Originally posted by Nephthys
Indeed. All I can see isAura and Blaxsome dudes speculating on how it [b]might be done. Theres absolutely no proof and so the arguments unwinnable. Every time anyone tries to use the pokedex as evidence this unending arguments going to start up again: 'the dex says so', 'verify the reliability of the dex', 'no u' etc etc. [/B]
Conversely, you can't prove the Dex is made of hyperbole. I do like how most of the data for the Pokedex is being accepted but just the few bits that can be used as feats on here aren't.
Originally posted by Burning thought
What do you think the precedures were? The scientists pointed at the first mountain and regardless of consequences apprently told it to toss it? Its not just "something heavy", its a mountain, an ecosystem where thousands of pokemon, other creatures lived and its the same place wherever the Machamp launched it towards. It sounds completly illogical just to test something like that, probably more illogical than getting a charizard to try and burn one pokemon. Even so, the fact is assuming it did not burn the thing, clearly thats something is not tested and the claim is hyperbole.Also, how do you suppose it picked up the mountain? balance it? stop the mountain from falling into rubble because its being put under such stresses?
It being an "armor pokemon" does not change how hyperbolic the statement is. "cannot be harmed" is a no limit fallacy and an incredibly general statement.
So you admit the Dex throws around loose terms?
Sounds completely illogical to us, not so much to the Pokemon world.
I suppose they use arms.
Body, read "Armor", cannot be harmed. It itself can feel pain pretty easily.
Cause developers are scientists who strict to strictly scientific terms when talking about their fictional creatures right?
Originally posted by TacDavey
Are you saying that attacking an indestructible object drains said objects stamina for some reason?
Yes. A vehicle will do the same. Runs out of gas. Though vehicles are far from indestructible, so drive safely.
Originally posted by TacDavey
I'm amounting the pokedex to nonsensical jibberish basically. It isn't a reliable means to show pokemon abilities because the entries make no sense half the time. Tyranitar, according to the developers, should never loose a fight, even to half the mystical pokemon. One pokemon can make black holes. Magcargo gives off heat that's hotter than the sun, yet doesn't kill every living creature around it. And one pokemon, according to the pokedex, is faster than another pokemon, yet in game has a lower speed stat. Larvatars eat mountains, yet we still have mountains left in the world. And Charizard can melt anything... except, apparently, Tyranitar.
Jibberish is still Word of God. You have no argument. Making black holes is not that strange. Heat hotter than the sun is not that strange. Gameplay mechanics. Larvitars are rare so problem solved. And they probably wouldn't ask Charizard to try and torch another of the players Pokemon.
Originally posted by TacDavey
When it isn't directly contradicting itself, it's making overly ridiculous claims. I don't think the developers ever intended anyone to think about these things mathematically or logically, which is what most people try to do when debating pokemon.Again, I say they probably just wrote what sounded cool at the time.
Probably. But then again, no game designer goes into a game thinking this shit is going to be up for debate. Do you think Miyamoto how abused that pillar and attack of Ganondorfs is on this site? No game designer actually wants you to care but that doesn't mean we don't anyway.
Probably. Then again, when some Pokedex entries are lame, they probably meant to inform.
Originally posted by TacDavey
But the anime has no place in this discussion, right?You are trying to rationalize how an indestructible creature can get hurt, but it can't be done. It can't be hurt by any attack according to the pokedex.
Was not bringing it into the discussion, just noting how simple it made things.
Body, read Armor, cannot be harmed. It is still very much able to feel pain.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Conversely, you can't prove the Dex is made of hyperbole. I do like how most of the data for the Pokedex is being accepted but just the few bits that can be used as feats on here aren't.
That doesn't mean you can still use it as proof. It means that we're at an impasse; you can't prove it and we can't disprove it. Though we still win by default, because therefore it can't be brought in as evidence because it proves jack shit.
Personally I'd use the Dex as evidence in a similar fashion to an opinion from an NPC.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
So you don't have to prove anything, even though the games themselves state you're wrong? I'm done proving things to you. If a game allows for this and this to fvck and lay eggs, I have no problem believing anything the games say.The [b]Armor
Pokemon is something the Pokedex has recorded. [/B]
What do you want me to prove? I proved the entries possess: Fallacies, hyperbole and they shouldn't be taken literally at all since they are totally null. They're useless, they serve no pupose in the game nor in its plot/story whatsoever. What do you mean they prove me wrong? They prove me right. Just because you want to apply some sort of ''logic'' or baseless alternatives to the entries doesn't mean they aren't inconsistent.
