Originally posted by omgchos
Well the Bifrost looks extremely mechanic. Even to the point if it haveng a large key it needed to function. The destroyer had moving parts and what looks like a power core. And that cool looking transporter tube they put the tesceract in to take LowKey and thor back to asguard. As we know that S.H.I.E.L.D. got close to harnessing the pwer of the teseract. Unless your saying that they somehow harnessed magic with some earth based technology.
Using artifacts doesn't mean it isn't magic, the HPverse is full of magical artifacts. BTW, the only thing that moved on the Destroyer was the metal that made up his armor, As for the tesceract, they didn't really get to close to understaing it, the best they were able to do is make some laser rifles based on studying the power it generated.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Using artifacts doesn't mean it isn't magic, the HPverse is full of magical artifacts. BTW, the only thing that moved on the Destroyer was the metal that made up his armor, As for the tesceract, they didn't really get to close to understaing it, the best they were able to do is make some laser rifles based on studying the power it generated.
Originally posted by omgchos
He absobed its power. And harnessed it. And just so you know you have to prove it IS magic to say that it is in fact magic. Whereas i have dialogue to back it up. No one in any of the movies said it was magic and therefore That one "throw away" statement is the only proof one way or the other.
You have an off hand comment by Thor, I have scenes of them using magic without any tech being used.
Feats >>>> Statements.
Originally posted by Silent Master
You have an off hand comment by Thor, I have scenes of them using magic without any tech being used.Feats >>>> Statements.
Again you dont have scenes of them using magic if the magic is just tech. Your argument is circular. Its magic cus it looks like magic? Thats not even an argument. And it wasnt an offhand comment mafriend. He was telling natalie portman all about his home world.
Originally posted by omgchos
Again you dont have scenes of them using magic if the magic is just tech. Your argument is circular. Its magic cus it looks like magic? Thats not even an argument. And it wasnt an offhand comment mafriend. He was telling natalie portman all about his home world.
Sure I do, both movies show them using magic without tech...hell Shield spent most of the Thor movie studying the hammer and not once did they say anything about it being tech based.
Originally posted by omgchos
Hes a moron because it means the asguardians arent using magic? I dont see how that workds.
No because, from watching the whole movie, one would reasonably assume it is magic. Also, it is based on the comics, where his powers were obviously magical. WHY was that line included? It wasn't important, it wasn't a theme to the movie, they didn't go on to show that it really was just tech. Do you honestly think that line was of significance or consequence? In the Avengers or in Thor 2, is it important they remember an idiot said it was only tech and not magic? Heck, they probably forgot about it already and are writing it assuming it is magic.
Another point is that even if we suppose Thor's powers are "tech-based", unless he is omniscient, has no right to say magic doesn't exist so the writer is still a moron.
And if people argue it is all tech, then there'll be plenty of questions you won't be able to answer.
Originally posted by Robtard
In Thor, wasn't it mentioned by someone in the ground base that Mjolnir's power levels or readings were off the chart?If so, I'd like to know what SHIELD used to register magic, if it's magic.
Cmon Robby, just in the other thread you said magic can replicate natural physical effects. You used the example of fire. I am sure magical fire is hot too, and the temperature can be measured.
Now as to the nature of the "power level", I have no idea, but surely you could allow a little suspension of disbelief?
Originally posted by Silent Master
Statements have to be backed up by feats or they are worthless, so what feats do you have?
So in this case since we have one of the "magicians" telling us its not magic, thats all the proof i need. It's not mysterious or supernatural once we are told it isnt by one who knows and uses the technology/magic. So if ur gonna keep saying feats>>>>>statements in this case your gonna keep getting your ass handed to you in actual arguable facts. Take you circular reasoning to the philosophy forums please.
Originally posted by Placidity
No because, from watching the whole movie, one would reasonably assume it is magic. Also, it is based on the comics, where his powers were obviously magical. WHY was that line included? It wasn't important, it wasn't a theme to the movie, they didn't go on to show that it really was just tech. Do you honestly think that line was of significance or consequence? In the Avengers or in Thor 2, is it important they remember an idiot said it was only tech and not magic? Heck, they probably forgot about it already and are writing it assuming it is magic.Another point is that even if we suppose Thor's powers are "tech-based", unless he is omniscient, has no right to say magic doesn't exist so the writer is still a moron.
And if people argue it is all tech, then there'll be plenty of questions you won't be able to answer.
Wait, so I have no right to say "magic doesn't exist" just because I'm not omniscient?
And I can answer almost every single question if it's tech not magic via Clarke's third law.
Originally posted by omgchos
Making up rules as well i see. And in this case its impossible to have feats in either argument. Magic is a concept. Its defined as...
mag·ic/ˈmajik/
Noun:
The power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.So in this case since we have one of the "magicians" telling us its not magic, thats all the proof i need. It's not mysterious or supernatural once we are told it isnt by one who knows and uses the technology/magic. So if ur gonna keep saying feats>>>>>statements in this case your gonna keep getting your ass handed to you in actual arguable facts. Take you circular reasoning to the philosophy forums please.
Statements needing to be backed up is hardly a rule that I've made up, it's a standard part of debating...do you have any feats to back up Thor's statement.
Otherwise, Thor is just wrong...it'd hardly be the first time someone in a movie made a incorrect statement.
Originally posted by Placidity
No because, from watching the whole movie, one would reasonably assume it is magic. Also, it is based on the comics, where his powers were obviously magical. WHY was that line included? It wasn't important, it wasn't a theme to the movie, they didn't go on to show that it really was just tech. Do you honestly think that line was of significance or consequence? In the Avengers or in Thor 2, is it important they remember an idiot said it was only tech and not magic? Heck, they probably forgot about it already and are writing it assuming it is magic.Another point is that even if we suppose Thor's powers are "tech-based", unless he is omniscient, has no right to say magic doesn't exist so the writer is still a moron.
And if people argue it is all tech, then there'll be plenty of questions you won't be able to answer.