Wolverine VS Cyclops

Here I'll make this short and sweet since your not grasping it. I wanted proof, the burden of proof is on you. If it is so easy to find myself why don't you just provide the information then? as I was the one who asked the question and wanted evidence. I'm basically repeating myself over and over again, and I'm at the point were just not even bother replying anymore

Post proof..nothing more, nothing less. Don't make excuses, if you have proof provided it. That's it, that's all I asked in the first place but have yet to get anything yet.

Batdude already posted a quotation about gravitons and their speed. They're fundamental and theoretical particles. There are no types of gravitons. They propagate at c. You were the one who posted that Cyclops emits gravitons.

If you actually expect anyone here to prove that gravitons exist and then measure their speed and then show you their measurements then you're just being irrational.

No most of that was edited from wikipedia, I have read that paragraph myself and lightspeed wasn't mentioned in that paragraph.

No I don't expect you to, however, YOU claimed not me that scientists agreed that gravitons move at lightspeed. Now I'm asking where you got that.

Originally posted by King_Mungi
No most of that was edited from wikipedia, I have read that paragraph myself and lightspeed wasn't mentioned in that paragraph.

No I don't expect you to, however, YOU claimed not me that scientists agreed that gravitons move at lightspeed. Now I'm asking where you got that.

A revolutionary new technology innovation will redefine core networking within the next 12 months. The key component to this new technology is the use of gravitons - those tiny little particles of gravity. Since gravitons have zero rest mass, they are similar to both photons and tachyons. However, the fact that they travel at the speed of light makes them simpler to study and implement than tachyons. Consequently, there are more immediate applications than for Tachyon Transmission Mode. For more background information on both gravitons and TTM, please see the links on the Graviton home page.

http://www.webtorials.com/public/gravitons/gravitons.htm

Happy? 🙄

Originally posted by batdude123
A revolutionary new technology innovation will redefine core networking within the next 12 months. The key component to this new technology is the use of gravitons - those tiny little particles of gravity. Since gravitons have zero rest mass, they are similar to both photons and tachyons. However, the fact that they travel at the [B]speed of light makes them simpler to study and implement than tachyons. Consequently, there are more immediate applications than for Tachyon Transmission Mode. For more background information on both gravitons and TTM, please see the links on the Graviton home page.

http://www.webtorials.com/public/gravitons/gravitons.htm

Happy? 🙄 [/B]

Actually yes, that's all I wanted. End debate.

Originally posted by King_Mungi
Actually yes, that's all I wanted. End debate.

🙄

Originally posted by #1101
🙄

What? for multiple pages I said I just wanted proof, yet no one provided it. Now batdude did and I'm happy.

Sorry but I have to concur with this:

Originally posted by #1101
🙄

Excuse me, your the one who kept delaying. I just wanted proof, no speals no lies just proof and that's it. You provided nothing, you still havn't except batdude did. You kept tip-toying around the subject and when it came to when someone asked for proof..you had none. So save your bashing for yourself.

Originally posted by King_Mungi
Excuse me, your the one who kept delaying. I just wanted proof, no speals no lies just proof and that's it. You provided nothing, you still havn't except batdude did. You kept tip-toying around the subject and when it came to when someone asked for proof..you had no. So save your bashing for yourself.

Multiple people stated that all EM radiation moves at c.

Yet you continued to maintain that not all EM radiation moves at c, that gravitons must have mass to exert force, and that gravitons don't move at c. All based on argument from personal incredulity i.e. logical fallacy.

There were no spiels. No lies. As stated by myself and others gravitons are theoretical fundamental particles that are massless, move at c, are conduits for gravitational force.

I could have posted the exact same things batdude had - in fact I had, multiple times - the only difference being it wasn't direct quotation. Anyone with an internet connection could have. It's called a search engine.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
That's because I found it redundant. Something like five different people stated gravitons move at c, and are massless. batdude posted multiple things stating these characteristics.

Multiple people stated that all EM radiation moves at c.

Yet you continued to maintain that not all EM radiation moves at c, that gravitons must have mass to exert force, and that gravitons don't move at c. All based on argument from personal incredulity i.e. logical fallacy.

There were no spiels. No lies. As stated by myself and others gravitons are theoretical fundamental particles that are massless, move at c, are conduits for gravitational force.

I could have posted the exact same things batdude had - in fact I had, multiple times - the only difference being it wasn't direct quotation. Anyone with an internet connection could have. It's called a search engine.

No he posted wikipedia artciles , maseless does not always equal c. That's a fact.

Except in comics, Guardian even admited his didn't.

Yes, it was stated in the actual comics so yes I do believe not all EM radiation moves at c. Even Cyclops blasts were stated to have mass, wether they do now with his new retconned source of power is unknown.

Except your speils you never back up your findings, I called you up on that and you didn't provide where you got it. How many times did I ask? many times.

Uhhh...did you even read what I posted? I actually asked for proof as in sources not just you. Once I got that I was fine with it, so get off your high-horse as I clearly asked for proof and you never did provide it

Originally posted by King_Mungi
No he posted wikipedia artciles , maseless does not always equal c. That's a fact.