Magcargo's body temperature is approximately 18,000 degrees F.
Apparently this Pokemon's body alone is even hotter than the sun's surface, like Tac said. The Pokedex is garbage, thus it shouldn't be trusted as a source. Less when it comes to versus fights.
Why are we denying the pokedex when every other bio and/or in-game description is still considered valid again? I believe BloodRain maintains that Frosts (of DMC) are below absolute zero since the description says it, for example. Aura brought up some Kingdom Hearts examples as well, earlier. Legacy of Kain has some descriptions that don't quite match the game, too; certain Dark Gifts come to mind.
What I'm asking is, why exactly does the pokedex need to be backed up when these other descriptions are accepted without a second thought?
Originally posted by Nephthys
The difference with the examples listed is that they are out of universe descriptions. They come directly from the developers and exist as Word of God. The Pokedex is created in-universe by fallible humans with unknown means of gathering information. Its fallible.
Snap, the source in this example, the pokedex is fallible. If it could be proven that its impossible that the Dex, its creators and everything based on its use and information could not be at fault (all this cannot be proven it seems) then the dex would be in a way as useful as most other sources.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Sounds completely illogical to us, not so much to the Pokemon world.I suppose they use arms.
Body, read "Armor", cannot be harmed. It itself can feel pain pretty easily.
Cause developers are scientists who strict to strictly scientific terms when talking about their fictional creatures right?
Whats that based on? again, the assumption that the dex is fallible logically. Circular logic.
You need more than arms to do that, give the human the ability to lift billions of tonnes, they could never lift up a mountain.
Where does it say armour again? can I see the canon entry please.
I dont know about the developers, they did not technically create a pokedex, their fictional characters did, professor oak I belive. If its not strictly scientific and has a ton of hyperbole/fallacies then again, its not a good source.
Originally posted by MooCowofJustice
Bro, you can feel pain without being wounded. Go get someone to pinch you.You're also arguing about a creature from a world where things can live being made of stone, which by the way is probably what Tyranitar is made of. It isn't far fetched to think he can feel pain without injury.
You're still doing damage when you pinch someone. It's very little damage, but it's damage. A better example would be to ask someone to touch you on the arm and ask if you feel pain, because that is apparently what happens with Tyranitar. He just feels pain even though the attack is doing absolutely nothing to him.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Body, read "Armor", cannot be harmed. It itself can feel pain pretty easily.
Have you ever felt pain from being touched? No? Because you feel pain if your body is being damaged. Tyranitar can't be damaged so Tyranitar doesn't feel pain.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Yes. A vehicle will do the same. Runs out of gas. Though vehicles are far from indestructible, so drive safely.
Indeed. But if I walked up to a vehicle and hit it with a baseball bat, it wouldn't affect it's gas at all, would it?
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Jibberish is still Word of God. You have no argument. Making black holes is not that strange. Heat hotter than the sun is not that strange. Gameplay mechanics. Larvitars are rare so problem solved. And they probably wouldn't ask Charizard to try and torch another of the players Pokemon.
Lavatars are not rare enough. And I still don't know why it's important that scientists wouldn't ask a Charizard to torch a Tyranitar. You're missing the point. The pokedex directly contradicts itself. Both of those entries cannot be correct at the same time. Either Charizard can torch Tyranitar, and thus Tyranitar ISN'T impervious to all attacks, or Charizard can't, and thus CAN'T melt any material.
So which one is right, and which one is wrong? And why?
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Probably. But then again, no game designer goes into a game thinking this shit is going to be up for debate. Do you think Miyamoto how abused that pillar and attack of Ganondorfs is on this site? No game designer actually wants you to care but that doesn't mean we don't anyway.
Very true. Which is why I think it's rather silly that people keep trying to apply mathematics to fantasy games.
Originally posted by Nephthys
That doesn't mean you can still use it as proof. It means that we're at an impasse; you can't prove it and we can't disprove it. Though we still win by default, because therefore it can't be brought in as evidence because it proves jack shit.Personally I'd use the Dex as evidence in a similar fashion to an opinion from an NPC.
Except for the fact that pretty much discredits the Pokedex is some fallacies. Which shouldn't affect all the information of the Pokedex, considering a great deal of it still makes sense within the context of the world anyway.
Originally posted by GrieverSquall
What do you want me to prove? I proved the entries possess: Fallacies, hyperbole and they shouldn't be taken literally at all since they are totally null. They're useless, they serve no pupose in the game nor in its plot/story whatsoever. What do you mean they prove me wrong? They prove me right. Just because you want to apply some sort of ''logic'' or baseless alternatives to the entries doesn't mean they aren't inconsistent.Magcargo's body temperature is approximately 18,000 degrees F.
