Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Except you havent addressed certain points. You also seemed to have said that Vikings were bigger and had better armour can I have proof please?


Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i could get deeper into this or i could have made my post far more detailed but i am far from wrong.. if you like we can open another thread involving viking life..

but vikings were responsible for various society if not directly then simply with interbreeding and or simply being absorbed into the culture..

i can sit here and name places and areas in europe where that was the case and societies that tied their culture to vikings in europe..

saxon in england
iceland
greenland
switzerland
germans
etc etc..

i could sit here and spout off about how vikings started to change life styles due to port city and open trade routes where raiding was no longer the preferred method of gaining wealth but trade was now the more likely way of not only gaining wealth but knowledge..

Except some of those examples arent really examples of exploration. The Norse people didn't move to Iceland due to exploration they moved because of persecuation and its not really far enough. The Normans travelled to England and conquered it would you classify that as exploration? The Romans conquered North Africa which isn't that far away from Rome, is that really exploration. If I took the eurostar to Paris would I be exploring?

Also there were lots of people that didn't go anywherel. just because some people travleled didn't mean that most of them did.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

i could use my life MA experience about the goal of sword fighting using my black belt weapons training in sword use.. how the warrior looks for a single opportunity and its not the goal to block and parry like in the movies although we are trained to it is not the focus of the sword fighter.. i could tell you how a sword fight usually ended within a few seconds or few minutes from the engagement.. strictly speaking of the MA not viking method of sword fighting

Do you have documented proof that Vikings didn't fight like this?

Originally posted by Deadline
Do you have documented proof that Vikings didn't fight like this?

I just need to point out that that is a ridiculous statement. People very rarely look around an detail what they see not happening, you should be looking for proof that they did fight that way.

Carry on.

when i was talking about better armor i was talking about compared to the ppl in villages they were raiding on average...

the vikings were prepared for battle while the unsuspecting ppl were not.

the fact that the viking were spreading out more and more is one of the causes for their extinction as a ppl.

and viking did explore the fact that they were looking for land to claim doesnt mean it wasnt.. your arguing semantics.. eric the red is a perfect example.. many viking leaders would take many of their tribe or clan for these sea voyages looking for new land to settle in..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcuZ9hb1Odo


i cant tell you much about the viking method of fighting b/c not much was left behind due to their oral tradition.. i know they were skilled grapplers but to me that has much more to do with their size, their broad sword is really designed for a certain form of combat and the amount of strength needed to wield such weapons did not really leave them very sprite and quick on their feet compared to a light weight samurai sword.. the size and weight of wps and armor actually effects and influences fighting styles a great deal..

but at the end viking sword fighting was not remotely close to that of a samurai the only similar thing they had in common was trying to kill their opponent.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I just need to point out that that is a ridiculous statement. People very rarely look around an detail what they see happening, you should be looking for proof that they did fight that way.

Carry on.

Not really. Im not even saying they did. Essentially my point is hes making assumptions. Carry on.

if you go to the spike T.V. website samuria vs viking you will see guys who studied the viking including their weapons and fighting style.. although the MA's of a viking isnt well known their are some ppl that still practice it like others practice tae kwon do or karate..


you can see that they are not similar nor fought the same way they focused more on size, strength and power.. definitely not overall skill, speed or precision.

http://www.spike.com/full-episode/viking-vs-samurai/31558

Where is Finti when we need him?

Originally posted by WickedDynamite
Where is Finti when we need him?

We don't need finti we got me. I'll reply on Monday.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I just need to point out that that is a ridiculous statement. People very rarely look around an detail what they see not happening, you should be looking for proof that they did fight that way.

Carry on.

I see what you did there, but that's not exactly what he meant.


Documentation that shows that they fought differently than what is in question, would show that they "didn't fight like this."


It's simple logic:

Person A assesses that P is true subject 1.

Person B assesses that P is not true of subject 1.


If person B proves that Q is true of subject 1, then person B is correct about P not being true, if and only if Q directly contradicts P.


Therefore, Person B proved that P is not true of subject one. Proving a negative works, "from a certain point of view."

viking sword fighting demonstration...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj-u3J8x598
starwars
i know it doesnt prove anything but still something to think about

Minnesota Vikings?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Minnesota Vikings? damn right they settled and claimed the land the US made a deal with them not to go any further by buying them off with volkswagons, beers and ciggerettes also giving them jobs and good insurance

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
damn right they settled and claimed the land the US made a deal with them not to go any further by buying them off Wuuuuuut?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
when i was talking about better armor i was talking about compared to the ppl in villages they were raiding on average.. .


Ok...

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

the vikings were prepared for battle while the unsuspecting ppl were not.


Again this seems like a generlisation.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

the fact that the viking were spreading out more and more is one of the causes for their extinction as a ppl.

Im sorry but I really think this is nonsense.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

and viking did explore the fact that they were looking for land to claim doesnt mean it wasnt.. your arguing semantics.. eric the red is a perfect example.. many viking leaders would take many of their tribe or clan for these sea voyages looking for new land to settle in..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcuZ9hb1Odo


No no no no. Im not arguing semantics it seems you don't know what you're talking about. Heres what you said.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
more often then not they were explorers who would settle in ares they discovered..

You seem to be using the term exploration incorrectly. If you're arguing that the Vikings were mostly vegetarians and you give examples of Viking eating beef then you can't prove your case. In some of the examples you listed those are not examples of exploration, Also some of the stuff you said doesn't even make sense. When people migrated to Iceland they didn't stop being Vikings and they were still part of the Viking world, so how could moving to Iceland contribute to the eradication of the Vikings?

I guess what you're saying is that lots of the Vikings moved around and migrated and that contributed to the civilization being destroyed, again this a generlisation. There were lots of people in the Viking world that didn't really go anywhere either. How did you come to the conclusion that MOST of them were explorers? Also some of the things you classify as exploration is something everybody did. The Romans used to move around and so did everybody else thats not what caused the Roman Empire and the Celts to lose influence.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

i cant tell you much about the viking method of fighting b/c not much was left behind due to their oral tradition.. i know they were skilled grapplers but to me that has much more to do with their size, their broad sword is really designed for a certain form of combat and the amount of strength needed to wield such weapons did not really leave them very sprite and quick on their feet compared to a light weight samurai sword.. the size and weight of wps and armor actually effects and influences fighting styles a great deal..

but at the end viking sword fighting was not remotely close to that of a samurai the only similar thing they had in common was trying to kill their opponent.

Heres something you posted and some of it doesn't make any sense.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

i could use my life MA experience about the goal of sword fighting using my black belt weapons training in sword use.. how the warrior looks for a single opportunity and its not the goal to block and parry like in the movies although we are trained to it is not the focus of the sword fighter.. i could tell you how a sword fight usually ended within a few seconds or few minutes from the engagement.. strictly speaking of the MA not viking method of sword fighting

Getting into a fight and look for an opprtunity to strike down your opponent is not exclusive to aisan martial arts you have this in boxing and you have this in all martial arts. Its not something inherently asian, the reason why you have this aspect in all martial arts is because its human nature. I can think of one specific fight were a King got into a fight with a beserker and ended up choping his hand off, now I can't be entirely sure about what his tactics were but I suspect due to the reputation of beserkers he wanted to end the fight as quick as possible. Looking for ways to end the fight as quick as possible and looking for an opportuntiy to strike were most likley things that they did in Viking combat.

Also the beserkers were elite warriors and there were many reports about how good they were. Sometimes the only way to beat them was to wait for them to go out of rage and then sneak up and kill them. Theres also strong evidence that some beserkers may have practiced meditation as well. They may have actually used meditation as a way to get into rage and this is actually something that people do in some forms of kung fu.

Weren't Vikings like all sloppy and shit with their fighting? Like just clubbing away until someone dies?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Weren't Vikings like all sloppy and shit with their fighting? Like just clubbing away until someone dies?

Thats a stereotype some of them were professional soldiers and may have actually taken fighting techniques from The Romans. How on earth would they not have any technique.

no one is saying they didnt have certain techniques and attack patterns.. what ppl are saying they could only do so much with the type of wpns they used and were limited in their actions.. imagine lifting and swinging a broad sword it requires power and may not be as fast as lets say a light weight katana that can be held with one or two hands and allow for faster strikes that didnt require the whole body to help make swings and attacks..

the demos youtube video and the viking practioner wpn guys from deadly warrior both said it was tiring to lift those weapons and use them for a prolong engagement that is a fact

I'll take a samurai or a ninja over a viking any day.

besides a MA'ers know about human anatomy well beyond what a viking would know about or even study.. that is also a heavy reason why a samurai or any MA swordsmen would have more options and opportunity to attack they knew the human body in great detail.. what did the vikings study? did they teach their warriors where each artery in the body is located? where the nerve clusters are located how far a joint could go?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
no one is saying they didnt have certain techniques and attack patterns.. what ppl are saying they could only do so much with the type of wpns they used and were limited in their actions..

