Originally posted by quanchi112
I offered to do this prior to and you backed down. Not everything that is hit over our heads is explained in the special features. You moronically acted like wizards like these two weren't aware of their surroundings despite seeing them do so until I said I have them talking about it. You're not bright.
Show us the special features. Show us your so called proof.
Originally posted by EmperorSidious2Harry was behind him while he dueled Voldemort. He sent back the fire at Voldemort which would have killed him. Boom. He also tried drowning him. Dumbledore doesn't fight typically by tossing killing curses. This is how he duels. He was on the defensive because Voldemort dictated the tempo of the fight.
You honestly believe Dumbledore was going all out in that battle. If your protecting someone but not trying to kill the opposition you would hold back. Look up voldemort a wiki and read the very first paragraph. This proves dumbledore wasn't trying to kill voldemort and also we know he is protecting Harry. With this he was on the defensive for the majority of the battle. Fact. With that we don't see his full power. So yes there is proof to it.Only factual thing is the elder wand being the most powerful wand in history. The wand is not the trump card you make it out to be. It may give him an advantage but based on feats not one that seems to help in the slightest. Rest is opinion.
So you are saying if we put a shield up made by the same people, dumbledore couldn't break it.? You can use any wand. So him being able to perform that by itself is not as impressive but still cool all the fireworks. So it resisting him after research is in the middle as after he used it, it broke. Also your own power is what it is, voldemort by himself has great power second to dumbledores, it's no shame in that dumbledore is just to smart, wise, experienced, and powerful.
Opinion. He protected Harry and succeeded. He protected Harry from voldemort during their duel. That was his purpose. Harry needed to use occlude cut that's why he was taught it. So dumbledore did his job, voldemort didn't.
Firestorm is better than the fire snake.
You concede it does give him an advantage. Concession accepted. Finally.
I am saying we don't know if Dumbledore could replicate it. We know for a fact Voldemort did so. Based on how powerful the shied,was it is by the greatest feat. Dumbledore using a firestorm and taking out inferi who are weak to fire not so much.
No, he did not defend Harry from being possessed. You said he was protecting Harry but he failed. Undeniable.
Based on ?
Originally posted by quanchi112
Harry was behind him while he dueled Voldemort. He sent back the fire at Voldemort which would have killed him. Boom. He also tried drowning him. Dumbledore doesn't fight typically by tossing killing curses. This is how he duels. He was on the defensive because Voldemort dictated the tempo of the fight.You concede it does give him an advantage. Concession accepted. Finally.
I am saying we don't know if Dumbledore could replicate it. We know for a fact Voldemort did so. Based on how powerful the shied,was it is by the greatest feat. Dumbledore using a firestorm and taking out inferi who are weak to fire not so much.
No, he did not defend Harry from being possessed. You said he was protecting Harry but he failed. Undeniable.
Based on ?
Both false and irrelevant.
Not to the point that you are asking. You are trying to make it out to where it decides the verdict of the battle.
Yes we do know. A shield that was already broken and the charm was meant to take down shields. I can play this game to. Again feat wise everyone has different opinions about what is the best. Dumbledore could definite replicate that feat no problem.
So you concede he defended Harry throughout the duel though. At the end of the movie dumbledore basically says I can't defend you if voldemort try's to posses you, that's why I had professor snape teach you occlumency or half the year. With that dumbledore did his job.
The fact it engulfed an entire cave, warded off hundreds of inferi, hurt some as well, was able to float on top of and go under water and did you see all of the power in that attack, couldn't you just feel the power coming from the most powerful wizard of all time. This also cane from a weakened dumbledore so definite not his most powerful magic but still very powerful. How can the fire snake compare. What has it done I order of the Phoenix that can compare.
Originally posted by EmperorSidious2Based on ? Quit lying.
Both false and irrelevant.Not to the point that you are asking. You are trying to make it out to where it decides the verdict of the battle.
Yes we do know. A shield that was already broken and the charm was meant to take down shields. I can play this game to. Again feat wise everyone has different opinions about what is the best. Dumbledore could definite replicate that feat no problem.
So you concede he defended Harry throughout the duel though. At the end of the movie dumbledore basically says I can't defend you if voldemort try's to posses you, that's why I had professor snape teach you occlumency or half the year. With that dumbledore did his job.
