Batman vs. Iron Man

Started by Odekahn29 pages

Originally posted by ODG

It's not our job to make your argument for you. You either have a point, or you don't.

And it's not my job to make yours for you eitherl. Either you have an unbeatable defense to protect your technology, or you don't.

Originally posted by Odekahn
The "resources gap" isn't near as large as you portray it to be. And basically, you just said that "Batman could find a way". So you agree with me and my "ilk" 👆
Prove it. What's the biggest or most extensive technological endeavor performed/produced by Batman? BTW, it has to at least be bigger than a partial Dyson Sphere designed to deal with multiverse-wide systemic collapse scenarios.

Originally posted by Odekahn
Sure, go ahead and list everything Ironman is bringing to the table first. If there's NO WAY that Batman would be able to beat Stark that you can think of, what defenses do you think he'd put into place that are unbeatable?

You guys are the one's saying Batman doesn't even "stand a chance" so you aren't at a disadvantage by answering first, right?

Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you can't back up your argument so you're trying to shift the burden. Nice try, but I'm not falling for it.

I'm asking you to answer the same question you asked me, and you don't want to do it. Now you see why it would be retarded for me to answer that question... aka showing you my poker hand.

Originally posted by ODG
Prove it. What's the biggest or most extensive technological endeavor performed/produced by Batman? BTW, it has to at least be bigger than a partial Dyson Sphere designed to deal with multiverse-wide systemic collapse scenarios.

It's not a science contest.

Originally posted by Odekahn
And it's not my job to make yours for you eitherl. Either you have an unbeatable defense to protect your technology, or you don't.
Your bumbling negative proof fallacy isn't remedying your completely inability to formulate an argument. I don't have to prove a negative, i.e., Batman can't overcome Iron Man's tech. You have to prove your argument, i.e., Batman can ovecome Iron Man's tech. I gave you a convenient list of Tony's tech in addition to two of the most powerful armors he's worn. You've given me nothing.

You either have arguments proving that Batman can deal with the multiple armors and weapons Tony has, or you don't.

Originally posted by Odekahn
I'm asking you to answer the same question you asked me, and you don't want to do it. Now you see why it would be retarded for me to answer that question... aka showing you my poker hand.

Difference is, you made a claim and are refusing to back it up.

Originally posted by ODG
Your bumbling negative proof fallacy isn't remedying your completely inability to formulate an argument. I don't have to prove a negative, i.e., Batman can't overcome Iron Man's tech. You have to prove your argument, i.e., Batman can ovecome Iron Man's tech. I gave you a convenient list of Tony's tech in addition to the many armors he's worn. You've given me nothing.

You either have arguments proving that Batman can deal with the multiple armors and weapons Tony has, or you don't.

Originally posted by Odekahn
It's not a science contest.
I bet it's not even a Pokémon battle either.

On that note, Pokémon time

Originally posted by Odekahn
It's not a science contest.
We both know Stark mudstomps Batman in pure science. But like you're trying to wrangle with your impotent non-sequiturs, this is a fight. So prove Batman can overcome the many weapons at Stark's disposal in a fight, where neither are holding back, per the OP.

Originally posted by Damborgson

Livid

To be fair, Odekahn has never read a comic.

Originally posted by ODG
Your bumbling negative proof fallacy isn't remedying your completely inability to formulate an argument. I don't have to prove a negative, i.e., Batman can't overcome Iron Man's tech. You have to prove your argument, i.e., Batman can ovecome Iron Man's tech. I gave you a convenient list of Tony's tech in addition to two of the most powerful armors he's worn. You've given me nothing.

You either have arguments proving that Batman can deal with the multiple armors and weapons Tony has, or you don't.

I've already given several different weapons that Batman could use.

Originally posted by Damborgson
Livid

Well then......

Originally posted by Odekahn
You're asking me to show you my poker hand. I tell you HOW Batman separates Tony from his tech, and you turn around and said "Oh! Well Tony would have thought about that already"

😕 Debates don't work that way.

Originally posted by Odekahn
I've already given several different weapons that Batman could use.
No, you haven't. But since you're so sure of yourself, go ahead and name examples from actual comics of Batman's weapons which are supposed to be countering the Thorbuster armor, the Phoenix-Killer armor, the N-zone transmitters, the orbital firing protocols, the black hole generators, or the dark matter accelerators.

Satisfied?

This thread still going on? Lol

Originally posted by Sixth_Winged
This thread still going on? Lol

figured out a few pages back i was dealing with a lv.15 Master troll