Batman vs Black Widow

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Maroon is not red...

Period...

Being of shade of red is not the same as being red; if they were the exact same thing then there would be no reason to call something maroon...it would all just be red instead.

Common sense dude...

And I never said it was exactly red.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shades_of_red

A shade is a variation of a color, as there are many variations that red (a primary color) would have. Pls educate yourself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_color

Meaning that while her statement is more correct, your statement that it is "red" isn't all that wrong either.

Ignoring facts by going "common sense" isn't the way to debate.

And you still haven't clarified what you mean by "gently saying" (I, literally, don't know what this means) and why he would engage is such speaking style.

The funny thing is that the movie showed Bruce lifting weights and training for the fight. Certainly not superhuman.

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
You can dispute it because you didnt verbally say it, but you absolutely attempted to shoot down my statement...

Of that I have no doubt...

You are currently couching your words in a manner meant to mislead us on what you really was getting at...

I have no doubt of that as well...

Anyway, now you ALSO have evidence that the suit gives no strength amp to Batman and a link of Batman performing a clearly superhuman feat with his own natural strength...

And your conclusion on Batman's level of strength is....?

Again, stop putting words in my mouth. Argue with what is there and don't make up things that don't exist.

And, as for my opinion on if Batman's level of strength is:

1) I do not agree with your interpretation of Snyder's comic con comments (as I have posted my reasons). So I am still of the belief that Batman's armor enhanced his strength.

2) I do not use director/writer/etc statements as evidence as they are subject to interpretation and, IMO, not a solid type of evidence as well as still being subject to errors as things can easily change as the movie can still go thru some last minute editing and Imp already made a ruling about (more-or-less, tho admittedly not exactly the same as this exact situation, but we know where his mindset/logic lies) using comments by moviemakers as a type of evidence:

Originally posted by Impediment
Therefore, the ruling is that a written adaptation of this film, as well as cast/crew commentaries made after the film has been completed, screened, and transferred to home media, will not be allowable. Movie feats only, please.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15415637&highlight=book+forumid%3A102+userid%3A62388#post15415637

Personally, I only use on screen movie "feats", and as "feats" go, Batman has displayed enhanced level of strength well beyond his size/build.

But so has Widow.

I am open to changing my mind if ppl can post non-armored Bats doing some superduper showings that put him well above even enhanced humans as, admittedly, I've only seen the movie once and might have missed some things.

Originally posted by tkitna
The funny thing is that the movie showed Bruce lifting weights and training for the fight. Certainly not superhuman.

lol squat as much as he was squatting and tell me thats not a peak human feat, dude was squatting like 7 plates a side and casually flipped it off his back like it was 20lbs

Originally posted by Nibedicus
And I never said it was exactly red.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shades_of_red

A shade is a variation of a color, as there are many variations that red (a primary color) would have. Pls educate yourself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_color

Meaning that while her statement is more correct, your statement that it is "red" isn't all that wrong either.

Ignoring facts by going "common sense" isn't the way to debate.

And you still haven't clarified what you mean by "gently saying" (I, literally, don't know what this means) and why he would engage is such speaking style.

If maroon is not exactly red, then she was right and I was wrong...

They not exactly the same; if they are not exactly the same then they are different and seperate...

There is a species of chimp is genetically 98% identical to a human; being very close to a human does not make it human...

Maroon being very close to red does not make it red; its different...

So yes, I will invoke common sense because this is not complicated at all...

You are too busy splitting hairs to see the reality of this debate starring you in the face...

You are overthinking this and trying very hard not to be wrong when its obvious that you are...

Give it up...

Red and Maroon have different names because that are not the same color...

Its that simple...

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Again, stop putting words in my mouth. Argue with what is there and don't make up things that don't exist.

And, as for my opinion on if Batman's level of strength is:

1) I do not agree with your interpretation of Snyder's comic con comments (as I have posted my reasons). So I am still of the belief that Batman's armor enhanced his strength.

