Originally posted by Philosophía
He doesn't. Basically he says "yeah, it's powerful" but at the same time, he's saying that it's shit because it wouldn't work against anybody else because "context!!".
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Obviously the blast had to be powerful to injure, much less kill Krona...That doesn't demean the firepower of the blast at all.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Because...it doesn't? Which is what I've been saying the whole time: that Hal's feat/showing against Krona is great. Personally, I feel it's great for reasons aside from the blasts power level, which, again, I've said is pretty high....
And that doesn't take anything away from Hal Jordan at all.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Either way, we all pretty much agree that Krona wins this and that Hal's feat is a top level one. No one's taking or trying to take away from that.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
😐
Originally posted by Philosophía
It's not my fauly you're bad at this. 🙂
Coming from one of the most transparent posters on the forum, this is pretty funny. You don't like my stance? Fine, no skin off my back. But don't try to project your laughable conspiracy theories and strawman techniques onto me. I mean, really?
All this...for Thanos? Lol, wtf.
Originally posted by CogitoYou do realize that nothing there contradicts what I've said?
"It's great against Krona, but it's shit against other because of context."
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The context behind Hal's "Krona Killer" makes me think that it wouldn't be as effective if Krona had been replaced by Thanos or whatever elite villain you could think of.
--
Originally posted by JakeTheBankIf you'd admit it would kill Thanos, then that would get you in trouble with all of your other favorite characters. 🙂
All this...for Thanos? Lol, wtf.
Originally posted by Philosophía
You do realize that nothing there contradicts what I've said?"It's great against Krona, but it's shit against other because of context."
Only that it does. And it doesn't support your notion of me saying the blast is shit against anyone else. Because I never said it. If you want to replace Krona with x character and expect the same result every time, that's your prerogative, however wrong it may be. I'm of the opinion you have to take into account those characters abilities/defenses/feats into account as well instead of just auto assuming Hal can annihilate every character placed in his path.
So, again, lol.
Originally posted by Philosophía
If you'd admit it would kill Thanos, then that would get you in trouble with all of your other favorite characters. 🙂
Phil, for the sake of whatever is left of your credibility, I'd stop right about now.
Though, a very morbid part of me is interested to see where your conspiracy theory leads you. mmm
Originally posted by JakeTheBankThat wasn't your argument, and don't try to bullshit your way into it. It had nothing to do with the opponent's durability or defenses, and I repeat what you've just said:
If you want to replace Krona with x character and expect the same result every time, that's your prerogative, however wrong it may be. I'm of the opinion you have to take into account those characters abilities/defenses/feats into account
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The context behind Hal's "Krona Killer" makes me think that it wouldn't be as effective if Krona had been replaced by Thanos or whatever elite villain you could think of.
'whatever elite villain you could think of'.
Your problem was an imaginary 'context' that everybody seems to be leaving out, and that this blast wouldn't really be good against everybody else without that context.
I believe I've said it before, but this doesn't fly with me, so don't even try it. 🙂
Originally posted by JakeTheBankI'll make it short, then. Would that blast kill Thor or Surfer?
Phil, for the sake of whatever is left of your credibility, I'd stop right about now.Though, a very morbid part of me is interested to see where your conspiracy theory leads you. mmm
Originally posted by Philosophía
That wasn't your argument, and don't try to bullshit your way into it. It had nothing to do with the opponent's durability or defenses, and I repeat what you've just said:'whatever elite villain you could think of'.
Your problem was an imaginary 'context' that eveyrbody seems to be leaving out, and that this blast wouldn't really be good against everybody else without that context.
I believe I've said it before, but this doesn't fly with me, so don't even try it. 🙂
Only that...it was. 😬
And it's funny how you glossed over how I felt Thanos himself would deal with said shot.
What doesn't fly with me is your pretentious self serving arguments with more than a dollop of condescending remarks as well as the odd ball nonsensical theory that "I'm out to back Thanos, because if I don't it makes my favorite characters look bad".
In short, Phil, everyone here knows your gimmick and no one's really fooled about it. Twist, project, strawman all you want, I know what I said and so does the rest of the board, whether they agree or not.
So, again, lol.
Originally posted by JakeTheBankIs that why people were actively engaging in a discussion on page 2, because they couldn't understand your twisting stance? The "appeal to majority" made me laugh, though.
I know what I said and so does the rest of the board
"lol, again"
But please, go right ahead. I'm willing to listen, as I've been from the start, if only you'd make a coherent argument.
Elaborate your stance.
Originally posted by Philosophía
Is that why people were actively engaging in a discussion on page 2, because they couldn't understand your twisting stance?"lol, again"
But please, go right ahead. I'm willing to listen, as I've been from the start, if only you'd make a coherent argument.
Elaborate your stance.
It's my own fault for not fully clarifying my stance within the first page. I can accept that. But as of now, I'm pretty sure people know what I mean, whether they agree with or not.
