Superman heat vision vs Black Bolt scream

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
WW took a LOOOOOOONG time to find that penny she lost, because Superman attacked Bunker D, went inside, got Batman's body out of it, Darkseid explained his whoooooole plan to Superman and showed how he controlled everybody, then he pulled his gun out explained some more, flashes arriveed, Darkseid got Omega blasted and THEN, That was when Finally Diana arrived.

Considering that when WW got HV "pushed" She had already crushed the resistence in the battle of bludhaven and that the fight took place very close to Bunker D in FC #5, All I have to say is that she really took a LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG TIME, To find her penny.

Those are my two cents anyway. 😄

Oh and that is on the comics too

I hope the "my two cents" thing wasn't an intentional pun or I'm going to have to taze you in the groin. 😠

Originally posted by Delta1938
Nib, while it is possible that Wonder Woman wasn't knocked-out, your entire argument is because it's possible.

You DO KNOW that BOTH sides are basing their arguments on "because it's possible", the only difference being that the "WW was KO'd side is clinging to a rather poorly thought out "eyes closed/ass up" logic?

Originally posted by Delta1938
Even if you're not saying she was for sure still conscious, you need a bit more than "we shouldn't assume that she was KOed because there's a little bit of doubt."

There isn't a little bit of doubt, there's actually quite a few things I pointed out that seems to indicate that her positional condition has more to do with being blasted back than it does her lying down KO'd.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Perhaps I'm biased, but I don't see there being enough doubt to not make the assumption she was KOed.

If you think that me needing to provide MORE reasoning when one side has actually provided less than me, then I have to say that you are biased. IF you look at both sides with unbiased eyes, and break things down, you'll actually realize that the "she's KO'd" side has based their ASSUMPTIONS on very flimsy logic.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You DO KNOW that BOTH sides are basing their arguments on "because it's possible", the only difference being that the "WW was KO'd side is clinging to a rather poorly thought out "eyes closed/ass up" logic?

There isn't a little bit of doubt, there's actually quite a few things I pointed out that seems to indicate that her positional condition has more to do with being blasted back than it does her lying down KO'd.

If you think that me needing to provide MORE reasoning when one side has actually provided less than me, then I have to say that you are biased. IF you look at both sides with unbiased eyes, and break things down, you'll actually realize that the "she's KO'd" side has based their ASSUMPTIONS on very flimsy logic.

She's in the position she's in, eyes closed, we don't see her for a while. That means the more likely instance is she's actually not KOed? Your argument is "The possibility that she isn't KOed means she wasn't" was basically your initial argument, then you went back and started nitpicking to support your claim after the fact.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You DO KNOW that BOTH sides are basing their arguments on "because it's possible", the only difference being that the "WW was KO'd side is clinging to a rather poorly thought out "eyes closed/ass up" logic?

There isn't a little bit of doubt, there's actually quite a few things I pointed out that seems to indicate that her positional condition has more to do with being blasted back than it does her lying down KO'd.

If you think that me needing to provide MORE reasoning when one side has actually provided less than me, then I have to say that you are biased. IF you look at both sides with unbiased eyes, and break things down, you'll actually realize that the "she's KO'd" side has based their ASSUMPTIONS on very flimsy logic.

Originally posted by Badabing
Just stop. Was she just resting? Was she just playing possum? Did she just find a shiny new penny on the ground there? Her eyes are even closed in the scan, along with her body contorted and on the ground. Unless you can prove otherwise, or provide evidence to the contrary, WW was KOed in that scan.

I'm going to say what I, along with other mods and some members, already know. Some Marvel fans like to play dumb, lowball feats and ignore any feats which go against their arguments. I'm going to make it my business to address these tactics with warnings and bans.

You ignore on panel proof to insert your own theory, you ignore mod ruling, you ignore even common sense for what? Nitpick another superman feat?

Also 😂 @ poor "face down/eyes closed/ass up" logic which is a classic pose of being KOED in comics.

