Originally posted by h1a8
Those still are the current rules (just not written in the current rules). Why do you think mods and many members have been mentioning it to invalidate feats on many threads? Just because something happened doesn't mean a character can do it. Mods were even talking about a rule of 3 at one time (Must happen at least 3 times). It is theoretically stupid to mention a rare exotic feat as it will happen in the forum fight.
Especially since you have been proven to have ZERO credibility in your interpretations as you have been cited to mislead ppl in many, many occasions.
Originally posted by h1a8
Mentioning the word soul has nothing to do with proving that one is just able to GO TO THE ASTRAL FIELD AT A MOMENTS NOTICE.
He mentions the word soul to describe the nature of his powers (the astral attack) making the feat (the astral attack) parallel in nature with his other soul feats.
You fail. Try again.
Originally posted by h1a8
Let's use logic here. If many writer's portrayed the astral field as being in a different dimension then it makes sense that Surfer was also went to a different dimension and that the comic showed the scenery of the current dimension just to show SS leaving his body to go to the Astral field. It was simply that he was merely traveling there from his body.
What is important is how something is being PORTRAYED AT THE EXACT MOMENT when the feat occurred. It was portrayed/drawn written as being in the same location for this SPECIFIC feat. Thus making your BFR rules-lawyering completely inapplicable as the rules state LOCATION.
You using "logic" while basing it on an obviously biased and ignorant assumption (something you always seem to do)of "writer's intention" is laughable. You never even read the comic, so what gives you the credibility (another thing you lack completely) to actually insert an interpretation of the writer's intention?
You fail. Try again.
Hell, this argument is irrelevant as you can't even CITE THE RULE THAT MAKES THIS BFR.
Originally posted by h1a8
Well many here have used Dr. M's feats from the movie. I'm pretty sure that no one would mention Dr. M without the comic ever becoming a movie, unless of course the movie is based on the comic and the exact things that happened in the movie happened also in the comics. And you are hypocritical here since some of your arguments were discussing the movie as well.
You're an idiot. Check the damned rules and the DAMNED FORUM HEADING before opening your mouth (or for the purposes of the forum: typing something). This is bordering on ridiculous now and if you can't see the absolute stupidity of your above post then God help you.
Originally posted by h1a8
You can't argue against my argument and then use my argument against me at a future date. Not only is that hypocritical but that's called arguing under extreme bias. Either you except my argument or you don't. You just can't except it when you seem fit to make you win the debate. Choose now what side you accept and I will then argue or agree accordingly.
Here is an example of your double standard logic:
-For the Astral feat to be valid, it has to be performed SPECIFICALLY that way multiple times with scans.
-Dr M can teleport others apart and I don't need scans to prove this. Just deductive reasoning.
The only way to DEAL with double standard debaters like you is to throw your logic back into your face so that you would be forced to chose w/c position you would stand with (therefore invalidating an entire set of arguments that you made).
Besides, it's fun ridiculing you as you fail time and again.
Originally posted by h1a8
Remember a ko is loss of consciousness. I seriously doubt Dr. M was unconscious for more than 10 seconds. He has to retain some form of consciousness just to reform himself. It is illogical to believe that he remained unconscious the entire time until his body was completely reformed.
Originally posted by h1a8
Also, when I mentioned necessary speed I was referring to speed in which to make an action and not speed of traveling. For example, I implied Dr. M's speed in manipulating matter and not his speed of traveling. SS can't shoot blasts faster than light so Dr. M would have either duplicated himself or simply teleported SS apart right after the bell well before SS gets to him.
You have not provided any FTL reflexes feats that Dr M has performed and repairing a TV is simply one showing (w/c by YOUR definition is PIS) that wasn't even occurring at FTL speeds (meaning, it is still much slower than the Surfer's reaction times).
You fail. Try again.
Originally posted by h1a8
Also Dr. M can see time as a whole and thus knows what SS is going to do before the bell (thinking before the bell is allowed).
