The Butcher (Wanted) vs Ozymandias (Watchmen)

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



TheVaultDweller
- Ozy gets his armour from the end of the film.
- The Butcher gets a pair of meat cleavers.
- Fight takes place in a parking lot.
- Opponents start 10 feet apart.

Who wins?

Impediment
Veidt shit stomps.

KingD19
Wasn't Butcher slicing bullets out of the air and almost killed Wesley?

Silent Master
Using h1 logic, Buthcer wins 1,000,000,000,000,000/10

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by KingD19
Wasn't Butcher slicing bullets out of the air and almost killed Wesley?

From around 0:46. In particular, at 0:49-0:50, they do a quick close up to show a bullet getting sliced.

FARSnLU-NJA

h1a8
Butcher should win because of the bullet feat. We must assume that the him and Wesley were fighting in superspeed.

h1a8
But Veidt did catch it at a closer distance and catching is harder than blocking.

Zack M
Butcher.

Silent Master
Not true at all, blocking a bullet with a blade is far harder than catching one in your hand

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Not true at all, blocking a bullet with a blade is far harder than catching one in your hand Not really. If the bullet is in slow motion then it is easier to put the blade in the path of a 1cm bullet when you already have the blade up in the path already. Veidt didn't even have his hands up.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Not true at all, blocking a bullet with a blade is far harder than catching one in your hand

Especially multiple shots, from a modern gun, while charging your opponent. And without falling over in the process. But it's H1. He would probably argue that the Miyagi arrow catch was better lol.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Not really. If the bullet is in slow motion then it is easier to put the blade in the path of a 1cm bullet when you already have the blade up in the path already. Veidt didn't even have his hands up.

If you really think blocking something with the edge of a blade is easier than catching something in your hand, then you really aren't as smart as you want people to believe you are.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
If you really think blocking something with the edge of a blade is easier than catching something in your hand, then you really aren't as smart as you want people to believe you are.

Notice how he also completely ignores the fact that the Butcher blocked several bullets without issue, instead of just one and then landing on the ground.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Notice how he also completely ignores the fact that the Butcher blocked several bullets without issue, instead of just one and then landing on the ground.

My guess is after about 6 or 7 pages of claiming it's easier to catch something than to block it with the edge of a blade he will suddenly claim that he is merely using someone else's metric.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
If you really think blocking something with the edge of a blade is easier than catching something in your hand, then you really aren't as smart as you want people to believe you are.

This can be applied to you for believing the opposite. It's actually common sense that it is easier to hold the blade in the path of a slow moving projectile than to catch it. Catching something takes multiple things to do.

Plus it's easier when the blade is already in front of you near the path of the bullet. It's like having your dukes up before a punch.

h1a8
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Especially multiple shots, from a modern gun, while charging your opponent. And without falling over in the process. But it's H1. He would probably argue that the Miyagi arrow catch was better lol.

Multiple shots are irrelevant since each bullet is a lifetime from the next.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
This can be applied to you for believing the opposite. It's actually common sense that it is easier to hold the blade in the path of a slow moving projectile than to catch it. Catching something takes multiple things to do.

Plus it's easier when the blade is already in front of you near the path of the bullet. It's like having your dukes up before a punch.

No, common sense would be that it's much easier to catch a moving object in your hand then it would be to actually manage to hit it with the edge of a sword.

Prove it, show a clip of you managing to hit a pellet with a sword as many times in a row as you can and I'll do the same for catching a pellet. We'll see who manages to have the higher number.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, common sense would be that it's much easier to catch a moving object in your hand then it would be to actually manage to hit it with the edge of a sword.

Prove it, show a clip of you managing to hit a pellet with a sword as many times in a row as you can and I'll do the same for catching a pellet. We'll see who manages to have the higher number. Then I'm afraid you lack common sense.

You are ignoring that I stated the bullet is moving in slow motion. So if a slow moving bullet is moving towards you with your blade in front then it's extremely easy to just place the blade in the path of the bullet.