Originally posted by Delta1938
She's in the position she's in, eyes closed, we don't see her for a while.

So you're saying anytime a character doesn't appear for a few pages you naturally assume they're KOd? Sorry, poor logic there.

Originally posted by Delta1938
That means the more likely instance is she's actually not KOed? Your argument is "The possibility that she isn't KOed means she wasn't" was basically your initial argument, then you went back and started nitpicking to support your claim after the fact.

facepalm

I never "went back and started nitpicking" anything. People presented their arguments and I offered rebuttals. If that is "nitpicking" to you, then I'm not sure you know how debating works.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
So you're saying anytime a character doesn't appear for a few pages you naturally assume they're KOd? Sorry, poor logic there.

facepalm

I never "went back and started nitpicking" anything. People presented their arguments and I offered rebuttals. If that is "nitpicking" to you, then I'm not sure you know how debating works.

Someone takes damage and we don't see them again for a while means most likely they were knocked-out unless you can provide greater evidence than your "non"-nitpicking from the comic. Is there something that was left out of the scene, or subsequent explanations that you have? If not, your arguments are largely baseless speculation, and you give the impression you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Someone takes damage and we don't see them again for a while means most likely they were knocked-out unless you can provide greater evidence than your "non"-nitpicking from the comic.

What you're doing is saying that when someone takes damage and not seen for a while it is right to ASSUME that they were KO'd.

Assumption is not how logic works.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Is there something that was left out of the scene, or subsequent explanations that you have? If not, your arguments are largely baseless speculation, and you give the impression you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

I'm not sure you read what I posted properly.

My argumentation was solely for the purposed of coming up with the proper interpretation of the scan in question. IN FACT, I made it clear in this post:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Not saying she wasn't KOd by it, but going by the scan it is more a "thrown by the force of something" than it is "she's lying on the ground KOd".

That I wasn't saying that she wasn't KO'd, just that if she was, this scan does not prove it as there is a better explanation on why she was depicted in her current physical position.

Hey nibedicus, did you put me on ignore bro?

🙁

Originally posted by abhilegend
Hey nibedicus, did you put me on ignore bro?

🙁

Nope, typing up a reply right now, thing is, my original one got accidentally deleted when I pressed "back" by accident.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
What you're doing is saying that when someone takes damage and not seen for a while it is right to ASSUME that they were KO'd.

Assumption is not how logic works.

I'm not sure you read what I posted properly.

My argumentation was solely for the purposed of coming up with the proper interpretation of the scan in question. IN FACT, I made it clear in this post:

That I wasn't saying that she wasn't KO'd, just that if she was, this scan does not prove it as there is a better explanation on why she was depicted in her current physical position.

er Yes not seeing someone for a while after taking damage would mean a KO/TKO is the most likely outcome, unless there's more that shows otherwise.

But this whole thing is basically going in circles and ignoring Bada's statement that it's a KO unless actual evidence(not nitpicking) is provided. So please either provide actual evidence or drop it(at least with me). Hell, I'll even post the scans if you provide the page number from either issue.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Of course it does. I produced evidence on the most likely scenario. You are going against what was actually shown without any kind of proof whatsoever. Occam's razor or shit like that.

You saying "Ass up/Eyes closed" is not evidence of anything. It's an opinion of how you interpret the same scan in question.

Again, not evidence. Stop trying to present it as such.

Originally posted by abhilegend
How is it disprovable without any kind of proof?

