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

3 on 1. Dark Knight Batman against three Raptors. Takes place in old abandoned warehouse with steel shipping containers at night. Batman has his usual on body gadgets and nothing special like his timer bombs and batmobile. Raptors have batman's scent, but Batman has sonar vision.

Batman dies

His suit didn't do much against dog bites and raptors are way bigger.

... Batman's capabilities were lowered when he was just bitten by dogs.

Multiple Raptors? I think the better question is "Who WOULD survive them?'

Why do you hate Batman?

Wolverine would Captain America/w shield Sabertooth could survive. The Raptors were said to also have cheetah like speed.

Give Batman some credit. I made it super dangerous intentionally, sure. And to be fair the dogs did get a little lucky and were eventually thrown aside by Batman.

I am not talking about him being attack by the dogs I am just talking about biting power of the raptors plus they seemed near human intellect too.

They were smart. But I don't include JP3 which was just stupid. They have JP1&2 intelligence and feats. They are still mentally inferior from batman by a large margin. I'm not sure who wins in the end and I don't mind. I just wanted to see what people thought.

In the 3rd movie they left they guy barely alive to try and get the people in the trees to try and rescue him using him as bait

Yeah I know. I thought that was dumb. Everything about the third is stupid. The weird Spinosaurus was taller then Rex true. But it lacked the physical stock and strength to over power one. They only actually ate fish. I could argue all day about how crap JP 3 was. 1&2 are amazing though.

Batman dies.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
Yeah I know. I thought that was dumb. Everything about the third is stupid. The weird Spinosaurus was taller then Rex true. But it lacked the physical stock and strength to over power one. They only actually ate fish. I could argue all day about how crap JP 3 was. 1&2 are amazing though.

T-Rex in San Fransisco was an amazing part of the film

Raptors rape.

The raptors in those movies were killed by a small teenage girl using acrobatics on them.

Batman ragestomps.

Also, he has a grappling hook. If Batman desires it, they won't get even nearly close enough to kill.

Batman on the other hand has ranged bladed weaponry as well as bombs.

Batman was owned by dogs.

After he got done owning a building full of SWAT, yes.

The Raptors are >> Batman in strength and speed + they have multiple natural weapons.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
3 on 1. Dark Knight Batman against three Raptors. Takes place in old abandoned warehouse with steel shipping containers at night. Batman has his usual on body gadgets and nothing special like his timer bombs and batmobile. Raptors have batman's scent, but Batman has sonar vision.

So Sonar, batarangs, grappling hooks and small bombs.

Batman leads them into a trap since he can see them coming via the sonar and uses the bombs to assplode them to teeny tiny bits.

Originally posted by golem370
His suit didn't do much against dog bites and raptors are way bigger.

Yea, you say that but I recall it doing quite well at cushioning a free fall slam into a car

The only reason that DOGS presented a problem for Batman is because they were unexpected at the moment.

With Sonar vision along with a grappling hook, smoke bombs and batarangs...,Batman has everything he needs to start making some dino-skin boots.

Originally posted by Psychotron
The Raptors are >> Batman in strength and speed + they have multiple natural weapons. Batman can reach areas they never could with his standard gear. They won't be able to reach him.

So what? He has to fight them sooner or later. They have better senses than him so I doubt he could get the jump on them.

They were seen speaking from a distance with vocal sound so they would have the advantage on him.

They're intelligent animals, but if he grapples high and drops a bomb, they're not going to know what it is and they'll be blown to bits.

Batman can also effectively 'see' through walls and such with his sonar.

Does Batman have bombs?

Originally posted by Psychotron
Does Batman have bombs? Are there dicks in gay porn?

You a fan of gay porn?

Does the pope shit in the woods?

This is getting interesting.

Depending how far he is from the raptors would only work because if these Raptors are like the ones from the first movie they have binocular vision problem solving smarts and could run 50 to 60 mph. The third movie the Raptors knew they were in the trees that why that one set the trap.

It wasn't just at the end with the Joker that batman was bitten... he was also bitten when he was saving the batman impersonators who were trying to stop the mob guys in the park structure... He got bite them.. and mentions to Morgain Freeman that he wants a new suit that can help against dog bites... so he got bitten and punctured twice.. not once.

There's no reason to assume that raptors can see in the dark, so Batman has an edge here. But that all depends on how quickly he can find a place to hide and react. If the steel containers aren't double stacked, he has probably nowhere to hide and they can smell him so they'll eventually find him. And they can jump six feet straight up, grab on to things, and are, according to Michael Crichton, as smart as chimps. They figured out doors, the shit that keeps dogs and cats domesticated for thousands of years.