Multiple bullets are irrelevant. Each bullet is fired a lifetime from the next one.

Dreampanther
Originally posted by h1a8
You are ignoring that I stated the bullet is moving in slow motion. So if a slow moving bullet is moving towards you with your blade in front then it's extremely easy to just place the blade in the path of the bullet.

https://media.giphy.com/media/ZaxXYBZJAhPP2/giphy.gif

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Then I'm afraid you lack common sense.

You are ignoring that I stated the bullet is moving in slow motion. So if a slow moving bullet is moving towards you with your blade in front then it's extremely easy to just place the blade in the path of the bullet.

Multiple bullets are irrelevant. Each bullet is fired a lifetime from the next one.

Do you accept my challenge?

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Do you accept my challenge?

Notice how he is also still dismissing that the Butcher performed multiple blocks in a row, which would require multiple arm movements and adjustments. Not just moving a blade in front of a bullet once.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Notice how he is also still dismissing that the Butcher performed multiple blocks in a row, which would require multiple arm movements and adjustments. Not just moving a blade in front of a bullet once.

Not to mention a thrown pellet would be moving hundreds of times slower than a bullet. Which would make my challenge the perfect way to test if his theory is accurate.

h1a8
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Notice how he is also still dismissing that the Butcher performed multiple blocks in a row, which would require multiple arm movements and adjustments. Not just moving a blade in front of a bullet once.

If the bullets are moving in slow motion then it would take a very long time between each successive bullet. You would block one and then wait for 1 minute and then block another. You are confusing our perception of the bullets as Butcher's and Ozy's.

Imagine that a meat cleaver already up and in front of you ready to block. A bullet comes at you slowly. All you must do is line the blade up with the path.

Now imagine from a much closer distance you are with your hands at your sides. You see a bullet come out at you slowly. You have to attempt to catch it.

The latter is harder because of the closer distance, hands are down and not up, and catching requires multiple tasks with the arm, hand and fingers.



Originally posted by Dreampanther
https://media.giphy.com/media/ZaxXYBZJAhPP2/giphy.gif Common sense sometimes sound like something idiotic to an idiot.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Not to mention a thrown pellet would be moving hundreds of times slower than a bullet. Which would make my challenge the perfect way to test if his theory is accurate. A thrown bullet would be moving 10-15 times slower than a fired bullet. To the eyes of these characters, a bullet is moving slower than a thrown bullet.

h1a8
Now that I re-watch the scene. It looks like Butcher hits the bullet, not cut it. It's unclear.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
A thrown bullet would be moving 10-15 times slower than a fired bullet. To the eyes of these characters, a bullet is moving
slower than a thrown bullet.

Wrong. It is entirely possible to throw a pellet at only a few mph, thus it would be moving at less than 1/100th the speed of a bullet. in essence slow-mo.

So accept my challenge.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong. It is entirely possible to throw a pellet at only a few mph, thus it would be moving at less than 1/100th the speed of a bullet. in essence slow-mo.

So accept my challenge.

So with a cleaver in front of you it is easy to hit a slow motion bullet than to catch it with your hands started at your sides.

Silent Master
The butcher's feat was far more impressive, if you disagree I would be more than happy to Battlezone you over it.

Dreampanther
Originally posted by h1a8
Then I'm afraid you lack common sense.

You are ignoring that I stated the bullet is moving in slow motion.

Originally posted by h1a8
If the bullets are moving in slow motion then it would take a very long time between each successive bullet. You would block one and then wait for 1 minute and then block another. You are confusing our perception of the bullets as Butcher's and Ozy's.

Imagine that a meat cleaver already up and in front of you ready to block. A bullet comes at you slowly. All you must do is line the blade up with the path.

Now imagine from a much closer distance you are with your hands at your sides. You see a bullet come out at you slowly. You have to attempt to catch it.