Interpretational arguments (w/c is what is the case here) require nothing more than the material (in this case, a comic page scan) in question as physical evidence/proof. What is critical is the proper interpretation of said material based on individual factors that can be pointed out within said material that points to which interpretation is more correct than the other. Which in this case I've already presented via:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I'm only looking at that one scan and only looking at the fourth panel from the top, if there's a differnt scan/panel that I missed, pls correct me, but from the looks of the scan/panel I'm seeing, it looks more like she was tossed by the force of the HV blast more than she was KOd by it. It is further corroborated by:

-The other characters/objects (as well as the mount she's riding) around her being thrown by the force of the HV blast at that exact moment.
-The fact that KOd ppl rarely ever have both legs up in the air and would be a poor way of depicting it.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, I'm just asking for a proof.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
For all intents and purposes wonder woman was KTFO. Prove otherwise with actual proof.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
You are saying that just because wonder woman was tossed doesn't mean she was KOED. Why when humans were tossed around too and they were definitely KOED.

Stawman. Never said that WW wasn't KO'd. In fact, I specifically said that in my post:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Not saying she wasn't KOd by it, but going by the scan it is more a "thrown by the force of something" than it is "she's lying on the ground KOd".

It is quite possible that everyone was KO'd. Just not shown by the scan you presented.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Wait, are you saying that the dog and wonder woman have the same durability? Hahahaha.

I'm not sure you got my point here.

IF you're mounted on something and it is falling, chances are (since you're riding the mount in question) that you were falling with it as well.

Originally posted by abhilegend
In your posts. Your obsessive nitpicking of every superman feat to death. And lying there eyes closed for half the book of Final Crisis 7 isn't KOED either. Who are you trying to fool here?

Actually, I don't "obsessively nitpick every superman feat to death" as I don't post here often, especially recently as I've been way busy, so I don't get where you're coming with all this.

What you call "nitpicking", I call "discussing the proper interpretation of a scan using variables present in said scan".

Originally posted by abhilegend
We're not. We're discussing your nitpicking. Because it shows what I'm saying and nothing of what you're saying.

No, we are discussing the proper interpretation of the scan in question please focus on the discussion at hand as the topic isn't about our personal posting preferences.

And no, it doesn't show what you're saying at all (see above).

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, you come on. I'm tired of your nitpicking and frankly everyone is. Why can't you accept something at its face value without nitpicking it to death?

How is "everyone" tired of my "nitpicking" when I've not really posted here in a while, a lot of the people here, I've never even debated with in the past....

Maybe it's because your "version" of a scan's "face value" isn't always what the real "face value" is.

Or maybe I like debating with you. This is a debating site after all.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It wasn't. He can see and read it just fine and he said she was KOED untill carver and alongside you can provide a proof otherwise. Do you have ANY kind of proof? Do you think I gave him incomplete information? What are you trying to prove here?

See above where I explained what "evidence" is required in an "interpretational debate".

Originally posted by abhilegend
Frankly, I don't give a damn.

/shrug

Originally posted by Delta1938
er Yes not seeing someone for a while after taking damage would mean a KO/TKO is the most likely outcome, unless there's more that shows otherwise.

No, a person not being seen for a while is simply proof of a person not being seen for a while. Anything else outside that is pure speculation. Pure assumption.

Is it possible? Sure! Is it likely? Maybe. Is it irrefutable? No, it is an assumption. And in logic, we cannot use an assumption as verification or proof.

Originally posted by Delta1938
But this whole thing is basically going in circles and ignoring Bada's statement that it's a KO unless actual evidence(not nitpicking) is provided. So please either provide actual evidence or drop it(at least with me). Hell, I'll even post the scans if you provide the page number from either issue.

Do you even read what people post or do you assume it is what you want it to be?

Here is Bada's post:

Originally posted by Badabing
Just stop. Was she just resting? Was she just playing possum? Did she just find a shiny new penny on the ground there? Her eyes are even closed in the scan, along with her body contorted and on the ground. Unless you can prove otherwise, or provide evidence to the contrary, WW was KOed in that scan.

I'm going to say what I, along with other mods and some members, already know. Some Marvel fans like to play dumb, lowball feats and ignore any feats which go against their arguments. I'm going to make it my business to address these tactics with warnings and bans.