You have yet to prove that Dr M has the reaction time to do anything before being one-shotted-dispersed by the Surfer.
Originally posted by h1a8
We are not going by average showings here. Otherwise your Astral feat stuff would be invalid.
Come on. Say it.
Originally posted by h1a8
Again reaction times are not speed of movement times.
Reactions =/= Speed of movement. I can have greater reactions times than you but by the time I get to you, you will already be prepared with something.
You mentioned that repairing the TV was a form of FTL reflexes, I pointed out that this was a stupid assumption and even IF (BIG IF) this was true, Surfer FAR outperforms Dr M in this area.
Originally posted by h1a8
Without making sense then how can one argue?
Originally posted by h1a8
Making sense has nothing to do with the factual possibility (current science) but it has something to do with the logical possibility. Factually impossible things are allowed but not the logically impossible things. Any argument has to be at least valid logically or it can't be accepted as truth.
My argument is that his physiology might be different from humans as it takes amount of energy (kinetic impact, heat, etc) and not shown physical trauma that can cause him to be KOd.
One is backed by comic showings, another is not.
Originally posted by h1a8
For an analogy to work it must be correct.
In the SAT test they have a section on this. Only one choice is correct.
Your argument is faulty since you assume that since this is comics anything is allowed to happen, even if it is logically impossible. Well I tell you sir, nothing is allowed to happen if it is logically impossible. Even if we want it to. Logically impossible = False (or self contradiction).
Surfer's durability and physiology functions differently from human durability and physiology. With all the facts that has been provided thru showings (ability to survive being cut apart, being blown to bits and being impaled as well as bending his body around to remove harpoons, not needing sustenance or air, etc.), this seems to be the case.
You're trying to misrepresent truths again by creating a false analogy.
The logical possibility exists and it is backed by on-panel evidence. You refusing to accept it is another thing.
The denial is strong in this one.
Originally posted by h1a8
I have proven that Dr. M is not destroying matter and sending it at the speed of light to another location. Thus he is simply transporting it instantly to another location.
This is the problem with you, h1. You present opinion and assumption (w/ no proof) and deem it "proof" to mislead ppl. Anyone reading this discussion for the first time would assume that you've ALREADY provided proof when all you have in your defense (of the Dr M nonfeat that you're trying to push down everyone's throat) is PURE CONJECTURE.
Originally posted by h1a8
Of course the rules exist, otherwise why would mods and many members continue to discuss it for rare feats.
You have none of that.
All you have is a desperate adherence to the EXACT minimum requirements of a nonexistent rule in the hopes that you can exclude an argumentation that you cannot refute. A desperate tactic oftentimes used by desperate lawyers.
Here's a little tip to help you debate better: When rules-lawyering, it is best to provide the rule first.
Originally posted by h1a8
Im not bragging, just defending myself. You claimed I wasn't and I had to prove you wrong. I didn't up and volunteer that I'm humble. I only mentioned it in defense to my character. I'm not just going to sit there and let you say false things about me without defense. I know who I am and what I have done in the past.
I believe most of your mistakes are from ignorance and the sheer tenacity of your replies stem from your unwillingness/fear of having to admit that you were proven wrong.
Funny thing is, Ignorance is one of your most admitted qualities in these forums. Ignorance of the rules, Ignorance of the characters, and ignorance of logic.
What I pointed out was that even thru the failure of your logic (probably borne out of pure ignorance), you would rather cling to ANY kind of loophole in the hopes that you somehow validate your claim or at least throw enough doubt around the facts by bogging down the debate thru waves and waves of weak logic (and then demanding the other party to prove you wrong countless times instead of providing the evidence to prove yourself right just once to end the debate).
This a sign of immaturity or cowardice. I happen to believe you are currently suffering from both.