The latter is harder because of the closer distance, hands are down and not up, and catching requires multiple tasks with the arm, hand and fingers.



Common sense sometimes sound like something idiotic to an idiot.

A thrown bullet would be moving 10-15 times slower than a fired bullet. To the eyes of these characters, a bullet is moving slower than a thrown bullet.

Common sense? COMMON SENSE? eek! laughing out loud laughing

Dear Baka,

the bullets are not moving in slow motion, as you repeatedly stated. If the bullets moved in slow motion I could catch them. My dog could catch them. My mother could catch them, and she has arthritis.

The bullets only appear to be moving in slow motion to the butcher, because adrenaline to his brain slows his perception of his surroundings and grants him superhuman strength and speed.

Do you understand the difference? Do you have any common sense? Do you even know what common sense means?

Second, no, it is not more difficult to catch a small object than it is to repeatedly slice said object in half with a butcher's blade. Your hand is gigantic compared to the edge of a blade and you only have to do it once, while if you hold the blade you have to do it repeatedly with only a tiny surface that can touch the bullet.

Go, on try it yourself. Ask a friend, if you have any, to throw a small pebble at you. If you don't have any friends just ask everybody you know, I'm sure you will find somebody who can't wait to throw rocks at you.

Then, after you've caught one pebble, ask them to throw multiple pebbles at you, one after another, without stopping, while you try to slice them out of the air with a knife.

Third, I'm going to leave you with this message: Just substitute a-hole with idiot.

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/98/77/c9/9877c9d8a62a6e0f293963f42f7bc87f--justified-quotes-tv-movie.jpg

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
The butcher's feat was far more impressive, if you disagree I would be more than happy to Battlezone you over it.

lol You'd probably be more likely to have Quan agree to propose to Robtard than H1 agreeing to this.

h1a8

Silent Master
Size of a hand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> edge of a blade. Catching something with your hand is far easier than hitting it with the edge of a blade. Even if you have to move your hand several times further.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Size of a hand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> edge of a blade. Catching something with your hand is far easier than hitting it with the edge of a blade. Even if you have to move your hand several times further.

Notice how he just glossed over the BZ challenge, as expected.

h1a8

Silent Master
The thinness of the blade more than makes up the distance it needed to be moved.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
The thinness of the blade more than makes up the distance it needed to be moved. So you saying that if a slow motion bullet traveled toward you with your cleaver right in the path that it would be harder to line the blade up with bullet? Remember the blade being thin isn't the same as the object being thin.

Basically, you can argue that Butchers feat was more skillful (debatable) but you can't argue that Ozy had to be a lot faster to perform his feat.

KingD19
Butcher was far closer to Wesley than Ozy was to Spectre. He ran up to his face while firing multiple shots. Whereas Spectre took a while to aim, did a quip, then fired from like 15-20 feet away.

h1a8
Originally posted by KingD19
Butcher was far closer to Wesley than Ozy was to Spectre. He ran up to his face while firing multiple shots. Whereas Spectre took a while to aim, did a quip, then fired from like 15-20 feet away. Wrong. Ozy was much closer. About 7-12ft away. Butcher was about 15-20 ft away.

The cleaver was already in front ready. Ozy hands were at his side.
Ozy hand to moved a larger distance than Butchers hand. And Ozy had less time to react.

Silent Master
Again, it's obvious that the Butcher's feat is far more impressive than Ozy's. if you disagree we can BZ it. FARSnLU-NJA

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Again, it's obvious that the Butcher's feat is far more impressive than Ozy's. if you disagree we can BZ it. FARSnLU-NJA It's debatable. What's not debatable is that Ozy had to be faster to perform his feat.

Silent Master
It's not debatable, the Butcher blocked multiple shots from a higher caliber weapon(IOW, much faster velocity) in bad lighting. while moving.

Butcher's feat >>> Ozy's.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
It's not debatable, the Butcher blocked multiple shots from a higher caliber weapon(IOW, much faster velocity) in bad lighting. while moving.