What is most likely with what he said was that the "arguments" presented up til that point have been rather poorly presented (thus the "find a shiny penny" appeal to ridicule approach) and that certain members in the forum tend to simply "play dumb" and "lowball".

I, however, presented proper arguments and presented proper rebuttals as well. Thus, I don't think this applies to me.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You saying "Ass up/Eyes closed" is not evidence of anything.

/shrug

Originally posted by Nibedicus
No, a person not being seen for a while is simply proof of a person not being seen for a while. Anything else outside that is pure speculation. Pure assumption.

I never said it was absolute, I stated most likely outcome. Unless you can provide scans showing otherwise, that is.[/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Is it possible? Sure! Is it likely? Maybe. Is it irrefutable? No, it is an assumption. And in logic, we cannot use an assumption as verification or proof.

Originally posted by Delta1938
er Yes not seeing someone for a while after taking damage would mean a KO/TKO is the most likely outcome , unless there's more that shows otherwise.

Now, where ever did I claim it was irrefutable? The fact is, we see her take damage, we don't see her for a long time. Unless you have something more than your nitpicking, she was most likely unconscious or otherwise incapacitated.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Do you even read what people post or do you assume it is what you want it to be?

Yes I do. Your reply to me makes me wonder this about you.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Here is Bada's scan:

That's a quote, not a scan. Still like nitpicking?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
What is most likely with what he said was that the "arguments" presented up til that point have been rather poorly presented (thus the "find a shiny penny" appeal to ridicule approach) and that certain members in the forum tend to simply "play dumb" and "lowball". I, however, presented proper arguments and presented proper rebuttals as well. Thus, I don't think this applies to me.

Nitpicking and failing to provide evidence from the comic isn't giving a proper argument. It's nitpicking and failing to provide evidence. You're accusing others of going entirely by their interpretation yet your argument is exactly that? Bada straight-up said unless you can prove it or provide evidence to the contrary. You're just saying a bunch of stuff to prove that maybe she wasn't KOed, not proven she wasn't or provided actual evidence. I wonder if YOU read what Bada wrote.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It is. Its on panel truth.

No, it is your interpretation of said panel, nothing more.

Originally posted by abhilegend
You saying something isn't the proof or denying of evidence. Stop using your arguments as it means on panel evidence is less than your argument.

No, on panel evidence is always better than an argument. Except that you've presented less on panel evidence than I did.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Blah, blah, blah.

Guess this is you new response when you can offer no rebuttal. I'll chalk that up as a win then.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Then what are you arguing about? Just arguing for ague's sake? The fact that she is lying there eyes closed is enough of a proof in itself. Her long absence is just icing on the top.

No, I don't agree with your interpretation of the scan, thus I'm presenting my own.

No, it is not proof enough especially when there are factors within the scan that seems to be counter indicative of your assumption as well as a different interpretation that explains why her eyes are closed and her "ass is up".

Originally posted by abhilegend
Fixed. We saw WW lying on the ground with no motion lines to detect that she was just thrown and could've been awake.

Here is the scan again:

http://s1113.photobucket.com/user/abhilegend/media/Superman/Superman_51jpg_FinalCrisis_6_p34.jpg.html

See the flying rocks? The flying debris? The flying people/mounts?

Do you see any motion lines anywhere? Motion lines weren't used in this artwork. Bad logic is bad.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Of course I did.

Apparently, you didn't. Otherwise, you'd agree with me that since her mount seems to be falling, chances are so is she.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So she fell down with her eyes closed and lied there for half of another book? Is that your flip-flopping stance right now?

Never made any assertion of what came after, just made an interpretation of what is going on in this one exact panel. You trying to strawman me nothwithstanding.

Originally posted by abhilegend
I didn't say you do it often, did I? Your posts degenerate in long essays anytime you do though. In every thread.

Then "Every" is a bad word to use, no?

Hey, I like to be thorough. Nothing wrong with that, especially in a debating forum.