They can't ascend a sheer surface though.

Batman, through his gear, can.

Wait... why would we assume they can't see in the dark? I'm unclear on this point.. When a vast VAST majority of land animals can see in the dark.. we're going to assume the Raptors fall into the 1% category who can't? That is silly logic in my opinion and doesn't make sense.. what makes more sense is that they can see just fine for hunting purposes in the dark.

Originally posted by NemeBro
They can't ascend a sheer surface though.

Batman, through his gear, can.

If the containers are stacked neatly, yeah Batman can hide out.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Wait... why would we assume they can't see in the dark? I'm unclear on this point.. When a vast VAST majority of land animals can see in the dark.. we're going to assume the Raptors fall into the 1% category who can't? That is silly logic in my opinion and doesn't make sense.. what makes more sense is that they can see just fine for hunting purposes in the dark.

This assumption is largely based around what I remember from the movies, which were filmed before newer advanced studies indicated that raptors were nocturnal. In any case, we can't prove conclusively to what level they could see; we know Batman with sonar has a huge advantage in perception, and he can maneuver himself out of harm's way. Raptors, in dark man-made environments, seem to be a bit more cautious unlike outside.

Regarding the movie:

The kids hid in a darkened kitchen. The raptors didn't immediately find them, even with the ability to smell them and hear them. This ignores the point that they are ridiculously easy to distract. Batman could throw nickels around and probably get out of a tight spot.

Kitchen Scene.

And that's a lot brighter than this place conceivably would be. There's other stuff too in 2-3 where in man-made darkened environments, they are more cautious, either implying natural distrust of their environment or some limited visual impairment. An impairment Batman simply does not have.

Also, the idea that 1% of animals can't is some BS; a large majority of birds are not nocturnal and lack the eye structure to truly see in the dark. There's a fundamental difference between having true night vision and getting by. Raptors are, feathers included, ancestors of modern birds.

you said they CAN'T see in the dark.. Which again.. goes against a HUGE majority of land animals that can in fact see in the dark. To me.. it's better to side with th majoirty when discussing probability than the minority when in doubt. If you said.. see just enough to get by... I could maybe accept that... that they can't see in the dark period... that seems illogical

In the kitchen scene you reference... there didn't see to be any room light issue at all. Not sure where you got that from. If anything.. I would accept the theory that they are more timid in man made environments at first than I would that there was an eye issue. To me it was more of a issue of places to hide and not an more open environment than any eye sight deficiency. Plus, I would submit the scenes where the Raptors open the doors on two seperate occasions.. AND when it followed them up the air duct before they jumped on the T-Rex fossil.. obviously learning how to climb something as they did to barely escape him.

I could be wrong.. but I even seem to remember the scene in the lost world.. where the raptors starting picking off that team in the field one by one that was sent to capture dinosaurs. Can't remember for sure.. but I thought that scene took place at night.

In any case, they just need to get by in the dark assuming that is the best they can do... They have better hearing and smell than batman.. and thus all they need is vision just to get by. They are faster.. stronger and bigger in general. They bite or claws would certainly pierce Batman's gear as well.. as we've seen dogs do it easily. I raptor I could see Batman beating.. 3... Just don't see it.

This largely depends on the distance for starters. If batman wants to grapple away he has to hook the line up to his belt after it attaches to something. Not to mention he would need to find the spot to shoot it in the first place. So if he can find the spot, aim and shoot it, then attach the line to his belt and let it pull him away before they get him....then sure he will make it to a hiding spot and and throw bombs. Other then that batman stands no chance at all and will die a very painful death.

Wow this got way more interesting.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
you said they CAN'T see in the dark.. Which again.. goes against a HUGE majority of land animals that can in fact see in the dark. To me.. it's better to side with th majoirty when discussing probability than the minority when in doubt. If you said.. see just enough to get by... I could maybe accept that... that they can't see in the dark period... that seems illogical

I can see, in retrospect, where you would think this based on my initial post. However, I clarified this quite well. You are mistaking "OMG ABSOLUTELY BLIND IN TEH DARK" with "lacking true night vision". Again, the film versions of these creatures are the admissible evidence here, since the idea that raptors were nocturnal was found out well after the films were created. JP debuted in theaters in 1993.



What I did not link you to besides were scenes from JP 2 and 3 in even darker environments where the raptors were as cautious. Outside, they can hide well, ambush, and work in concert. Inside, they are still very very deadly, but there's an element of uncertainty. It could be limited night vision; could be the environment; could be both. We're both speculating heavily here.



