Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Pointing out flaws in ones argument is pertfectly acceptable...
The irony is lost on you, isn't it?
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
I formulated my [b]opinion based on what the movie presented to us, but if thats not good enough for you, you can troll someone else as I have no time for willful ignorance... [/B]
😆
Originally posted by TheLordofMurderSoeculation. I go by the facts not worthless speculation. We don't know the mutants were organized and ready to fight like the sentinels. You do get the difference don't you ? Go by the facts not speculation.
The Last Stand showed tons of mutants during the fight sequence at near the end, and that was just the mutants in the general area of San Francisco...The Sentinels (as per the story) had almost eliminated the [b]worlds
mutant population...Arachnid's speculation is likely accurate based on what the movies have shown us... [/B]
Originally posted by quanchi112
Soeculation. I go by the facts not worthless speculation. We don't know the mutants were organized and ready to fight like the sentinels. You do get the difference don't you ? Go by the facts not speculation.
My speculation is actually logical deduction based on what the movies have shown us...
You had scores of mutants in the San Francisco area alone; do the math of SF's total population vs the number of mutants present and then extrapolate that across the entire Earth...
Yeah, Arachnids number is likely accurate...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurderWere they organized ? If an organized tactical army decimates numbers far greater does that make it impressive ?
My speculation is actually logical deduction based on what the movies have shown us...You had [b]scores
of mutants in the San Francisco area alone; do the math of SF's total population vs the number of mutants present and then extrapolate that across the entire Earth...Yeah, Arachnids number is likely accurate... [/B]
You have no evidence whereas I do for the end scene. I have a fact you have a made up theory you can't prove.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
The irony is lost on you, isn't it?😆
Reading comprehension is lost of you isnt it?
When the entirety of my argument is examined then your fallacy in reading ability becomes exposed...
So, my pet troll, what shall I feed you today? Or are you simply content to bask in the glory of my presence?
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Reading comprehension is lost of you isnt it?When the entirety of my argument is examined then your fallacy in reading ability becomes exposed...
So, my pet troll, what shall I feed you today? Or are you simply content to bask in the glory of my presence?
You call me the troll, but you're the one who is refusing to actually engage with my arguments and instead just waves your arm about how your opinion is sacrosanct.
Even here, you don't actually produce an argument to counter my point - you just vaguely allude to fallacies I allegedly committed and then call me a troll. 🙄
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
My speculation is actually logical deduction based on what the movies have shown us...You had [b]scores
of mutants in the San Francisco area alone; do the math of SF's total population vs the number of mutants present and then extrapolate that across the entire Earth...Yeah, Arachnids number is likely accurate... [/B]
I have lots of evidence and the ability to do math at my disposal...
How many mutants do you think are in this scene? From there do the math of SF's total population vs the number of mutants present and then extrapolate your findings to include the worlds population...
This is empirical data based on what the movie has shown us; its far more than speculation:
The video quality here is crappy as hell, but it does allow you to see how many mutants were present in the SF area alone:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzAVgxAlSUs
Edit: link fixed...
Originally posted by The Ellimist
You call me the troll, but you're the one who is refusing to actually engage with my arguments and instead just waves your arm about how your opinion is sacrosanct.Even here, you don't actually produce an argument to counter my point - you just vaguely allude to fallacies I allegedly committed and then call me a troll. 🙄
Oh I did engage and put forth a logical, reasonable, argument, while all you did was troll...
But that is neither here or there as you have can enjoy your troll bait solo; I'll not participate...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurderSo no real evidence just speculation. Show me millions of organized mutants against how many sentinels. Speculate. You have no real answers just speculation. Too many unknown variables hence useless.
I have lots of evidence and the ability to do math at my disposal...How many mutants do you think are in this scene? From there do the math of SF's total population vs the number of mutants present and then extrapolate your findings to include the worlds population...
This is empirical data based on what the movie has shown us; its far more than speculation:
The video quality here is crappy as hell, but it does allow you to see how many mutants were present in the SF area alone:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzAVgxAlSUs
Edit: link fixed...
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Lord's answer had nothing to do with what Quanchi was saying, lol. He was talking about the tactical readiness and organization of the mutants, which was likely close to nonexistent.
It had everything to do with Quan's argument...