Butcher's feat >>> Ozy's.

That weapon shoots nearly the same velocity as the model 10 s&w. Maybe a little more.(~1200 vs ~1000fps) There isn't a big difference.

Multiple shots use the same hand speed as 1 shot. The mechanics of the gun don't allow for two bullets to enter the air simultaneously. As a matter of fact it would seem as the second bullet is fired many seconds after the first, if viewed in slow motion.

The fact that the cleaver was already in front means that Butcher only needed to move his hands less distance than Ozy did.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
That weapon shoots nearly the same velocity as the model 10 s&w. Maybe a little more.(~1200 vs ~1000fps) There isn't a big difference.

Multiple shots use the same hand speed as 1 shot. The mechanics of the gun don't allow for two bullets to enter the air simultaneously. As a matter of fact it would seem as the second bullet is fired many seconds after the first, if viewed in slow motion.

The fact that the cleaver was already in front means that Butcher only needed to move his hands less distance than Ozy did.

Wrong.

Blocking multiple shots with a edge of a knife >>> Catching one

Butcher's feat > Ozy's, for the reasons already listed.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong.

Blocking multiple shots with a edge of a knife >>> Catching one

Butcher's feat > Ozy's, for the reasons already listed.

You still arguing skill. Trolling. My argument is about who had to move the fastest and reacted the quickest.

Multiple shots = 1 shot in terms of degree of difficulty when the shots are moving in slow motion and your blade is still in front of you waiting for the next shot (which occurs many seconds later).

Silent Master
We have already explained why your argument is wrong.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
We have already explained why your argument is wrong.

So Butcher moving a matter of inches from a further distance means that he moved faster than someone that moved several feet from a closer distance? Good to know.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
So Butcher moving a matter of inches from a further distance means that he moved faster than someone that moved several feet from a closer distance? Good to know.

We have alreaady explained why you're wrong and I've personally issued a challenge that would prove who is right.

If you truly believed yourself right, you'd accept the challenge.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
We have alreaady explained why you're wrong and I've personally issued a challenge that would prove who is right.

If you truly believed yourself right, you'd accept the challenge.

So I am wrong. Moving a shorter distance from a larger distance from a bullet is to move faster than someone who moved several feet from a closer distance from the bullet.

Great logic.

Silent Master
We have alreaady explained why you're wrong and I've personally issued a challenge that would prove who is right.

If you truly believed yourself right, you'd accept the challenge.

h1a8
Originally posted by h1a8
So I am wrong. Moving a shorter distance from a larger distance from a bullet is to move faster than someone who moved several feet from a closer distance from the bullet.

Great logic.

Silent Master
If you truly believed yourself right, you'd accept the challenge.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
If you truly believed yourself right, you'd accept the challenge.

BZ who had to move faster in their own feat? Or which feat is more impressive?

Silent Master
You claimed it was easier to block bullets with the edge of a knife, I offered you a way to prove it. do you accept?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
You claimed it was easier to block bullets with the edge of a knife, I offered you a way to prove it. do you accept?

So which feat is more impressive basically.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
So which feat is more impressive basically.

I'm taking your claims one at a time. keeps you from going off on tangents.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
I'm taking your claims one at a time. keeps you from going off on tangents. what's impressive or more impressive is subjective to some people but who is faster is objective

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
what's impressive or more impressive is subjective to some people but who is faster is objective

Wrong, when feats can be compared using facts, which is more impressive stops being subjective.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, when feats can be compared using facts, which is more impressive stops being subjective. Wrong! Some people it is more difficult to learn a particular skill then another skill and other people vice versa.

With that said, Ozy had to be faster to perform his feat. That's all that I care.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Wrong! Some people it is more difficult to learn a particular skill then another skill and other people vice versa.

With that said, Ozy had to be faster to perform his feat. That's all that I care.

