Originally posted by Arcana
Ah yes... so I misspelled a single word... that automatically labels me as stupid, and for your information little man, I have read the thread and think, I have been at this damn forum long enough that, I would carry some weight around here.Also, I do understand the concept of being out-debated... I mean you are ample proof of what it means to be out-debated.
You're right, proof>Arguments=outdebated.. Very logical..
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Horror of horros! I'm using proof instead of continuously arguing in circles!
If I could, I'd ask God what the purpose of life is rather than bicker on about it endlessly
No, I'm saying you defeat the purpose of this forum when your arguments contain 100% text and email.
Many things in Star Wars are illogical. "The Force" is illogical. Sidious/Dooku being able to keep up with a 900 year old Jedi is illogical. Hyperspace travel, Superweapons, light freaking sabers... If these things were debatable, many people would doubt their existance.
However, in Star Wars, some things just are. Before it was debatable whether Yoda can keep up with the Ancient Sith. Now he just... can.
Originally posted by Generic Hero
Many things in Star Wars are illogical. "The Force" is illogical. Sidious/Dooku being able to keep up with a 900 year old Jedi is illogical. Hyperspace travel, Superweapons, light freaking sabers... If these things were debatable, many people would doubt their existance.However, in Star Wars, some things just are. Before it was debatable whether Yoda can keep up with the Ancient Sith. Now he just... can.
OK GH, you seem to have some common sense as opposed to the majority of members, so let me ask you something. If I was to ASK you how Yoda would defeat Kun or the ancients in combat, could you truly answer that, or would your answer be a bunch of quotes? Hence the "How" question to Tom.
But that's just my point lightsnake, you never seem to be winning an argument, or hardly at all. Which is why you resort to authority. When you DO win an argument(I've seen some), you don't use text and emails. It's a sheepish way to finish a debate whether it's true or not.. I don't care about the validity, it's the argument itself that matters.. The way you end losing arguments isn't right.
Personally, I dislike the idea of comparing people from different eras. There are far too many factors to sub in. Maybe the Ancient Sith, while strong, were slow? Maybe Yoda's got defense against all their strange "Sith alchemy" stuff. Maybe Yoda's relentless fury could break an ancient Sith Lord? Maybe Yoda's unique techniques (Example: On Dagobah, he confines the Dark Side energy to a single cave) could disfunction an Ancient Sith amulet (which amplifies power)?
Conventionally, I don't see Yoda beating the man who absolutely ravaged Vodo. However, my view (perhaps logical) can't override Veitch's.
Originally posted by Generic Hero
Personally, I dislike the idea of comparing people from different eras. There are far too many factors to sub in. Maybe the Ancient Sith, while strong, were slow? Maybe Yoda's got defense against all their strange "Sith alchemy" stuff. Maybe Yoda's relentless fury could break an ancient Sith Lord? Maybe Yoda's unique techniques (Example: On Dagobah, he confines the Dark Side energy to a single cave) could disfunction an Ancient Sith amulet (which amplifies power)?Conventionally, I don't see Yoda beating the man who absolutely ravaged Vodo. However, my view (perhaps logical) can't override Veitch's.
Views like yours is what I thought this forum is for, logically deducing 1 v 1 fights.. My complete point is that when I argue with lightsnake, and ask him how something happens, he cannot provide an argument, just quotes and emails. Again, as I told Sama, he should be able to outdebate anybody if he's truly passionate about a subject.
You don't PROVIDE any logic lightsnake, which is why you couldn't win an argument with the antedeluvians.. This is why you go to proof. If you DID provide logic, and not irrelevant hyperbole, text, and emails, then we could have some interesting debates. But you choose to go the route of the creators, who win your battles for you.
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Well, in some fairness, GH, Yoda's style of fighting and Vodo's style are rather different, and by Vodo's own admission, he couldn't really bring himself to destroy his beloved ex-apprentice.
Vodo's own admission that he can't destroy his apprentice? You mean the admission where he says "You and I will fight again...perhaps not for a long time, but I will defeat you".
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Really, now? Saying that Yoda could overwhelm him with an extreme;y fast and agile style isn't logical? NAI even supported that and Nai and I have been arguing for ages!
No, Nai said that he could POSSIBLY be faster and more agile. And I agreed with you on the agile part. Now let me ask you something, since you consider yourself to be somewhat of a debator. Your quotes and emails aside, HOW would Yoda beat Kun? Because we know Kun has an amulet, and we know they were both lightsaber prodigies. So as Nai said, the x factor would be the amulet.. So how does Tom saying Yoda>Kun account for Kun and his amulet?