Originally posted by 2damnloud
Opinion.No facts.
No, they're facts. You not likeing it doesn't devalue them into opinions. The feat is not backed by any other occurances of the same type of feat. she only absorbed the galactic core once.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Denying the antecedant
You wish... though you never really had a strong grasp on logic so its not surprising you're using the term incorrectly. It seems whenever there's something you cannot refute you throw that out.
For example what is the "If"?
Originally posted by 2damnloud
No facts yet again.
On your part.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
If it's used "a lot" then it is false??
Strawman.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Please. 😂
Please yourself.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Also note how you ignore the context.
Not that you'd even know what context is. You just look at a scan, ignore the context of how it cam to be, and then try to use it as evidence.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
A still healing body.Empty space bright stars and solid planets.
It says so.[/b][/quote] And it didn't say she was chanelling the lighning through the stars. That would be ridiculous and completely ignores the distances between stars and the two opponents in the given scan.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
No grasp of how the character's powers worked, when it is he who made the character??
That's right. Do you know what explination he gave? Do you know what it means?
Jubilee was created as a character who could shoot fireworks. That's the character concept. How'd he explain it? With buzz speak which meant nothing in actuality.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Ad Hominem/Poisoning the well 😮💨
Wishful thinking fallacy.
Sorry, but its true, he has no grasp of how a characters powers work.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Strawman.I never said she did.
I never said you did. I was pointing out how this "Spiritual connection" was a red herring.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
@ the bolded- Lack of Proportion fallacy. 🙄
Wishful thinking fallacy/
Originally posted by 2damnloud
No red herring because it directly correlates to the subject in question.
It has NOTHING to do with her powerset.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
It would only be an Appeal to Authority if Claremont wasn't an authority.
Wrong. But thanks for proving you know nothing about what fallacies are, but then we already know that from your frequent misuse of them.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
No a non-sequiter. Where did you get that from? 😂
It's non sequential. saying that she has a spiritual connection and citieing plants and trees does not follow the connection to her powerset.
It's misleading and has nothing to do with the topic of her powerset. Therefore its a red herring.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Strawman.
Wishful thinking fallacy.
I'm sorry but you have made it clear through implications that low showings for storm are PIS...
5 times in 32 years😄 @ all them sides Phoenix being able to do what she can do.
All are PIS.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Which makes me wonder how you got "non-sequiter" when you can't even properly decipher my argument. LMAO
This is denying the antecedant.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Wishful thinking fallacy.Strawman
How is pointint out that your argument is not valid simply because you say it is an exageration of your claims?
You make a claim I call bullshit, that's not a strawman...
Originally posted by 2damnloud
"A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true. Otherwise, a deductive argument is unsound."What's my argument, anyway? 😂
That she always operates on a level of power she's only been shown to do 3 times in current continuity when the times she's operated under that power level are alot more frequent.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
Strawman.
Oh really?
So this wasn't you talking about Storm KILLING Sue?
Originally posted by 2damnloud
And even if it wasnt, the other scenario works just as well for Storm to kill Sue.
Oh wait it is, which means I'm NOT exagerating your claims.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
I never said she would never kill. I have said she doesn't like to.
I never said you said that.
Looks like you're the one that can't decipher arguments properly.
Originally posted by 2damnloud
She killed the Brood and would have inadvertently killed herself, if she wasn't.........ya kow..........so ****in powerfulermmhappy
Or you know, scripted not to die. 🙄
Originally posted by 2damnloud
I'll finish.✅
In last place proving that ignorance is bliss...