Originally posted by abhilegend
With nothing but your make believe theories, I might say.

Your theory is much more "make believe" than mine, at least I presented factors and reasoning. All you've done is repeating the same ass up/eyes closed schtick over and over again.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, we're not. Its just you nitpicking as usual.

Scrutinizing scans and interpreting them properly is important to get the correct argument across. I know you don't like it when people disagree with your every interpretation of the scans you present, but given your past history, I'm sure you can understand why many people find the need to scrutinize?

Originally posted by abhilegend
So wonder woman wasn't lying there, eyes closed, face down ass up with no motion lines to indicate that she was just thrown and no indication of getting up?

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
You took that literally?

Not sure how else one can take:

Originally posted by abhilegend
Im tired of your nitpicking and frankly everyone is."

other than literally or is there a sublte message there that I'm missing?

Originally posted by abhilegend
facepalm

Its in this case though.

Nope, just another misinterpreted scan from where I'm standing.

Originally posted by abhilegend
This isn't debating. Its splitting hair.

Actually this is debating. You DO KNOW scrutiny of evidence is kinda important in debates right?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Your "blah, blah, blah"? No thanks.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Guess this is you new response when you can offer no rebuttal. I'll chalk that up as a win then.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Good day to you too.

shrug

Originally posted by Nibedicus
No, it is your interpretation of said panel, nothing more.

shrug

So, I don't want to write another essay like this. I would make this simple for you, was wonder woman KOED or not based on this scan and the fact that she was absent for a long time in the following comic? If you think she wasn't, present a proof or else I'm going to ask for a mod ruling.

Originally posted by Delta1938
I never said it was absolute, I stated most likely outcome. Unless you can provide scans showing otherwise, that is.

I don't need to present scans of anything. You made the assertion of her being KOd in the specific scan we're discussing, you need to provide the evidence. Here, let me help you understand how burden of proof works:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

Originally posted by Delta1938
Now, where ever did I claim it was irrefutable? The fact is, we see her take damage, we don't see her for a long time. Unless you have something more than your nitpicking, she was most likely unconscious or otherwise incapacitated.

There are many instances in comics where where characters are struck and not seem for a while, it happens with Superman, it happens with every comic book character

While you may assume what possibly happened to them in between and that'd be all right, it's a whole 'nuther thing entirely to present your assumptions as evidence in a debate.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Yes I do. Your reply to me makes me wonder this about you.

You're not getting what I posted and got Bada's post entirely wrong as well, so I'm not sure you do.

Originally posted by Delta1938
That's a quote, not a scan. Still like nitpicking?

I actually corrected my post before you were able to post yours. Me having a typo has nothing to do with anything, but yes accuracy is good so being corrected is actually a good thing. I'd thank you if I didn't actually see it (and corrected it) before you got done posting your reply.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Nitpicking and failing to provide evidence from the comic isn't giving a proper argument.

Failing to provide evidence of what? I think you didn't get my last post, let me re-post it:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
My argumentation was solely for the purposed of coming up with the proper interpretation of the scan in question.

The scan in question.

This scan.

http://s1113.photobucket.com/user/abhilegend/media/Superman/Superman_51jpg_FinalCrisis_6_p34.jpg.html

I presented the line of reasoning on why I disagree with Abhi's interpretation of it and I've already posted and re-posted it for your benefit. And used that very scan as my evidence.

Here, let me re-post what I told Abhi regarding his obsession with providing immaterial "proof" as somehow necessary in order to resolve a type of debate that has all the proof needed being already available:

Interpretational arguments (w/c is what is the case here) require nothing more than the material (in this case, a comic page scan) in question as physical evidence/proof. What is critical is the proper interpretation of said material based on individual factors that can be pointed out within said material that points to which interpretation is more correct than the other.

I seriously don't think you're following me all too well.

Originally posted by Delta1938
It's nitpicking and failing to provide evidence.