The fact it engulfed an entire cave, warded off hundreds of inferi, hurt some as well, was able to float on top of and go under water and did you see all of the power in that attack, couldn't you just feel the power coming from the most powerful wizard of all time. This also cane from a weakened dumbledore so definite not his most powerful magic but still very powerful. How can the fire snake compare. What has it done I order of the Phoenix that can compare.
I am saying it was an advantage. You agreed. It's over.
The shield was not broken until Voldemort got angry and destroyed it. We do not know Dumbledore can since he was dead after it was erected. Shame. Speculation. I have a fact. Cry more.
I say he dueled to protect Harry. He was 100 percent focused on the duel. Only an idiot would say he didn't go all out and jeopardize his life and Harry's. You make no sense and are appalling to the character Dumbledore. He failed to protect Harry. Undeniable.
It encompasses a greater area. That doesn't prove its more powerful. It destroyed beings weak to fire. Weakness exploitation. It is not as impressive as fiendfyre.
Watch the other examples of fiendfyre in the films. Look at an inexperienced user from that dumb death eater kid against Harry, Ron, and Hermione.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Based on ? Quit lying.I am saying it was an advantage. You agreed. It's over.
The shield was not broken until Voldemort got angry and destroyed it. We do not know Dumbledore can since he was dead after it was erected. Shame. Speculation. I have a fact. Cry more.
I say he dueled to protect Harry. He was 100 percent focused on the duel. Only an idiot would say he didn't go all out and jeopardize his life and Harry's. You make no sense and are appalling to the character Dumbledore. He failed to protect Harry. Undeniable.
It encompasses a greater area. That doesn't prove its more powerful. It destroyed beings weak to fire. Weakness exploitation. It is not as impressive as fiendfyre.
Watch the other examples of fiendfyre in the films. Look at an inexperienced user from that dumb death eater kid against Harry, Ron, and Hermione.
Well nothing in that paragraph had anything new or important or just lies to add to this debate. Quite being irrelevant.
As long as we both agree it's not a game changer. Do you agree.
It was breaking. Which is more impressive. To break a tampered wooden board and chops it in half, or chop a solid piece of tampered wood. He broke it yes but with great strain in the wand, and it was already breaking. I'm not saying voldemort is powerful but destroying the shield isn't as big of feat anymore.
This shows how unintelligent you are. If I'm protecting someone half of my attention is on you and the other half on the guy I'm protecting. Also even if he wasn't protecting Harry, dumbledore was on the defensive, so with that we didn't see his full power. So your argument that we don't see dumbledore goo all out is debunked. You are a good voldemort person. You lie and make no sense just to please him. Tell me how often do you to engage in intercorse. So the entire duel when voldemort was aiming for Harry and dumbledore was protecting him. Was dumbleodore just sitting down the whole time. Undeniable. You have been defeated on this point.
It did way more and looked way more impressive. What did voldemort fire snake do. OH I KNOW, it exploded amd was destroyed with ease. Look at firestorm, it did way more. The shield was destroyed by the very spell meant to kill it. Weakness exploited.
As of the films it was the only other time it was used. Yea I saw it he got himself killed and almost killed everyone else. Also unchecked raw power is devastating. Him doing that doesn't help your case as it was made. Y someone who did t even intend to mask it that big or anything. Notice how he is trying to put it out and eventually throws his wand with it to stop it. Voldemort is way more powerful so the feinfyre he shows is what it should be and that version isn't nearly as impressive as firestorm.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I offered to do this prior to and you backed down. Not everything that is hit over our heads is explained in the special features. You moronically acted like wizards like these two weren't aware of their surroundings despite seeing them do so until I said I have them talking about it. You're not bright.
So you have no proof then?
Originally posted by EmperorSidious2I use logic and reasoning to show you why you're irrelevant. You just summarily dismiss due to an inability to debate.
Well nothing in that paragraph had anything new or important or just lies to add to this debate. Quite being irrelevant.As long as we both agree it's not a game changer. Do you agree.
It was breaking. Which is more impressive. To break a tampered wooden board and chops it in half, or chop a solid piece of tampered wood. He broke it yes but with great strain in the wand, and it was already breaking. I'm not saying voldemort is powerful but destroying the shield isn't as big of feat anymore.
This shows how unintelligent you are. If I'm protecting someone half of my attention is on you and the other half on the guy I'm protecting. Also even if he wasn't protecting Harry, dumbledore was on the defensive, so with that we didn't see his full power. So your argument that we don't see dumbledore goo all out is debunked. You are a good voldemort person. You lie and make no sense just to please him. Tell me how often do you to engage in intercorse. So the entire duel when voldemort was aiming for Harry and dumbledore was protecting him. Was dumbleodore just sitting down the whole time. Undeniable. You have been defeated on this point.