It did, but I rewatched it; there's a bright bright light source overhead. Think road work at night type light.



That didn't help them gobble up the kids in that tiny kitchen, even though they could smell the children (who were filthy and had thrown up in the car, not bathed for a day, etc.) and they could hear them gasp and move. It didn't help them nab any either; they charged balls out into a reflection.



Again, this is a warehouse, with steel stacked containers. He has a grapplying hook. He can dangle from the ceiling and throw Bat-a-rangs and make the lights go out, then use his sonar to drop Bat-Raptor-Repellent, or use his Bat-Stun-Gun to take some out.

He's not fist-fighting these guys in a hallway.

Fair enough and you did clarify this point in your next post.

I'm curious about what has come out after the movies.. I didn't know there was some in depth study on their vision and what it was capable of. That is pretty cool in an of itself and I'm going to try and read more on this... I'm just wondering how they can test such things..

I understand your point about one of them not getting the kids when he had the chance... However, I kinda view that scene as PIS more than anything. I know you may not, but that is just how I see it. They aren't going to kill off those kids.. no matter if T-Rex had them trapped with no where to go.. somebody or something would save them. Shit, they already survived glass stopping T-Rex from eating them.. Like that glass would stopped a thing... Does that mean T-Rex isn't a good killer or hunter? Nah, they just had to live.

Hmmm that is weird about the light... I watched it myself again, and you're right. I'mnot sure if that was used to light up the area so we can see them picked off one by one in dramatic fashion.. or the light was really there and working. Problem with later is, no lights were working at all.. so why were some random lights in field working when no others were?

You're right Batman does have a chance if he fights smart and uses all his resources.. I suppose he could. Like you say, it would require hiim GTFOOdodge quickly to even have a chance. If he did, yeah he could make it happen.. if he doesn't.. it's over.

As stated, Batman has his BATMOBILE.
The dude doesn't need to take the raptors down H2H.
He just stays in the Batmobile, runs one or two over & uses whatever arsenal the mobile has to kill the 3rd.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
3 on 1. Dark Knight Batman against three Raptors. Takes place in old abandoned warehouse with steel shipping containers at night. Batman has his usual on body gadgets and nothing special like his timer bombs and batmobile. Raptors have batman's scent, but Batman has sonar vision. Cripes, my family vs 1 of my favorite comic book characters. osheet

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
As stated, Batman has his BATMOBILE.
The dude doesn't need to take the raptors down H2H.
He just stays in the Batmobile, runs one or two over & uses whatever arsenal the mobile has to kill the 3rd.

I totally missed this. Ridiculous. Batmobile is OP.

Batman doesn't have his time bombs or Batmobile. DOESN'T

Yeah the OP says doesn't have time bombs or batmobile

Originally posted by Robtard
Are there dicks in gay porn? that's a bomb sack of surprise you got me with on that response.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Yeah the OP says doesn't have time bombs or batmobile

Ok, he still has sonar, grappling hooks, and batarangs and shit.

Okay... and the raptors still have Height... Weight.. Strength.. Numbers... Claws.. teeth.. speed.. and hunting advantages.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Okay... and the raptors still have Height...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Vraptor-scale.png

I kid.

At most, they're 6' on their tip-toes, craning upwards. Because of their posture, much of their height is leaning forwards anyways, increasing their reach.



They seemed solid, but I'm uncertain of how heavy they were. A little girl kicked one and they went flying in The Lost World.



Much of their 'strength' is in their ridiculous bite and hind legs. Their forearms are negligible in combat.



Which has never been a definite attribute to victory except with other variables.



By this kind of reasoning, the raptors lack opposable thumbs, imagination, higher reasoning, a belt, and a cape.



They have pouncing and flat run speed advantage. However, in artificial environments they are outmaneuvered by 'slower' human beings. See JP1-3. People less awesome than Batman got away from raptors in indoor environments.



See above. Their hunting advantages seem to be most beneficial outside. Inside, they are wary, and can be fooled or mislead. We have raptors trapped behind two-way doors, running into reflections in kitchens, being dropkicked by small girls, and so on. While they are still deadly, they aren't so deadly that victory is unattainable. Basically, Batman loses this if he fights them in one of the shipping containers.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
Batman doesn't have his time bombs or Batmobile. DOESN'T

People can't read apparently.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Vraptor-scale.png

I kid.

At most, they're 6' on their tip-toes, craning upwards. Because of their posture, much of their height is leaning forwards anyways, increasing their reach.



They seemed solid, but I'm uncertain of how heavy they were. A little girl kicked one and they went flying in The Lost World.