I don't think that makes it less efficient. Less isn't always a bad thing.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

imagine lifting and swinging a broad sword it requires power and may not be as fast as lets say a light weight katana that can be held with one or two hands and allow for faster strikes that didnt require the whole body to help make swings and attacks..

Vikings also used longswords and some beserkers fought with no armour.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

the demos youtube video and the viking practioner wpn guys from deadly warrior both said it was tiring to lift those weapons and use them for a prolong engagement that is a fact

Great so that means there fighting method was not good for prolonged combat. Doesn't make it less efficient.

Heres what this guy had to say about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muEPMZTAKs0

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
besides a MA'ers know about human anatomy well beyond what a viking would know about or even study.. that is also a heavy reason why a samurai or any MA swordsmen would have more options and opportunity to attack they knew the human body in great detail.. what did the vikings study? did they teach their warriors where each artery in the body is located? where the nerve clusters are located how far a joint could go?

Don't know. Also that might not have worked on the beserkers anyway.

facepalm2sigh... i agree that an axe could and would smash cut into a lager armor ... i think you missed the point where a actual MA'er sword fighting isnt to take or block an attack but simply to avoid it.. this aint the movies..

i agree with you and i couldnt finish watching the video the guy makes the bully in me foam at the mouth..

okay i agree that a katana sword would have a hard time getting past the chain mail.. an axe or heavy swing sword a samurai wouldnt block they would side step or step into the attack to reach the person.. a good samurai could hit an artery as he moves to the side dodging the swing and hitting an exposed opening like a thigh or throat..
anyways my youtube video is better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kGsQPncKzg&feature=related

Are you **** arguing who would win in a fight if a Viking fought a Samurai?

Yes, Rob.

Originally posted by Robtard
Are you **** arguing who would win in a fight if a Viking fought a Samurai? no.. this is thread came about over two comic characters.. my only argument that a comicbook ninja samurai arguably one of the greatest swordmen in marvel could beat a viking god. a god who only uses a sword against his comic samurai/ninja counterpart who has more options and maneuvers not including ninja magic tricks and samurai sixth sense type sh@# and 30 yrs of sword fighting history and the god only has about 4 or 5 issues of using a sword in comics..

i actually think a fully geared viking armor shield sword has a great chance of taking the majority with a samurai with a single sword or two..in real life but not in comics

my argument really is who is the most knowledgeably skilled one, who has better maneuverability and speed.. and use that to make my argument for a comic character and multiply those attributes 10x over with comic feats and history of a character and why he would beat a god with no feats in sword fighting or comic history..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
facepalm2sigh... i agree that an axe could and would smash cut into a lager armor ... i think you missed the point where a actual MA'er sword fighting isnt to take or block an attack but simply to avoid it.. this aint the movies..

No I got that point, duh.

i agree with you and i couldnt finish watching the video the guy makes the bully in me foam at the mouth..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

a good samurai could hit an artery as he moves to the side dodging the swing and hitting an exposed opening like a thigh or throat..
anyways my youtube video is better


Possible but beserkers were alot faster and I do believe that some of them could resist sword blows without dying or being injured. They have that in kung fu thet call it iron shirt.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
no.. this is thread came about over two comic characters.. my only argument that a comicbook ninja samurai arguably one of the greatest swordmen in marvel could beat a viking god. a god who only uses a sword against his comic samurai/ninja counterpart who has more options and maneuvers not including ninja magic tricks and samurai sixth sense type sh@# and 30 yrs of sword fighting history and the god only has about 4 or 5 issues of using a sword in comics..

i actually think a fully geared viking armor shield sword has a great chance of taking the majority with a samurai with a single sword or two..in real life but not in comics

my argument really is who is the most knowledgeably skilled one, who has better maneuverability and speed.. and use that to make my argument for a comic character and multiply those attributes 10x over with comic feats and history of a character and why he would beat a god with no feats in sword fighting or comic history..

WellI started this thread because you were generalising, period.

What's the 4'8" 106lbs Samurai going to do when the 8'4" 312lbs Viking gets him in an arm-bar or triangle-choke? Answer me that!

Originally posted by Robtard
What's the 4'8" 106lbs Samurai going to do when the 8'4" 312lbs Viking gets him in an arm-bar or triangle-choke? Answer me that!

This is supposed to be serious. Get out you! durhulk

Originally posted by Robtard
What's the 4'8" 106lbs Samurai going to do when the 8'4" 312lbs Viking gets him in an arm-bar or triangle-choke? Answer me that! Gut him ten times over.

What is this nonsense about a Viking sword being harder to swing than a katana? A Viking sword is maybe two pounds at most.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Weren't Vikings like all sloppy and shit with their fighting? Like just clubbing away until someone dies?
Absolutely. This is historians' most accurate depiction of ancient Viking culture:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/zanpanzer/17028-72256-LostVikings04jpg-550x.jpg

As you can see, they aren't nearly as developed as Asian warriors, as they are usually limited to only one form of combat (offensive, defensive, or running/jumping), but they more than make up for it with their excellent teamwork and coordiation.

Originally posted by Deadline
Possible but beserkers were alot faster and I do believe that some of them could resist sword blows without dying or being injured.

Without dying? Sure, most people don't die instantly from a single sword blow.

without being injured? You've jumped right past the crazy anime fanboys who think a katana can cut through a tank.

Originally posted by Autokrat
What is this nonsense about a Viking sword being harder to swing than a katana? A Viking sword is maybe two pounds at most.
I agree... the notion that midevil or viking swords or celtic were gigantic and unwieldy isn't true at all, that's a notion from later euro writers who did has small swords and of course yes, even a lighter viking sword is heavy compared to the ultra-light swords those were, but yeah Katana's are also heavier than small swords.

Originally posted by Autokrat
What is this nonsense about a Viking sword being harder to swing than a katana? A Viking sword is maybe two pounds at most.

try grabbing and lifting a large broad sword with one outstretch arm and twist and bend your wrist... overall a sword in itself isnt heavy its the repetitive action.. i forgot what it is called kinestitics i think in battle this would make the difference and they would get winded within a few minutes.. not saying they cannot fight for extended period of time but hauling armor and weapons is a tiring exercise

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
try grabbing and lifting a large broad sword with one outstretch arm and twist and bend your wrist... overall a sword in itself isnt heavy its the repetitive action.. i forgot what it is called kinestitics i think in battle this would make the difference and they would get winded within a few minutes.. not saying they cannot fight for extended period of time but hauling armor and weapons is a tiring exercise
First of all, viking swords come in more varieties than just big ass great swords, also "broadsword" is meaningless that's just a term romance era writers used to refer to any sword that weighed more than their feather-weight smallswords.

Also viking swords are intended to be wielded one handed, the other hand is for the shield, katanas can be wielded with one hand but in most sword forms two handed is more common. In any case, obviously the strain of a viking sword is less with two hands than with one, but the fact remains, the average weight for a katana is a little more than two pounds. Oh yes, what is that... that's also the wieght of the usual viking sword.

balance makes the difference with comfort and ability to wield it longer

like i said shield, armor and sword will eventually slow down and tire a particular person..

look at what it did to the modern viking practitioners on the deadliest warriors show.. bastards were winded from just 30 seconds of attacking a hard rubber dummy.. also wind resistence and drag

Cool... meanwhile the armor and just as heavy weaponry, won't do the same for the samurai who is likely going to be physically weaker? I'm not buying that based on the evidence given. Shields are used because they are useful, and in a fight I think that will show against the samurai.

Viking swords are longer than katanas as well... that could be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on the circumstances.

Weapons, armor are about equal. Physical strength goes to the vikings. What do samurai have, nothing that I have seen proof of. Also the samurai will have to deal with the katana's infamously bad armor-piercing, which is another strength for the viking.

this is what i see happening to the viking...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpJoykyfOE&NR=1

you must not have seen my american samurai link..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kGsQPncKzg&feature=related

ppl have this concept that a samurai is actually trained to tank or block attacks when that is not the main focus of a samurai,, if he were to be hit i agree that the viking weapon would get past his armor or seriously f@#$ him up.. but then again if a samurai simply side steps maneuvers he could kill a viking with a well placed stab slice..

another cool link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQRFuBeRAi4&feature=fvw

lul.

I laughed pretty hard at Brett Chan's(guy with the katana) expression when he didn't cut the chainmail on Deadliest Warrior. A Viking with chain, sword and board would kick the shit out of a samurai.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
this is what i see happening to the viking...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpJoykyfOE&NR=1

you must not have seen my american samurai link..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kGsQPncKzg&feature=related

ppl have this concept that a samurai is actually trained to tank or block attacks when that is not the main focus of a samurai,, if he were to be hit i agree that the viking weapon would get past his armor or seriously f@#$ him up.. but then again if a samurai simply side steps maneuvers he could kill a viking with a well placed stab slice..

another cool link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQRFuBeRAi4&feature=fvw
Wow you act like Samurai are sooo much lighter and faster than vikings, they have just as much weight on proportionally and it's like dodging is some alien concept to vikings? Especially with the viking using a shield the samurai is just not going to be able to dance around him like you say and strike an ideal blow... their blows are just as likely to skate off on mail, while any hit from the viking will be dangerous.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
but then again if a samurai simply side steps maneuvers he could kill a viking with a well placed stab slice..

