Lotr (movie universe) vs. Twilight Princess

Started by BloodRain35 pages

But your only counter has been saying "Yeah but the same is said for Sentry".

When it isn't, because as Ive been saying in these instances we look at contradictions. In your example we know that a decently powered Galactus is far above Sentry, so we can logically assume that either it was a weakened version or something else intervened.

While in this one, we know that Barns is correct as he was the one attacking the beast in the first place. His fear alone shows how formidable they are against him.

If you threw a bomb as it downed one, but later another brought it back. Would you be scared and remark how strong they are? No, of course not, you just downed the beast,

Originally posted by BloodRain
But your only counter has been saying "Yeah but the same is said for Sentry".

When it isn't, because as Ive been saying in these instances we look at contradictions. In your example we know that a decently powered Galactus is far above Sentry, so we can logically assume that either it was a weakened version or something else intervened.

While in this one, we know that Barns is correct as he was the one attacking the beast in the first place. His fear alone shows how formidable they are against him.

If you threw a bomb as it downed one, but later another brought it back. Would you be scared and remark how strong they are? No, of course not, you just downed the beast,

No, since both are blanketed statements without visual proof meaning weightless proof.

Nope, one has obvious contradictions when the other does not unless, in your words, we speculate a reason.

As in, there is nothing to suggest this is not the feat its written as.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Nope, one has obvious contradictions when the other does not unless, in your words, we speculate a reason.

As in, there is nothing to suggest this is not the feat its written as.

Again, speculation either way.

Exactly, no counter argument. Them the feat stands unopposed.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Exactly, no counter argument. Them the feat stands unopposed.
It is off limits.

What are you talking about Quanny?

Originally posted by BloodRain
What are you talking about Quanny?
The feat.

Then one you've failed to discredit yet?

Yeah it stands until proven otherwise.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Then one you've failed to discredit yet?

Yeah it stands until proven otherwise.

The onus is on you. You have failed.

I provide a feat with evidence. Your claim is that it is wrong, but cannot back up your view without saying you just don't know.

Originally posted by BloodRain
I provide a feat with evidence. Your claim is that it is wrong, but cannot back up your view without saying you just don't know.
You haven't proven it.

Evidence:
-Video
--Providing a character statement
---From a reliable, first-hand witness
---Who gives enough to support the claim (his fear, saying they're too strong for bombs to work)
-No contradictions

The counter evidence:
-Saying its not enough without giving legitimate reasons.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Evidence:
-Video
--Providing a character statement
---From a reliable, first-hand witness
---Who gives enough to support the claim (his fear, saying they're too strong for bombs to work)
-No contradictions

The counter evidence:
-Saying its not enough without giving legitimate reasons.

We don't have the context just like the Sentry/Galactus statement. Quit picking and choosing.

I stated several times that the difference is the /contradictions/, just like a court case.

Your Sentry one has tons. This one has none. Well, if it does you've failed to bring up any. And until you do, you have nothing to negate this feat.

I mean it. Can you even show me a single area that we're lacking in which stops the statement being true?

Originally posted by BloodRain
What power again? Trying to think of the strongest spells and beast, only coming up with the dragon.

Issue with this is that unlike the true Novel version, the movie version of Gandalf is unimpressive in terms of power. The fall was something. Though so is a Goron being launched out of an exploding volcano.. and sleeping through it.

Balrog feat was more impressive than Link tbh.

What, knocking off a human sized chunk of rock? Something far smaller than Dabgoro, the chandelier or the ice chunk? How in any way is that more impressive when Gorons regularly punch through rocks their own size?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Quit picking and choosing.
then stop doing it then.

You pick the lowest feats of the Zelda characters and you choose to ignore there higher feats.

Originally posted by BloodRain
What, knocking off a human sized chunk of rock? Something far smaller than Dabgoro, the chandelier or the ice chunk? How in any way is that more impressive when Gorons regularly punch through rocks their own size?
Due to gear. Link is someone who can be easily parried here.

Originally posted by God Cloth Seiya
then stop doing it then.

You pick the lowest feats of the Zelda characters and you choose to ignore there higher feats.

What feats have I ignored ?