IOW, you know that the Butcher's feat was more impressive and this is just your way of backing out of the challenge.

steverules_2
Catch a pellet anyway, I wanna see that!

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you know that the Butcher's feat was more impressive and this is just your way of backing out of the challenge.

I don't really care about the challenge (win or lose) as it doesn't have anything to do who is faster here (which can determine the winner).

An bullet object moving at slow motion towards you with your hands right there in the path then it is EXTREMELY EASY to swat the bullet out of the way.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
I don't really care about the challenge (win or lose) as it doesn't have anything to do who is faster here (which can determine the winner).

An bullet object moving at slow motion towards you with your hands right there in the path then it is EXTREMELY EASY to swat the bullet out of the way.

It has to do with a claim that you made. You have two choices, you can either retract the claim or accept the challenge.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
It has to do with a claim that you made. You have two choices, you can either retract the claim or accept the challenge.

I choose to do neither.
Ozy's feat was more impressive, he was also faster, and I don't accept the challenge.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
I choose to do neither.
Ozy's feat was more impressive, he was also faster, and I don't accept the challenge.

I challenge you to a BZ. Do you accept?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
I challenge you to a BZ. Do you accept?

Nope. There is nothing worthwhile to gain for my time.

Batting a pellet with a cleaver in front is easier than catching a pellet the way Ozy did with his hands starting at his sides

Silent Master
IOW, you know your wrong.

TheVaultDweller
Time is such a BS excuse, because H1 clearly has no problem giving up his time to post the same crap, for page after page after page, in any of the other threads (hell, he has been going since the first page of this one). If he genuinely cared about getting the most value for time, he would be for a BZ, as it would cut out a lot of needless back and forth.

Instead, he would rather drag out pointless, circular discussions (which wastes everyone else's time) than get to a point from where a discussion can move forward.

And any further response he makes, after it is clear just repeating his opinion over and over isn't going to achieve any notable result, while also continuing to avoid a BZ, proves my point.

KingD19
He knows he's full of shit that's all. And a BZ would confirm what everybody knows while also making him lose a straight up challenge. Can't lose if you say you're always right and never back yourself up. Its a cowards game bit somebody's gotta play I guess lol.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Time is such a BS excuse, because H1 clearly has no problem giving up his time to post the same crap, for page after page after page, in any of the other threads (hell, he has been going since the first page of this one). If he genuinely cared about getting the most value for time, he would be for a BZ, as it would cut out a lot of needless back and forth.

Instead, he would rather drag out pointless, circular discussions (which wastes everyone else's time) than get to a point from where a discussion can move forward.

Of course he's lying, doing a BZ would take far less time than arguing about it for pages in these threads.

His real reason for turning down BZ's. he knows that he'll lose.

TheVaultDweller
Yup. The thing is, he might think he is saving face, but it actually just makes him look like a posturing coward.

He's like the guy who claims they can beat anyone in a fight, but always has an excuse not to fight when push comes to shove.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Yup. The thing is, he might think he is saving face, but it actually just makes him look like a posturing coward.

He's like the guy who claims they can beat anyone in a fight, but always has an excuse not to fight when push comes to shove.

IIRC hasn't h1 talked about his "fight training" several times, or was that a different poster?

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
IIRC hasn't h1 talked about his "fight training" several times, or was that a different poster?

Among other things, he has claimed that he is an expert in wrestling. Yet he also said, in the Bane vs Winter Soldier thread, that he doesn't really understand grappling (when I pointed out how Bucky could grapple with Steve without getting ragdolled, he brought up some silly argument about grappling with a gf or some shit and being unable to outmuscle her and not knowing why). So, how anyone can claim to be an expert on a fighting style that largely involves grappling, yet claim to not really understand grappling, is one of those mysteries.

h1a8
A BZ is a waste of time.
1. Bias judges (against me)
2. Does nothing to prove who wins the fight.
3. A slow motion pellet coming at you with your two cleavers in the guard and it is extremely easy to knock them out of air (by batting them with the flat side).