Much of their 'strength' is in their ridiculous bite and hind legs. Their forearms are negligible in combat.



Which has never been a definite attribute to victory except with other variables.



By this kind of reasoning, the raptors lack opposable thumbs, imagination, higher reasoning, a belt, and a cape.



They have pouncing and flat run speed advantage. However, in artificial environments they are outmaneuvered by 'slower' human beings. See JP1-3. People less awesome than Batman got away from raptors in indoor environments.



See above. Their hunting advantages seem to be most beneficial outside. Inside, they are wary, and can be fooled or mislead. We have raptors trapped behind two-way doors, running into reflections in kitchens, being dropkicked by small girls, and so on. While they are still deadly, they aren't so deadly that victory is unattainable. Basically, Batman loses this if he fights them in one of the shipping containers.
We aren't using the real three foot Vraptor, we're using Michael Crichton's ridiculously tall Vraptors. Other than that this is a good analysis.

Can't Batman just use his grappling hook to hang onto a ceiling and just shoot batarangs at the Raptors with no chance of them reaching his elevated position?

Originally posted by Lestov16
Can't Batman just use his grappling hook to hang onto a ceiling and just shoot batarangs at the Raptors with no chance of them reaching his elevated position? Yes.

This is Batman's fight to lose.

People like to forget that the raptors, in all movies, failed to kill certain human beings (Despite having far greater numbers) that eluded them and in some cases killed them. All of whom were not nearly as formidable physically or mentally than Batman.

A ****ing little girl killed one with her gymnastic skills for Christ's sake.

Originally posted by Dramatic Gecko
We aren't using the real three foot Vraptor, we're using Michael Crichton's ridiculously tall Vraptors. Other than that this is a good analysis.

When looking up their normal height, I decided to use the picture for my own amusement. But their actual height is around 6' IIRC. I was a huge fan of the original movie when it came out.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Yes.

This is Batman's fight to lose.

People like to forget that the raptors, in all movies, failed to kill certain human beings (Despite having far greater numbers) that eluded them and in some cases killed them. All of whom were not nearly as formidable physically or mentally than Batman.

A ****ing little girl killed one with her gymnastic skills for Christ's sake.

Please.. If PIS or CIS doesn't count in other parts of this forum it doesn't count here. Thnk about what you just said.. he failed to kill CETAIN humans... ummm I wonder why? maybe because they were key characters in the movie so of course they weren't going to die. It's like claiming T-Rex and the Raptors coudln't kill the little girl and guy in the first one and then coming to the conclusion that they were terrible hunters and killers because they couldn't kill either. Please, no animal or human was going to kill either of them that movie and it should've be hled against them. They couldn't kill a girl but can kill guys 2 or 3 times their since... odd..or just PIS and movies.

Even though the raptors are admittedly more intelligent than the average animal, if (when) Bats grapple hooks to the ceiling, I do not see them devising an effective strategy to get to him

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Please.. If PIS or CIS doesn't count in other parts of this forum it doesn't count here. Thnk about what you just said.. he failed to kill CETAIN humans... ummm I wonder why? maybe because they were key characters in the movie so of course they weren't going to die. It's like claiming T-Rex and the Raptors coudln't kill the little girl and guy in the first one and then coming to the conclusion that they were terrible hunters and killers because they couldn't kill either. Please, no animal or human was going to kill either of them that movie and it should've be hled against them. They couldn't kill a girl but can kill guys 2 or 3 times their since... odd..or just PIS and movies. Shut up you ****ing coward.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Please.. If PIS or CIS doesn't count in other parts of this forum it doesn't count here. Thnk about what you just said.. he failed to kill CETAIN humans... ummm I wonder why? maybe because they were key characters in the movie so of course they weren't going to die. It's like claiming T-Rex and the Raptors coudln't kill the little girl and guy in the first one and then coming to the conclusion that they were terrible hunters and killers because they couldn't kill either. Please, no animal or human was going to kill either of them that movie and it should've be hled against them. They couldn't kill a girl but can kill guys 2 or 3 times their since... odd..or just PIS and movies.

The point is, you have to use movie evidence to weigh the decision coupled with knowledge of their capabilities. You can't just ignore the multitude of times in similar environments they are outmaneuvered or evaded by people inferior in every way to a gadget-toting Batman, just because you think it falls under PIS.

Concession accepted.

Still upset about the other thread I see haha

Who is the most skilled person the raptors managed to kill?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
The point is, you have to use movie evidence to weigh the decision coupled with knowledge of their capabilities. You can't just ignore the multitude of times in similar environments they are outmaneuvered or evaded by people inferior in every way to a gadget-toting Batman, just because you think it falls under PIS.