His initial stance was that the Sentinels only beat the mutants because of superior numbers; both me and Arachnid proved him wrong as pertains that (me with the fact that 3 Sentinels beat 7 mutants and Arachnid did by pointing out that there were likely millions of mutants world wide and that the mutants had the numerical advantage...not the Sentinels)...
Quan then shifted goal posts to say "well the mutants werent organized."
You got it?
Originally posted by quanchi112
So no real evidence just speculation. Show me millions of organized mutants against how many sentinels. Speculate. You have no real answers just speculation. Too many unknown variables hence useless.
Stop shifting goal posts...
Your initial argument was that the Sentinels were only dangerous when they had the numbers; that was thoroughly disproved...
Your argument falls apart as a result...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurderI referred to the end scene. The beginning scene was the mutants successfully escaping. The last stand was the mutants trying to stand their ground not escape like they successfully did in the beginning. Different objectives, sport. That matters. Quit confusing my point with the beginning when their objective was different.
It had everything to do with Quan's argument...His initial stance was that the Sentinels only beat the mutants because of superior numbers; both me and Arachnid proved him wrong as pertains that (me with the fact that 3 Sentinels beat 7 mutants and Arachnid did by pointing out that there were likely millions of mutants world wide and that the mutants had the numerical advantage...not the Sentinels)...
Quan then shifted goal posts to say "well the mutants werent organized."
You got it?
Originally posted by quanchi112
I referred to the end scene. The beginning scene was the mutants successfully escaping. The last stand was the mutants trying to stand their ground not escape like they successfully did in the beginning. Different objectives, sport. That matters. Quit confusing my point with the beginning when their objective was different.
Nope, your argument was that the Sentinels needed superior numbers to beat the mutants...
That stance is false and was proven at the beginning of the movie when 3 beat 7...
Numbers just make the kills more efficient...
I wont let you run from your stance; it was a false one...your argument fails.
Originally posted by TheLordofMurderYes, they did. In the beginning they failed against the mutants. 😂
Nope, your argument was that the Sentinels [b]needed superior numbers to beat the mutants...That stance is false and was proven at the beginning of the movie when 3 beat 7...
Numbers just make the kills more efficient...
I wont let you run from your stance; it was a false one...your argument fails. [/B]
My stance is correct. The sentinels failed in the beginning while the mutants achieved their objective.
😂
At the end they did too by the way.
😂
Originally posted by quanchi112So you are saying the team's only chance is to escape? I agree.
I referred to the end scene. The beginning scene was the mutants successfully escaping. The last stand was the mutants trying to stand their ground not escape like they successfully did in the beginning. Different objectives, sport. That matters. Quit confusing my point with the beginning when their objective was different.
They won't be able to do it, but I agree.
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
It had everything to do with Quan's argument...His initial stance was that the Sentinels only beat the mutants because of superior numbers; both me and Arachnid proved him wrong as pertains that (me with the fact that 3 Sentinels beat 7 mutants and Arachnid did by pointing out that there were likely millions of mutants world wide and that the mutants had the numerical advantage...not the Sentinels)...
Quan then shifted goal posts to say "well the mutants werent organized."
You got it?
Firstly, shifting arguments doesn't somehow invalidate the new ones; you can try X proof for an argument, it can fail, and then you can try Y, and that may or may not work. There's no requirement that the initial set of arguments has to be the correct one.
Secondly, if the sentinels are better organized and concentrate attacks against isolated groups of mutants, they effectively do have superior numbers. What their figures are in a global sense is irrelevant.
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Oh I did engage and put forth a logical, reasonable, argument, while all you did was troll...
Show me where in the other thread you replied to my latest argument. Because you just suddenly insulted me out of nowhere, called me a troll, and then claimed that I wasn't allowed to disagree with your opinion.
But the proof is in the pudding; quote me to where you do otherwise, and I'll apologize. 👆
Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, they did. In the beginning they failed against the mutants. 😂My stance is correct. The sentinels failed in the beginning while the mutants achieved their objective.
😂
At the end they did too by the way.
😂
The mutants couldnt defeat the Sentinels in direct combat...
Changing time (and thereby preventing the confrontation from ever occurring) is the only thing that saved them in both cases...
Cap and WS dont have that option here; they both die horribly...