Originally posted by abhilegend
-snip-
Pray tell, who is the one who derailed that last thread with a different topic entirely? Who was the one who dug up a year old thread to bait someone else into an argument. Who replies by every seventeen or so hours, as if they are on a schedule?
You're the one who keeps on replying. You're the one who keeps on trying to get the last word in. Then you had the nerve to try it again after I was banned so I couldn't reply back.
Hoping that I would let you have that pyrrhic victory.
No, that would be your over active imagination attributing traits to me that do not exist. You're the only one who has been doing this.
You do know that respect is earned not given? You want my respect so badly?
You know what? I will humor you. You want me to treat you respectfully?
You have to drop your double standards, start treating others with respect, and drop the pretenses. You have to stop arguing for no reason at all. You have to accept that some people out there are not going to like you.
You literally just admitted that it does in the part of this post right before this one.
I am not bashing you here. When I said that you replied in a way that admitted that was the case, and that my initial claim about you was correct.
You're specifically doing this because I am not showing you proper etiquette. This is about me not showing you respect, and you wanting it.
Don't feign ignorance.
Okay, lets see. You broke the board rules regarding author statements and data-books. Then you pretended that you didn't even do so when you explicitly did. You're denying that you don't have double standards even when you do.
You're using logical fallacy after logical fallacy.
You're saying that you're not doing something even when you admit that you are in the same breath.
You debate entirely based on bias. You disagree on principle even when you have no reason to disagree. You treat others with disrespect, and bias based on things they have done years ago. Such as with Carver.
Despite that you want respect yourself. When you have behaved in no way that would allow you to earn it.
It proves my point about you being a coward. This is a debate we're having. That's what this is about.
You're the one who is doing this as we speak and sounding like a broken record in the process.
That's not being a tough guy. That was me calling you out on your positively pathetic behavior. You honestly expect someone would let that stand?
None of which actually make sense, and of which I have already rebuked several times over. Which you have only rehashed in your ad nauseam.
You're repeating your same broken points but are only adding a different pinch of seasoning to them at best.
On top of the red herrings, and straw mans.
There exists an actual ruling against using author statements and anything similar. The writers are idiots, and yes what they say doesn't make sense.
Yes, it is. Thank you for agreeing with me.
I accept your concession.
You're the one in perpetual denial about your own motives regarding this.
Okay, so you make this about attacks on each other's character? Alright then, I have already listed your mistakes.
They're far uglier then any I have ever made.
No, I was merely pointing out your unoriginality and your ad nauseam.
No, it's that I do not buy into the ramblings of an obsessive troglodyte.
Now who is the one who is projecting?
You're saying that I am doing what you're doing? I haven't used any red herrings. I haven't used any double standards. I haven't used any straw men.
That's the same as saying a computer's ability to transfer and process information between other computers is not a processing feat but instead a reflex feat usable in combat.
Your personal opinion about it does not matter here. The fact is this is an instance of processing information, and it's not used to move anywhere.
How was that blind? I merely noted that the terminology you used makes no sense there. He is not actually moving. He is thinking, and extremis does the rest.
I do know how to read, and what you said there makes positively no sense. Which why I asked whether you used the wrong word because it was idiotic otherwise.
That is exactly my point. He wasn't moving. In order for this to be speed there needs to be actual movement.
If he is not thinking or moving how is he making extremis do any of that?
Only because you are refusing to listen to reason, and have to be reminded of that constantly.
Which means that he is not moving. Which means this is different. That it is processing speed, and not movement speed.
He is not moving to some specific spot or attacking someone.
Oh no, you're wrong. As I already made note of several times.
Who was the one calling me blind again? Who was the one who said I was jerking someone off?
Oh, that's right. You're the one.
Ad nauseam once again for the sake of a circular debate.
No, as far as I know that's you on practically every forum that you got kicked out of because of this behavior of yours.
Yes it does. Always has and always will.
Whatever they say outside of a story does not carry more weight than what is actually said in a story or seen in a story.
No, you're not. You brought up a databook, and even attempted to say they held more sway than what we see in the stories in the very post.
They are your rules which you apply in whatever way that you see fit.
Comic books do not follow any kind of universal rulings. They are so inconsistent that their rulings are all over the place.
They're the standards and norms held within every form of debate. I have nothing to do with them.
Do you honestly hear yourself you're a caricature of your own personality at this point. This just you wanting to get back at me for calling you crazy earlier.
Which you are by the way. Your fixation truly knows no bounds.
You're going to dodge the question then? I was right you are a coward. Come on it's nothing strange. We have all seen death. You must have.
We're both nerds on an internet forum talking about fictional characters. This has nothing to do with "being a kid" and has more to do with "being a weirdo."
You mean what you do every day of your life?
I am a dick but at least I am honest about it.
Unlike you.
You who expect others to give you a curtsy that you do not extend to them.
They are not as rare as you think they are. As I have already proven pages ago. Which you dismissed based on imagined inconsistencies.
Your rhetoric doesn't average out.
There is no technique that allows Batman to hide from every visible spectrum, and completely conceal all of his bodily functions.
You're the one who is trying to say it's there when it's not.
You are the one using circular logic right now. Yes, we can disregard it when it makes positively no sense for Batman to accomplish this.
There are no general rules in any genre as that would require every writer to be consistent with each other which they're not.
If a character who can survive the destruction of an entire planet is hurt by a normal handgun I have every right to ignore it. Since it's one of the most egregious examples of plot induced stupidity.
I get to disregard it because it doesn't even make sense within any kind of standard. It's pure nonsense within nonsense.
Originally posted by abhilegend
-snip-
No, Justin Jordan used a specific real life incriminate and said they were about twice peak human by our standards which is contradicted by what is said and seen in the Luther Strode trilogy.
You went out of your complaining about how I didn't adhere to author statements or give them any credit. Yet, now you're back-peddling out of that and saying that what happens in the story matters. When before you said otherwise. Often interchangeably with this.
As I already noted your standards are nonexistent, and you change them whenever it conveniences your side of the argument.
It is a knock on Superman because the vast majority of the times Batman does this there is no excuse. He doesn't use his gadgets or his special suits. He does it anyway without them.
Show my any technique that allows Batman to disappear from every visible spectrum, and hide every single one of his biological functions.
He literally does not use these gadgets most of the time, and the most he ever had was a heart monitor. It didn't hide the rest of his biological functions. He also has a suit specifically made for hiding from pretty much every visible spectrum but almost never uses it. That's post flash point. Whereas the heart monitor was pre flash point. He never had or used both at the same, and for most of this instances where managed to hide from Superman he was using his standard equipment.
These rules do not work universally, and requires you to assume every writer agrees with each other. That there are no inconsistencies in comic books when they are. That this has been uniformed throughout every comic book in existence. Which is impossible to prove, and not true.
People change.
I don't know Carver seems much better than he was a long time ago. I can't say the same about you.
This is a sham. You made this thread to begin with out of spite, and you dug it in order to bait me into this ridiculousness. You're focusing on running speed because you think that since they can't run long distances it means they can't move quickly in combat. Despite you differentiating between running speed and attack speed yourself, and then flip flopping back into saying you need to be able to run long distances really fast in order to have any kind of super-speed. Which is not true.