It's scrutinizing and further evidence outside the material being interpreted is not necessary in an argument where interpreting that one scan is the point.

Originally posted by Delta1938
You're accusing others of going entirely by their interpretation yet your argument is exactly that?

I presented arguments that refute what others' "interpretations" are. You then come along and said that I needed to offer "more" than what others are offering.

So let's not shift blame here. I did not go around requiring others to present "more", just offer rebuttals to my argument. You, however, did with this:

Originally posted by Delta1938
Nib, while it is possible that Wonder Woman wasn't knocked-out, your entire argument is because it's possible.

You stated that I somehow didn't provide enough when the other side provided just as much evidence as I did. So, yeah, let's not be a big hypocrite here. Now you cling to Abhi's whole "nitpick" and "provide more proof" fallacious debating methodology like a dependable little foot apparel.

Originally posted by Delta1938
Bada straight-up said unless you can prove it or provide evidence to the contrary. You're just saying a bunch of stuff to prove that maybe she wasn't KOed, not proven she wasn't or provided actual evidence. I wonder if YOU read what Bada wrote.

No, Bada said that people aren't allowed to lowball (w/c I didn't do) or "play dumb" (w/c I didn't do). Thus I am not in violation of anything.

What he DID NOT SAY was that the burden of proof was solely on the shoulders of those trying to disprove the assumption of the "she was KOd" camp. So please reread what he posted.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It is a fact. You can deny all you want.

Fact as evidenced by what?

Originally posted by abhilegend
I'm not interpreting that wonder woman fell down and dusted herself off in the next second.

Strawman. Never said she did.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Its better than yours then.

And how is that?

Originally posted by abhilegend
😂

You haven't produced anything but an essay. Again.

And you've misinterpreted a scan. Again.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Its a response to your nonsense. What are you even trying to say there? That's all you do.

No, it's you closing your eyes and going "LA LA LA, I don't like it, it doesn't exist".

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope.

See above.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Which is utter garbage. "She wasn't lying there out cold but thrown down and dusted herself off".

Strawman. Never said she dusted herself off, just that she is more likely thrown back in the scan than she is lying down.

Originally posted by abhilegend
There are nothing to suggest she wasn't KOED other than your nitpicking. You are just stretching the posts to obfuscate the facts.

And there is no evidence in that specific scan that she was.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It is MY scan. You think I haven't seen it?

Then what's with the "motion lines" train of thought where not once was it used in the entire scan?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Wonder Woman isn't flying though. There goes your whole argument.

Everything else was being thrown around by the blast, to you, WW wasn't because somehow she was special and was KO'd and already lying down on the ground just as the blast hit and threw everything else.

Wait... what?

Originally posted by abhilegend
So where was wonder woman flying in the air again? Why wasn't she just fell down after getting knocked out like characters do? All the other characters are human and they flew away like pins in hurricane, she didn't but got knocked out.

She got blasted back and landed on her face. The humans got tossed but she managed to keep herself mounted. Most of the mounts didn't get tossed too far either.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So she was just falling and dusted herself off the next second?

I don't know why you keep coming back to this wherein I never said this at all.

Originally posted by abhilegend
That's not what's been discussed here. Was she knocked out there based on that scene and the evidences that she was absent for a long time in the next comic? Yes or no. Hahaha.

You replied to my initial post that specified that IN THIS PARTICULAR SCAN, it is more likely that the her body position can be explained by her being thrown back and falling on her face than it is her lying down already KOd.

You replied to MY comment and thus, that is what I am discussing here.

You weakly trying to drag me into an argument I never made by strawmanning notwithstanding.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No.

Tsk tsk.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Everything's wrong with that.

That's where we're different, I guess.

I like to make sure a scan is interpretted correctly in order to get the proper use of it as evidence in a debate.

You like to present a scan in the best possible light for the character you're arguing for. Sometimes to the point of being slightly "loose" with the facts.