Originally posted by h1a8
Assuming I'm misleading someone, then If I'm knowingly doing it then I'm merely crazy. Because I can assure and swear that I'm not trying to mislead anyone. I believe in what I say. If I didn't then I wouldn't post it. If I don't believe in what I say then I would assume others wouldn't either. We all have a natural tendency to believe others think as we do. I write what I think is true and not what I don't think is true.
As it is, even when you're proven wrong (such as when you FAILED to understand Superman's starbreaker scan by not reading the scan properly), you automatically resort to crappy logic (it was spoken "figuratively"!!!) in the hopes of diverting attention away from your mistake.
This leads me to believe that you would do anything, say anything, type anything simply to avoid being proven wrong (to the point of misleading ppl).
Originally posted by D_Dude1210Of course they are still the current rules. No one here can use extremely rare exotic feats as to what will happen in a forum fight. I'm definitely not going to accept it. Otherwise any character can perform any action that has been shown, no matter how exotic and rare.
No. They're not current rules as they're not posted on the board that outlines the current rules. You just can't come here, point out SPECIFIC rules that require SPECIFIC circumstances when those very rules don't exist anymore then hope to debate with your own interpretations of it. That's completely moronic.
What? Soul feats having nothing to do with BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE ASTRAL FIELD ON A MOMENT'S NOTICE. The conclusion doesn't follow.Nice strawman. Actually, no, that was pretty bad. Or is your english so bad that you can't even interpret simple arguments anymore?
He mentions the word soul to describe the nature of his powers (the astral attack) making the feat (the astral attack) parallel in nature with his other soul feats.
You fail. Try again.
The scene was only shown when SS was leaving his body. The scene wasn't shown when SS was attacking the creature. Clearly SS left out of his body and traveled to the Astral Field. And this is assuming I agree with your "we see the scenery thus it isn't leaving the battlefield" logic (which I still don't).
What is important is how something is being PORTRAYED AT THE EXACT MOMENT when the feat occurred. It was portrayed/drawn written as being in the same location for this SPECIFIC feat. Thus making your BFR rules-lawyering completely inapplicable as the rules state LOCATION.You using "logic" while basing it on an obviously biased and ignorant assumption (something you always seem to do)of "writer's intention" is laughable. You never even read the comic, so what gives you the credibility (another thing you lack completely) to actually insert an interpretation of the writer's intention?
You fail. Try again.
Going to another dimension is clearly leaving the battlefield.
[B]Hell, this argument is irrelevant as you can't even CITE THE RULE THAT MAKES THIS BFR./facepalm
[/B]
Am I? Well you must be too since you were arguing the movie all along too. And all others must be too since they argue movie related feats for all Dr. M threads. No need to bash though.
You're an idiot. Check the damned rules and the DAMNED FORUM HEADING before opening your mouth (or for the purposes of the forum: typing something). This is bordering on ridiculous now and if you can't see the absolute stupidity of your above post then God help you.
What does this have to do with you going against my argument and then using it at a future date? You are avoiding trying to respond to my argument with an irrelevant one of your own. You might be committing the "you do it too fallacy". Just because someone else did it doesn't make your argument logically sound if you do it.
This is yet another instance where you're wrong, h1. You see, you're what ppl call a double-standard debater. You apply one set of rules for one character and then apply a COMPLETELY different set of rules for another.Here is an example of your double standard logic:
-For the Astral feat to be valid, it has to be performed SPECIFICALLY that way multiple times with scans.
-Dr M can teleport others apart and I don't need scans to prove this. Just deductive reasoning.
Now to defend. My argument wasn't a double standard. SS leaving to go to the Astral field while in battle is an exotic feat in which doesn't commute from his other main feats. My argument is more like, "If Dr. M can teleport others and he can control subatomic particles, all as his MAIN power, then he can teleport molecules.