Apparently this Pokemon's body alone is even hotter than the sun's surface, like Tac said. The Pokedex is garbage, thus it shouldn't be trusted as a source. Less when it comes to versus fights.
"Exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally"
That is the definition of a hyperbole. You have not actually sited a single one.
Also, you have no right to claim the Pokedex is garbage when it is, in all mediums of Pokemon, considered a great source of information about Pokemon. Hell, I distinctly remember Pokenerds coming up to me in-game and having a nerdgasm at it.
Originally posted by Burning thought
Whats that based on? again, the assumption that the dex is fallible logically. Circular logic.You need more than arms to do that, give the human the ability to lift billions of tonnes, they could never lift up a mountain.
Where does it say armour again? can I see the canon entry please.
I dont know about the developers, they did not technically create a pokedex, their fictional characters did, professor oak I belive. If its not strictly scientific and has a ton of hyperbole/fallacies then again, its not a good source.
The Pokemon world is clearly far different from our own. Moving a mountain probably wouldn't affect things that much in it.
Give a human the ability to breathe fire and he'll still burn his teeth, tongue, face, and all the nerves in his mouth to a crisp. Fiction and science don't always go hand in hand. Shocking I know.
Was trying to find a screen shot of Tyranitar but this will have to do.
Where is says Tiny Bird Pokemon, it would say Armor Pokemon for Tyranitar.
According to Tac, they wrote them, so they're word of god. I've yet to see examples of hyperbole.
Originally posted by TacDavey
Have you ever felt pain from being touched? No? Because you feel pain if your body is being damaged. Tyranitar can't be damaged so Tyranitar doesn't feel pain.
Know what an FNE is?
Originally posted by TacDavey
Indeed. But if I walked up to a vehicle and hit it with a baseball bat, it wouldn't affect it's gas at all, would it?
Depends on where you'd hit it. Tyranitars whole torso and his head would probably be where his fuel comes from.
Originally posted by TacDavey
Lavatars are not rare enough. And I still don't know why it's important that scientists wouldn't ask a Charizard to torch a Tyranitar. You're missing the point. The pokedex directly contradicts itself. Both of those entries cannot be correct at the same time. Either Charizard can torch Tyranitar, and thus Tyranitar ISN'T impervious to all attacks, or Charizard can't, and thus CAN'T melt any material. So which one is right, and which one is wrong? And why?
Pretty rare. And considering it takes a while for them to grow, mountains should be fine. Simple, scientists don't test how durable a turtles shell is by feeding it to a lion do they? And if it is absolutely necessary to compare those two, Tyranitar would come out on top because in game fire does shit to rocks.
Originally posted by Nephthys
The difference with the examples listed is that they are out of universe descriptions. They come directly from the developers and exist as Word of God. The Pokedex is created in-universe by fallible humans with unknown means of gathering information. Its fallible.
Developers are just as faliable. Such as getting the wrong cartoon for Mickey Mouse placed in the Journal of Kingdom Hearts. Well...sort of anyway. Anyway, the journal holds information about things that happened in-universe but in a different game. The player is still supposed to take them at face value even if they haven't seen the proof.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Know what an FNE is?
No.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Depends on where you'd hit it. Tyranitars whole torso and his head would probably be where his fuel comes from.
No, it really doesn't. Hitting a car with a bat doesn't drain fuel. Breaking open the fuel storage tank drains fuel, but the fuel is being drained because there is a rupture in the tank. Not because I'm hitting it with a bat.
Point is, hitting an indestructible thing doesn't make said indestructible thing tired. At all. And why should it? The indestructible thing isn't expelling any energy of any kind.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Pretty rare. And considering it takes a while for them to grow, mountains should be fine. Simple, scientists don't test how durable a turtles shell is by feeding it to a lion do they? And if it is absolutely necessary to compare those two, Tyranitar would come out on top because in game fire does shit to rocks.
I'm still not getting your point. Obviously the people who wrote the pokedex (the developers) know that a charizard can do what it does because........ they made it. No one needs to test anything. Mystery solved.
This still doesn't change the fact that they directly contradict themselves. I'm still wondering what your defense to this is. If the pokedex is "word of god" then Charizard can melt Tyranitar. But at the same time, if the pokedex is "word of god" it can't. So we've already seen that the pokedex doesn't provide reasonable data 100% of the time, which undermines the entire pokedex argument.