Katanas really aren't made for stabbing due to the design of the blade though.

Your scenario seems unlikely.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow


i actually think a fully geared viking armor shield sword has a great chance of taking the majority with a samurai with a single sword or two..in real life but not in comics

my argument really is who is the most knowledgeably skilled one, who has better maneuverability and speed.. .


i think i have to post my prior post just so you guys know who i am siding with and what my argument really was.. this really started with who was more skilled and knowledgeable as well as what type of style was used and that neither is remotely similar to one another..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxYvwEnKRjA&feature=related

anyways this is what started this whole thing.. also notice that in real life i did not side with a samurai but i did side with him in a fiction story due to magic and massive mystic skills..

What does that clip prove, they don't give any evidence that vikings were brute strength alone...

More skilled, we don't know because there aren't actual records of viking technique.

Speed/maneuverability, we'd all like to say samurai but i've yet to see actual evidence for it.

umm.. the fact that ppl who were practitioners and trained with old viking weapons and even they stated it was tiring and required strength to wield such weapons.. also the fact that particular weapons influence fighting styles..

a samurai being trained in the human body and best way to take them down and key areas to attack.. also the fact that my argument was based on a fictional world where such abilities are multiplied ten folds where its basically like watching anime and the viking is still depicted as a dumb barbarian fighting style..

anyways skills is knowledge of weapons and bodies and options and maneuvers.. looking at weapons alone one can come up with a set number and even limitations of each weapon..

damn i posted the wrong link but that clip shows how a samurai swings the sword and how the european swong his broads sword obviously he was putting more weight and strength in his swing then the smooth action of the samurai..

this is the link that started this thread.. and the one i meant to post instead of the clip link

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=531557&pagenumber=4

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
umm.. the fact that ppl who were practitioners and trained with old viking weapons and even they stated it was tiring and required strength to wield such weapons..

anyways skills is knowledge of weapons and bodies and options and maneuvers.. looking at weapons alone one can come up with a set number and even limitations of each weapon..


So then after all the years of training they would be stronger?

Logically, the katana would have more limitations than the long sword

they winded themselves out within a few seconds of a demonstration of viking attack styles and they bn doing it for years..

http://www.spike.com/full-episode/viking-vs-samurai/31558

a samurai has no shield and allows him to move more freely with a katana and they are trained to fight from various positions.. giving them more attack options from different angles

Eqs5jALHb2U

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
they winded themselves out within a few seconds of a demonstration of viking attack styles and they bn doing it for years..

http://www.spike.com/full-episode/viking-vs-samurai/31558

a samurai has no shield and allows him to move more freely with a katana and they are trained to fight from various positions.. giving them more attack options from different angles

What time exactly?

Either way I doubt they are trained warriors... training everyday for their lives.

Logically, I'd imagine someone training would get stronger.

Lol @ 11:48

"The Vikings were the largest people on earth. If a Viking came down with a strike like this(demonstrates overhand axe swing), there is no way a little samurai is going to reach that far."

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
a samurai has no shield and allows him to move more freely with a katana and they are trained to fight from various positions.. giving them more attack options from different angles

Katanas are short 2handed weapons that lack ability to inflict damage against someone in chain.

A Viking could simply keep his shield raised and use the swords reach and design and stab the hell out of the samurai.

Or a Viking could drop the shield since the katana won't hurt him in chain and then... wow he is just like the Samurai.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
they winded themselves out within a few seconds of a demonstration of viking attack styles and they bn doing it for years..

http://www.spike.com/full-episode/viking-vs-samurai/31558

a samurai has no shield and allows him to move more freely with a katana and they are trained to fight from various positions.. giving them more attack options from different angles

its fallacious to assume that the stamina of a few demonstrators on a TV show equals that of a person who's entire life revolved around fighting and who's very existence depended on his ability to win a fight to the death

actually samurias are trained to walk into the attack to disrupt it and get into their exposed body from an over head attack.. thats where the whole thing from stepping into death not fearing death etc etc.. that samurais come from they have to step into danger..

anyways lets look at it like this a samurai and viking with nothing but their swords who do you think would win?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
anyways lets look at it like this a samurai and viking with nothing but their swords who do you think would win?

My opinion is that the katana is inferior to the long sword.

I imagine after a couple collisions between the two swords, the katana's edge would be all messed up.

Maybe dull, chipped...?

Long sword still has the reach advantage ans its double bladed.

It would definitely be up to the combatants skills to than ever as the Viking would no longer be able to tank sword strikes.

with just the swords its no longer a "viking" versus a "samurai", so this discussion is now pointless. . . *kills mood*

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
its fallacious to assume that the stamina of a few demonstrators on a TV show equals that of a person who's entire life revolved around fighting and who's very existence depended on his ability to win a fight to the death agreed.. but what evidence are their for a viking? none we use what we can also how do we know those viking practitioners arent in shape? they obviously practice and i would bet your average athlete trained in a fighting weapons style would be physically superior to an ancient man..

either way we make comparisons of the ppl by what we do know.. and the samurai has more history and feats that can be seen even today by bushido practitioners who are not warriors 24 seven.. there is a japanese show that puts samurai myths to the test to test modern samurai skills .. even today we have seen practitioners slice through arrow in mid flight and block them.. we have seen them cut rubber bb bullets in mid flight.. slice through steel bars.. etc etc.. if a non warrior samurai can do this what do you think a seasoned samurai could do?

http://www.google.com/search?q=samurai+cuts&btnG=Search&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=p&tbs=vid%3A1&sa=2
either way it shows the skills, speed of a samurai training..

if ppl what to make an argument for a viking that is fine throw some evidence examples of what they can do..

ppl say well if the viking hits the samurai he wins of course he wins.. its the same for a samurai if a samurai stabs the vikings throat he wins..

ppl need more then just say he wins b/c he is big and strong. a long sword? so what the sword doesnt mean anything samurai waiting him out picking his attack somehow a charging guy with a shield and axe isnt that scary or very effective against a cool analyzing killer who is studying you as he charges at the samurai.. maybe the viking does hit the samurai before he can move maybe the samurai side steps him at the last minutes and lops off a leg maybe not..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
agreed.. but what evidence are their for a viking? none we use what we can also how do we know those viking practitioners arent in shape? they obviously practice and i would bet your average athlete trained in a fighting weapons style would be physically superior to an ancient man..




Wait, wait, wait. Are you arguing that those guys are fitter than an actual Viking warrior?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Without dying? Sure, most people don't die instantly from a single sword blow.

without being injured? You've jumped right past the crazy anime fanboys who think a katana can cut through a tank.

Nope. I was doing Iron Shirt for about a year and I was able to make my body resistant to blows people where even able to observe how tough I could make my body when I channeled chi to certain areas.

I stopped doing it and I've never met anybody who claimed to do it but due to my experience I can see how it could be possible for somebody who trained their whole life to pull this off.

Originally posted by Deadline
Nope. I was doing Iron Shirt for about a year and I was able to make my body resistant to blows people where even able to observe how tough I could make my body when I channeled chi to certain areas.

I stopped doing it and I've never met anybody who claimed to do it but due to my experience I can see how it could be possible for somebody who trained their whole life to pull this off.

You seriously believe Vikings could be hit with a sword and be totally unharmed based on training to resist punches?

Read it again.

Originally posted by Deadline
Nope. I was doing Iron Shirt for about a year and I was able to make my body resistant to blows people where even able to observe how tough I could make my body when I channeled chi to certain areas.

I stopped doing it and I've never met anybody who claimed to do it but due to my experience I can see how it could be possible for somebody who trained their whole life to pull this off.

I underlined the relevant sections. The point im making is that I was only doing it for year. The point in making is that the more time you spend on something the better you get. I only spent 1 year doing it and had some success therefore its logical that people who have spent their whole life doing it can be even better.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
actually samurias are trained to walk into the attack to disrupt it and get into their exposed body from an over head attack.. thats where the whole thing from stepping into death not fearing death etc etc.. that samurais come from they have to step into danger..

anyways lets look at it like this a samurai and viking with nothing but their swords who do you think would win?
An overhead attack? Are you joking? Nobody in this match is going to be jumping around while wearing armor, that even on the samurai is pretty heavy.