I guess when one is loose with the facts and gets called on it, one would find everything wrong with it, too.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Its cute how you believe that.

Awww, you're cute, too, shnookums.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yeah, I'm consistent.

Consistent isn't correct.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nitpicking a simple scene isn't scrutinizing. Are you trying to say that I try to bend the truth and mods like bada believe it?

Mods are people and can be either right or wrong at times and can also misinterpret a scan just as much as normal ppl would. I'm more than willing to discuss this scan with him and hear why he thinks that way. Hey, I can be wrong, too you know. The point is to get a discussion going and not close our minds to other interpretations.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Its getting annoying.

You keep repeating the same tired argument that I've already offered rebuttal for and all you did in response was go "blah blah blah". So you can forgive me if I simply point you to the very argument that you glossed over and offered no counterargument to.

Originally posted by abhilegend
As satirical?

Poorly presented satire then. :-/ You need writing tips.

Originally posted by abhilegend
😂

/shrug

Originally posted by abhilegend
Hahahaha, sure scan police. Sure.

I guess if you're a scan con artist that gets busted from time to time, you wouldn't like the scan police all too well...

😛

Originally posted by abhilegend
This is being a jerk, nothing else.

If you don't like to debate, what the heck are you doing here?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz.

So, I don't want to write another essay like this. I would make this simple for you, was wonder woman KOED or not based on this scan

Based on this scan? Doesn't seem like it. Or at least it's inconclusive and easily explainable by other things.

Originally posted by abhilegend
and the fact that she was absent for a long time in the following comic? If you think she wasn't, present a proof or else I'm going to ask for a mod ruling.

Nice try trying to pull me into an argument I never made. But not really playing that game.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I don't need to present scans of anything. You made the assertion of her being KOd in the specific scan we're discussing, you need to provide the evidence. Here, let me help you understand how burden of proof works:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

Actually, you do. Your argument goes against a mod ruling and doesn't fit the criteria of what Bada stated.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
There are many instances in comics where where characters are struck and not seem for a while, it happens with Superman, it happens with every comic book character

Yes, I know this type of thing has happened before. Problem with your argument is those examples have follow-ups that SHOW the case. Like in SUPERMAN/BATMAN #4, we know Hawkman didn't actually KO Superman, despite that's the scene we see, because the following issue has a narration from Superman stating they were playing possum. It's your job to provide evidence similar to Superman showing he wasn't really KOed, and you've done nothing of the sort. All you've done is nitpick to point-out it's possible that she was still conscious.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
While you may assume what possibly happened to them in between and that'd be all right, it's a whole 'nuther thing entirely to present your assumptions as evidence in a debate.

I'm assuming this due to the fact that there's no follow-up disputing this assumption. Unless you know of something from the two issues being cited that contradicts it? Perhaps a tie-in? I've been a good sport and even offered to post the scans if you give the issue reference and page number. You ignored it, perhaps because all you have is "she might not be KOed 'cuz it's possible she wasn't?"

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You're not getting what I posted and got Bada's post entirely wrong as well, so I'm not sure you do.

That's your opinion. My opinion is you're the one who's getting Bada wrong. Much like you appeared to get me wrong by saying Diana's KO/TKO isn't irrefutable when I never said it was.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I actually corrected my post before you were able to post yours. Me having a typo has nothing to do with anything, but yes accuracy is good so being corrected is actually a good thing. I'd thank you if I didn't actually see it (and corrected it) before you got done posting your reply.

It's not a typo, it's the wrong word completely. See? Isn't nitpicking fun? Oh, it's not when you're the one getting it? By the way, it's irrelevant if you corrected it before I posted or not, I quoted it before you corrected it. You editing it doesn't magically mean you didn't make the mistake. Just like the mistake of calling it a typo. You see my point?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Failing to provide evidence of what? I think you didn't get my last post, let me re-post it:

The scan in question.