2) I do not use director/writer/etc statements as evidence as they are subject to interpretation and, IMO, not a solid type of evidence as well as still being subject to errors as things can easily change as the movie can still go thru some last minute editing and Imp already made a ruling about (more-or-less, tho admittedly not exactly the same as this exact situation, but we know where his mindset/logic lies) using comments by moviemakers as a type of evidence:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15415637&highlight=book+forumid%3A102+userid%3A62388#post15415637

Personally, I only use on screen movie "feats", and as "feats" go, Batman has displayed enhanced level of strength well beyond his size/build.

But so has Widow.

I am open to changing my mind if ppl can post non-armored Bats doing some superduper showings that put him well above even enhanced humans as, admittedly, I've only seen the movie once and might have missed some things.

Great, so the director of the dam movie is wrong about his movie and your opinion is right about it...

LoL... 😂

There is nothing else I can say to you as pertains this...

@Nib...

Let me simplify our debate on color like this (and hopefully this sinks in):

Lets say I have a colored line that represents the spectrum from ultraviolet to infrared...

"Red" and "Maroon" will both fall on a slightly different point on this colored line...wont they?

Do you know why?

Because they are different!!

Does my point make sense now?

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
If maroon is not exactly red, then she was right and I was wrong...

They not exactly the same; if they are not exactly the same then they are different and seperate...

There is a species of chimp is genetically 98% identical to a human; being very close to a human does not make it human...

Maroon being very close to red does not make it red; its different...

So yes, I will invoke common sense because this is not complicated at all...

You are too busy splitting hairs to see the reality of this debate starring you in the face...

Dark red, imperial red, crimson. All different shades of red. Had I used any of those prior colors, you would never argue that we were talking about red. Maroon is considered a shade of red, just like them. But you'd argue to death that it isn't red even tho I've provided the facts before you with sources while you provide ZERO rebuttal other than your usual "nuh-uh! Common zenze!".

Your new analogy with humans and apes is wrong. Red is the primary color, maroon is a shade of it, Funny thing about humans, we come in different shades, too. Caucasian, Asian, etc. Still, all humans. Funny how your analogies tend to bite you in the butt all the time. Not that you'd ever admit it.

If you refuse to educate yourself on the reality of how logic and facts work, far be it for me to waste time educating you. Believe what you want if you refuse to accept the irony or your analogy.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Dark red, imperial red, crimson. All different shades of red. Had I used any of those prior colors, you would never argue that we were talking about red. Maroon is considered a shade of red, just like them. But you'd argue to death that it isn't red even tho I've provided the facts before you with sources while you provide ZERO rebuttal other than your usual "nuh-uh! Common zenze!".

Your new analogy with humans and apes is wrong. Red is the primary color, maroon is a shade of it, Funny thing about humans, we come in different shades, too. Caucasian, Asian, etc. Still, all humans. Funny how your analogies tend to bite you in the butt all the time. Not that you'd ever admit it.

If you refuse to educate yourself on the reality of how logic and facts work, far be it for me to waste time educating you. Believe what you want if you refuse to accept the irony or your analogy.

Dude, you are admitting that I am right and you cant even see it...

A shade of red is not red; its different...

Once again, if you have a line going from ultraviolet to infrared, red and maroon would both fall on a different point on the line...

Thats common sense man...

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Great, so the director of the dam movie is wrong about [b]his movie and your opinion is right about it...

LoL... 😂

There is nothing else I can say to you as pertains this... [/B]

Why is it you always believe your interpretation is the only correct one?

Is it because you are unbelievably arrogant or just plain dense?

I never argued that the director was wrong, I argued that I disagree with your interpretation of what he said and even provided you the reason on why, which you never rebutted.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Why is it you always believe your interpretation is the only correct one?

Is it because you are unbelievably arrogant or just plain dense?

I never argued that the director was wrong, I argued that I disagree with your interpretation of what he said and even provided you the reason on why, which you never rebutted.

No, you are disagreeing with the director because I am simply repeating what the director said...

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Dude, you are admitting that I am right and you cant even see it...

A shade of red is not red; its different...