Ko only means to be unconscious. Otherwise, it would be similar to a trapping BFR (which is 3 minutes by the way).[quote]b[]
There are many definitions of a KO. One is the literal definition for "knockout", but with regards to the acronym ("KO"😉 itself (w/c was taken for boxing), the main definition is when one loses consciousness OR when one is incapacitated from injury sufficiently to be unable to fight (w/c is far more applicable for forum debates).Yet ANOTHER attempt to misrepresent my reply. Or just simply complete ignorance from not reading my reply. This makes this whole line of your argument irrelevant.
We are not talking about speed but reactions. Dr. M doesn't have to be fast if he can mentally react in the time it takes a light speed attack to get to him. He needs not to move to activate his powers.
You have not provided any FTL reflexes feats that Dr M has performed and repairing a TV is simply one showing (w/c by YOUR definition is PIS) that wasn't even occurring at FTL speeds (meaning, it is still much slower than the Surfer's reaction times).
You are correct. Knowing what will happen is not the same as being able to stop something. That is why I showed he does have at least light speed reactions (the ability to process a thought before a beam of light gets to you from battle distance).
Knowing what would happen is not the same as being able to react to it or being able to do something about it.You have yet to prove that Dr M has the reaction time to do anything before being one-shotted-dispersed by the Surfer.
Irrelevant. As average showings will still invalidate the Astral field stuff, whether I agree or disagree.
So, now you agree that the Astral feat is valid?
Irrelevant. It doesn't matter if SS's reaction times are far above's Dr. M. All that matters is that SS has no attack that can get to Dr. M before he can make an action. Remember he witnesses things that happen so fast they are said not to have happened at all.When did I ever mention Surfer's travel speed in my previous post?
You mentioned that repairing the TV was a form of FTL reflexes, I pointed out that this was a stupid assumption and even IF (BIG IF) this was true, Surfer FAR outperforms Dr M in this area.
It is damage that causes KO, nothing more. Something had to be disconnected or damaged as to how he can be koed. Separating him to pieces will produce this separation to a greater extent.
You should really ask yourself that question a lot more.Your logic is that Surfer has been KOd by powerful strikes before even when he has not been shown to be physically maimed (by artwork) by such attacks and thus attacks that can cause him to be dispersed/seemingly maimed (by artwork) is not survivable.
My argument is that his physiology might be different from humans as it takes amount of energy (kinetic impact, heat, etc) and not shown physical trauma that can cause him to be KOd.
It is asinine and logically faulty to believe that someone can be koed with a blow yet can't be when they are separated into pieces. This is very ridiculous.
I already pointed out the logical possibilities.Surfer's durability and physiology functions differently from human durability and physiology. With all the facts that has been provided thru showings (ability to survive being cut apart, being blown to bits and being impaled as well as bending his body around to remove harpoons, not needing sustenance or air, etc.), this seems to be the case.
You're trying to misrepresent truths again by creating a false analogy.
The logical possibility exists and it is backed by on-panel evidence. You refusing to accept it is another thing.
The denial is strong in this one.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210If one can lift a train then certainly they can lift a car. This is deduction. The strongest argument there is.
You have proven nothing. No scans, no issue number, nothing.This is the problem with you, h1. You present opinion and assumption (w/ no proof) and deem it "proof" to mislead ppl. Anyone reading this discussion for the first time would assume that you've ALREADY provided proof when all you have in your defense (of the Dr M nonfeat that you're trying to push down everyone's throat) is PURE CONJECTURE.
It is a clear rule since mods talk about it. Doesn't have to be written in the forum rules if they have the last say. Otherwise, I can use the craziest exotic feat that happened for a character as to what will happen in the forum fight. Ridiculous!
They read the comics. They know what is "outside a character's history" and what is not. They have credibility enough to make other debaters believe their opinions. And they present logical and acceptable arguments to prove their case (well most of them anyway).You have none of that.
All you have is a desperate adherence to the EXACT minimum requirements of a nonexistent rule in the hopes that you can exclude an argumentation that you cannot refute. A desperate tactic oftentimes used by desperate lawyers.