KingD19
The judges who go over ACTUAL FACTS/FEATS/EVIDENCE and not whatever you pull out of your ass are biased? Of course it seems biased when you, ya know, don't have any actual evidence to support your claim, and you simply invent new shit each time to keep your nonsensical argument going.

You're a Math teacher, right? If a student said, 4+4=27. Would you agree with him because he says according to him, and a set of rules he invented, that's what it is? He will not show proof of why. He will not accept any other answer than he is right. But he has no proof. He thinks he's right and anyone who disagrees is wrong despite evidence. Do you just listen to him? Despite there being proof that 4+4 is in fact not 27, but 8? Or would you call your student out on his bullshit?

Silent Master
1) The judges haven't been picked yet, so your claims of judge bias is laughable
2) It proves who is right about a piece of evidence, which helps move the dabte along. so this was another laughable claim from you.
3) Prove that the Butcher's feat was extremely easy to perform.

h1a8
Originally posted by KingD19
The judges who go over ACTUAL FACTS/FEATS/EVIDENCE and not whatever you pull out of your ass are biased? Of course it seems biased when you, ya know, don't have any actual evidence to support your claim, and you simply invent new shit each time to keep your nonsensical argument going.

You're a Math teacher, right? If a student said, 4+4=27. Would you agree with him because he says according to him, and a set of rules he invented, that's what it is? He will not show proof of why. He will not accept any other answer than he is right. But he has no proof. He thinks he's right and anyone who disagrees is wrong despite evidence. Do you just listen to him? Despite there being proof that 4+4 is in fact not 27, but 8? Or would you call your student out on his bullshit? A lack of intelligence will cause you to come to the conclusion that you have come to.

I use sound reasoning, math, science, etc to support my argument.
I don't make anything up. Everything can be verified by speaking with an expert (physicist, etc).

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
A lack of intelligence will cause you to come to the conclusion that you have come to.

I use sound reasoning, math, science, etc to support my argument.
I don't make anything up. Everything can be verified by speaking with an expert (physicist, etc).

Then accept the BZ and prove it.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Then accept the BZ and prove it.

So, I see the guy who apparently doesn't have time for a BZ has more time for some more empty, meaningless posturing.

And of course, he will come with his BS "bias" excuse (even though no one has been picked yet) to try and weasel out of it. But of course, I forgot. According to H1, there is a conspiracy on KMC against him, where we have all apparently decided to doctor any BZ etc. H1 might get involved in, in order to make sure he loses (irrespective of our own views on the actual BZ topic). Because, you know, we all consider H1 that important and worth that much effort lol. laughing

Seriously, the lengths this guy will go to is priceless.

I will say that the fact that he so easily assumes dishonesty on the part of others, with regards to the BZ and judges, says more about his own character and level of trustworthiness, and his own likely willingness to resort to that kind of thing if given a change, than anyone else.

Also, LOL at the guy who got stumped by a small typo questioning the intelligence of anyone else here.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
So, I see the guy who apparently doesn't have time for a BZ has more time for some more empty, meaningless posturing.

And of course, he will come with his BS "bias" excuse (even though no one has been picked yet) to try and weasel out of it. But of course, I forgot. According to H1, there is a conspiracy on KMC against him, where we have all apparently decided to doctor any BZ etc. H1 might get involved in, in order to make sure he loses (irrespective of our own views on the actual BZ topic). Because, you know, we all consider H1 that important and worth that much effort lol. laughing

Seriously, the lengths this guy will go to is priceless.

I will say that the fact that he so easily assumes dishonesty on the part of others, with regards to the BZ and judges, says more about his own character and level of trustworthiness, and his own likely willingness to resort to that kind of thing if given a change, than anyone else.

Also, LOL at the guy who got stumped by a small typo questioning the intelligence of anyone else here.

