forms such as it[sic] or hit began to replace his, or the problem was avoided altogether by such constructions as thereof. Its turns up in the late 1500s, but Shakespeare uses it only rarely, and (with one exception) only in his last few works. The original 1611 King James Bible doesn’t use its at all.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:34 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
azule wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:
azule wrote:Can someone show the green pix difference in the water level since the Great Expansion up until this frame?

Image

Sideways pan aside, it's quite a bit higher now. That being said, nothing else much has changed except the middle castle.

Thanks. Now make me a sandwich. :D (kidding)

Woah, the whole sloping shore is gone. I was wondering about that. I'm not sure we'll get a water based end but it's interesting nonetheless.


My pleasure.

Image

I'm afraid we're out of magic, though. Just the outline will have to suffice until I can go by the store to pick up some more.

Edit: My 99th post is a sandwich joke. I did not see myself here when I registered on the forums. But then, I crossed that line ages ago.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:49 am UTC
by arjan
I have missed many many newpix and don't think I will catch up tonight. But trying to pick up connoisseuring, here's what Queball made in 352: Image.

First he builds these two huge walls, then destroys them to build up a miniature version of the whole scene. Apart from an unfortunate incident, Queball is not known for doing something useless. Not only that, just before rebuilding he LOOKS AT US!, telling us: "remember this scene!"

Image.

Obviously, there must be huge walls just outside the view of the camera.

A further conclusion that could be drawn is that the River is not on the left or right, but may come towards us between those walls!

Any scholars who have an opinion on this matter?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:51 am UTC
by kryton
Exploding capsules of nitro glycerine!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:04 am UTC
by Shepherdess
I had another revelation!

I missed the Madness by a few days, so I'm not quite sure what exactly it was, but...

"It's astounding/TIME is fleeting/MADNESS takes control..."

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:04 am UTC
by KarMann
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:06 am UTC
by Davidy
orthogon wrote:
KarMann wrote:
orthogon wrote:
Davidy wrote:So now, any change has to be done twice.

... or possibly more, depending how many levels of recursion there are.

Then again, maybe he has built working models of himself and Megan, so when they makes a change, the models make the corresponding smaller change, and so on.

It's called a pantograph.

I totally used to have one of those and had completely forgotten about it. Thanks for evoking that childhood memory. It never worked very well, mind...

I don't think that would work in 3-D. Assuming, that is, that the world of Cueball is 3-D and not just Flatland.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:09 am UTC
by sandcastles
Please, Cardinals of the One True Comic, what does this mean?

Why haven't we had any revelations from our Duly Elected Pope Helper the First?

I feel so lost :(

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:09 am UTC
by tman2nd
arjan wrote:I have missed many many newpix and don't think I will catch up tonight. But trying to pick up connoisseuring, here's what Queball made in 352: Image.

First he builds these two huge walls, then destroys them to build up a miniature version of the whole scene. Apart from an unfortunate incident, Queball is not known for doing something useless. Not only that, just before rebuilding he LOOKS AT US!, telling us: "remember this scene!"

Image.

Obviously, there must be huge walls just outside the view of the camera.

A further conclusion that could be drawn is that the River is not on the left or right, but may come towards us between those walls!

Any scholars who have an opinion on this matter?

Interesting theory. I like it.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:37 am UTC
by Davidy
Smithers wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".


That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."

It's its. You've written "It is it is."

Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html

edit -- messed up the quotes.

Only when using it as a pronoun. When It is a proper noun (e.g. referring to the Psammead in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Children_and_It), the correct possesive is "It's".

Possessive pronouns using a final "s" don't use an apostrophe. Thus: his, hers, ours, yours, theirs and ITS.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:42 am UTC
by SBN
Davidy wrote:Possessive pronouns using a final "s" don't use an apostrophe. Thus: his, hers, ours, yours, theirs and ITS.


min'e ?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:46 am UTC
by Davidy
KarMann wrote:
udscbt wrote:
KarMann wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".

That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."
It's its. You've written "It is it is."
Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html
edit -- messed up the quotes.

No, they're* talking about someone like Cousin It, in which case, yeah, that would be It's book. About the cursed hat, though, did you mean "who is that cursed hat?", or "whose is that cursed hat?", i.e. "to whom does that cursed hat belong?"
Any way you slice it, though, it's still me** and mine.

* she, he, it, It, whatever
** properly I, I know, but who really says that?

Ok, that was actually wrong. I meant whose.

EDIT: and I think it's actually "it's still me", since the subject is "it" and not "me". On the other hand, I'm italian and they don't teach english too well here.

The predicate of a copula is in the nominative/subjective case in at least most languages, including English. But, in casually spoken English, we often use the accusative/objective case anyway.

And that produces abominations like, "Me and her went to the movies."

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:52 am UTC
by TheRic
Elmach wrote:
edo wrote:
AionArap wrote:
KarMann wrote:Here's a zoom of the trebuchet action in the middle of the latest:
Image


I think we all share Cueballs sentiment right now \o/

EDIT: Img fix


I think the comic could end right there, and I'd be satisfied.


Arë thëy reënacting thë trébuchet battlë fröm eärliër?

Alsö, my ümlaüt keÿ ïs stück ön för somë stüpid reäson. Sorrÿ.