I think the viking would win, keeping distance and thrusting while defense from shield and armor pretty much means the win over the samurai who just plain won't be able to attack through that defense, and if he does will probably be stopped by armor. But the shield is a part of this match, and can't just be neglected.

what match this isnt a samurai vs viking thread and again read my damn post i already sided with the viking from the beginning in this thread and the one the started it..

this thread what suppose to be on the life of a viking and how their culture was lost or why...


also who said a shield is a part of this match? this wasnt put in the OP by anyone and if you want to we can further argue that the thread that had started all this were between two fictional character who only had a sword no shield..

now if you want to argue about the viking then start showing some examples and history of the viking b/c as far as i know the shield was not just the only weapons they used some carried multiple axes, spears swords.. some wore armor some didnt.. some had shields some didnt.. so you saying the shield is part of this match when the thread isnt even about fighting but individual skills, abilities and the life of a viking.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=531557&pagenumber=5

this started b/c deadline wanted to deflect from the real argument of sword handling and b/c i said that vikings were explorers and had spread themselves thin which was one of the reasons they lost their culture along with christian conversion..

also its funny how ppl keep giving the viking every weapon they can think of with why he would win but dont even bother to think what weapons a samurai carries, like bow an arrow, long bladed spear and even up to the 1800's they had single shot pistols as well as horses...

Originally posted by Deadline
Read it again.



I underlined the relevant sections. The point im making is that I was only doing it for year. The point in making is that the more time you spend on something the better you get. I only spent 1 year doing it and had some success therefore its logical that people who have spent their whole life doing it can be even better.

Not well enough to ignore being cut by a sword swung by a competent person they can't. You've made an extraordinary claim, where's your extraordinary evidence?

Originally posted by Spire
My opinion is that the katana is inferior to the long sword.

I imagine after a couple collisions between the two swords, the katana's edge would be all messed up.

Maybe dull, chipped...?

Long sword still has the reach advantage ans its double bladed.

It would definitely be up to the combatants skills to than ever as the Viking would no longer be able to tank sword strikes.

actually samurai sword blocking is usually done with the back of the sword to avoid chipping and dulling the edge.

in a sword fight it is more then reach but the wielders ability to fight and maneuver.. in single sword fight i give it to the better trained skilled warrior

man, so, what I've got from this is that, way back in the day, people were ****ing magic (Samurais were immortal gods of death and vikings were impennetrable chi masters ).

Did I misread somewhere?

yes, u missed something. its called reading the rules against spamming/trolling..

my comment was an on topic mockery of certain positions I read within the last few comments on the previous page

yours is an off topic personal slight

this entire thread started with deadline trying to deflect an argument from another post and i never sided with the samurai in full gear combat not once but ppl think i did based on the skill, speed argument and knowledge of a particular warrior

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not well enough to ignore being cut by a sword swung by a competent person they can't. You've made an extraordinary claim, where's your extraordinary evidence?

I don't have to prove anything. Im simply telling you what I think from my personal experience. Due to what I've experienced it may actually be possible.

When I was practising Iron Shirt I didn't know I was going to be part of KMC and I would have to have collected proof. If I knew that I would gone out of my way to collect data just so I could prove it for you. Hell why don't you do some research instead of getting on my case everytime I bring it up?



Originally posted by inimalist
man, so, what I've got from this is that, way back in the day, people were ****ing magic (Samurais were immortal gods of death and vikings were impennetrable chi masters ).

Did I misread somewhere?

I personally think its personal due to the training I've done.

Originally posted by Deadline
I don't have to prove anything. Im simply telling you what I think from my personal experience. Due to what I've experienced it may actually be possible.

When I was practising Iron Shirt I didn't know I was going to be part of KMC and I would have to have collected proof. If I knew that I would gone out of my way to collect data just so I could prove it for you. Hell why don't you do some research instead of getting on my case everytime I bring it up?

Because its your job to support a claim you make, not mine. Let's say that I'm awesome at jumping and thus claim that samurai (better jumpers than me) would probably be able to get thirty of fourty feet in the air. Surely you would expect me to provide some sort of evidence and if I didn't point out that "that's the craziest bullshit I've ever heard".

Anyway I can't find any evidence of real people being able to use chi to stop sharp objects or any evidence of it being useful in real combat outside of legend.

In fact mostly I'm finding advice on how to keep my lapels crisp . . .

iron shirt? as in the monk body hardening?

i know ppl's muscles and bones can increase in density through training and i have seen some monk spear demonstration not sure if that would be the same as slashing motion and if it would work..

one of my friends was a dirt bike enthusiast and he had told me about a bike rider who died from internal injury caused by a trick gone bad.. he died b/c doctors couldnt get into his internals on time b/c his stomach muscles were extreme dense and tight from repetitive training with the dirt bike.. a scalpel couldnt cut him like it was suppose to.

Originally posted by Deadline
I personally think its personal due to the training I've done.

then you can see why i wouldn't believe it?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because its your job to support a claim you make, not mine. I can't find any evidence of real people being able to use chi to stop sharp objects or any evidence of it being useful in combat.

In fact mostly I'm finding advice on how to keep my lapels crisp . . .

I'm sure you can find the video on youtube (i have no interest in watching it) of a guy who actually believed he could do this

he got on tv, and somebody burried a sword into their arm, because his "chi" powers didn't work properly.

i seen the monk iron shirt and spear demo in casino show floors and whatnot.. two finger upside down push ups. etc etc..

anyways with body hardening i only go so far especially in MA training.. my master use to wanna do his blind fold sword cutting demo on me and i never let his @$$ get near me..

punching sand and kicking and punching me to harden me up is one thing pushing a sword or hitting me with a metal slab over my head is not going to happen..

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because its your job to support a claim you make, not mine. I can't find any evidence of real people being able to use chi to stop sharp objects or any evidence of it being useful in combat.

In fact mostly I'm finding advice on how to keep my lapels crisp . . .

No it isn't. When thing your failing to understand is this if I've done this training I do actually have a logical basis for my beliefs. Just because I don't have the proof doesn't make it wrong for me to mention in a discussion forum.


I don't have time to drop what im doing to prove to you that Iron shirt exists. All I can do at this moment is tell you things from my perspective just because I don't have the proof you need doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to express my opinion.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
iron shirt? as in the monk body hardening?

i know ppl's muscles and bones can increase in density through training and i have seen some monk spear demonstration not sure if that would be the same as slashing motion and if it would work..

one of my friends was a dirt bike enthusiast and he had told me about a bike rider who died from internal injury caused by a trick gone bad.. he died b/c doctors couldnt get into his internals on time b/c his stomach muscles were extreme dense and tight from repetitive training with the dirt bike.. a scalpel couldnt cut him like it was suppose to.

Scalpels are small instruments that have to be used quite precisely during surgery. If they just needed to hack through his flesh with a meat cleaver and then let him die I really doubt it would have been a problem.

Yes, people can train themselves to be very resilient. Boxers can go for many rounds against people who could probably lay me out with one punch. Martial artists all around the world have proven that with concentration and preparation you can stand up to very powerful impacts, Houdini could do it too.

There's a long distance between "surprisingly tough" and "can't be hurt with a sword".

Originally posted by inimalist
then you can see why i wouldn't believe it?



Of course but you should keep open mind. I don't have any stats don't mean it has to be bullshit.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because its your job to support a claim you make, not mine. Let's say that I'm awesome at jumping and thus claim that samurai (better jumpers than me) would probably be able to get thirty of fourty feet in the air. Surely you would expect me to provide some sort of evidence and if I didn't point out that "that's the craziest bullshit I've ever heard".

You idiot. Obviously, you didn't watch Samurai Jack. Remember, "You jump good."? AHA!

Originally posted by Deadline
Of course but you should keep open mind.

sure, give me one iota of reason to believe it and we can talk

else, open your mind to the glory of Allah. I don't have the time to prove to you that he is real, but trust me, from my own experiences, I can promise he is real.

and optimus prime. I don't have time to drop everything I'm doing to prove it to you, but keep an open mind.

Originally posted by Deadline
I don't have any stats don't mean it has to be bullshit.

lol, forget stats, give me a plausible mechanism

i think a person can tank a spear or sword thrust by flexing but i dont see them getting the option in a real fight and the sword will go into them easily with the speed and force put into it..

after all your not going to slowly place a sword or spear and slowly apply pressure while the person flexes and tightens his body as he prepares with his own counter force in a real combat situation.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i seen the monk iron shirt and spear demo in casino show floors and whatnot.. two finger upside down push ups. etc etc..

I've seen David Blaine levitate, Chris Angel cut in half, and David Copperfield make a traincar dissapear.

Originally posted by Deadline
No it isn't. When thing your failing to understand is this if I've done this training I do actually have a logical basis for my beliefs. Just because I don't have the proof doesn't make it wrong for me to mention in a discussion forum.

No you don't have a logical basis. You've extended one real life technique far beyond your own familiarity with it. That's not logic.

Here's the line of thinking you've demonstrated:

I can take a punch really well.
This guy can take a punch better than me.
Thus Vikings were invulnerable to swords.

