It is this holding back of power which brings Magik and Colossus into conflict resulting in the both of them knocking each other out.
^ Also Iron fist states that Scott ripped into the dimension of K'un-L'un to find Hope after their whereabouts were revealed by Emma. Emma telepathically scaned every mind on Earth to find out btw.
Originally posted by Sundipped
It is this holding back of power which brings Magik and Colossus into conflict resulting in the both of them knocking each other out.^ Also Iron fist states that Scott ripped into the dimension of K'un-L'un to find Hope after their whereabouts were revealed by Emma. Emma telepathically scaned every mind on Earth to find out btw.
^^
mmm
I don't think he means it in the plural sense as you do. More like in the sense of this is what happens anytime a (only 1) dimension is ripped. Unless it's some kind of effect that occurs when multiple dimensions are being ripped upon entering in succession and IF has witnessed it before, which I doubt.
Originally posted by Sundipped
^^
mmm
I don't think he means it in the plural sense as you do. More like in the sense of this is what happens anytime a (only 1) dimension is ripped. Unless it's some kind of effect that occurs when multiple dimensions are being ripped upon entering in succession and IF has witnessed it before, which I doubt.
Otherwise I am going exactly by what the on-panel illustrative tells us . And it clearly mentions "dimensions" , not "dimension" .
^
The statement was spoken in general terms. There is no other time (tmk) that IF has ever witnessed nor referenced someone tearing through multiple dimensions. Scott was not lost & just bouncing from dimension to dimension. Even if he did, how would IF know? He went straight from the Earth 616 plane to K'un L'un.
Originally posted by Sundipped
^
The statement was spoken in general terms. There is no other time (tmk) that IF has ever witnessed nor referenced someone tearing through multiple dimensions. Scott was not lost & just bouncing from dimension to dimension. Even if he did, how would IF know? He went straight from the Earth 616 plane to K'un L'un.
How do you know that it was a generic statement ? Burden of proof is on you .
^
Seems to be a case of you overanalyzing again.
Can't you see the comment was ambigious? disgust
I can say "that's how it looks when someone tears cardboard boxes" in relation to someone actually tearing a (singular) cardboard box. Doesn't mean that person actually tore more than that 1 cardboard box.
Combine that with the fact IF has never referenced or seen anything like Scott or any other being visibly tearing through more than 1 dimension at a time, (seems like something like that would've been noted in more detail) then how can you figure it was more than 1? All it takes is a little common sense.
Anyway no need to spam this thread with something so simple. If you still fail to comprehend this then we can take the discussion elsewhere.
Originally posted by Sundipped
^
Seems to be a case of you overanalyzing again.
Can't you see the comment was ambigious? disgustI can say "that's how it looks when someone tears cardboard boxes" in relation to someone actually tearing a [B](singular)
cardboard box. Doesn't mean that person actually tore more than that 1 cardboard box.Combine that with the fact IF has never referenced or seen anything like Scott or any other being visibly tearing through more than 1 dimension at a time, (seems like something like that would've been noted in more detail) then how can you figure it was more than 1? All it takes is a little common sense.
Anyway no need to spam this thread with something so simple. If you still fail to comprehend this then we can take the discussion elsewhere. [/B]
Again , if only a single dimension was being referenced then , it wouldn't have been written in a plural format .
So , if Thanos says that the Ultimate Nullifier is capable of destroying universes , then that should mean that he is onlhy referring to a single universe , because he has never seen it being used in such a fashion , right ?
The on-panel evidence very clearly tells us it was "dimensions" being torn through . You can speculate all you want , but at the end of the day you're the one claiming that only it was referenced in singular format . As I said before , burden of proof is on you , for making such a positive claim .
Originally posted by TheGodKiller
First you state that it was a generic statement , now you claim that its ambiguous . Make up your mind already as to what it is . Generic ? Or ambiguous ?
Again , if only a single dimension was being referenced then , it wouldn't have been written in a plural format .
facepalm
I never said generic. That's what you assumed. I said general, meaning the phrase was vague and could possibly have a broader meaning & ambigious, meaning this phrase can be open to more than one interpretation.
Originally posted by TheGodKiller
So , if Thanos says that the Ultimate Nullifier is capable of destroying universes , then that should mean that he is onlhy referring to a single universe , because he has never seen it being used in such a fashion , right ?
facepalm
Horrible analogy. The context is not even the same. I figured you wouldn't get the example I made earlier.
Originally posted by TheGodKiller
The on-panel evidence very clearly tells us it was "dimension[b]s" being torn through . You can speculate all you want , but at the end of the day you're the one claiming that only it was referenced in singular format . As I said before , burden of proof is on you , for making such a positive claim . [/B]
facepalm
There is no speculation and there is no "burden of proof" on me to make my claim. Only moderate comprehension in the context of the English language is needed. Now stop spamming the thread.
Originally posted by Sundipped
facepalm
I never said generic. That's what you assumed. I said general, meaning the phrase was vague and could possibly have a broader meaning & ambigious, meaning this phrase can be open to more than one interpretation.
Originally posted by Sundipped
facepalm
Horrible analogy. The context is not even the same. I figured you wouldn't get the example I made earlier.
Originally posted by Sundipped
facepalm
There is no speculation and there is no "burden of proof" on me to make my claim. Only moderate comprehension in the context of the English language is needed. Now stop spamming the thread.
You're making a positive claim , so the burden of proof is on you to prove said claim .
^ You can keep that 1 track mind. And I'll stick to using basic common sense + keeping an open mind.
I'm not in the mood to verse you in the many different contexts of words in English language. Get back at me after you've taken up some Language Arts courses.
In the meantime try not to get reported again for spaming respect threads. You're really testing my patience.
