Ozymandias vs Captain America

Originally posted by h1a8
Either you or an idiot or you are trolling. I clearly stated that speculation is never allowed (its trolling just to ask someone to agree to that).

But I clearly defined that firm evidence IS NOT SPECULATION.

So it's up to you to agree with that statement or give me your take on speculation (if you disagree

No, you said "Speculation doesn't need to be agreed upon, it is automatically a rule" yet you didn't state what the rule was. which could allow you to plead ignorance later.

But, thank you for now finally answering my question. it only took me asking it 3 times. you're getting better.

Now, who decides if something rises to the level of firm evidence rather than speculation?

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, you said "Speculation doesn't need to be agreed upon, it is automatically a rule" yet you didn't state what the rule was. which could allow you to plead ignorance later.

But, thank you for now finally answering my question. it only took me asking it 3 times. you're getting better.

Now, who decides if something rises to the level of firm evidence rather than speculation?

Preponderance of evidence of course

Originally posted by h1a8
Preponderance of evidence of course

Yes, but who decides whether something meets the requirements of "Preponderance of evidence" IE, beyond 50% chance something is true based off given evidence.

Originally posted by h1a8
What does bullseye have to do with this debate.

Can you move like Bullseye yet like you claimed you’d be able to, troll?

Originally posted by Eon Blue
Can you move like Bullseye yet like you claimed you’d be able to, troll?

I can claim to be God and be able to do impossible shit.
That still has nothing to do with this thread, troll.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, but who decides whether something meets the requirements of "Preponderance of evidence" IE, beyond 50% chance something is true based off given evidence.

I'm pretty sure we would agree that something has a more than 50% chance of being true or not. Any borderline 50-50 shit then I'll concede or accept it as speculation.

Let's test that.

What proof do you have that Ozy can actually fight fast enough that Captain America would be unable to land even one hit like you claimed?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Let's test that.

What proof do you have that Ozy can actually fight fast enough that Captain America would be unable to land even one hit like you claimed?

Ozy's movement speed is sufficient due to
1. Visual speed from both
2. Movement speed to defend doesn’t need to be as fast as movement speed to attack.
3. Hand speed in catching the bullet.

Ozy's perception speed is sufficient due to
1. Perceiving the bullet

Ozy's skill in knowing how to avoid attacks is sufficient due to
1. His blocking, ducking, and evading punches kicks and grabs.

lol I knew that H1's whole basis on saying Ozy wins is still him clinging to that 1 NON combat bullet feat.

I guess if a person catches a fly with chopsticks, it means they can beat up the current heavyweight MMA champion.

Sorry, but being able to move your hand once while outside of combat is hardly proof that you can fight at that speed. Otherwise major league pitchers would be some of the fastest fighters on Earth, which they're not.

So I'll ask again, what proof do you have that Ozy can fight fast enough to avoid being hit by Captain America even once?

Originally posted by h1a8
I can claim to be God and be able to do impossible shit.
That still has nothing to do with this thread, troll.

You just proved that you, yourself, are a troll. Bravo, idiot.

There has been times where cap has caught bullets. Cap has done thing ozzy can't do. Cap has precognition he also can predict movements and has a vast array of fighting styles. Plus he's an All American hero where as Ozzy is a sinister specimen built by the coats of wrath.

Cap would’ve won in 2015. He definitely wins now.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Sorry, but being able to move your hand once while outside of combat is hardly proof that you can fight at that speed. Otherwise major league pitchers would be some of the fastest fighters on Earth, which they're not.

So I'll ask again, what proof do you have that Ozy can fight fast enough to avoid being hit by Captain America even once?

Originally posted by Inhuman
lol I knew that H1's whole basis on saying Ozy wins is still him clinging to that 1 NON combat bullet feat.

I guess if a person catches a fly with chopsticks, it means they can beat up the current heavyweight MMA champion.

The speed in which someone can move their hand and the speed in which they can perceive motion plays a large role in combat.

Even if Ozy chooses to move his hands at the speed he showed while in combat then Cap still wouldn't be able to land a blow. Ozy would view Cap as a slow turtle due to his perception speed and be able to counter anything Cap throws.

Originally posted by Emmy Evangeline
There has been times where cap has caught bullets. Cap has done thing ozzy can't do. Cap has precognition he also can predict movements and has a vast array of fighting styles. Plus he's an All American hero where as Ozzy is a sinister specimen built by the coats of wrath.

Originally posted by Eon Blue
You just proved that you, yourself, are a troll. Bravo, idiot.

A troll derails the thread with shit that has nothing to do with the thread.

That’s you, not me.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is MCU Cap, not comic Cap. Try again.

Originally posted by h1a8
Your analogy is faulty because
1. It's impossible to catch a bullet at close range by luck.
2. The writer intended on Ozy being fast enough to move his hands in relation to the speed of the bullets and able to perceive the bullet.

The speed in which someone can move their hand and the speed in which they can perceive motion plays a large role in combat.

Even if Ozy chooses to move his hands at the speed he showed while in combat then Cap still wouldn't be able to land a blow. Ozy would view Cap as a slow turtle due to his perception speed and be able to counter anything Cap throws.

Neither one of us said anything about luck. stop with the strawmanning.

BTW, Nothing you said refutes our points.

Originally posted by h1a8
Your analogy is faulty because
1. It's impossible to catch a bullet at close range by luck.
2. The writer intended on Ozy being fast enough to move his hands in relation to the speed of the bullets and able to perceive the bullet.

The speed in which someone can move their hand and the speed in which they can perceive motion plays a large role in combat.

Even if Ozy chooses to move his hands at the speed he showed while in combat then Cap still wouldn't be able to land a blow. Ozy would view Cap as a slow turtle due to his perception speed and be able to counter anything Cap throws.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I've already responded to that point regarding the human body, physics, and the [bullet catching]:

Originally posted by dadudemon
He used to demo his [bullet catching] to large crowds.

It was more like 3 [bullets].

I decided to test Ozymandias' [bullet catching] out. So I went back in time to 1972, and asked him to show me. Right when he went to [catch the bullet] (at the first movement I saw from his fist), I slapped his face, put some [bullets] in his other hand just so I could take them out to prove how much better I was than Ozymandias, then I smacked his left buttock all before I went back to the original position to [catch the bullet I fired from my gun].

He looked right into my eyes, with utter shock. I just smirked right back at him for about 5 awkward seconds. Then I made the classic monkey "ooooooooooo!" sound that Ozymandias usually does. Then he relaxed his face and faintly smiled and said, "awww, I see. You are a martial artist as well. I wasn't certain until you made the monkey sound."

Originally posted by Silent Master
Neither one of us said anything about luck. stop with the strawmanning.

BTW, Nothing you said refutes our points.

He implied luck with the chopstick analogy. Tell you what, let him defend himself since he's the most qualified person to know what he means.

How do I know this?
You never explained how nothing I said refuted your point.
You have to address the things I said and explain why they are faulty.

Just saying that they are isn't debating.