Socrates and Aristotle are sobbing in their graves right now.

Originally posted by inimalist
I've seen David Blaine levitate, Chris Angel cut in half, and David Copperfield make a traincar dissapear. i give more credibility to the touring monks then david blane.. i have also seen them in MA tournament demonstrations as i shook their hands as i prepared my own demos.. David blane is an illusionist not an actual martial artist..

Originally posted by inimalist
sure, give me one iota of reason to believe it and we can talk

else, open your mind to the glory of Allah. I don't have the time to prove to you that he is real, but trust me, from my own experiences, I can promise he is real.

and optimus prime. I don't have time to drop everything I'm doing to prove it to you, but keep an open mind.

I can understand your skepticism but you dont'actually know me. Thats not a reason to believe but its not a reason to unsult somebody either. Its up to you you can take that option if you like

Originally posted by inimalist


lol, forget stats, give me a plausible mechanism

Im not even sure how it works myself. All I know is that when I foucsed on certain areas I could make my body tougher. Its a combination of physical exercise and meditation. One example were my stomache muscles by focusing on the stomache I was able to make it alot tougher than my friends, they were doing the same exercises I was doing and were not able to do it.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i give more credibility to the touring monks then david blane.. i have also seen them in MA tournament demonstrations as i shook their hands as i prepared my own demos.. David blane is an illusionist not an actual martial artist..

gEDaCIDvj6I

I'm still waiting for the Shaolin monk who can KO Cro Cop

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No you don't have a logical basis. You've extended one real life technique far beyond your own familiarity with it. That's not logic.

Here's the line of thinking you've demonstrated:

I can take a punch really well.
This guy can take a punch better than me.
Thus Vikings were invulnerable to swords.

Socrates and Aristotle are sobbing in their graves right now.

Yes I do. The basis is that if I can have a degree of success in a small time period somebody whose trained there whole life can be much better.

Its not about me talking nonsense its about you looking for an argument. Hell even before I made this argument you were bitching about this:

Originally posted by Wild Shadow


i could use my life MA experience about the goal of sword fighting using my black belt weapons training in sword use.. how the warrior looks for a single opportunity and its not the goal to block and parry like in the movies although we are trained to it is not the focus of the sword fighter.. i could tell you how a sword fight usually ended within a few seconds or few minutes from the engagement.. strictly speaking of the MA not viking method of sword fighting

Originally posted by Deadline



Do you have documented proof that Vikings didn't fight like this?


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I just need to point out that that is a ridiculous statement. People very rarely look around an detail what they see not happening, you should be looking for proof that they did fight that way.

Carry on.

Was it a ridiculous statement...nuh uh.

Originally posted by Deadline
I can understand your skepticism but you dont'actually know me. Thats not a reason to believe but its not a reason to unsult somebody either. Its up to you you can take that option if you like

oooooh, patronize me some more, then spank me! I love it when you talk down to me

Originally posted by Deadline
Im not even sure how it works myself. All I know is that when I foucsed on certain areas I could make my body tougher. Its a combination of physical exercise and meditation. One example were my stomache muscles by focusing on the stomache I was able to make it alot tougher than my friends, they were doing the same exercises I was doing and were not able to do it.

to you, however, that is unexplainable without chi? What if I told you that you had in fact just described the basics of human biology, excersize and attention?

i believe you deadline but to me it isnt nothing mystical.. it is a combination of body hardening exercises and subconscious control of muscles working in unison to achieve said goal.. i dont see it happening in a fight through if some one launched at you with a spear in mid battle.

although due to your muscle density i would believe the spear may not penetrate as deep as an average person with no body hardening exercises but dont get me wrong the spear is going in..

by the way i call my fist jack hammers.. i have blinded two ppl.. broken a jaw and knocked ppl the f@#$ out with one punch due to training and body hardening.. even broken some cement slabs although one of them wasnt a good idea b/c my friends dared me to do it on a job site while working i did it after 5 hits bloody hand and fractures it swelled up nasty since the cement slab was industrial not your average ones used in MA demo..

my legs are also tree killers.. i have some increased calcium deposits in them.. i can actually feel some lumps in my shins from them..

Originally posted by Deadline
Yes I do. The basis is that if I can have a degree of success in a small time period somebody whose trained there whole life can be much better.

Seriously look at your own thinking. Stopping a punch versus stopping a sword. Unless you have direct familiarity with someone being far far beyond your skill and stopping sharp objects with chi you don't have a logical basis for you claim. At all.

At best you have a tenuous connection to something you have no evidence has ever happened.

Originally posted by Deadline
Was it a ridiculous statement...nuh uh.

Yes it was. You asked him to prove a negative . . .

Originally posted by inimalist
oooooh, patronize me some more, then spank me! I love it when you talk down to me

Im not trying to do anything. Im having a conversation.

Originally posted by inimalist

to you, however, that is unexplainable without chi? What if I told you that you had in fact just described the basics of human biology, excersize and attention?

The thing I don't actually think that chi has to be some quasi-mystical force but the meditation I was doing did make a difference.


Originally posted by inimalist
gEDaCIDvj6I

I'm still waiting for the Shaolin monk who can KO Cro Cop

I don't know arent there actual demonstrationf os shoalin monks resisting sharp objects? Obvoulsy that clip is going to be embarrasing.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Seriously look at your own thinking. Stopping a punch versus stopping a sword. Unless you have direct familiarity with someone being far far beyond your skill and stopping sharp objects with chi you don't have a logical basis for you claim. At all.

At best you have a tenuous connection to something you have no evidence has ever happened.


No it isn't its inference. The longer you train at something the better you get. I understand that it may not be true but yes there is a logical basis that it maybe.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos


Yes it was. You asked him to prove a negative . . .

No it wasn't and I explained my stance in my next post. My point was he was making assumptions.

Originally posted by Deadline
No it isn't its inference. The longer you train at something the better you get. I understand that it may not be true but yes there is a logical basis that it maybe.

Then, as I explained previously, we have to accept that samurai could jump thirty or forty feet into the air.

Originally posted by Deadline
The thing I don't actually think that chi has to be some quasi-mystical force but the meditation I was doing did make a difference.

ok

but then why is it even necessary in the equation? If "chi" simply means "the results of focused training and meditation", isn't "chi" redundant?

Originally posted by Deadline
I don't know arent there actual demonstrationf os shoalin monks resisting sharp objects? Obvoulsy that clip is going to be embarrasing.

not to the best of my knowledge

the only thing I have heard of is some monks capable of raising their internal body temperature high enough to dry cloths or something of the like, but even then, I remain highly skeptical, as it was a single study and no real logical explanation (especially when you consider that humans sweat as their internal temp goes up).

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Then, as I explained previously, we have to accept that samurai could jump thirty or forty feet into the air.

Great. If you had somebody who was able to jump 10 feet after doing some samurai training for 1 year, I would belive it might be possible for somebody who was much better trained.

Also im not saying its a forgone conclusion im saying it maybe be possible

Originally posted by inimalist


I'm still waiting for the Shaolin monk who can KO Cro Cop

i've seen the video the idiot though he could hypnotize his students with chi and put a challenge with random ppl and got his @$$ beat..

one idiot old man does not equal a monk who does two finger push upside down and iron shirt demos. do i think the spears are nano point sharp? no.. do i think it is high quality surgical steel? no.. but non the less it is impressive... have you ever gone to a MA tournament and seen demonstrations do you stand up and call them liars or fake?

if you can argue against it then do so if not then stop patronizing ppl and posting an akido guy to some how discredit a shaolin monk practitioner how about you use a kung fu guy who fails the iron shirt demonstration..

sTxjE2t2Sa8&feature=related

anyways the fact that one person cant do something doesnt mean that everyone else cant either and vice versa..

what is fake?

I didn't say people can't do "the iron shirt" technique. I'm saying what they do has nothing to do with chi, and, as you even agreed, has nothing to do with stopping a sword attack.

Actually, come to think of it, not having a dull spear impale you under extremely controlled conditions is impressive, but not really.

My point would be that there are as many charlatans who call themselves monks as those who don't.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
anyways the fact that one person cant do something doesnt mean that everyone else cant either..

so you do actually believe there are monks out there who can beat people up with chi and stop swords?

**** swords. **** tai chi. **** ninja.

12 Gauge semi auto.

Originally posted by Deadline
Great. If you had somebody who was able to jump 10 feet after doing some samurai training for 1 year, I would belive it might be possible for somebody who was much better trained.

No we're using your logic remember:

I can jump pretty high.
This guy can jumper higher than me after some training.
Thus samurai can jump forty feet into the air.


Seriously I can apply this to any ridiculous claim you want me to.

I can w.
After training x can do w better than me.
Thus y can do z.

Where w is a confirmed skill, x and y are people, z is a mythic ability that is sounds sort of like its related to w but I have no evidence of ever happening or being possible at all.