Here's a little tip to help you debate better: When rules-lawyering, it is best to provide the rule first.
If I had the slightest feeling I am wrong then I either wouldn't post or I'll admit I'm wrong. You did imply I am prideful. Pride or real negative consequence are the only reasons why anyone wouldn't admit they are wrong when they know they are.
Prior to you bragging about your humility, I never mentioned anything about you being arrogant within this thread. Thus, mentioning that you are humble was purely irrelevant for no other purpose than to claim that you are humble.I believe most of your mistakes are from ignorance and the sheer tenacity of your replies stem from your unwillingness/fear of having to admit that you were proven wrong.
Evidence can be in the form of scans or logic or both. Get it out of your head that evidence is ONLY SCANS.What I pointed out was that even thru the failure of your logic (probably borne out of pure ignorance), you would rather cling to ANY kind of loophole in the hopes that you somehow validate your claim or at least throw enough doubt around the facts by bogging down the debate thru waves and waves of weak logic (and then demanding the other party to prove you wrong countless times instead of providing the evidence to prove yourself right just once to end the debate).
This a sign of immaturity or cowardice. I happen to believe you are currently suffering from both.
I still believe Superman was pulling solo in that arc. Hal was helping only due to making and the keeping the harness in one piece. But this is a different argument. Let's not debate that here but in a relevant Superman thread.
If this were true, then you would acknowledge mistakes in your logic and you would scrutinize your logic to make sure that you are believing the correct thing. Because, you know, no one likes to defend the incorrect side.As it is, even when you're proven wrong (such as when you FAILED to understand Superman's starbreaker scan by not reading the scan properly), you automatically resort to crappy logic (it was spoken "figuratively"!!!) in the hopes of diverting attention away from your mistake.
Originally posted by h1a8
Of course they are still the current rules. No one here can use extremely rare exotic feats as to what will happen in a forum fight. I'm definitely not going to accept it. Otherwise any character can perform any action that has been shown, no matter how exotic and rare.
The rules are the rules as they are WRITTEN. If you do not like it, don't rules lawyer. I win here. I have fact, you have opinion. Unless you can provide concrete evidence that this rule of yours exist, you have nothing here. Utterly nothing except pathetic denial.
Seriously, you can't cite rules that no longer exist and expect it to carry in a debate. You MIGHT try and convince me thru logic and your DEEP understanding of the Surfer's history that it is indeed PIS. But you don't read Surfer comics. So you have none of that.
Without the word of the rules specifying anything as a basis of your argument, all you have is your opinion on its interpretation.
If you had any credibility, you might be able to convince me of your interpretation. Sadly, you have none of that, too.
All you have now are: Assumptions. Biased, misleading interpretations. Denial. And this is the story of your life.
You seriously already lost here. You need to concede this point.
Originally posted by h1a8
What? Soul feats having nothing to do with BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE ASTRAL FIELD ON A MOMENT'S NOTICE. The conclusion doesn't follow.
What does "a moment's notice" have anything to do with anything here.??
Of course he can, he's done it on-panel. The point of my argument is that it's NOT PIS for the Surfer to affect the Astral Plane as he's done it multiple times in his history as shown by his multiple Astral/Soul feats.
That and the fact that you can't cite any rules to support you PIS argument.
Originally posted by h1a8
The scene was only shown when SS was leaving his body. The scene wasn't shown when SS was attacking the creature. Clearly SS left out of his body and traveled to the Astral Field. And this is assuming I agree with your "we see the scenery thus it isn't leaving the battlefield" logic (which I still don't).
Yes it does. Clearly you didn't even look at the scan. Look at the creature's hand as the Surfer is about to attack it.
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o106/bigbran1/comic/InThyName2005.jpg
This is the problem with you. You don't scrutinize the evidence THEN post trash assumptions borne of utter ignorance to mislead ppl then shift the burden of proof to the other party just so that you are given more room to post more trash.