It did way more and looked way more impressive. What did voldemort fire snake do. OH I KNOW, it exploded amd was destroyed with ease. Look at firestorm, it did way more. The shield was destroyed by the very spell meant to kill it. Weakness exploited.
As of the films it was the only other time it was used. Yea I saw it he got himself killed and almost killed everyone else. Also unchecked raw power is devastating. Him doing that doesn't help your case as it was made. Y someone who did t even intend to mask it that big or anything. Notice how he is trying to put it out and eventually throws his wand with it to stop it. Voldemort is way more powerful so the feinfyre he shows is what it should be and that version isn't nearly as impressive as firestorm.
It is an advantage. It gives Dumbledore an edge Voldemort does not possess here.
It is the single most impressive feat of the entire films. We see in the film the shield disintegrates anyone who ran into it. Completely. We see hundreds of wizards and how their power matches up compared to the shield. We see that one wizard has the raw power to bring it down despite the wand in his possession resisting him. Meaning he did not even have the full cooperation of the wand at the time yet still comparatively had greater power than hundreds of wizards.
False. If I fight someone else to protect someone I can be 100 percent in the fight at hand. That is what occurred. You already said he tried protecting thus you concede his ineffectiveness in doing so. You use hypocritical double standards left and right here. You can't have it both ways.
Dumbledore is not a death eater so you aren't even using the right terms. I'll help you out since you're obviously uneducated. You do not mean he didn't go all out you mean he didn't use the same ruthless tactics Voldemort and other death eaters typically employ. Dumbledore did not use the kill curse against Grind. We know this because he's alive and it is against Albus' nature. We clearly see during the fight that a) sending a powerful flame will kill him so he attempted to kill him there. b) attempting to drown Voldemort in a water bubble is again attempting to kill his opponent.
You just lied. Voldemort was trying to hurt Harry by the stray electrical energy hitting the walls but he was aiming and trying to kill Dumbldore. Voldemort's words and actions are clear. He intends to kill Dumbledore and leave before the aurors are present. Quit denying the facts.
The fire snake was used against two of the baddest wizards. Dumbledore sent it back and Voldemort dissipated it. We later see an inexperienced wizard who is untrained and can't control the fiendfyre use it so see the collateral damage and raw destructive power it truly is capable of. Don't you dare ever question my, grasp, logic, or debating merits because I always cite evidence to support my case.
The firestorm was more effective against multiple threats weak to fire than one giant fiery creature that could have killed Harry. It was too dangerous and not as effective in that set of circumstances.
False. We see an knee princes wizard who lacks control but the clear devastation it can cause when unleashed. Far greater feats than killing inferi.
Originally posted by quanchi112
It is a waste of time because in the past when I had definitive proof over a scene you tucked tail and ran. Stick to the sidelines, idiot.
I asked you to provide it and you welched like the coward you are. Guess this is just another time you've chosen to concede to me.
Originally posted by juggermanIf I prove it will you leave for the board for a month ? If you won't accept my terms I am not was time my time, skip.
I asked you to provide it and you welched like the coward you are. Guess this is just another time you've chosen to concede to me.
I don't think you've ever proven one claim. Not one.
🙂
Originally posted by quanchi112
If I prove it will you leave for the board for a month ? If you won't accept my terms I am not was time my time, skip.I don't think you've ever proven one claim. Not one.
🙂
If you were confident in your "evidence" you wouldn't need to do all this grandstanding. Since when does a poster need to barter for evidence in a debate? Show em if ya got em or concede
I proved Voldemort didn't kill Snape. 😄
Originally posted by quanchi112
I use logic and reasoning to show you why you're irrelevant. You just summarily dismiss due to an inability to debate.It is an advantage. It gives Dumbledore an edge Voldemort does not possess here.
It is the single most impressive feat of the entire films. We see in the film the shield disintegrates anyone who ran into it. Completely. We see hundreds of wizards and how their power matches up compared to the shield. We see that one wizard has the raw power to bring it down despite the wand in his possession resisting him. Meaning he did not even have the full cooperation of the wand at the time yet still comparatively had greater power than hundreds of wizards.
False. If I fight someone else to protect someone I can be 100 percent in the fight at hand. That is what occurred. You already said he tried protecting thus you concede his ineffectiveness in doing so. You use hypocritical double standards left and right here. You can't have it both ways.