The disagreeing with my belief isn't a problem, but this...I guess... - motive? - you think I have concerning this? That you honestly believe the bullshit you spouted about me trying to somehow protect....Thanos (seriously WTF) out of some misguided attempt to protect my "favorite characters" and that I feel Hal Jordan "can't be that impressive".
Which, lol, even now, is a pretty crazy claim.
So, why don't you tell me which of these characters am I trying to protect by "downplaying" Hal? No dodging, none of this classic Phil warping, no bullshit.
Tell us all about this conspiracy against Hal and how I fit into it so that I can make sure Thanos looks good for the sake of my favs.
Was it a redonkulous feat? Yes!! Was it a little PIS'sy? Yep..
No way is Highball going to go around melting trans-leveler's faces off... Can that shot kill a Thanos? Probably. Then again he's tanked shots from a pissed off Odin that thought his people were in danger. In the end, a feat is a feat. This particular one is along the lines of a great hero rising above his station and producing a feat that no way in hell he would normally do. (ie. Thor shattering a celestial's shell, Nova shielding against Sphinx w/2 KA stones, etc. etc.)
As for the fight, Thanos wins because Krona with all entities lost to a high herald and Thanos wtfpwned a seriously amped trans leveler. (notice I'm going by most recent showing)
Originally posted by JakeTheBankEven you don't know what you mean, since you tried to bring every crap you could think of, from an imaginary context, to Ion playing a part in it, Hal overriding Krona's defenses, to "actually I was talking about other characters durability!". It's a reaching so transparent, that I just have to sit back and watch as you fall down and break your face.
But as of now, I'm pretty sure people know what I mean, whether they agree with or not.
I asked you to elaborate your stance, you ignored it and started going on "Puhlease Phil, tell me about the conspiracy of me -- hear that ME -- being biased and having an ulterior motive to downplay Hal?! I'd looove to hear it!".
You saw that being vague wasn't enough to stop anybody from attacking your stealth-downplaying, so now you resort to "THE FORUM KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS ME!!" crap?
Funnily enough, it reminds me of this passive-agressive ***** trying to act all high and mighty:
Enjoy the video.
This discussion is useless. I'll stop here.
Originally posted by Philosophía
Even you don't know what you mean, since you tried to bring every crap you could think of, from an imaginary context, to Ion playing a part in it, Hal overriding Krona's defenses, to "actually I was talking about other characters durability!". It's a reaching so transparent, that I just have to sit back and watch as you fall down and break your face.I asked you to elaborate your stance, you ignored it and started going on "Puhlease Phil, tell me about the conspiracy of me -- hear that ME -- being biased and having an ulterior motive to downplay Hal?! I'd looove to hear it!".
You saw that being vague wasn't enough to stop anybody from attacking your stealth-downplaying, so now you resort to "THE FORUM KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS ME!!" crap?
Funnily enough, it reminds me of this passive-agressive ***** trying to act all high and mighty:
Enjoy the video.
This discussion is useless. I'll stop here.
Classic Phil. Once someone points out your hypocritical transparent bullshit and asks you to defend your likewise bullshit claims, you try to play the sanctimonious holier than thou crap and retreat to fight (pathetically) another day.
You're the one who made the claim that "they" are trying to protect Thanos and downplay Hal for whatever half baked moronic conspiracy theory you think is at work here. And when called out on it directly more than once, you dodge the claim and then try to belittle whomever has you pissy at the moment to save face. It's not my fault you're bad at this.
And you always have been.
Originally posted by JakeTheBankI thought we were talking about me?
hypocritical transparent bullshit
I told you before, I don't give a sh*t how passive you are in your stealth-downplaying, how you're trying to change your stances in what passes for subtletly in caveman times, how you go the higher-than-thou attitude and go "I have the mob on my side! Everybody else understands me! Hoorah!" appeal to majority. You are unable to back your arguments. You are wrong. You have a shifting stance, trying to choose the one that makes you look the least worst, maybe even good for there surely must be someone who buys into it! You try to pass for some unbiased monk, as if somebody questions ulterior motives in not wanting Hal to one-shot Thanos you go all "lol, shut up, me ulterior motives!?".
Hypocritical. I don't think you know what that word means. If you're reffering to me asking you a question, you ignoring it and going off tangents on my "conspiracy theory" of your bias, and then criticizing me for not answering yours then yes, that does constitute hypocrisy. The other way.
Transparent bullshit? Jake, I'm not the one trying to come up with any kind of bullshit excuse from imaginary context. I'm not the one transparently shifting my stances from one post to another. I'm not the one sticking my hand up the horses ass and hoping the next batch of shit will smell better. I'm not the one returning the same insults "transparent bullshit!" because it sounds right, because I have nothing else even remotely intelligent to say.
And last, but not least...