I guess not having to worry about having any credibility whatsoever is a luxury you can afford.
Originally posted by h1a8
Going to another dimension is clearly leaving the battlefield.
Translation: "WAH!WAH!WAH! I can't refute your logic so I'll just run back to pure denial again!! Cuz that's the kind of guy I am!!"
Originally posted by h1a8
Am I? Well you must be too since you were arguing the movie all along too. And all others must be too since they argue movie related feats for all Dr. M threads. No need to bash though.
This is the "COMIC VS" forum, noob. Sadly, you don't really know that a LOT of the ppl here actually DO base their arguments off the comic. Funny thing is, since you never read the comic, you can't tell the difference.
Unfortunately, I'll have to concede the fact that I based my arguments off YOUR accounts of the feats (cuz, well, like I said, even I get mislead by you at times, you're pretty good at misleading ppl after all.). Admittedly, I am guilty of being gullible enough to believe your accounts.
But seeing now as you're basing your argumentations off the movie, I must now facepalm, shake my head and point you to the direction of the nearest comic store.
Buy the comic, read the comic, understand the comic, scan some pages THEN come back here and debate. I tire of debating with the ignorant.
Originally posted by h1a8
What does this have to do with you going against my argument and then using it at a future date?
The fact that the best way to argue with a double standard debater is to throw back his own double standard logical arguments to his face so that he realizes his logical contradictions to show him his debating faults and force him to take a more unbiased stance?
Heck, go down a few sentences, you'll see another one of your double standards in play, yet again.
I think I explained it solidly enough. Do I need to spell it out more?
Originally posted by h1a8
You are avoiding trying to respond to my argument with an irrelevant one of your own. You might be committing the "you do it too fallacy". Just because someone else did it doesn't make your argument logically sound if you do it.
I responded to your argument. Sadly, you don't really get it.
I'm not doing it because I have a specific stance and want it to prove it using your logic. My goal here is to point out YOUR logical flaws (as I find it quite entertaining to do so) and how it applies to the opposite side given similar standards just to prove to you that you're a hypocrite. 🙂
Originally posted by h1a8
Now to defend. My argument wasn't a double standard. SS leaving to go to the Astral field while in battle is an exotic feat in which doesn't commute from his other main feats. My argument is more like, "If Dr. M can teleport others and he can control subatomic particles, all as his MAIN power, then he can teleport molecules.
You cannot argue ability of two completely different powers.
Let me use YOU type of logic here:
-Wolverine has regeneration.
-Wolverine has adamantium claws.
-Both are within Wolverine's history as main powers.
Thus it can be argued that Wolverine can regenerate his adamantium claws.
Without proof, you cannot VOMIT assumptions like this.
You fail. Try again.
Originally posted by h1a8
Ko only means to be unconscious. Otherwise, it would be similar to a trapping BFR (which is 3 minutes by the way).
KO is incapacitation or being unable to fight. Stop making stuff up. GEEZ!
Cite the rule where trapping BFR requires 3 mins. Otherwise, I'll call this another one of your misleading lies.
Incapacitation by trapping has also been considered an possible and acceptable victory condition in these forums. Such as Thanos' force block.
Originally posted by h1a8
We are not talking about speed but reactions. Dr. M doesn't have to be fast if he can mentally react in the time it takes a light speed attack to get to him. He needs not to move to activate his powers.
You've never proven that Dr M can react at light speeds.
Surfer travels at far faster than light.
Originally posted by h1a8
Do the math. If one can move a gazillion particles in exact order in less than a second then how fast of reaction time do you think that is?
My GOD do you know how idiotic and desperate you sound here? We don't know how Dr M's matter manipulation works so we don't know if it takes speed to fix a TV or simply a level of mental awareness/multitasking.
The TV did NOT explode at light speed thus you cannot make the inference that it was even CLOSE to FTL. COMPLEXITY of performed actions has nothing to do with reaction speeds.