Originally posted by Deadline
Also im not saying its a forgone conclusion im saying it maybe be possible

A lot of things are "maybe possible" that doesn't mean they're worth bringing up in a serious debate. It's "maybe possible" that the Celt developed general relativity in 1200AD but in a serious debate about physics I'm not going to demand they be given credit for that accomplishment simply because it wasn't strictly impossible for them.

Where did this idea that Vikings trained their warriors to focus chi so that they become invulnerable come from anyway?

Originally posted by inimalist
ok

but then why is it even necessary in the equation? If "chi" simply means "the results of focused training and meditation", isn't "chi" redundant?


The problem is when you focus on a certain area your body temperature rises. So I can see why its described as an energy. You maybe be right but at the same time I stopped doing that particular training so I can't tell you more, also I don't think anybody has done enough scientifc testing to make a conclusive analysis.

Originally posted by inimalist

not to the best of my knowledge

the only thing I have heard of is some monks capable of raising their internal body temperature high enough to dry cloths or something of the like, but even then, I remain highly skeptical, as it was a single study and no real logical explanation (especially when you consider that humans sweat as their internal temp goes up).

I can raise my body temperature but I can't do that. People may not be able to fly but I do think you can do extradinary things with meditation. I think you also have to bare in mind I don't think that scientific community is always open minded about this and maybe looking to debunk it. Im currentlty doing reasearch into parasychology and to be quite honest with you there does seem to be alot of bias.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
**** swords. **** tai chi. **** ninja.

12 Gauge semi auto.

well, samurais are too fast and stealthy, and they would chop the gun in half

and vikings would just focus their chi and stop the blast

Originally posted by inimalist




so you do actually believe there are monks out there who can beat people up with chi and stop swords? was it with you and the straw man arguments? did i say that?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No we're using your logic remember:

I can jump pretty high.
This guy can jumper higher than me after some training.
Thus samurai can jump forty feet into the air.


Seriously I can apply this to any ridiculous claim you want me to.

I can w.
After training x can do w better than me.
Thus y can do z.

Where w is a confirmed skill, x and y are people, z is a mythic ability that is sounds sort of like its related to w but I have no evidence of ever happening or being possible at all.



A lot of things are "maybe possible" that doesn't mean they're worth bringing up in a serious debate. It's "maybe possible" that the Celt developed general relativity in 1200AD but in a serious debate about physics I'm not going to demand they be given credit for that accomplishment that wasn't strictly impossible for them.

Where did this idea that Vikings trained their warriors to focus chi so that they become invulnerable come from anyway?

Oh go away.

Originally posted by Deadline
Oh go away.

Yes, how dare I make reasonable points and expose the flaws of your arguments for everyone to see.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes, how dare I make reasonable points and expose the flaws of your arguments for everyone to see.

No thats not the problem. Inimalist is skeptical as well don't see me telling him to go away. Thats because hes having a discussion in a mature manner. Grow up.

Originally posted by Deadline
The problem is when you focus on a certain area your body temperature rises. So I can see why its described as an energy. You maybe be right but at the same time I stopped doing that particular training so I can't tell you more, also I don't think anybody has done enough scientifc testing to make a conclusive analysis.

lots of tests have been done. At this point, the benefits of meditation are considered to be akin to taking time out of your busy day and listening to relaxing music. This sort of focused mediation, where you try to do something new with your body, is a matter of neuroplasticity and probably some confirmation bias.

I'd be happy to test anything you want. Let me know who you know that can do crazy things.

Originally posted by Deadline
I can raise my body temperature but I can't do that. People may not be able to fly but I do think you can do extradinary things with meditation. I think you also have to bare in mind I don't think that scientific community is always open minded about this and maybe looking to debunk it. Im currentlty doing reasearch into parasychology and to be quite honest with you there does seem to be alot of bias.

oh

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
was it with you and the straw man arguments? did i say that?

ok, so you don't?

you certainly made it sound like you did, but maybe I misread it

Originally posted by Deadline
Inimalist

the i is not capitalized, inimalist

also, skeptical isn't appropriate, given that there is little to be skeptical of

you have produced no information or data for me to be skeptical of, the proper term would be that I don't agree with your opinion

Originally posted by Deadline
No thats not the problem. Inimalist is skeptical as well don't see me telling him to go away. Thats because hes having a discussion in a mature manner. Grow up.

I didn't tell you to go away, you told me to go away. Seriously, that was like thirty seconds ago.

All that I have done is ask for any evidence in support of your claims and point out why your logic is invalid.

chi has bn looked at as many different things from quasi mystical energy to your soul body and mind as one.. but some ppl dont believe in a soul and think it is broha same with the quasi mystic stuff so all you get left is with body and mind and how well one can control it...

some of us can turn off pain or ignore it.. raise body temp or lower it.. fall asleep in certain positions which i can do.. etc etc..

their was this old monk video guy who said he can use chi to paralyze animals and used a high yelp to focus it and had a bird fall in mid flight.. i think he learned to focus his voice to a particular pitch since i dont see any ironfist magic type ppl running around

Originally posted by inimalist
lots of tests have been done. At this point, the benefits of meditation are considered to be akin to taking time out of your busy day and listening to relaxing music. This sort of focused mediation, where you try to do something new with your body, is a matter of neuroplasticity and probably some confirmation bias.

Yes but did they do tests on highly skilled indivduals eg shaolin monks etc.

Originally posted by inimalist

I'd be happy to test anything you want. Let me know who you know that can do crazy things.

I might take you up on that at some point.

Originally posted by inimalist

oh

Im looking into NDEs and intersted in a particular scientist and I think he makes a good case for life after to death. I haven't actually seen anybody make a credible rebuttal against some of the points he made but I have seen alot of insults.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos


Where did this idea that Vikings trained their warriors to focus chi so that they become invulnerable come from anyway?

Actually I might adress that point. Its based on a beserker called Little Bear who was said to have laid in bed and made his soul leave his body so it could particpate in battle. No im not saying that actually happened but I do know there is a meditation where you lie on your back and visualise your soul leaving your body. He tought he was astral projecting but what he was really doing was meditating.

Also it been said that Odin himself used to do this and beserkers tended to be followers of Odin, so its possible they would have done this specific type of meditation in a way of honouring Odin.


Originally posted by inimalist
the i is not capitalized, inimalist

also, skeptical isn't appropriate, given that there is little to be skeptical of

you have produced no information or data for me to be skeptical of, the proper term would be that I don't agree with your opinion

Well whatever but im absouletely fine with your opinion.

i use to do it while on acid.. i did it about 5 times 3 of them times were shadow ppl and one who claimed to be the devil. but i think the devil one was just a flash back since i wasnt on acid and i was meditating..

Originally posted by Deadline
Actually I might adress that point. Its based on a beserker called Little Bear who was said to have laid in bed and made his soul leave his body so it could particpate in battle. No im not saying that actually happened but I do know there is a meditation where you lie on your back and visualise your soul leaving your body. He tought he was astral projecting but what he was really doing was meditating.

That's really cool but I don't see how you go from using mediation for visualization to using mediation to make yourself preternaturally durable.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos


All that I have done is ask for any evidence in support of your claims and point out why your logic is invalid.

Your not getting it. I don't have any evidence im simply telling you why I think its possible. No my logic isn't invalid but for somebody with my experience its enough proof to look into it further. As I already stated I realise that it may actually not be possible, all it is 'maybe'.

Were not having a scientfiic debate we are having a conversation on a discussion forum. You are blowing this way out of proportion.

This thread is hilarious. Viking Chi, and that.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's really cool but I don't see how you go from using mediation for visualization to using mediation to make yourself preternaturally durable.

because thats how they do it in qi-gong and kung fu. Meditation is essential

so wait this iron shirt chi wasnt just a random post about chi and MA's but that vikings had the iron chi technique?facepalm2

whats next viking vanish technique and pepper powder distraction?

in this case viking definitely get 10/10

Originally posted by Deadline
No my logic isn't invalid

Saying this changes nothing when I've shown why your logic really is invalid three times.

Originally posted by Deadline
Were not having a scientfiic debate we are having a conversation on a discussion forum. You are blowing this way out of proportion.

But you can't have a discussion if people are allowed to make any claim they want, which is what you seem to be advocating. If that's allowed then the discussion devolves into seeing who can make the wildest claim about the side they support.

Originally posted by Deadline
because thats how they do it in qi-gong and kung fu.