This scan.

http://s1113.photobucket.com/user/abhilegend/media/Superman/Superman_51jpg_FinalCrisis_6_p34.jpg.html

I presented the line of reasoning on why I disagree with Abhi's interpretation of it and I've already posted and re-posted it for your benefit. And used that very scan as my evidence.

Your failure to provide evidence beyond your interpretation of the scan.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Here, let me re-post what I told Abhi regarding his obsession with providing immaterial "proof" as somehow necessary in order to resolve a type of debate that has all the proof needed being already available:

Interpretational arguments (w/c is what is the case here) require nothing more than the material (in this case, a comic page scan) in question as physical evidence/proof. What is critical is the proper interpretation of said material based on individual factors that can be pointed out within said material that points to which interpretation is more correct than the other.

I seriously don't think you're following me all too well.

Am I? I'm not so sure when you claimed a scan when it was a quote, claimed a typo when it was the wrong word, and said I argued something was irrefutable when I never said so. See what I'm doing? Scrutinizing every single mistake you make. Nitpicking is fun, huh?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
It's scrutinizing and further evidence outside the material being interpreted is not necessary in an argument where interpreting that one scan is the point.

You're claiming other evidence beyond your nitpicks are not needed, despite the fact that you cited examples of others appearing to be KOed without providing a follow-up that Wonder Woman was not KOed like in examples you cite.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I presented arguments that refute what others' "interpretations" are. You then come along and said that I needed to offer "more" than what others are offering.

So basically you're saying that your interpretations are just as valid as those of others despite your argument would require evidence of a follow-up to show she wasn't actually KOed, so you're arguing maybe she wasn't because she might not have been, and this is a stronger argument than what has been brought to your attention. Gotcha.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
So let's not shift blame here. I did not go around requiring others to present "more", just offer rebuttals to my argument. You, however, did with this:

And it's true. You're nitpicking the scans and not providing a follow-up example, even after offers to post the scans if you're unable to.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You stated that I somehow didn't provide enough when the other side provided just as much evidence as I did. So, yeah, let's not be a big hypocrite here. Now you cling to Abhi's whole "nitpick" and "provide more proof" fallacious debating methodology like a dependable little foot apparel.

Look above. Any time someone takes damage, has their eyes closed, and isn't seen for a while is more likely to be a KO/TKO without a follow-up showing otherwise like in examples you're randomly citing.

And how hilarious that I'm clinging to Abhi's "nitpick" and blahty blahty blahty BLAH. If it looks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck, the chances are it's a duck. You look like you're nitpicking, talk like you're nitpicking, act like you're nitpicking, but you're just providing evidence?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
No, Bada said that people aren't allowed to lowball (w/c I didn't do) or "play dumb" (w/c I didn't do). Thus I am not in violation of anything.

What he DID NOT SAY was that the burden of proof was solely on the shoulders of those trying to disprove the assumption of the "she was KOd" camp. So please reread what he posted.

He stated without proof or further evidence. Your interpretations certainly aren't proof and is not further evidence. Your arguments are based off your take on the scans already presented, not further evidence.

By the way, looking at the scan again, seems Superman's firing multiple heat vision bursts. So, looks like Wonder Woman's KOed and then we see the rest flying. My evidence is how the art implies multiple blasts, how we do see a smaller blast in the following page, and the fact that it seems odd that Wonder Woman would be on the ground already from the same blast where everybody else is in the air.

But really, your better bet is to provide a follow-up at least implying that she's still conscious, otherwise you should admit that you citing other examples of characters not being KOed is a strawman and your argument is solely that you're pointing-out that it's possible she's not KOed. No matter how much you say you're scrutinizing the scans, that's exactly what your argument comes down to. She might not be KOed because it's possible she wasn't. The nitpicking is just to make it look like you have a solid argument.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Fact as evidenced by what?

Her lying there eyes closed.

Strawman. Never said she did.

Nice try trying to pull me into an argument I never made. But not really playing that game.