Once again, if you have a line going from ultraviolet to infrared, red and maroon would both fall on a different point on the line...

Thats common sense man...

Red the freakin wiki entry ffs. It has freakin diagrams laying out what red is, and no, it is NOT a simple single color.

Stop being ignorant.

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
No, you are disagreeing with the director because I am simply repeating what the director said...

You're not the only one saying what he said. We both did. Stop being dense.

Again, here is my interpretation of what he said and my reasons behind it:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Because it is sounds like a comparative statement?

Here, reread without the "really":

It's not really enhancing his strength more than it is protecting him.

If you refuse to educate yourself on the reality of how logic and life works, far be it for me to waste time educating you. Believe what you want if you refuse to accept the

This statement would be interpretted that the primary focus of his suit was to protect Batman, not to enhance his strength.

It does not, however, explicitly state that it does not enhance his strength in any way.

I will admit I can be wrong in the interpretation of this statement, however, as I'm not an English major. Someone with a more defined understanding of the intricacies of the English language should come in and offer their 2 cents on this.

But pardon me for not immediately accepting your interpretation of it as I tend to find that your interpretations tend to be rife with confirmation bias.

In the spirit of fairness, feel free and go ahead and find a different interpretation for: "Batman, unlike Superman, Wonder Woman or Flash, is a guy without superpowers."

Edit. Quote got cut for some reason.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Red the freakin wiki entry ffs. It has freakin diagrams laying out what red is, and no, it is NOT a simple single color.

Stop being ignorant.

You stop being ignorant...

According to your logic the word maroon shouldnt even exist; red is red...right?

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
You stop being ignorant...

According to your logic the word maroon shouldnt even exist; red is red...right?

Of course it should exist. To distinguish one shade of red from the other.

Blood is crimson, but also red. And you wouldn't be wrong in calling it thus.

Rubies are ruby red, still red. Ditto.

Again, if you read the entry I posted, you'd know this. Stop wasting my time.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You're not the only one saying what he said. We both did. Stop being dense.

Again, here is my interpretation of what he said and my reasons behind it:

No, we are both not saying what the director said; you are saying that the armor enhanced Batman's strength...

Synder said it really doesnt...

You are disagreeing with the guy who directed the movie; how on Earth can I debate movies with you when your opinion trumps the directors?

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
No, we are both not saying what the director said; you are saying that the armor enhanced Batman's strength...

Synder said it really doesnt...

You are disagreeing with the guy who directed the movie; how on Earth can I debate movies with you when your opinion trumps the directors?

Yes, cut the sentence in half and ignore the fact that he included "more than it is protecting him" so you can take his quotes out of context.

Like when cutting "as hard as I want to" from "I didn't punch you..." doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.

You are not the director of the movie. I am disagreeing with you. Not him. Stop being delusional.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Of course it should exist. To distinguish one shade of red from the other.

Blood is crimson, but also red. And you wouldn't be wrong in calling it thus.

Rubies are ruby red, still red. Ditto.

Again, if you read the entry I posted, you'd know this. Stop wasting my time.

But Maroon occupies a different spot on the spectrum than what is commonly thought of as red though doesnt it?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yes, cut the sentence in half and ignore the fact that he included "more than it is protecting him" so you can take his quotes out of context.

Like when cutting "as hard as I want to" from "I didn't punch you..." doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.

You are not the director of the movie. I am disagreeing with you. Not him. Stop being delusional.

Nope, you are disagreeing with the director...

Its seems pretty clear to me that he's saying that the armor doesnt enhance Batman's strength, but you believe it does anyway...

How can I argue with that?

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Nope, you are disagreeing with the director...

Its seems pretty clear to me that he's saying that the armor doesnt enhance Batman's strength, but you believe it does anyway...

How can I argue with that?

Yes, your interpretation is clear to you. The same way my interpretation is clear to me.

The difference is only one of us is arrogant enough to assume that his interpretation is the only valid one.

You are not Snyder, stop trying to pass off your (oftentimes biased) interpretation as fact. It is not.

Seriously, what part of "open to interpretation" is so hard to understand here?