Khan Noonien Singh vs. Yoda

Originally posted by quanchi112
I never said he is perfect I said he didn't miss.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Khan has perfect accuracy. We see everyone he aims at dies. Your attempts at downplaying is falling on deaf ears.

No one ever said you claimed Khan was perfect. We're taking issue with your 'perfect accuracy' claim, which you have not supported.

Anyway, same difference. All I'm trying to point out here is that Khan has missed shots before. It doesn't mean he misses all the time. Why do you have so much resistance to this?

There is no definitive proof he misses. You said by my same logic Khan never hits anyone despite the fact we see it on screen. That means you're a liar.

Then you missed the context of the post again. Under your logic of "scene change = no definitive proof" it can not be claimed that Khan hit or missed, because there would be no 'definitive' proof either way. The evidence for both is equal; the only difference is your bias. I'm just trying to get you to apply your double standard equally.

Khan fires --> scene change --> blast hits the wall.

Khan fires --> scene change --> blast hits Klingon.

If you claim that the scene change prevents us from seeing what happens in between, and therefore prevents definitive proof, then that standard should apply equally. Thus, there is also no definitive proof that Khan hit. If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, that is.

Again, it's been answered but keep asking it.

You claim it has been answered, but I have not seen you do so. Your choices now are either answer again or quote your original answer.

Otherwise you concede that you have no answer.

Originally posted by The Scenario
No one ever said you claimed Khan was perfect. We're taking issue with your 'perfect accuracy' claim, which you have not supported.

Anyway, same difference. All I'm trying to point out here is that Khan has missed shots before. It doesn't mean he misses all the time. Why do you have so much resistance to this?

Then you missed the context of the post [b]again. Under your logic of "scene change = no definitive proof" it can not be claimed that Khan hit or missed, because there would be no 'definitive' proof either way. The evidence for both is equal; the only difference is your bias. I'm just trying to get you to apply your double standard equally.

Khan fires --> scene change --> blast hits the wall.

Khan fires --> scene change --> blast hits Klingon.

If you claim that the scene change prevents us from seeing what happens in between, and therefore prevents definitive proof, then that standard should apply equally. Thus, there is also no definitive proof that Khan hit. If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, that is.

You claim it has been answered, but I have not seen you do so. Your choices now are either answer again or quote your original answer.

Otherwise you concede that you have no answer. [/B]

We see khan fire in the same view and hit his target. We also have Kirk's words and the crew sitting back while he destroys them in perfect view. Again, I win.

Scenario has epic endurance level. I couldn't debate with quanchi112 for this long without ripping a Wookie's arm off.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You implied I said he was perfect which I did not. As the posts prove. Again the scenes show he was perfect accuracy without you being able to prove he missed.

You implied that yourself when you claimed perfect accuracy; I didn't have to do much of anything. And again, the scene shows either both hits and misses, or neither hit nor misses, depending on whether or not you feel and scene change prevents definitive accuracy.

We see khan fire in the same view and hit his target. We also have Kirk's words and the crew sitting back while he destroys them in perfect view. Again, I win.

Not really, it's just the ship there. In all the scenes where a blasts hits a Klingon, Khan is not in the shot. Just like all the scenes where a blast hits the wall, I hope you notice?

Can I get confirmation that with your "Kirk's words" argument you are claiming that everything any character says can be taken as 100% confirmed fact? That seems like a quote that would be useful to cite in the future.

Also, since you've failed to either answer or quote that answers you claim exist, I am taking that as a concession that you have no answer for me.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Scenario has epic endurance level. I couldn't debate with quanchi112 for this long without ripping a Wookie's arm off.

Originally posted by The Scenario
You implied that yourself when you claimed perfect accuracy; I didn't have to do much of anything. And again, the scene shows either both hits and misses, or neither hit nor misses, depending on whether or not you feel and scene change prevents definitive accuracy.

Not really, it's just the ship there. In all the scenes where a blasts hits a Klingon, Khan is not in the shot. Just like all the scenes where a blast hits the wall, I hope you notice?

Can I get confirmation that with your "Kirk's words" argument you are claiming that everything any character says can be taken as 100% confirmed fact? That seems like a quote that would be useful to cite in the future.

Also, since you've failed to either answer or quote that answers you claim exist, I am taking that as a concession that you have no answer for me.

Kirk's words back up what we see. 2+2=4.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I had a sig made out of Khan firing and jumping towards in the same scene. Your ignorance is appalling.

Time?

Kirk's words back up what we see. 2+2=4.

A character's words are not definite evidence.

Originally posted by The Scenario
Time?

A character's words are not definite evidence.

We see it with our eyes. A characters words plus evidence is ramming home my excellent case.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Watch the movie. Your ignorance disgusts me. The force lightning kos him at the beginning of their fight. Please watch the movie and quit embarrassing yourself.

Got your logic is simply horrendous....

