Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove that the shield can stop bombs.
Prove that the shield can be overcome by the force of the bombs available to the US military in BFLA.
Guys, enough with the improper invocation of "no-limits fallacy". None of you are using it correctly and it absolutely does not apply in this thread, thus far.
What has happened is a flagrant use of the limit's fallacy. You guys are arbitrarily putting a limit on something when no known limit has been implied or stated.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Prove that the shield can be overcome by the force of the bombs available to the US military in BFLA.Guys, enough with the improper invocation of "no-limits fallacy". None of you are using it correctly and it absolutely does not apply in this thread, thus far.
What has happened is a flagrant use of the limit's fallacy. You guys are arbitrarily putting a limit on something when no known limit has been implied or stated.
The burden is on people claiming that the shield can stop a bomb/missile.
Originally posted by Silent Master
The burden is on people claiming that the shield can stop a bomb/missile.
The burden of proof is not on them: it can block physical stuff...and that's is as far as they need to go. The only thing seen taking down a shield is magic: that is its limit (anti-shield magic).
The burden is now on the detractors to prove some sort of "near" physical limit exists.
A no-limits fallacy would be committed if they stated that it could withstand the forces of an 5-mile wide asteroid colliding with the shield and being unscathed. It is not known if the shields could withstand that or not. It very well could be that no amount of physical force can take out the shields and the only thing seen being able to take down a shield is anti-shield magic. It could be that a fired tank shell carries just enough kinetic force to break the shields (but this is false and you'll see why, later).
We can just as easily conclude that the shields can withstand any physical force as we can conclude that there is a limit. Both positions are almost equally illogical as neither was proven or disproved. Both positions are almost equally baseless (again, more on this, alter).
However, and this is the bane of the "no-limits fallacy" criers: Voldemort could have used a nuke on Hogwarts if a nuke would have actually worked: he had access to the muggle's technology and could have easily used it. He didn't so it would not have worked. Same with a tank shell.
Lastly, in cases of ambiguity regarding feats, it is up to the OP to specify whether or not something arbitrarily has a specific limit. You are not the OP so you cannot specify that it has a physical limit. Nor can anyone else except the OP.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes it is, they are claiming that shields can block bombs, therefore they have to provide proof.
Originally posted by dadudemon
The burden of proof is not on them: it can block physical stuff...and that's is as far as they need to go. The only thing seen taking down a shield is magic: that is its limit (anti-shield magic).The burden is now on the detractors to prove some sort of "near" physical limit exists.
Originally posted by dadudemon
We can just as easily conclude that the shields can withstand any physical force as we can conclude that there is a limit. Both positions are almost equally illogical as neither was proven or disproved.
Quanchi: KingD19 is correct. That bridge was a flimsy, posey national joke over here. Were it designed in a serious non competition and built without appearences being in mind foremost, it could have been a less than shit un wobbling disaster. But it wasn't and as noted had to be closed down for augmentation.
If disrupting this represents Death Eater power, then they intentionally or not made them a laughing stock.
And DDM, the burden of proof is on the one making the outrageous and non-scientific claim.
(IE That unexplained wizards shields definitely can repell X attack or Y nuke)
Originally posted by Sadako of GirthNo, he's wrong since the film clearly used it as a display of power. It wasn't their fligjht which took it down otherwise strong gusts of wind would really endanger lives.
Quanchi: KingD19 is correct. That bridge was a flimsy, posey national joke over here. Were it designed in a serious non competition and built without appearences being in mind foremost, it could have been a less than shit un wobbling disaster. But it wasn't and as noted had to be closed down for augmentation.
If disrupting this represents Death Eater power, then they intentionally or not made them a laughing stock.And DDM, the burden of proof is on the one making the outrageous and non-scientific claim.
(IE That unexplained wizards shields definitely can repell X attack or Y nuke)
You're wrong since the onus is on those who claimed the bombs kill them easily. Prove it.