Yet it clearly is though.. as illustrated. Now I'm suppose to believe a T-Rex is a poor killer because it couldn't kill the kids when it had them dead to rights? Come on Stealth, PIS is PIS and it happens and is not allowed on this forum all the time. It's like me claiming Michael myers is a poor killer because he couldn't kill a 120 pound woman in Jamie Lee Curits... Even though he had no issue killing people more than twice her size on numerous occasions.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Concession accepted.

Still upset about the other thread I see haha The one you sheepishly never replied in? mmm

Sauron wins, gg.

Anyway, you didn't make a real point other than "PIS exists in movies". K.

Batman still grapples his way to safety and fights them on his own terms.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Who is the most skilled person the raptors managed to kill?

They killed somebody who knew them better than anybody and was a trained hunter of all kids of animals. It stalked and out thought him and he got killed. Not to mention the dozens of mercenary hunters they killed who all had weapons. Yet, some of you are holding against them not being about to kill unarmed kids who were PIVOTAL characters in the movies that nothing was going to kill.

I don't give a shit about the kid (although that scene was cheesy as hell) but they only beat the mercs because the tall grassy environment gave them an advantage to ambush, and the Hunter was nowhere near as intelligent or skilled as Bruce. The raptors don't get such an environmental advantage here.

Originally posted by NemeBro
The one you sheepishly never replied in? mmm

Sauron wins, gg.

Anyway, you didn't make a real point other than "PIS exists in movies". K.

Batman still grapples his way to safety and fights them on his own terms.

There was nothing further to say on the matter. I had been dicussion it with Stealth and Ares LONG before you even showed up. I had said the same things to them as I did you and there was not much more to say on the matter. Odd you think you won because I stopped typing in the thread. Odd is kinda the word...more like silly or stupid since threads eventually die.. doesn't mean there is a winner or loser. For this thread...

yes I pointed out PIS in the movies because you wrere using a PIS example as proof.. That isn't proof of anything. Thus I had to correct your evidence, or should I say, lack there of. I'm not saying Batman can't win, in fact, I said he could if he fought really smart and went up hgih from the get go. If he can't or doesn't.. he's done. I think that is a far assesment.

Originally posted by Lestov16
I don't give a shit about the kid (although that scene was cheesy as hell) but they only beat the mercs because the tall grassy environment gave them an advantage to ambush, and the Hunter was nowhere near as intelligent or skilled as Bruce. The raptors don't get such an environmental advantage here.

He may not be as good as batman in some areas no doubt.. but he's certainly better than Batman at hunting big game with basic weaponary.. and knowing the raptors better than Batman would. Point is, you ask and I said who they were. Which again, was to illustrate that them not killing kids was part of the plot not some lack of killing ability on their part.

So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now?

Originally posted by Lestov16
I don't give a shit about the kid.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now? Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
if he fought really smart and went up hgih from the get go. If he can't or doesn't.. he's done. I think that is a far assesment.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now?

I already stated my conclusion on how the fight would go that Lestov quoted. I've also said the advantages the Raptors have over batman which you saw and responded to. Those are the reasons the Raptors would win.

But you were wrong in one respect; Muldoon, at least in the films, is ignorant of Raptor hunting behavior. He was caught in the same ambush that Alan Grant, a dino expert, related to that bug-eyed kid at the beginning of the film.

Second, the instances of raptors behaving differently indoors and being easier to fool/deal with are valid evidence. You would assume that we can't take any of those failings as evidence and must write them off as PIS. I stated in my conclusion that Batman loses pretty much if and only if he fights the raptors in a tight area like a container. This is because he's stronger, faster, and much much smarter than anyone else we've seen evading and defeating raptors in similar situations. He also has the advantage of his grappling hook, batarangs, etc.

So the PIS statement remains invalid, and the evidence of Muldoon was flat out wrong.

What other arguments do you have, if any? Or do you agree with me?

It's not invalid.. We're told through character dialogu how good Muldoon was.. that isn't just dismissed because he was killed. That isn't how it works at all. In fact, we're told that he's knows them better than anybody. Him dying doesn't change that, in fact, it was used to show just how the good the raptors are. For the sake of this argument you've choosen to forgot the clear presentation of the scene and go the opposite dirrection. Them killing them was used to show their excellance.. not the opposite.