So, a force push combined with some lightning, and that didn't kill Yoda to begin with, is somehow the same thing as getting hit with a beam weapon? No, get your head out of the sand Quan.

What I said was "We never see Yoda hit with weapons fire", not "Yoda has never been hit". Now, combine that with your infamous Quan Logic and Creative Interpretation™ I can conclude that Khan will never ever strike Yoda.

The painful truth hurts your butt Quan.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Got your logic is simply horrendous....

So, a force push combined with some lightning, and that didn't kill Yoda to begin with, is somehow the same thing as getting hit with a beam weapon? No, get your head out of the sand Quan.

What I said was "We never see Yoda hit with weapons fire", not "Yoda has never been hit". Now, combine that with your infamous Quan Logic and Creative Interpretation™ I can conclude that Khan will never ever strike Yoda.

The painful truth hurts your butt Quan.

There was no force push it was force lightning that ko'd him alone. Beam weapon will do far more damage than the weak force lightning.

Yoda has been hit by blasts. Khan blasts him with his guns. Conclusion: Khan wins.

Advice: Watch the films, momma's boy.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You said it never struck him. You didn't watch the movie. 😂

Your just sore from being proven wrong on specific points. You claimed "But Lightning!" whuch we already discussed back near the start of this failwreck of a thread. You keep returning to shot down points.

Originally posted by quanchi112
There was no force push it was force lightning that ko'd him alone. Beam weapon will do far more damage than the weak force lightning.

Except force lightning does not fling targets on its own, as proven in ROTJ.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yoda has been hit by blasts. Khan blasts him with his guns. Conclusion: Khan wins.

No, Yoda has been hit by force powers, never by weapons fire.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Advice: Watch the films, momma's boy.

Advice: grow a brain, you mindless moron.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Your just sore from being proven wrong on specific points. You claimed "But Lightning!" whuch we already discussed back near the start of this failwreck of a thread. You keep returning to shot down points.

Except force lightning does not fling targets on its own, as proven in ROTJ.

No, Yoda has been hit by force powers, never by weapons fire.

Advice: grow a brain, you mindless moron.

We see it fling Windu out the window. 😂

You are quite ignorant, momma's boy.

Seriously, watch the Star Wars movies.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You said it never hit him directly. Wrong.

I said he has never been hit by weapons fire, but you decided to do your flip-flopping moron dance.

Originally posted by quanchi112
We see it fling Windu out the window. 😂

And here is another example of your Quan Logic go awry. Can you prove that a force push was not involved? Considering Palps was at full power when going for Luke.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I said he has never been hit by weapons fire, but you decided to do your flip-flopping moron dance.

And here is another example of your Quan Logic go awry. Can you prove that a force push was not involved? Considering Palps was at full power when going for Luke.

You need to prove force push was involved. It's like saying one punch ko'd someone and one didn't so something else had to be in play without proof.

Awful debating.

Considering every other time Force Lightning was used, there was no kinetic impact, and especially nothing so much as to force someone flying like Mace, that one outlier scene would need to be proved by you that Force Push wasn't used rather than him that it was.

Originally posted by quanchi112
When he shoots the one as he jumps.

That's not a time.

We see it with our eyes. A characters words plus evidence is ramming home my excellent case.

You haven't definitively proven your case yet, though. But you do believe that a character's words count as evidence, yes?

Originally posted by quanchi112
You said he absorbed the lightning and it never hit him directly. You have the memory of a goldfish.

It is just like you to try and snip bits you don't like and try to claim I said things I did not while at the same time dodging the original point. Classic pointless Quan Logic tactics.

Quit dodging and accept the fact that Yoda has never been hit by weapons fire.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You need to prove force push was involved. It's like saying one punch ko'd someone and one didn't so something else had to be in play without proof.

No I don't, according to your own Quan Logic, we don't see that the force push was no seen, therefore we cannot definitively rule it out that it was not used, in light of ROTJ Luke not being thrown by superior force lightning.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Awful debating.

By yourself, yes, I agree.

Originally posted by KingD19
Considering every other time Force Lightning was used, there was no kinetic impact, and especially nothing so much as to force someone flying like Mace, that one outlier scene would need to be proved by you that Force Push wasn't used rather than him that it was.

Originally posted by The Scenario
That's not a time.

You haven't definitively proven your case yet, though. But you do believe that a character's words count as evidence, yes?

Watch the clip.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
It is just like you to try and snip bits you don't like and try to claim I said things I did not while at the same time dodging the original point. Classic pointless Quan Logic tactics.

Quit dodging and accept the fact that Yoda has never been hit by weapons fire.

No I don't, according to your own Quan Logic, we don't see that the force push was no seen, therefore we cannot definitively rule it out that it was not used, in light of ROTJ Luke not being thrown by superior force lightning.

By yourself, yes, I agree.

You need to prove the force push it isn't my job to disprove your worthless points.

You lost a long time ago.