Thanos vs Maxima, Sersi, Silver Surfer, Superman

Started by Sr J-Bieb6 pages
Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by Black bolt z
What is so hard to understand about what I am saying?
You dodging the question and you being proven wrong.

You're claiming something that is wrong, or can't be proven. You don't think that problems can arrise from this?

Black bolt z Mindsets Master

Originally posted by Nihilist
There is nothing hard to understand, its you making it this way, you say his energy durability was weaker than his blunt force durability, which i didnt agree with and gave examples of his high blunt force durabilty( to which you said "ok he does has high blunt force durability). So do you know disagree or agree that both sets of durability are equal or not.
Let me recap what I have said from the beggining

1: Thanos has massive durability is blunt force trauma
2: Thanos has even higher durability in energy attacks
3: Both are super high. One is just higher then the other.

753 Senior Member

neither of you have proved anything. give the spam a rest

Black bolt z Mindsets Master

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
You dodging the question and you being proven wrong.

You're claiming something that is wrong, or can't be proven. You don't think that problems can arrise from this?

I don't see whats so hard to understand about what i'm saying.

Nihilist Senior Member

Originally posted by Black bolt z
Let me recap what I have said from the beggining

1: Thanos has massive durability is blunt force trauma
2: Thanos has even higher durability in energy attacks
3: Both are super high. One is just higher then the other.


i
1.Only after i gave examples, as you said it was weaker than energy durabilty.
2.Which you have given no expmples of to back YOUR stance.
3.Based on?

Nihilist Senior Member

Originally posted by 753
neither of you have proved anything. give the spam a rest
Why dont you just keep your nose out, as its not effecting you in anyway.

Black bolt z Mindsets Master

Originally posted by Nihilist
i
1.Only after i gave examples, as you said it was weaker than energy durabilty.
2.Which you have given no expmples of to back YOUR stance.
3.Based on?
No I said his energy was stronger then his blunt force. Not his blunt force was weaker then his energy. One would imply one is low while the other would imply one is high.Its not hard.

Just please understand this.

I end this discussion.

753 Senior Member

Originally posted by Nihilist
Why dont you just keep your nose out, as its not effecting you in anyway.
it's affecting the thread and it spams my user cp with senseless new posts that amount to nothing

Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by Black bolt z
I don't see whats so hard to understand about what i'm saying.
It isn't hard to understand. What you need to understand is that you're wrong, plain and simple.

Black bolt z Mindsets Master

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
It isn't hard to understand. What you need to understand is that you're wrong, plain and simple.
About?

Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by Black bolt z
About?
Thanos having better resistance against energy attacks than physical attacks.

Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by 753
neither of you have proved anything. give the spam a rest
Irony

Black bolt z Mindsets Master

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
Thanos having better resistance against energy attacks than physical attacks.
I did.

Nihilist Senior Member

Originally posted by Black bolt z
No I said his energy was stronger then his blunt force. Not his blunt force was weaker then his energy. One would imply one is low while the other would imply one is high.Its not hard.

Just please understand this.

I end this discussion.

So if one is STRONGER than the the other, which you did say energy durability was stronger, and you said his blunt force wasnt as strong therefore making it weaker than the other. Stop trying to use a play on words to get out of it.

Nihilist Senior Member

Originally posted by 753
it's affecting the thread and it spams my user cp with senseless new posts that amount to nothing
Dont read the posts then or put us on ignore.

753 Senior Member

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
Irony
one post requesting an end to spam isnt spam as it is not repetitive, neither is a single other one explaining how you need to improve your comprehension of the definitions of both irony and spam

Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by Black bolt z
I did.
You did what? Say that? Be wrong about it?

You didn't prove it. You're still claiming it. You don't see a problem here?

Nihilist Senior Member

Originally posted by Black bolt z
I did.
So me where you posted any proof.

Sr J-Bieb Dead

Originally posted by 753
one post requesting an end to spam isnt spamas it is not repetitive, neither is a single other one explaining how you need to improve your understanding of both irony and spam
You contributed nothing to the thread while telling two people to stop arguing and calling it spam when they're trying to talk about two characters in the thread, and saying they proved nothing, and you were uppity about it.

Irony is the word that fits there. Trolling actually might fit better...

753 Senior Member

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
You contributed nothing to the thread while telling two people to stop arguing and calling it spam when they're trying to talk about two characters in the thread, and saying they proved nothing, and you were uppity about it.

Irony is the word that fits there. Trolling actually might fit better...

[facepalm]