Originally posted by The ScenarioWe hear Kirk's words say he took out a squadron singlehandedly.
You are aware this argument works against you, right?There's no proof Khan hit any of the Klingons, because, and I quote, "we don't see Khan and the Klingons with the clear intent to blast them with nothing in front of them."
Would you like to try again? I'm afraid I can only give you half credit for the question since you refused to answer once, but rules are rules.
Try again, noob.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We hear Kirk's words say he took out a squadron singlehandedly.Try again, noob.
Kirk's fallible, we don't see Kirk see Khan see Klingons see what was between them. He could be talking about Khan taking them out to dinner and the camera just didn't show it. I don't have to prove your speculation, you need to prove Khan hit them.
See how that works? Perhaps you would like to present an actual argument.
Originally posted by The ScenarioKirk's words and we can see Khan shoot them by his laser fire. We also see him shoot ships. Quit trolling.
Kirk's fallible, we don't see Kirk see Khan see Klingons see what was between them. He could be talking about Khan taking them out to dinner and the camera just didn't show it. I don't have to prove your speculation, you need to prove Khan hit them.See how that works? Perhaps you would like to present an actual argument.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Kirk's words and we can see Khan shoot them by his laser fire. We also see him shoot ships. Quit trolling.
Kirk could be talking about something else. We don't see what's between Khan and the Klingons nor his intent to shoot them. Quit speculating.
Spoiler:
Quanchi, you realize I am just switching the words in posts you've made, right? Saying I am trolling is calling your own posts trolling.
Originally posted by The ScenarioI have Kirk's words and the clear implications of him downing the Klingons. Proven.
Kirk could be talking about something else. We don't see what's between Khan and the Klingons nor his intent to shoot them. Quit speculating.Spoiler:
Quanchi, you realize I am just switching the words in posts you've made, right? Saying I am trolling is calling your own posts trolling.
Originally posted by quanchi112
You don't understand his words but I do. Don't project your inability to understand the English language onto me.
How about I just drop the pretense and make this as obvious as possible.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I don't see what happened prior to. Sorry, your words are not proof.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We don't see the entire scene to definitively say, nerd man.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We can't see what's inbetween them and Khan. That's the point.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He might have missed someone prior to. We just can't say for certain.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Might have missed the intended targeted prior to. Up in the air.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We can't say yes or no either way. Speculation. No proof he hit.
I bolded the bits I changed. Do you understand that your current argument is so poor that by merely changing a single word, or even nothing at all, your stance flips to its complete opposite? For the last few posts you were literally arguing with yourself, and you called it trolling. It's hilarious.
But as for your most recent post, I can still use the strategy you have been trying to employ. Here: Kirk's words are not proof, he could have said something the microphone didn't hear, it's just your speculation.
So why don't you answer the question. Did one of Khan's blasts hit the ground, yes or no?
Originally posted by The ScenarioWrong as we see Khan fire and the targets hit in the same shot. We have Kirk's words backing the obvious unlike your terrible case.
How about I just drop the pretense and make this as obvious as possible.I bolded the bits I changed. Do you understand that your current argument is so poor that by merely changing a single word, or even nothing at all, your stance flips to its complete opposite? For the last few posts you were literally arguing with yourself, and you called it trolling. It's hilarious.
But as for your most recent post, I can still use the strategy you have been trying to employ. Here: Kirk's words are not proof, he could have said something the microphone didn't hear, it's just your speculation.
So why don't you answer the question. Did one of Khan's blasts hit the ground, yes or no?
Originally posted by quanchi112
Wrong as we see Khan fire and the targets hit in the same shot. We have Kirk's words backing the obvious unlike your terrible case.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Wrong as we see Khan fire and the targets unharmed in the same shot. We have the film backing the obvious unlike your terrible case.
We do see him hit targets, and yes, Kirk did say that. That's fine, good for him.
However, we also see Khan miss. That's all I'm saying. Khan is a good shot, he did kill most of the Klingons and did win that fight nearly by himself. He is definitely a competent, even great, fighter. I do not deny any of that. All I'm saying is that "perfect accuracy" is a blatant falsehood. Khan can miss, and he has done so. That doesn't diminish him as a fighter, and doesn't even affect the outcome of this fight.
Do you think I'm arguing that Khan is some kind of braindead moron that can't hit the broad side of a barn? No, that's clearly false. But so are your claims that he never ever missed anything ever. That's all, really. As far as shots go, Khan's a good one. Even so, 99 hits out of 100 is not perfect.
That serious enough for you? Come on, I was having fun before. Calm down a bit, maybe?
Originally posted by The ScenarioYes, we do. We see the entire pathway between him and his targets. We also hear Kirk agree. Proven.
We do see him hit targets, and yes, Kirk did say that. That's fine, good for him.However, we also see Khan miss. That's all I'm saying. Khan is a good shot, he did kill most of the Klingons and did win that fight nearly by himself. He is definitely a competent, even great, fighter. I do not deny any of that. All I'm saying is that "perfect accuracy" is a blatant falsehood. Khan can miss, and he has done so. That doesn't diminish him as a fighter, and doesn't even affect the outcome of this fight.
Do you think I'm arguing that Khan is some kind of braindead moron that can't hit the broad side of a barn? No, that's clearly false. But so are your claims that he never ever missed anything ever. That's all, really. As far as shots go, Khan's a good one. Even so, 99 hits out of 100 is not perfect.
That serious enough for you? Come on, I was having fun before. Calm down a bit, maybe?
Still awaiting your rebuttal. Where we last left off:
Originally posted by quanchi112
Quit being silly. Its like saying we never saw him cook a steak I bet he can't. Based on his skill and the scene we see him firing on multiple targets at once as opposed to this one on one situation.Yoda's an epic failure.
I am only following the format you have established, which is to provide showings for proposed results. There are no showings for either character being able to cook a steak, so that cannot be determined. It also does not have much to do with the debate at hand.
Based on the scene, the showings available for observation, we never see Khan firing both weapons at the same time. He does fire on multiple targets, yes, but he alternates fire between each gun. By this, and your format, Khan is unable to wield both simultaneously.
Yoda survives wartime, trains a new generation, which leads to the fall of the Sith. That sounds more like a success to me.
Continue?
2