Dumbledore is not a death eater so you aren't even using the right terms. I'll help you out since you're obviously uneducated. You do not mean he didn't go all out you mean he didn't use the same ruthless tactics Voldemort and other death eaters typically employ. Dumbledore did not use the kill curse against Grind. We know this because he's alive and it is against Albus' nature. We clearly see during the fight that a) sending a powerful flame will kill him so he attempted to kill him there. b) attempting to drown Voldemort in a water bubble is again attempting to kill his opponent.
You just lied. Voldemort was trying to hurt Harry by the stray electrical energy hitting the walls but he was aiming and trying to kill Dumbldore. Voldemort's words and actions are clear. He intends to kill Dumbledore and leave before the aurors are present. Quit denying the facts.
The fire snake was used against two of the baddest wizards. Dumbledore sent it back and Voldemort dissipated it. We later see an inexperienced wizard who is untrained and can't control the fiendfyre use it so see the collateral damage and raw destructive power it truly is capable of. Don't you dare ever question my, grasp, logic, or debating merits because I always cite evidence to support my case.
The firestorm was more effective against multiple threats weak to fire than one giant fiery creature that could have killed Harry. It was too dangerous and not as effective in that set of circumstances.
False. We see an knee princes wizard who lacks control but the clear devastation it can cause when unleashed. Far greater feats than killing inferi.
That bull crap is logic? I don't believe so. That just you being butthurt again. Actually if we follow the post you actually can't debate.
Well that would interest me if two things weren't in place 1. Dumbledore wasn't going all out which he wasn't. 2. The elder wand actually gave an edge that decided a battle.
Opinion. Like I said anyone can use any wand it just won't be as powerful of magic if it doesn't have loyalty to you. That's why voldemort was disarmed in the end because the wand had no loyalty to voldemort and refused to kill its owner. As of the movies we four strands not hundreds, and in the video game only one person made it. As the movie version is most important only 4 people made it. Movies only.
False if you protect someone half of your attention is diverted to the fight and half to the protecti, or even less toward the opponent. Dumbledore did his job and Harry did his job. The only one who didn't do their job was voldemort.
How does this show I use wrong terms or am uneducated. And you are very uneducated in how to debate and how Harry Potter works. You are correct, killing is against dumbledores nature, however it's not to say he won't resort to measures to protect people. No i said what I meant. He didn't go at full power. So you are trying to tell me that throwing water around is dumbledores full power, ( and you say I'm uneducated ). Dumbledore used one true offensive spell while voldemort used offense for all of the battle.
How did I lie. He tried to kill Harry with the Arvada kedavra tendrils and he tried to attack Harry with the dark spell. This is fact as stated by the description of the movie battle. He aimed the dark magic at Harry but dumbledore blocked it. Also the tendrils they were clearly passing dumbledore and going for Harry this is obvious. If what you say is true than voldmelrt has some terrible aim because those tendrils went straight pass if anything not trying to hit dumbledore but aiming for Harry. YOU ARE STUPID. He was trying to kill Harry to. Quit denying the facts. He says you shall be dead, but as you see his plan didn't work, he didn't do his job right.
Ok let me help you understand. It was by an inexperienced person. Crabbe never meant for it to get that big. Also stay on topic this is about voldmelrt. If that was how feinfyre was supposed to go that's that's how voldemort would have used it instead of a fire snake. So the destructive you speak of it clearly not meant to be power. Voldmelrt is clearly the more powerful of the two, and his fire snake is the one we are evaluating not crabbes. Voldmelrt was an animal and nothing else. That's what fiendfyre is supposed to be. The only reason it was that way with crabbe is because he couldn't control it. This is seen in the deathly hallowed part 2 where crabbe is trying to put the fire out but can't and looks frustrated. So with that, voldemorts is the one and only fiendfyre we are examining. So with that the grasp you have on Harry Potter is terrible, not even worthy of being a potter fan. The "logic" you use is what you call your own speculation and interpretation of things.
Firestorm wipes voldmelrts fire snake every time.
Uncontrolled and irrelevant to this argument. Voldmelrts is the true fiemdfure so argue that. Also if something is uncontrolled is bound to cause more devastation which was not what crabbe wanted. He wanted it to be controlled but lacked the skill so with that, fiemdfure is what we voldmelrt use since that's the one we are observing for this argument.