Except in comics, Guardian even admited his didn't.

Yes, it was stated in the actual comics so yes I do believe not all EM radiation moves at c. Even Cyclops blasts were stated to have mass, wether they do now with his new retconned source of power is unknown.

Except your speils you never back up your findings, I called you up on that and you didn't provide where you got it. How many times did I ask? many times.

Uhhh...did you even read what I posted? I actually asked for proof as in sources not just you. Once I got that I was fine with it, so get off your high-horse as I clearly asked for proof and you never did provide it

A single Alpha Flight instance takes precedence over the rest of comics?

I'm not a physicist, nor do I claim to be. Nor do I take it are you, or batdude, or Darkcrawler. I told you where I got said information numerous times. Google. Likely the same place batdude got the things he posted. I told you how I found information and how to find information on it.

You filibustered with. Prove it. Prove it I don't believe you. Prove it. Then when some proof was provided. Prove it with a different source.

You should take a bit of your own advice because you're riding that horse like a certified Mounty.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You're strawmanning. I never said rest mass of zero automatically implies propagation of c. And I'm relatively certain at one point or another you've used Wikipedia as a source. Everyone has.

A single Alpha Flight instance takes precedence over the rest of comics?

I'm not a physicist, nor do I claim to be. Nor do I take it are you, or batdude, or Darkcrawler. I told you where I got said information numerous times. Google. Likely the same place batdude got the things he posted. I told you how I found information and how to find information on it.

You filibustered with. Prove it. Prove it I don't believe you. Prove it. Then when some proof was provided. Prove it with a different source.

You should take a bit of your own advice because you're riding that horse like a certified Mounty.

However, others were implying masless automatically did. Sure, but wikipedia never mentioned it could go c. All I asked for several pages was proof I didn't get any until batdude.

No, because at that time he didn't have complete control over the E-M spectrum yet. So what wavelength or frequency he had was unique

No you didn't, I clearly asked for it more than once. If I ask the question I shouldn't be the one searching, it's the same comment that with me asking the question it's up to me making another possible theory, no it's not.

No proof was provided, if you had it you should have posted. You didn't so you delayed and prolonged the debate. Notice when batdude posted the link, the debate ended. All I wanted was proof, and recieved none.

How so? Once batdude provided the link I was happy and was going to leave it as that and then you made your comment. How many times did I ask for proof? if you had the sources why didn't you just provide them? all you had to do was give a link, just one link and I would be happy.

Speed of EM propagation is independent of wavelength and frequency.

Maybe I'm interpreting tone wrong due to lack of sleep but the whole I'm happy thing just strikes me as unctuous, after being frustratingly stubborn for several pages and trying to call into question people's credibility and integrity.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Speed of EM propagation is independent of wavelength and frequency.

Maybe I'm interpreting tone wrong due to lack of sleep but the whole I'm happy thing just strikes me as unctuous, after being frustratingly stubborn for several pages and trying to call into question people's credibility and integrity.

Well whatever the source his was independent as he tried to tag Northstar and went on a speil about his powers.

I was stubborn because all I wanted was proof. I even made specific comments that's all I wanted. When I didn't get any, I was getting frustrated. Seriously how many times did I ask? and how many times did I get ignored? of course I'm going to be stuborn. I swear and I will put my entire credibility here, that once batdude posted the link I was happy and content. That's seriously all I wanted.

Frankly anything I post I believe to be true, and if in retrospect it isn't I'll retract it. Thus persistent prodding to provide source of what I was posting, which were various, was equally annoying. That and being awake for 26 hours.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Frankly anything I post I believe to be true, and if in retrospect it isn't I'll retract it. Thus persistent prodding to provide source of what I was posting, which were various, was equally annoying. That and being awake for 26 hours.

but anyone can post anything, when I asked for proof that Cyclops blasts went lightspeed I got nothing. When I asked for proof gavitons go lightspeed I got nothing. All this could have been avoided, if just one link was provided as I just wanted a source. Nothing more, nothing less. Soon as when batdude posted that I was actually relieved, as the entire debate now can end and I have my proof.

Meh. I've probably been spending too much time in the GDF, where when people ask for proof it's only so they can refute it or ignore it, and when people ask you questions they're always leading.

Wolverine? close rang fighter? 😕 vs Cyclops long range fighter? 😉

Cyc wins if Wolvie is kept at bay but Wolvmeister wins if he gets within claw range 😎 Whats the debate about? really? 😕

Originally posted by Ryonslaught
Wolverine? close rang fighter? 😕 vs Cyclops long range fighter? 😉

Cyc wins if Wolvie is kept at bay but Wolvmeister wins if he gets within claw range 😎 Whats the debate about? really? 😕

Whether wolverine would EVER be able to close the gap between them.

Which would be nigh-impossible.

Not to mention the fact that Cyke can hold his own in melee anyways, till he decides to get a decimating shot off.