Again, saying is killed and thus wasn't very good is really bad logical reasoning. Was Michael Myers weak and a terrible killer because he couldn't kill Jamie Lee Curtis? even though he could kill people 3 x her size who had weapons? Of course not, she wasn't meant to die. Just like the kids weren't meant to die. The raptors not killing them was PIS and you nkow that very well Stealth. Is the T Rex bad at killing things 2 cause it couldn't kill 2 small kids right in front of him? Was Apollo Creed not one of the best boxers of all time in the Rocky verse because he lost to Balboa? Going by your logic.. all the character dialogue about him was false since Rocky beat him.. Doesn't work that way and you know very well that it doesn't.

It's not valid evidence since again, it was against the kids they struggled. Who again, weren't going ot be KILLED BY ANYTHING.. Period. That isn't evidence. That is CIS or PIS or just simply key characters to the plot who aren't going to die. Them struggling to kill unarmed kids yet killling a trained killer or trained mercs prove my point not the opposite.

What on earth makes the PIS argument invalid again? Are you saying there is no PIS or CIS in movies? What is your stance here exactly. If you say there is, then tell me why the raptors not killing the kids doesn't fall into that category.

The facts are these.. unless batman goes up high he has NO chance. Period. If you want to make an argument for him still winning.. please do so. If not, I agree that if he goes up high he can and prob would win. However, it seems you might be under theimpression that he can stay low and still win... we can debate that further since I don't see it that way. The Raptors have most of the physical advantages in this fight and there is no getting around that fact

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
It's not invalid.. We're told through character dialogu how good Muldoon was.. that isn't just dismissed because he was killed. That isn't how it works at all. In fact, we're told that he's knows them better than anybody.

Correction: He knows them better than the foreign workers he employs, eccentric "who gives a ****" John Hammond, and the egg heads who just work in gene manipulation or operating a theme park. He's the only animal expert on the island, and he was explicitly not a dino expert. Grant is, which is why he knew how they thought and survived them so well.

Muldoon is just a game warden. That's even his title.



No, unlike you, I correctly remember the context of his death, his position, and so on. In fact, when the movie came out, he was my favorite character. He's much better in the book, IMO, drunk or no.

The point remains that Grant, a dino expert, knew their attack patterns. Muldoon, a non-dinosaur expert, a game warden of African animals from Kenya reserves, wasn't, and he died for it.

The environment and his ignorance favored them. The feat has zero relevance here.



What does this have to do with anything? No one is saying this.



Their deaths are irrelevant. The fact that they outmaneuvered or escaped the raptors is relevant, except when it's extremely contrived or someone else aided them.

The assertion I made was this: that the raptors have been fooled, evaded, or defeated by people much less capable than Batman.

You have not refuted this with anything, except false information about Muldoon and whining about PIS while abusing the term and stretching it to cover any plot-situation which doesn't favor your stance.



1. Batman's going to go up high. Because he's not a moron.

2. I never said he can "stay low and win". I said he would lose only if he was confined, because that would obliterate his chances for evasion. People evade the raptors in indoors settings constantly throughout the movies, and again, these people are far inferior to Batman in every way.

3. What other arguments do you have that aren't already crushed?

I think Batman wins now.

Ok let's try this again... You haven't crushed my argument at all... I tried to make this point crystal clear but I'll try again... IS YOUR STANCE:

That batman would still win if he doesn't go up high? Simple is that your stance? If so, we'll debate this subject further.

Me admitting that Batman woudl most likely win if he goes up high.. isn't you crushing my argument. I've said so from the start. How can you crush somethign I've agreed to. Now.. NOW if you're saying batman still wins down low.. then by all means.. I disagree and we'll discuss further.

Now onto your other arguments I need to "crush" The point is, Maldoon was said to know them better than anybody. There was NO dialogue about him only knowing them better than the workers there.. janitors... IT guys... none of that was said. Do you have some deleted scenes I don't? If so, please post it. If not, that wasn't what was said.

Next, I have most certainly refuted your assertion... and did so easily. The kids evaded them because THEY WERE SUPPOSE TO LIVE. What on God's Green Earth is so hard to understand about this. Your reasoning is this... yeah.. they were suppose to live BUT BUT.. they still were evaded by kids with less physcial attributes than Batman. That is about as piss poor an arguement as I've seen you make. You can't agree they were meant to live.. and then with a straight face go.. but looked they evaded them so they are weak killers. I know you are better at following logical progression of arguments than this Stealth. Them evading them WAS the PIS and thus not admissable. What did you want Mothra to come save the kids from being killed... How about Iron man show up right then and save the kids from them? Of coruse now, how would you have somebody live against another trying to kill them... have them EVADE THEM. This doesn't prove what you're asserting. The evading was the PIS. Thus not in evidence.

I'm going to ask this again...

