Originally posted by Darth Thor
Ah so you admit Wiki Just states it’s own opinions and that nothing stated is necessarily Canon.Ergo Hulk’s superior regeneration to Thor is not Canon 👆
Ofcourse.
That is a prediction the Wiki is doing since the Movie never stated it.
No. There is a difference between a prediction and a statistic. They are not predicting anything by stating Hulk's Reg. They even actually use actual screen feats when quoting Banner's suicidal statement.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Ofcourse.That is a prediction the Wiki is doing since the Movie never stated it.
No. There is a difference between a prediction and a statistic. They are not predicting anything by stating Hulk's Reg. They even actually use actual screen feats when quoting Banner's suicidal statement.
So you're saying that a statement from a wiki doesn't count unless it's also specifically stated in the movie?
Originally posted by Josh_AlexanderNo. There is a difference between a prediction and a statistic. They are not predicting anything by stating Hulk's Reg. They even actually use actual screen feats when quoting Banner's suicidal statement.
Wasn’t a statistic. No numbers involved.
It was an assumption. They’re entitled to their assumption but it’s not Canon.
Originally posted by Silent Master
So you're saying that a statement from a wiki doesn't count unless it's also specifically stated in the movie?
Not a statement. A prediction.
You are confising statement with prediction.
They are predicting what could have happened.
If i say that the earth is going to end tomorrow atleast i should have material to back it up.
The Wiki presents no material to back up their prediction.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Not a statement. A prediction.You are confising statement with prediction.
They are predicting what could have happened.
If i saybthaat the earth is going to end tomorrow atleast i should have material to back it up.
The Wiki presents no material to back up their prediction.
state·ment
ˈstâtmənt/
noun
noun: statement; plural noun: statements
a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing.
Explain in detail how is Thor would have won is not "a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing".
Originally posted by Silent Master
state·ment
ˈstâtmənt/
noun
noun: statement; plural noun: statements
a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing.Explain in detail how is Thor would have won is not "a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing".
Yes you are right.
What am trying to say is, a prediction doesnt have the same value as an actual feat.
The Wiki is clearly giving their prediction for the fight.
Unless they present evidence to support their ideas it isnt canon.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Yes you are right.What am trying to say is, a prediction doesnt have the same value as an actual feat.
The Wiki is clearly giving their prediction for the fight.
Unless they present evidence to support their ideas it isnt canon.
Who had the advantage in the fight when GM interfered?
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Yes you are right.What am trying to say is, a prediction doesnt have the same value as an actual feat.
The Wiki is clearly giving their prediction for the fight.
Unless they present evidence to support their ideas it isnt canon.
Josh: Provides link to some article that states Hulk gets stronger the angrier he gets.
Us: "You need to prove that what is said in the article is supported by evidence on screen".
Josh: "It doesn't matter, because nothing on screen contradicts what the article says. Therefore the article is valid".
____________________________________________
Us: Points out that an article (that Josh mentioned) states that Thor would have won over Hulk sans intervention.
Josh: "You can't use stuff you read from articles unless it's supported by evidence on screen".
Us: "Nothing on screen contradicts what the article said."
Josh: "no no no no no"
What BS.
Originally posted by FrothByteThor is almost as strong and more powerful
Josh: Provides link to some article that states Hulk gets stronger the angrier he gets.
Us: "You need to prove that what is said in the article is supported by evidence on screen".
Josh: "It doesn't matter, because nothing on screen contradicts what the article says. Therefore the article is valid".____________________________________________
Us: Points out that an article (that Josh mentioned) states that Thor would have won over Hulk sans intervention.
Josh: "You can't use stuff you read from articles unless it's supported by evidence on screen".
Us: "Nothing on screen contradicts what the article said."
Josh: "no no no no no"What BS.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Not a statement. A prediction.You are confising statement with prediction.
They are predicting what could have happened.
If i say that the earth is going to end tomorrow atleast i should have material to back it up.
The Wiki presents no material to back up their prediction.
When your corner stops the fight in order to stop you from getting further injured, it means you've lost the fight. It's certainly not considered a "tie".
Originally posted by FrothByte
Josh: Provides link to some article that states Hulk gets stronger the angrier he gets.
Us: "You need to prove that what is said in the article is supported by evidence on screen".
Josh: "It doesn't matter, because nothing on screen contradicts what the article says. Therefore the article is valid".____________________________________________
Us: Points out that an article (that Josh mentioned) states that Thor would have won over Hulk sans intervention.
Josh: "You can't use stuff you read from articles unless it's supported by evidence on screen".
Us: "Nothing on screen contradicts what the article said."
Josh: "no no no no no"What BS.
Yeah it’s just blatant trolling at this point.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Who had the advantage in the fight when GM interfered?
Spoiler:
Thor hit Hulk which sent him flying away. Then the Hulk was clearly getting angrier when the GM had the fight stopped
Thor had the advantage. Doeant mean he would have won.
Thats why Marvel had the fight interupted by GM. So it was a cliffhanger. So there's no saying that the movie had a winner.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Josh: Provides link to some article that states Hulk gets stronger the angrier he gets.
Us: "You need to prove that what is said in the article is supported by evidence on screen".
Josh: "It doesn't matter, because nothing on screen contradicts what the article says. Therefore the article is valid".____________________________________________
Us: Points out that an article (that Josh mentioned) states that Thor would have won over Hulk sans intervention.
Josh: "You can't use stuff you read from articles unless it's supported by evidence on screen".
Us: "Nothing on screen contradicts what the article said."
Josh: "no no no no no"What BS.
HAHAHAHAHA. I love the way you use the current debate to try debilitate a debate you have already lost.
Now let me address your MISUNDERSTANDINGS!!!
1. Hulk's anger boosts his strength: Although this topic has already been DEBATED and proven by my behalf, i will bother to repeat this one last time .
The wiki wasn't giving UNPROVEN evidence by stating that. I myself gave you screen evidence! The comics ALSO support this statement, and the movies follow the comic's general information. The HULK IS THE HULK due to his anger. The moment you go against that idea you are ****ED UP DUDE!
So isn't like the wiki is predicting or stating something that isn't known by the community or that is CONTRADICTED by the movies!
But nice try! The way you use another discussion to debilitate an already closed one is PATHETIC! [COLOR]
2. The Article's prediction: The article clearly foretells how the fight would have ended. A clear prediction with no base of evidence nor SUPPORTED by ANY SCREEN FEATS!
I don't see how one thing connects with another!!?
The article/wiki is in it's complete RIGHTS to make their own predictions of the fight. THAT'S THE SAME REASON marvel ended the fight with a CLIFFHANGER! So that the watchers could make their own assumptions and predictions!
It doesn't mean that ANY of the predictions is CANON. Since the movie never took an official stand on who would win should the GM have not interfered, that means all predictions are valid! You are entitled to your opinion!
So, I don't see how an OPINION from the WIKI rebukes other FACTS from the same article!
Now it's funny. COMICAL! How you guys have now taken the stand of," OHHH! The article is either canon or non canon!".
Just because an article has made an assumption or gave something that isn't supported by evidence doesn't mean that the ENTIRE ARTICLE is a fraud. Everyone makes mistakes! Even in literature! A good debater knows to filter texts and use material that is evidenced and logical! A good debater doesn't trash the whole ARTICLE JUST BECAUSE A LINE IN IT ISN'T VIABLE!
Instead of fighting my points with actual evidence from your behalf you bring me this shit! What's so hard about formulating your own points?
The only BULLSHIT I SEE HERE is yours FrothByte!