Originally posted by quanchi112
We don't see him shoot and see him with the clear intent of hitting his opponent or his entire view of site path. Thus you have failed.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We don't see him shoot and see him with the clear intent of hitting his opponent or his entire view of site path. Thus you have failed. [/B]
Originally posted by quanchi112
We don't see him...
Originally posted by quanchi112
...and see him...
First, pick an argument. We either didn't see Khan shoot, or we saw him shoot with clear intent of hitting his target. You cannot claim that we both did and did not see Khan. Try again.
Second, stop trying to dodge. Your claim is that Khan hit something else before hitting the wall. Is that correct? If so, the onus is on you to prove that Khan hit something prior to, and to further prove that phaser blasts can ricochet. So far, you have failed to do both of these things, and thus you have failed to prove your case.
News flash, both sides need to prove their case. Until you provide evidence for your view, your nitpicking 'what if' scenarios are nothing more than unbacked claims. I thought you wanted to use the movie, so why are you making things up?
Did the blast hit the wall?
Originally posted by The ScenarioThe problem is we don't know so its speculation either way. You failed to prove your claim. Just take a kmc break things are getting to you.
First, pick an argument. We either didn't see Khan shoot, or we saw him shoot with clear intent of hitting his target. You cannot claim that we both did and did not see Khan. Try again.Second, stop trying to dodge. Your claim is that Khan hit something else before hitting the wall. Is that correct? If so, the onus is on you to prove that Khan hit something prior to, and to further prove that phaser blasts can ricochet. So far, you have failed to do both of these things, and thus you have failed to prove your case.
News flash, both sides need to prove their case. Until you provide evidence for your view, your nitpicking 'what if' scenarios are nothing more than unbacked claims. I thought you wanted to use the movie, so why are you making things up?
Did the blast hit the wall?
Originally posted by Stealth MooseAgain, everything has been said on the matter. We never definitively see him miss so he needs to accept that and quit repeating himself in a trollish fashion.
Your debating style is quite trollish, considering it's basically "dance around valid points" and:Then you move them goalposts.
Absence of proof is proof of absence? Since when?
Yoda never poops in the movies. So his species is incapable of rendering feces. Solid reasoning there.
Also, you still never answered how Khan would defeat TK. Yoda can knock out guards with a wave of his hand. What is Khan going to do about it? Look menacing?
Originally posted by quanchi112
The problem is we don't know so its speculation either way. You failed to prove your claim. Just take a kmc break things are getting to you.
So why are you assuming that the doubt automatically ends in your favor? When your argument is an unproven positive? That's the bit I don't think you're getting.
Based on the evidence of two of Khan's blasts hitting a wall, there are essentially two possibilities here:
[list]
[*]Khan fired at the Klingons and missed
[/list]
Or
[list]
[*]Khan hit an unknown object, causing the phaser blast to ricochet (something no phaser has ever done) and be deflected into the wall, and this happened not once but twice
[/list]
Am I correct in saying that you support the latter scenario? If so, it's up to you to prove your case. Your suggestion here requires several assumptions, and goes against all the evidence we've seen so far. In order for you successfully claim this, you must:
[list]
[*]Identify the object that Khan hit
[*]Explain why the shot ricocheted
[*]Provide evidence of phaser blasts ricocheting
[*]Explain why this happened twice
[/list]
Until you do this, my argument will, for demonstration purposes, be thus: Khan can't shoot Yoda because invisible offscreen objects will continuously deflect his shots. Yoda then beheads Khan.
Originally posted by Stealth MooseGuards next to a wall not Palpatine a known geriatric.
Absence of proof is proof of absence? Since when?Yoda never poops in the movies. So his species is incapable of rendering feces. Solid reasoning there.
Also, you still never answered how Khan would defeat TK. Yoda can knock out guards with a wave of his hand. What is Khan going to do about it? Look menacing?
Tk is exaggerated to laughable levels, troll.
Originally posted by The ScenarioSpeculation cannot be proven either way.
So why are you assuming that the doubt automatically ends in your favor? When your argument is an unproven positive? That's the bit I don't think you're getting.Based on the evidence of two of Khan's blasts hitting a wall, there are essentially two possibilities here:
[list]
[*]Khan fired at the Klingons and missed
[/list]
Or
[list]
[*]Khan hit an unknown object, causing the phaser blast to ricochet (something no phaser has ever done) and be deflected into the wall, and this happened not once but twice
[/list]Am I correct in saying that you support the latter scenario? If so, it's up to you to prove your case. Your suggestion here requires several assumptions, and goes against all the evidence we've seen so far. In order for you successfully claim this, you must:
[list]
[*]Identify the object that Khan hit
[*]Explain why the shot ricocheted
[*]Provide evidence of phaser blasts ricocheting
[*]Explain why this happened twice
[/list]Until you do this, my argument will, for demonstration purposes, be thus: [b]Khan can't shoot Yoda because invisible offscreen objects will continuously deflect his shots. Yoda then beheads Khan.
[/B]
Khan shoots Yoda based on the squadron he decimated on screen.