Is Michael Myers a weak killer because he couldn't kill a 120 pound woman who kept evading him? Simple question was he? Using your logic... I could put another 120 woman against Myers and say she'll win cause hey loook how much trouble myers had killing a Curtis.. See how illogical this argument is? That is exactly what you're saying here about Raptors... Look they suck at killing things.. they couldn't even kill armed kids and were evaded... which forgets the fact that of course that is how they'll live by evading. That is what they woud've done to ANYTHING dino sent there way. Evade or have something allow them to live. Holding that against the raptors and using that as evidence doesn't work. Thus I've now crushed your assertion. Do you have another?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi

That batman would still win if he doesn't go up high? Simple is that your stance? If so, we'll debate this subject further.

That's not his stance:

Originally posted by Stealth Moose

1. Batman's going to go up high. Because he's not a moron.

2. I never said he can "stay low and win".



Bats goes to an elevated position and picks the raptors off with batarangs. No reason he would go for any option or strategy besides that.

Bat-win batman /thread

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
There was nothing further to say on the matter. I had been dicussion it with Stealth and Ares LONG before you even showed up. I had said the same things to them as I did you and there was not much more to say on the matter. Odd you think you won because I stopped typing in the thread. Odd is kinda the word...more like silly or stupid since threads eventually die.. doesn't mean there is a winner or loser. For this thread...

Look at this guy, lol.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Still waiting on those 1st age feats again... LULZ

Here we see you gloating and acting as though you won the thread (While I was busy actually reading the Silmarillion to verify my stance mind you) when no one really responded after a while.

Strange how you hold other people to standards above yourself.

Anyway, Sauron wins 10/10 gg.



Which PIS examples were those now?

Frankly I don't know why raptors being eluded by some humans is PIS. It isn't like they were ever shown to be more competent. The only real PIS showing I've (semi-jokingly) used is the ****ing kid killing them in Lost World.

Anyway, there is no reason why Batman couldn't or wouldn't go high up. And when he does, he wins.

The Raptors wins, plain and simple.

Raptors>Dogs>Batman

Shut up Supra.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Shut up Supra.

Dude batman got taken down by dogs. Cmon dude.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Yeah the OP says doesn't have time bombs or batmobile

My bad. I read too fast...

Originally posted by NemeBro
Look at this guy, lol.



Here we see you gloating and acting as though you won the thread (While I was busy actually reading the Silmarillion to verify my stance mind you) when no one really responded after a while.

Strange how you hold other people to standards above yourself.

Anyway, Sauron wins 10/10 gg.



Which PIS examples were those now?

Frankly I don't know why raptors being eluded by some humans is PIS. It isn't like they were ever shown to be more competent. The only real PIS showing I've (semi-jokingly) used is the ****ing kid killing them in Lost World.

Anyway, there is no reason why Batman couldn't or wouldn't go high up. And when he does, he wins.

Which I'm STILL waiting for by the way. I claimed 1st age elves feats shit all over 2nd or third. Then you acted like you had something by saying Gil-Galad was a 1st age elv.. Cool THEN POST HIS FEATS. Ohh wait.. could it be that he wasn't even around till the END of the first age and for the most part was a child and thus had no first age feats just as I said. The man-king obbiously has no first age feats... So again POST THEM if you have them. If not, my statement stands ... Killing Elves with first age feats trumps beating two kings with no feats to speak of. Which again, makes sense since GOthmog is the WARRIOR.. Sauron is just the lackey held up in the fortress to learn the ways of Malkor but kept away from the battles so he doesn't get hurt. For the life of you.. you couldn't explain why Sauron was never there at any of the battles when GOthmog was around. For somebody so badass.. you'd think he would be leading the army or killing elves left and right.. yet he wasn't.. Gothmog was leading and do the killing while Sauron was held in the fortress cause he's no warrior... he's a politician.

Where did good ol' moose go... I'll ask again... is Michael Myers ad bad killer cause he couldn't kill a 120 pound girl with no weapon? This is the exact kinda logic your'e trying to use for the raptors. Them not being able to kill kids who couldn't be killed for the sake of the plot isn't a strike against them... that is PIS for the sake of the movie. Just like Jamie Lee not dying.. just like every movie pretty much ever made... certain characters are key and won't die.. no matter what.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Which I'm STILL waiting for by the way. I claimed 1st age elves feats shit all over 2nd or third. Then you acted like you had something by saying Gil-Galad was a 1st age elv.. Cool THEN POST HIS FEATS.

Gil-Galad is a First Age Elf. He was king of the Noldor for a while before the War of Wrath happened.