Otherwise, Surfer would have the reaction speed so far above FTL that it's not even funny.
Originally posted by h1a8
You are correct. Knowing what will happen is not the same as being able to stop something. That is why I showed he does have at least light speed reactions (the ability to process a thought before a beam of light gets to you from battle distance).
FYI, you've never proven that the TV feat was anything close to FTL as it didn't explode anywhere near light speed.
FYI-2, Surfer's bullrush travels at many many many times light speed.
Originally posted by h1a8
Irrelevant. As average showings will still invalidate the Astral field stuff, whether I agree or disagree.
You use ONE inconclusive feat to indicate FTL reflexes on Dr M using EXTREMELY FLEXIBLE standards of interpretation for the feat yet refuse to recognize Surfer's Astral feats (even though the Surfer has multiple Soul/Mind/Astral feats and his history of versatility within the physical and nonphysical has been well documented) by using an EXTREMELY RIGID interpretation of multiple feats to segregate them as completely unrelated to each other.
Pure, unadulterated hypocrisy.
You see how you are a double standards debater now?
Also, you don't even read the Surfer (I'm beginning to doubt that you even read comics at all). How the hell can you even have the audacity to state what his "average historical showings are".
Just admit that you're a double standards debater so we can move on.
Originally posted by h1a8
Irrelevant. It doesn't matter if SS's reaction times are far above's Dr. M. All that matters is that SS has no attack that can get to Dr. M before he can make an action. Remember he witnesses things that happen so fast they are said not to have happened at all.
You've never proven that Dr M has FTL reflexes. Repairing the TV is not FTL reflexes and I would thank you not to make misleading statements such as this unless you have conclusive proof for the benefit of the other posters reading this debate.
It would actually be nice for you to actually PROVE a point before FIRST making biased, ignorant and completely misleading statements.
Originally posted by h1a8
It is damage that causes KO, nothing more. Something had to be disconnected or damaged as to how he can be koed. Separating him to pieces will produce this separation to a greater extent.
I disagree. Wolverine has been KOd by punches or knocks to the head before but can be sliced up or burnt to a crisp and still stand up.
This is comics, human physiological rules don't apply. Just because it kills your argument, doesn't make it wrong.
Originally posted by h1a8
It is asinine and logically faulty to believe that someone can be koed with a blow yet can't be when they are separated into pieces. This is very ridiculous.
HELLOOOOO!! (/knockonyouremptyhead) this is comics, you shmoe. You apparently only argue "suspension of disbelief" when it is convenient for your argument but argue strict logic when it doesn't.
Yet another example of your double standards.
Originally posted by h1a8
If one can lift a train then certainly they can lift a car. This is deduction. The strongest argument there is.
The premise of deductive reasoning stems from correct (and unbiased) set of premises.
What you did was simply pull 3 completely unrelated premises to form an extremely BIASED and MISLEADING conclusion.
Just because Dr M can manipulate matter does not infer that he can teleport with the same level of accuracy, capability and control.
HELL, you've yet to PROVE that your knowledge of the NATURE of Dr M's teleportation allows him to apply the ability in the method that you claim it can. Which you never have.
You fail. Try again.
Originally posted by h1a8
It is a clear rule since mods talk about it. Doesn't have to be written in the forum rules if they have the last say.
Except that your interpretation is incorrect.
And unless you can cite EXACT rules to prove the accuracy of your interpretations, then all you have is conjecture. Conjecture cannot be used to argue disqualification of on-panel evidence.
In short:
Evidence > Opinion.
Originally posted by h1a8
Otherwise, I can use the craziest exotic feat that happened for a character as to what will happen in the forum fight. Ridiculous!
Well, if you can ARGUE that it is within the character's history (due to your extensive knowledge of the character and his history) to do so and supply on-panel evidence that the character was able to perform it (even once). Then why not?