I thought you said this worked by focusing on specific parts of yourself not visualization while lying in bed.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
so wait this iron shirt chi wasnt just a random post about chi and MA's but that vikings had the iron chi technique?facepalm2

whats next viking vanish technique and pepper powder distraction?

in this case viking definitely get 10/10

*sigh*

1. Asian martial artists used mediation to do iron shirt and were said to be able to resist sword blows.
2. Theres evidence that beserkers meditated and were said to be able to resist sword blows

See where im going with this..... I've actually got things to back up what im saying you've done nothing but generalise. The only problem is we don't have conclusive evidence of wether the technique works.

b/c no modern person is stupid enough to be slashed with a sword to prove their Iron shirt techniques is 100% reliable...

i believe that viking and MA's can take sword blows with armor/chain mail on... not bare chested...

i also agree that they could take more damage then your average person and keep on trucking they are warriors trained to turn off pain I.E. meditation no mind and berserker rage also beer and certain rituals would help b4 battle to reach that state but i dont see them surviving days later from the wounds

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
b/c no modern person is stupid enough to be slashed with a sword to prove their Iron shirt techniques is 100% reliable...

Nope im pretty sure I've seen demonstrations were people have.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

i believe that viking and MA's can take sword blows with armor/chain mail on not bare chested...

also i also agree that they could take more damage then your average person and keep on trucking they are warriors trained to turn off pain I.E. meditation no mind and berserker rage also beer and certain rituals would help b4 battle to reach that state but i dont see them surviving days later from the wounds

Fair enough.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Saying this changes nothing when I've shown why your logic really is invalid three times.

No you haven't because it doesn't mean its illogical for somebody of my experience to look into it. Its just illogical for you.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

But you can't have a discussion if people are allowed to make any claim they want, which is what you seem to be advocating. If that's allowed then the discussion devolves into seeing who can make the wildest claim about the side they support.

Not at all it depends on the seriousness of the conversation.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

I thought you said this worked by focusing on specific parts of yourself not visualization while lying in bed.

Thats one way of doing it. If you were to use meditation to go beserk that make your body more resistant as well.

Isn't the "iron shirt" technique a Shoalin practice of toughing the body through physical exercises? Being repeatedly hit in one spot, doing strenuous exercises targeting the joints, growing callouses on your hands/knuckles etc; not just thinking you're tough and shuddenly you are?

Pretty sure it is, I watched a show on Shoalin Monk's daily regiments/training.

Originally posted by Robtard
Isn't the "iron shirt" technique a Shoalin practice of toughing the body through physical exercises? Being repeatedly hit in one spot, doing strenuous exercises targeting the joints, growing callouses on your hands/knuckles etc?

Pretty sure it is, I watched a show on Shoalin Monk's daily regiments/training.

Thats external iron shirt. There are other ways of doing it.

Originally posted by Deadline
Thats external iron shirt. There are other ways of doing it.

That one makes sense.

Originally posted by inimalist
well, samurais are too fast and stealthy, and they would chop the gun in half

and vikings would just focus their chi and stop the blast Nah, they'd die.

most ppl dont know this but vikings were really a mix of oriental ppl and Nordics which is why they knew chi..

in fact viking were really the mongolians who attacked the romans and invaded asia.. true story

http://www.1watchmovie.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Genghis-khan.jpgsneer

Originally posted by Robtard
That one makes sense.

Bare in mind that the Vikings were Indo-Europeans and can be traced back to India. Chinese martial arts has been strongly influenced by India as well.

People stereotype the Vikings as being just brutes but they had a strong mystical background and disciplines as well. They may not have actually have had superpowers but I do belive some of them could do extraodinary things.

Its been also shown that some stage magacians can mess with peoples minds. I think in one Norse Saga there is an example of witch doing just that.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
most ppl dont know this but vikings were really a mix of oriental ppl and Nordics which is why they knew chi..

in fact viking were really the mongolians who attacked the romans and invaded asia.. true story


No.

Originally posted by Robtard
No. look up at your post at deadlines..

Originally posted by Deadline
Bare in mind that the Vikings were Indo-Europeans and can be traced back to India. Chinese martial arts has been strongly influenced by India as well.

People stereotype the Vikings as being just brutes but they had a strong mystical background and disciplines as well. They may not have actually have had superpowers but I do belive some of them could do extraodinary things.

Its been also shown that some stage magacians can mess with peoples minds. I think in one Norse Saga there is an example of witch doing just that.

If you go back far enough, you can trace them to Africa. Still doesn't mean they were the Chi masters of China.

Originally posted by Robtard
If you go back far enough, you can trace them to Africa. Still doesn't mean they were the Chi masters of China.

No no im not saying that. Im saying they would have taken some aspects of Indian mysticism. same as the Chinese did. There is one specific example of a beserker practicing meditation. In India they call it the death posture.

The difference I can't see any examples of specfic African meditation which the Vikings were doing.


Originally posted by Wild Shadow
most ppl dont know this but vikings were really a mix of oriental ppl and Nordics which is why they knew chi..



LOL the Vikings are Indo-Europeans and Chinese martial arts is strongly influenced by India.

If you actually did some research you would know some aspects of the Viking religon can be traced back to India. You know READ instead of just talking out of your arse.

Originally posted by Deadline
No you haven't because it doesn't mean its illogical for somebody of my experience to look into it. Its just illogical for you.

Sorry, that's not how logic works. Your line of thinking simply doesn't work at all.

Watch:

First assumption
The iron shirt technique exists (I think we all accept this)
Second assumption
You can use it to resist blunt trauma through training (again everyone accepts this)
Conclusion
A person who is really good at Iron Shirt can, during a fight, stop a sword with his chest and walk away.

The assumptions don't lead to the conclusion. In fact there is a specific name for the problem here, it's called the No Limits Fallacy.

We can demonstrate it like this:

First assumption
Water flows through a two inch wide pipe (we all accept this)
Second assumption
If we increase the force pushing the water through the pipe it will flow faster (again, we accept this because it's true)
Conclusion
We can move water through the pipe at any speed we wish (we must deny this because empirical and theoretical work show that the water cannot move faster than light, no to mention that the pipe is not infinitely durable and will eventually burst as the pressure rises)

Or you can go look at the proof that Samurai can jump forty feet in the air.

Really I can't make it any simpler than this. You have no evidence (as you admit) and your logic is based on a fallacy (as seen above).

Originally posted by Deadline
Not at all it depends on the seriousness of the conversation.

So then you're not taking this seriously at all and we can just make wild claims about what Samurai can do? Good to know.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
look up at your post at deadlines..

Genghis was 13th century, long after the Vikings did their 250-odd years of pillaging and long after the Roman Empire fell.

So I do hope you're joking with that nonsense.

Originally posted by Robtard
Genghis was 13th century, long after the Vikings did their 250-odd years of pillaging and long after the Roman Empire fell.

So I do hope you're joking with that nonsense. i am..

now i am mad that you would think i was serious

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i am..

Its so hard to tell in this thread.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Sorry, that's not how logic works. Your line of thinking simply doesn't work at all.

Watch:

First assumption
The iron shirt technique exists (I think we all accept this)
Second assumption
You can use it to resist blunt trauma through training (again everyone accepts this)
Conclusion
A person who is really good at Iron Shirt can, during a fight, stop a sword with his chest and walk away.

The assumptions don't lead to the conclusion. In fact there is a specific name for the problem here, it's called the No Limits Fallacy.

We can demonstrate it like this:

First assumption
Water flows through a two inch wide pipe (we all accept this)
Second assumption
If we increase the force pushing the water through the pipe it will flow faster (again, we accept this because it's true)
Conclusion
We can move water through the pipe at any speed we wish (we must deny this because empirical and theoretical work show that the water cannot move faster than light, no to mention that the pipe is not infinitely durable and will eventually burst as the pressure rises)

Or you can go look at the proof that Samurai can jump forty feet in the air.

Really I can't make it any simpler than this. You have no evidence (as you admit) and your logic is based on a fallacy (as seen above).




Whats really interesting is again you ignored the point that skill increases over time. You are simply picking and choosing what you like. Your analogy fails.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

So then you're not taking this seriously at all and we can just make wild claims about what Samurai can do? Good to know.

No I'm taking it seriously but you don't have to. Again that doesn't prove how its illogical for somebody in my position to believe it.


Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i am..

now i am mad that you would think i was serious #

You were? Thats pure fail.

anyways like rub tart said if you go far enough you can trace everyones ancestry to africa..

i am aware that some races have roots in other cultures and came from certain parts of the world but once a few thousand yrs have passed and they no longer share the same features you cant say they are still the same culture.. look at russians they dont have much in common with middle eastern ppl but that is where they originated from some thousand yrs ago.

Originally posted by Deadline
No no im not saying that. Im saying they would have taken some aspects of Indian mysticism. same as the Chinese did. There is one specific example of a beserker practicing meditation. In India they call it the death posture.

The difference I can't see any examples of specfic African meditation which the Vikings were doing.


Call you show some connection with the Vikings having an Indian based past, that ties into what you're saying? Because that's news to me.

If you have to go back to prehistoy, it logically doesn't count.

Originally posted by Deadline
Whats really interesting is again you ignored the point that skill increases over time. You are simply picking and choosing what you like. Your analogy fails.