Notice how he is trying to float the idea that the Butcher caught the bullets on the flat of the blade instead of the edge, it's like he doesn't think we'll notice his attempts at downplaying the feat. Just like he also ignores that the Butcher was making large swings. so his implication that the Butcher barely needed to move the blades is pure BS.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Notice how he is trying to float the idea that the Butcher caught the bullets on the flat of the blade instead of the edge, it's like he doesn't think we'll notice his attempts at downplaying the feat. Just like he also ignores that the Butcher was making large swings. so his implication that the Butcher barely needed to move the blades is pure BS.

I also noticed his latest tactic for avoiding the burden of proof on his claims. Says what he claims is reasoned fact, and then basically says, if you don't believe him, go speak to an "expert" lol. Anyone here can claim that their personal opinion is supported by a fictitious person who isn't present in the discussion. So, all he is doing is making himself look even more desperate and cowardly.

I mean I could say the Butcher's feat is better, based on math, science and deductive reasoning, and that a professional would support it, and there would be nothing H1 can say (well, not justifiably, but I am sure he will anyway), considering he hasn't provided any evidence other than his opinion on the matter, and refuses to take it to BZ.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Notice how he is trying to float the idea that the Butcher caught the bullets on the flat of the blade instead of the edge, it's like he doesn't think we'll notice his attempts at downplaying the feat. Just like he also ignores that the Butcher was making large swings. so his implication that the Butcher barely needed to move the blades is pure BS.

Prove that he hit the bullet solely on the edge of the blade, with no contact with the flat part.

The big (opinionated word) swings still happened with his arms up in front and ready to go.

Silent Master
Look at that, he1 is trying to shift the burden of proof to us, because h1 knows that he can't back up the several claims he made earlier in the thread.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
Look at that, he1 is trying to shift the burden of proof to us, because h1 knows that he can't back up the several claims he made earlier in the thread.

Well, that's hardly anything new. He has done it in plenty of threads before. Make a claim and demand others disprove it. And when people point out that they don't need to debunk a claim that hasn't been proven, he comes out and claims his opinion is writer's intent, and therefore doesn't require proof. How much do you want to bet he is going to come up with something similar here?

h1a8
Ozy moves faster. Ozy is more skilled. Ozy has armor. Ozy wins.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Ozy moves faster. Ozy is more skilled. Ozy has armor. Ozy wins.

Prove it.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove it.

I did, many times. The fact that you are telling me to means that you are in troll mode and will troll any and all proof.

steverules_2
I love this thread

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
I did, many times. The fact that you are telling me to means that you are in troll mode and will troll any and all proof.

No, me asking you to prove it means that you haven't.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, me asking you to prove it means that you haven't.

But anyone can say that. It doesn't hold any weight without some justification or reasoning why the proof is faulty.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
But anyone can say that. It doesn't hold any weight without some justification or reasoning why the proof is faulty.

Multiple posters have already explained it, you ignoring us doesn't mean it didn't happen.

h1a8

Silent Master
That is hardly the only thing I asked you too prove.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
That is hardly the only thing I asked you too prove.

Multiple posters have indeed pointed out the flaw in his arguments though. But now he is acting as though people not explicitly stating Ozy isn't faster, even though arguing in favour of the Butcher would obviously imply that Ozy isn't, as evidence of them agreeing that he is. But then, this is the guy that got stumped by the letter E (and, previously, by the abbreviation "KK"wink, so I guess he needs things spelled out for him.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Multiple posters have indeed pointed out the flaw in his arguments though. But now he is acting as though people not explicitly stating Ozy isn't faster, even though arguing in favour of the Butcher would obviously imply that Ozy isn't, as evidence of them agreeing that he is. But then, this is the guy that got stumped by the letter E (and, previously, by the abbreviation "KK"wink, so I guess he needs things spelled out for him.

You'll also notice that he said, people never disagreed that Ozy wasn't faster.


He can't keep his fake points straight.