Though if you want we could just point out that Tolkien said that heroes as mighty as him (Or Elendil) no longer exist in the Third Age. This includes Galadriel.



So what you're saying is he was born and reigned in the first age? Great.



No one said Elendil was a First Age character, lol.



The only elf he killed with "First Age feats" also killed him.

And Sauron easily tanked Luthien's enchantment and knocked her out. Luthien is more powerful than everyone Gothmog killed (Usually with help) combined.

Oh, and he also warded off the power of the Valar when it was sent to raze Numenor to the ground.

Did you even read my last few posts that raped your argument to death?



Let's take a look at their track record:

Sauron took Minas Tirith solely due to his powerful magic.

Gothmog tried to take Gondolin and died in the attempt.



Only Sauron did go out and wage campaigns though. Like Minas Tirith.

The difference is Sauron could do more than just fight. Which he could still do mind you. Better than Gothmog in fact, who has never actually overcome a single character without help.

No he wasn't reigning fo rsometime at all. In fact, he was SHARING the reign once his father died. He was only a teenager when he took over and that was AT THE END of the first age. He had NO FIRST AGE FEATS.. You concede this correct? You about it in a long winded way but this point this stands he has NO first age feats.

That was my point... Killing Elendil and Gil-Galad isn't impressive. They were both FEATLESS wonders and all shit all over by feats in comparisonto who Gothmog killed. There is no getting around this fact. Gothmog killed probably the greatest elv ever and Ecth, who's feats also shit all over Gil-Galad and Elendil. Again.. you go about things the hard way... Do the guys Gothmog killed have better feats than Gil-Galad and Elendil? Not to mention Sauron also died in the process of killing guys with no feats.. that's pretty piss poor. Wait did you say Ecth was more impressive and the only one with feats? You do know who Feanor is right?

I'm curious.. do you even know when he took on Minas Tirith? Do you have any idea what age that was in? I'm starting to think you don't.

Explain this.. Why was Gothmog LEADING the armies in battle and in charge of the armies when he as around. Not once.. not ONE TIME was Sauron leading the troops in battle when Gothmog was around. Why is that if Sauron was such a badass warrior? Because he wasn't on gothmog's level and Melkor knew who daddy was when it came to battle. He named Gothmog Captain.. while Sauron was only a LIeu.. Which again speaks volumes about the pecking order in battle. So again, explain why Sauron NEVER lead any troops in battle if he was so badass. We know in Tolkienverse.. the strong and the royalty generally always lead the troops. The best of the best are in front. We see this with Elves.. men... everybody. Why was Sauron never leading when Gothmog was around? Shit, he was never even battling or sent to battle... that tells you how piss poor Melkor thought his battle skills were if he never sent him into battle. You'd think if he had the ace in the hole to win and a bad ass warrior at his side.. he'd use him to ya know.. WIN BATTLES.. Nope.. he never went to battle when his daddy Gothmog was around.

You keep going on and on about him SURVIVING when Numenor was wasted.. He didn't live.. he was killed.. his spirit survived and he took on another host.. This doesn't mean he wasn't killed.. he was.. just not permakilled. Aren't you the one who said of Eru wanted him dead.. that Sauron would still live... LMFAO HHAHAHAHAHHAH... Why I even debate with somebody that says God can't kill someone is beyond me. that exemplifies how off base you are. If Eru wanted middle earth completly destroyed that is EXACTLY what would've happened. He could do whatever he wants. With a mere gesture or thought... Sauron would be wipe away for all existence. Eru couldn't kill Sauron HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAA

Fight better than Gothmog LULZ... if so why was he not the captain of the forces.. why was he not leading them? Why when Gothmog was around Sauron NEVER was in any battles or leading any troops? Odd eh for such a great warrior and better warrior than Gothmog. You do know how logical reasoning works right? Your premise and conclusion defy logic and reason. IF he was a better warrior than Gothmog.. he would've lead the armies in battle.. he woudl've been the one killing elven Lords... Yet he wasn't.. explain that

Dear Lord

STFU with your War and Peace-length off-topic LOTR bullshit. You and Neme both agreed Bats can (and will) go airborne and use that strategy to win. You also both agreed he can not win if he is grounded. The debate is over. If your guys want to swordfight with your dicks, do it in the LOTR thread you are discussing or the OT forum. Not here, where it is entirely irrelevant to this thread.

Taken to the appropriate thread.

Come meet your doom Thanosi.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Dear Lord

STFU with your War and Peace-length off-topic LOTR bullshit. .

Agreed, they're not even LoTR scholars like I am. Jerks.

Where did Moosie Poo go