Also, Charizards fire does a lot of shit to rocks. Apparently, it does a lot of shit to any material ever.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
The Pokemon world is clearly far different from our own. Moving a mountain probably wouldn't affect things that much in it.Give a human the ability to breathe fire and he'll still burn his teeth, tongue, face, and all the nerves in his mouth to a crisp. Fiction and science don't always go hand in hand. Shocking I know.
Was trying to find a screen shot of Tyranitar but this will have to do.
Where is says Tiny Bird Pokemon, it would say Armor Pokemon for Tyranitar.
According to Tac, they wrote them, so they're word of god. I've yet to see examples of hyperbole.
"probably" would not affect things that much? not the best basis for an argument i have ever seen. How different do you think it is? people still have cities, creatures still live across the globe right? including pokemon, so clearly throwing a whole mountain as we know it is major.
So your argument, is that this mountain may not even be that heavy at all, or that it has some special forces that make certain things possible that gravity, weight, physics make impossible in our world?
So why does that change the pokedex entry? whether its got armour or not?
I disagree with Tac there to some degree, I mean yes, the devs wrote everything in every game but if were looking at something within a fiction from a fictional standpoint which we do in games rather than argueing literally then whoever invented it and whoever updates it/is responsible for it is up for question.
Originally posted by TacDavey
No.
It means Free Nerve Ending. They exist a little bit under the skin. They can detect pressure on the body. If Tyranitar is hit, a lot of pressure will be put on this nerve endings. So, yes. You can get hurt by only a touch.
Originally posted by TacDavey
No, it really doesn't. Hitting a car with a bat doesn't drain fuel. Breaking open the fuel storage tank drains fuel, but the fuel is being drained because there is a rupture in the tank. Not because I'm hitting it with a bat.Point is, hitting an indestructible thing doesn't make said indestructible thing tired. At all. And why should it? The indestructible thing isn't expelling any energy of any kind.
The rupture is there because you hit it with a bat.
Indestructible means it cannot be destroyed. Does nothing about it's stamina. Put on football gear and let someone beat on the parts where the padding is. You'll get tired sooner or later.
Originally posted by TacDavey
I'm still not getting your point. Obviously the people who wrote the pokedex (the developers) know that a charizard can do what it does because........ they made it. No one needs to test anything. Mystery solved.
The developers do not care about Tyranitars Pokedex while typing Charizards.
Originally posted by TacDavey
This still doesn't change the fact that they directly contradict themselves. I'm still wondering what your defense to this is. If the pokedex is "word of god" then Charizard can melt Tyranitar. But at the same time, if the pokedex is "word of god" it can't. So we've already seen that the pokedex doesn't provide reasonable data 100% of the time, which undermines the entire pokedex argument.Also, Charizards fire does a lot of shit to rocks. Apparently, it does a lot of shit to any material ever.
Word of God can contradict itself, especially when you're talking about 600 some creatures with different skills. The rest of the Pokedex isn't being questioned, just the only things one might use as feats. They also are not paying attention to Pokedex entries in the past. There is only one Pokedex entry that says he can melt anything and that's an older one. I can easily say it has been retconned for the non-fallacy.
Nah, gameplay says you're wrong.
Originally posted by Burning thought
"probably" would not affect things that much? not the best basis for an argument i have ever seen. How different do you think it is? people still have cities, creatures still live across the globe right? including pokemon, so clearly throwing a whole mountain as we know it is major.
Considering it was probably done all of once or twice. And yeah, people still have cities. That doesn't change the fact that no matter where you go there is a monster capable of doing crazy things. So, very different.
Originally posted by Burning thought
So your argument, is that this mountain may not even be that heavy at all, or that it has some special forces that make certain things possible that gravity, weight, physics make impossible in our world?
Nah, my argument would be that game developers don't know anything about how science works.
Originally posted by Burning thought
So why does that change the pokedex entry? whether its got armour or not?
You've argued that the Pokedex did not mention armor. Proven wrong. 😮
Originally posted by Burning thought
I disagree with Tac there to some degree, I mean yes, the devs wrote everything in every game but if were looking at something within a fiction from a fictional standpoint which we do in games rather than argueing literally then whoever invented it and whoever updates it/is responsible for it is up for question.
Good thing the person responsible for the updates are scientists.
Except for the fact that pretty much discredits the Pokedex is some fallacies. Which shouldn't affect all the information of the Pokedex, considering a great deal of it still makes sense within the context of the world anyway.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
It making sense sometimes but not at other times just proves that its fallible.