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Multiple posters have indeed pointed out the flaw in his arguments though. But now he is acting as though people not explicitly stating Ozy isn't faster, even though arguing in favour of the Butcher would obviously imply that Ozy isn't, as evidence of them agreeing that he is. But then, this is the guy that got stumped by the letter E (and, previously, by the abbreviation "KK"wink, so I guess he needs things spelled out for him.

You'll also notice that he said.


He can't keep his fake points straight.

TheVaultDweller
Yup, that's a double-negative in his post. So, if we want to be technical about it, in a roundabout way, H1 just admitted that the Butcher is faster. big grin

cdtm
They actually made a movie from Mark Millars abortion of a pregnant fetus?

Someone actually LIKED his shit enough to movie-ize it? Or do they just really hate their audience, and they needed to spend money for some reason..?

KingD19
Originally posted by cdtm
They actually made a movie from Mark Millars abortion of a pregnant fetus?

Someone actually LIKED his shit enough to movie-ize it? Or do they just really hate their audience, and they needed to spend money for some reason..?

What do you even want?

h1a8

Silent Master
Still, the butcher was skilled enough to block multiple bullets with knives.

You lose, try again

h1a8
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Yup, that's a double-negative in his post. So, if we want to be technical about it, in a roundabout way, H1 just admitted that the Butcher is faster. big grin

It's a triple negative. So it's means Ozy is faster.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
It's a triple negative. So it's means Ozy is faster.

IOW, you can't count. That explains a lot.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you can't count. That explains a lot.

He thinks "never disagreed" counts as two. Except another way to phrase it is "always agreed". Yet the second part remains Ozy "wasn't faster". In other words, "other posters always agreed that Ozy wasn't faster".

And he claims to be a teacher. How on earth does this guy accurately grade papers and tests?

h1a8

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
He thinks "never disagreed" counts as two. Except another way to phrase it is "always agreed". Yet the second part remains Ozy "wasn't faster". In other words, "other posters always agreed that Ozy wasn't faster".

And he claims to be a teacher. How on earth does this guy accurately grade papers and tests?

H1 actually thinks you're agreeing with him.

TheVaultDweller
Originally posted by Silent Master
H1 actually thinks you're agreeing with him.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/554/picard-facepalm.jpg

I just can't anymore.

h1a8

h1a8

Silent Master

h1a8

cdtm
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/554/picard-facepalm.jpg

I just can't anymore.

I feel you man.

Even happy go lucky types like me can't help but wince at some of this stuff.

Silent Master
He wasn't agreeing with you about it being a triple negative. In fact, he actually said it was a double negative earlier.

You're making yourself look incredibly silly.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
He wasn't agreeing with you about it being a triple negative. In fact, he actually said it was a double negative earlier.

You're making yourself look incredibly silly.

He never said it was a double negative (that would lead to a positive). He clearly pointed out that that the whole statement meant that Ozy isn't faster.

Either he's an idiot and came to the conclusion of a double negative leading to a single negative or you are falsely accusing him of something he didn't do. The reason why he doesn't answer is because he knows I'm right but don't want to defend me and go against you (you and him are allies against me).

Silent Master
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Yup, that's a double-negative in his post. So, if we want to be technical about it, in a roundabout way, H1 just admitted that the Butcher is faster. big grin

You were saying?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
You were saying?

Ha ha. Thank you for showing his sillyness and yours as well. You even said that it was a double negative.

"never disagreed" is a double negative.
"isn't faster" is a negative.

Triple negative all day.

Silent Master
You may need to go back to school and pay special attention to English class. That is a double negative.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
You may need to go back to school and pay special attention to English class. That is a double negative.

Then you are an idiot.

Disagree means to not agree
Never disagreed means it didn't happen where someone disagreed.

Silent Master
Lol!!!

Silent Master
Despite your inability to grasp the English language, it's nice that you're finally agreeing with me and vault as to what your abortion of a sentence actually meant.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.