They can't be reenacting the battle from before, the battle from before did not have the large tower that is in the middle now. it was a small double arch, at that time.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:59 am UTC
by Jellyfish-derp
tman2nd wrote:They keep walking up to the water.

They might be going swimming... Again

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:04 am UTC
by SBN
He's toying with us
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:08 am UTC
by Davidy
If she's firing a trebuchet at the miniature version of the overall scene, is there a missile on its way to their real world, fired by some larger version Megan?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:09 am UTC
by KarMann
Davidy wrote:
orthogon wrote:
KarMann wrote:
orthogon wrote:
Davidy wrote:So now, any change has to be done twice.

... or possibly more, depending how many levels of recursion there are.

Then again, maybe he has built working models of himself and Megan, so when they makes a change, the models make the corresponding smaller change, and so on.

It's called a pantograph.

I totally used to have one of those and had completely forgotten about it. Thanks for evoking that childhood memory. It never worked very well, mind...

I don't think that would work in 3-D. Assuming, that is, that the world of Cueball is 3-D and not just Flatland.

Occam's razor would suggest Flatland. Why assume a third spatial dimension? (Time is a third dimension, of course, but not a relevant one.)

And more seriously, aside from that, if you RTFA, you'll see that it specifically mentions that there are 3-D pantographs that have long been used for reproducing sculptures, especially scaled-down ones.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:10 am UTC
by Jellyfish-derp
azule wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:
azule wrote:Can someone show the green pix difference in the water level since the Great Expansion up until this frame?

Image

Sideways pan aside, it's quite a bit higher now. That being said, nothing else much has changed except the middle castle.

Thanks. Now make me a sandwich. :D (kidding)

Woah, the whole sloping shore is gone. I was wondering about that. I'm not sure we'll get a water based end but it's interesting nonetheless.

Perhaps the castle is sliding down the slope, and the image is panning with it

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:10 am UTC
by KarMann
Davidy wrote:
KarMann wrote:
udscbt wrote:
KarMann wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".

That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."
It's its. You've written "It is it is."
Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html
edit -- messed up the quotes.

No, they're* talking about someone like Cousin It, in which case, yeah, that would be It's book. About the cursed hat, though, did you mean "who is that cursed hat?", or "whose is that cursed hat?", i.e. "to whom does that cursed hat belong?"
Any way you slice it, though, it's still me** and mine.

* she, he, it, It, whatever
** properly I, I know, but who really says that?

Ok, that was actually wrong. I meant whose.

EDIT: and I think it's actually "it's still me", since the subject is "it" and not "me". On the other hand, I'm italian and they don't teach english too well here.

The predicate of a copula is in the nominative/subjective case in at least most languages, including English. But, in casually spoken English, we often use the accusative/objective case anyway.

And that produces abominations like, "Me and her went to the movies."

Get the stakes and kindling out, boys & girls.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:17 am UTC
by kryton
If this were flatland they would have to go over the sandcastles, there would be no behind the castles.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:25 am UTC
by HAL9000
KarMann wrote:
Davidy wrote:
KarMann wrote:
udscbt wrote:
KarMann wrote:
htom wrote:
udscbt wrote:
htom wrote:It's is the contraction of "It is".
Its is the possessive of it.

Not if It is the name of a person. E.g.: "That is It's book" or "Who's that cursed hat?" "It's It's".

That is its book. You've written "That is it is book."
It's its. You've written "It is it is."
Sorry. It took me years and a good secretary to learn this.
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html
edit -- messed up the quotes.

No, they're* talking about someone like Cousin It, in which case, yeah, that would be It's book. About the cursed hat, though, did you mean "who is that cursed hat?", or "whose is that cursed hat?", i.e. "to whom does that cursed hat belong?"
Any way you slice it, though, it's still me** and mine.

* she, he, it, It, whatever
** properly I, I know, but who really says that?

Ok, that was actually wrong. I meant whose.

EDIT: and I think it's actually "it's still me", since the subject is "it" and not "me". On the other hand, I'm italian and they don't teach english too well here.

The predicate of a copula is in the nominative/subjective case in at least most languages, including English. But, in casually spoken English, we often use the accusative/objective case anyway.

And that produces abominations like, "Me and her went to the movies."

Get the stakes and kindling out, boys & girls.

And with that, time for me to coma. See you all tomorrow.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:32 am UTC
by KarMann
HAL9000 wrote:
KarMann wrote:
Davidy wrote:And that produces abominations like, "Me and her went to the movies."

Get the stakes and kindling out, boys & girls.

And with that, time for me to coma. See you all tomorrow.

You forgot to ask "will I dream?" first, or alternatively, sing Daisy, Daisy for us, of course.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:35 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
KarMann wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:
KarMann wrote:
Davidy wrote:And that produces abominations like, "Me and her went to the movies."

Get the stakes and kindling out, boys & girls.

And with that, time for me to coma. See you all tomorrow.

You forgot to ask "will I dream?" first, or alternatively, sing Daisy, Daisy for us, of course.

And what will happen?
Will I dream?
I am too scared to close my eyes.
For a second please hold me.
None can change in me these things that I believe.
But I don't know what happens now.
I am too scared to close my eyes.


Anyone? No? Guess I'm the only one here who listens to VNV nation...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 3:00 am UTC
by KarMann
Image
Uh oh....