No not really. My analogy uses "increased pressure" for increased skill. Or in the Samurai jumping one I actually use increased skill over time to stand for increased skill over time.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
anyways like rub tart said if you go far enough you can trace everyones ancestry to africa..

i am aware that some races have roots in other cultures and came from certain parts of the world but once a few thousand yrs have passed and they no longer share the same features you cant say they are still the same culture.. look at russians they dont have much in common with middle eastern ppl but that is where they originated from some thousand yrs ago.

Again there is a specific type of meditation that the Indians used which some of the Vikings used. Please show me examples of African meditation that the Vikings did.

Originally posted by Robtard
Call you show some connection with the Vikings having an Indian based past, that ties into what you're saying? Because that's news to me.

If you have to go back to prehistoy, it logically doesn't count. i think he is arguing the aryan race thing.. that originated in india argument that a particular person used as an excuse

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i think he is arguing the aryan race thing.. that originated in india argument that a particular person used as an excuse

Isn't that the other way around, the Aryans were a Russian based race who supposedly invaded Northern Indian and possibly some parts of the Middle East?

Originally posted by Deadline
Again there is a specific type of meditation that the Indians used which some of the Vikings used. Please show me examples of African meditation was the say as viking nor did i compare them.. i simply agreed with run tart that you can trace ancestry to just about any race most known one is our african origin i never argued that africans can meditate which they can its called chewing herbs and swaying side to side while drums play and they stare at flames or pass out..

but anyways example many ppl believe that the natives of the americas may have originated from asia hence certain similarities in facial or bone and teeth structure..

same for the indian and middle eastern ppl when comparing certain european physical traits but that was thousands of yrs ago they no longer even share hair, eye or skin tone on average.. its now a completely different race of ppl.

Originally posted by Robtard
Call you show some connection with the Vikings having an Indian based past, that ties into what you're saying? Because that's news to me.

If you have to go back to prehistoy, it logically doesn't count.

Well for example....Thor had a swastika and this is a religous Hindu symbol. If you look at the Rig-Vedas there are some gods that are similar to Norse gods. I also think the Vikings can be traced back to a group of people called the Aryans who were in Inida at the time the Rig-Vedas were made.

Its a long time ago but I don't think its pre-history.




Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No not really. My analogy uses "increased pressure" for increased skill. Or in the Samurai jumping one I actually use increased skill over time to stand for increased skill over time.

No not neccesarily. It depends on what speed you're refering to. I don't think that Iron Shirt could stop a bullet. Depending on what speed you can make the water run you could deduce that it maybe be possible to attain certain speeds. Its not as clear cut as you're making it. Are you done now?

The American Indians are indeed descendants from Asia, maybe they should have taken the Iron Shirt technique with them, would have helped them stop the white-man's steel and lead.

Originally posted by Robtard
Isn't that the other way around, the Aryans were a Russian based race who supposedly invaded Northern Indian and possibly some parts of the Middle East? yes and no..

the aryan race was originally the 1st tribe or group of ppl to master agriculture in india the enlighten ones...the nazi then claim they originated from these smart ppl who may have supposedly come from atlantis a technologically advance race and then threw in some angels as well into their BS story..

the viking spread out and mixed with certain races including the russians who did invade and places like the middle east and possibly india not sure...

basically all they did was latch on to another races history to give themselves some form of history and purpose.. you can thank hitler for this propaganda

Originally posted by Robtard
The American Indians are indeed descendants from Asia, maybe they should have taken the Iron Shirt technique with them, would have helped them stop the white-man's steel and lead.

Ok but can you give me specific examples meditation practices that the American Indians used that were found in India? can you give me examples of religous symbology that both the Vikings and the people in India used?


Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i never argued that africans can meditate which they can its called chewing herbs and swaying side to side while drums play and they stare at flames or pass out..

but anyways example many ppl believe that the natives of the americas may have originated from asia hence certain similarities in facial or bone and teeth structure..

same for the indian and middle eastern ppl when comparing certain european physical traits but that was thousands of yrs ago they no longer even share hair, eye or skin tone on average.. its now a completely different race of ppl.


Mate I think you missed the point I was making, again.

Originally posted by Deadline
Well for example....Thor had a swastika and this is a religous Hindu symbol. If you look at the Rig-Vedas there are some gods that are similar to Norse gods. I also think the Vikings can be traced back to a group of people called the Aryans who were in Inida at the time the Rig-Vedas were made.

Its a long time ago but I don't think its pre-history.


Never seen Thor with a Swastika , have seen Roman helmets with Swatikas though, just tells you that knowledge and symbols are passed along, which we all know. Doesn't really connect as you're saying though, could, but not concrete.

The India-Aryan thing is something around 6k BC (though there's many theories that differ), which is around 7k years before the Vikings.

Originally posted by Deadline
Ok but can you give me specific examples meditation practices that the American Indians used that were found in India?

can you give me examples of religous symbology that both the Vikings and the people in India used?


Why would I do that? I'm not making the claim that the Seoux or Apache could "Iron Shirt" because their lineage can be traced back to Asia if you go back far enough.

I can't, though I do think most religions share common routes, again, if you go back far enough. Then there's also the chance of dumb coincidence.

@ deadline

your viking race tied to india's aryan people is a fantasy started by hitler... they are as much your ancestors as they are mine.. they were simply the 1st human group to master agriculture and help build a society a bases for humanity in all parts of the world some 5, 6, 7 8, thousands if not longer of years ago... facepalm2

by your argument i can call myself a descendant of vikings as easily as an african guy can and i would be right genetically speaking with all sharing the same majority genetics

hitler took the swaztika from an expedition in a monastery in either asia or in india..

either way native americans also have the swastika and the crooked cross is a symbol for the aztec serpent god who is similar to jesus. also thor's hammer was also depicted as a cross and sh#$

Originally posted by Robtard
Never seen Thor with a Swastika , have seen Roman helmets with Swatikas though, just tells you that knowledge and symbols are passed along, which we all know. Doesn't really connect as you're saying though.

Its not just the swastika. There is that specific meditation practice and there are also gods in the Rig-Vedas that are similar to Norse gods. You sure the Romans had swastikas?


The Celts are also Indo-Europeans and I think there was a statue found in India that looked almost exactly like a celtic god.

Originally posted by Robtard

The India-Aryan thing is something around 6k BC (though there's many theories that differ), which is around 7k years before the Vikings.

Not sure what your point is but as far as I know they can be traced back ther due to migration patterns.

Originally posted by Deadline
Im looking into NDEs and intersted in a particular scientist and I think he makes a good case for life after to death. I haven't actually seen anybody make a credible rebuttal against some of the points he made but I have seen alot of insults.

who?

i feel like crying.. i didnt think anyone was still brain washed by hitlers propaganda..

i wanna grab him by the collar drag him to a class and sit his @$$ in some college courses, like religions of the world, cultural awareness and even agriculture and its history..

vikings and indians oh gawd

Originally posted by Deadline
Its not just the swastika. There is that specific meditation practice and there are also gods in the Rig-Vedas that are similar to Norse gods. You sure the Romans had swastikas?


The Celts are also Indo-Europeans and I think there was a statue found in India that looked almost exactly like a celtic god.



Not sure what your point is but as far as I know they can be traced back ther due to migration patterns.

I've seen a picture. The Swastika is a fairly common symbol, many cultures used it, doesn't mean there was a direct connection simply because of it. Some tribes of the American Indians used them in their weavings; does that mean they had a Hindu-connection too?

Not sure what my point is? Not sure what your point is, I've said many post ago that if you go back far enough you can trace everyone to a common ground.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
@ deadline

your viking race tied to india's aryan people is a fantasy started by hitler... they are as much your ancestors as they are mine.. they were simply the 1st human group to master agriculture and help build a society a bases for humanity in all parts of the world some 5, 6, 7 8, thousands if not longer of years ago... facepalm2


LOL you actually need to go to a heathen forum were people actually study the Norse religon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_race


The Aryan race is a concept historically influential in European culture and American culture in the period of the late 19th century and early 20th century. It derives from the idea that the original speakers of the Indo-European languages and their descendants up to the present day constitute a distinctive race or subrace of the larger Caucasian race.

While originally meant simply as a neutral ethnic classification, it was later used for political racism in Nazi and neo-Nazi ideological form. It became a concept of scientific racism, and hence also in other currents such as occultism and white supremacism.



Hitler didn't perputate anything he just used it for his own agenda.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

by your argument i can call myself a descendant of vikings as easily as an african guy can and i would be right genetically speaking with all sharing the same majority genetics



Except thats not really my point.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow

hitler took the swaztika from an expedition in a monastery in either asia or in india..

either way native americans also have the swastika and the crooked cross is a symbol for the aztec serpent god who is similar to jesus. also thor's hammer was also depicted as a cross and sh#$

Everybody can be traced back somewhere but my point is that Vikings in particular took something from their stay in India.