FYI, I've always believed that Superman has planetary-level strength all along. It's your own logic that disqualifies his feats and puts doubt on his on-panel showings proving this fact.
That and I find it fun throwing back your own fail logic onto your face. I find it very entertaining.
Originally posted by h1a8
If I had the slightest feeling I am wrong then I either wouldn't post or I'll admit I'm wrong. You did imply I am prideful. Pride or real negative consequence are the only reasons why anyone wouldn't admit they are wrong when they know they are.
There is also ignorance and cowardice.
Originally posted by h1a8
Evidence can be in the form of scans or logic or both. Get it out of your head that evidence is ONLY SCANS.
Incorrect. Both on your interpretation of what I said as well as the entire line of reasoning itself.
Firstly, I stated that you didn't provide ANY evidence whatsoever. But scans and issue numbers (seeing as we're debating COMICS) are the most concrete evidence you can supply. What you CANNOT use are unproven logical deductions and state them as irrefutable evidence to mislead ppl.
This is an example of yet another misleading generalization borne out of sheer ignorance.
Also, logic cannot be used as evidence unless you have evidence supporting the logic. Otherwise, you suffer from Logical Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence.
Here is something I copy/pasted for your benefit:
One of the things that can undermine logic is basing an argument on insufficient evidence. There are several errors that one can make related to insufficient evidence as one chooses evidence to bolster an argument, and the following fallacies of insufficient evidence occur so frequently that they are named.
Hasty Generalization. A hasty generalization bases a conclusion on too little evidence.
Fallacy of Exclusion. Leaving out evidence that would lead to a different conclusion is called the fallacy of exclusion.
Fallacy of Oversimplification. In this fallacy, some aspects of an issue -- generally more subtle ones -- and their ramifications are not explored.
Do you get it now?
Originally posted by h1a8
I still believe Superman was pulling solo in that arc. Hal was helping only due to making and the keeping the harness in one piece. But this is a different argument. Let's not debate that here but in a relevant Superman thread.
All of which you never proved and all of where I had far more solid on-panel evidence proving MY point.
But thank you for proving my opinion of you.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
What I pointed out was that even thru the failure of your logic (probably borne out of pure ignorance), you would rather cling to ANY kind of loophole in the hopes that you somehow validate your claim or at least throw enough doubt around the facts by bogging down the debate thru waves and waves of weak logic (and then demanding the other party to prove you wrong countless times instead of providing the evidence to prove yourself right just once to end the debate).This a sign of immaturity or cowardice. I happen to believe you are currently suffering from both.
Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
This thread has turned into the worst thread on this entire site, and that's saying something.
Originally posted by The Nuul
These walls of text are annoying.
Hm. I'll have to concur. This "debate" has gone far enough.
To: h1a8
I think this debate has gone far enough. I've had my fun and the walls of texts aren't really serving any real purpose anymore.
My solution? Let's BOTH post our closing remarks and let the forum decide the outcome. The closing remarks will simply outline how we think the scenario will play out and why we think our presented evidences are valid.
That or we take this to Battlezone.
If you want, I'll even go first.
Fair enough?
Originally posted by D_Dude1210I don't think there's a person on this forum that backs up h1's comments, hell, even h1 doesn't believe what he's saying... in any thread he's ever posted in.
My solution? Let's BOTH post our closing remarks and let the forum decide the outcome. The closing remarks will simply outline how we think the scenario will play out and why we think our presented evidences are valid.That or we take this to Battlezone.
If you want, I'll even go first.
Fair enough?
Yes please. Battlezone it.
Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
I don't think there's a person on this forum that backs up h1's comments, hell, even h1 doesn't believe what he's saying... in any thread he's ever posted in.
Also, "evidence".
I highly doubt h1's even read Watchmen, no need go that far as to say he's presented 'evidence'.Yes please. Battlezone it.
Agreed.
Well, h1. Do you believe your stance enough to Battlezone this?
I'm game.