Developers are just as faliable. Such as getting the wrong cartoon for Mickey Mouse placed in the Journal of Kingdom Hearts. Well...sort of anyway. Anyway, the journal holds information about things that happened in-universe but in a different game. The player is still supposed to take them at face value even if they haven't seen the proof.
Developers are fallible yes. But unless they actually acknowledge mistakes their word is law for the universe they have created. I don't know the circumstances for the Mickey Mouse thing. Can't comment on it.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Considering it was probably done all of once or twice. And yeah, people still have cities. That doesn't change the fact that no matter where you go there is a monster capable of doing crazy things. So, very different.Nah, my argument would be that game developers don't know anything about how science works.
You've argued that the Pokedex did not mention armor. Proven wrong. 😮
Good thing the person responsible for the updates are scientists.
Again with the probablies, "probably" told a Machamp to toss a mountain or two like its no big deal. That does not sound like science, especially not modern science, "hey machamp, go and toss that mountain, we dont care what we crush, destroy or how many pokemon we kill in the process" and all this to cover up the idea that this entry is nonsense? Define crazy things? I dont know all the pokemon but a lot of the stronger ones to me seem like their rarer than the smaller weaker ones.
Science? this is just common sense, that a mountain would crumble around you even if you could pick it up, their not perfectly solid structures afterall, hence landslides. If you dont think the developers realise a mountain would not be an unmovable solid chunk then its fair to claim they dont know how heavy a mountain is anyway and did not care how heavy. May not even be a feat worth mentioning if we can argue developer ignorance disqualifies certain information.
I dont recall argueing that, although its probably important that the specific dex entry says it there. I have yet to see the specific claim and the specific entry side by side.
Why is that a good thing? also how do we know? earlier someone said the users can influence what the pokedex has in it, these scientists are also fond of hyperbole, loose/general claims and adding in theories/legends. So far the evidence already suggests the dex is fallible so how do the scientists being responsible (assuming they are solely) help you?
Originally posted by Nephthys
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.It making sense sometimes but not at other times just proves that its fallible.
Developers are fallible yes. But unless they actually acknowledge mistakes their word is law for the universe they have created. I don't know the circumstances for the Mickey Mouse thing. Can't comment on it.
Pokedex is a bit better than a broken clock.
And just because it's fallible sometimes doesn't affect other times. For example, no one is arguing Beheeyem's Pokedex entry doesn't make sense. And that one is really the only one needed to write this thread down as spite.
Basically it says Mickey's first cartoon was Steamboat Willie. Which isn't strictly true I believe. Two were made before it but I don't know whether they were shown in theaters. I could look it up but I don't mind.
Originally posted by Burning thought
Again with the probablies, "probably" told a Machamp to toss a mountain or two like its no big deal. That does not sound like science, especially not modern science, "hey machamp, go and toss that mountain, we dont care what we crush, destroy or how many pokemon we kill in the process" and all this to cover up the idea that this entry is nonsense? Define crazy things? I dont know all the pokemon but a lot of the stronger ones to me seem like their rarer than the smaller weaker ones.
Indeed, they are far above us as far as modern science goes. Time machines and shit. And apparently, it isn't throwing mountains like I had thought. It's just moving them. Much more eco friendly. And yes, rarely stronger Pokemon tend not to be in the environment. Unless the place is isolated somewhat.
Originally posted by Burning thought
Science? this is just common sense, that a mountain would crumble around you even if you could pick it up, their not perfectly solid structures afterall, hence landslides. If you dont think the developers realise a mountain would not be an unmovable solid chunk then its fair to claim they dont know how heavy a mountain is anyway and did not care how heavy. May not even be a feat worth mentioning if we can argue developer ignorance disqualifies certain information.
It's even more common sense that things can't breathe in space. Tons of cartoon characters still do it though. And no really, a developers statement is still better than common sense. Such is the world of fiction.
Originally posted by Burning thought
I dont recall argueing that, although its probably important that the specific dex entry says it there. I have yet to see the specific claim and the specific entry side by side.
Originally posted by Burning thought
Its true the pokedex does not point out armour, infact again its extremely general source. From unkown actual sources. I dont think anyone is going to take it as some infallible source.
It does.
Originally posted by Burning thought
Why is that a good thing? also how do we know? earlier someone said the users can influence what the pokedex has in it, these scientists are also fond of hyperbole, loose/general claims and adding in theories/legends. So far the evidence already suggests the dex is fallible so how do the scientists being responsible (assuming they are solely) help you?
You said it was important to look at it within a fictional standpoint. It's written by scientists in high techy encyclopedia. Not much gets written down in encyclopedia's designed to record rather accurate info is likely to be exaggerated.
