John Preston vs Wesley Gibson

Gibson wins. And there H1 again goes and claims it takes Wesley a few seconds to amp. It's funny how he keeps making that claim, and keeps telling other people to essentially prove his claim wrong (proving a negative, which is generally frowned upon in debates) when he hasn't actually presented any solid evidence to back his stance. He expects all his statements to be accepted at face value, yet constantly dismisses arguments other people make, despite them actively referencing screen feats/evidence.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Gibson wins. And there H1 again goes and claims it takes Wesley a few seconds to amp. It's funny how he keeps making that claim, and keeps telling other people to essentially prove his claim wrong (proving a negative, which is generally frowned upon in debates) when he hasn't actually presented any solid evidence to back his stance. He expects all his statements to be accepted at face value, yet constantly dismisses arguments other people make, despite them actively referencing screen feats/evidence.

Prove that he can amp in less than a half of second.

Originally posted by h1a8
Prove that he can amp in less than a half of second.

Are you aware of how debates work?

Originally posted by h1a8
Prove that he can amp in less than a half of second.

Thank you for proving my point.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Are you aware of how debates work?

I'm aware. My claim is that Wesley can't amp in less than a second.
The proof is: it took him longer than a second to amp in one scene and there is no other scene where he shown to amp less time.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Thank you for proving my point.

What was your point? You are claiming that he can amp in less than half of a second. This is not a negative.

Originally posted by h1a8
I'm aware. My claim is that Wesley can't amp in less than a second.
The proof is: it took him longer than a second to amp in one scene and there is no other scene where he shown to amp less time.

No, your claim was that

It takes more than a few seconds for Wesley to amp.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, your claim was that

correct! Was and IS are two different things.
But it took Wesley more than a few seconds to amp in one scene in the movie.

Originally posted by h1a8
correct! Was and IS are two different things.
But it took Wesley more than a few seconds to amp in one scene in the movie.

Can you prove that he always took more than a few seconds to amp?

preston uses gun kata to dodge wesleys bullets and puts a bullet in his skull lol

Originally posted by h1a8
What was your point? You are claiming that he can amp in less than half of a second. This is not a negative.

Nope. All I said is that Gibson wins, and that you are making claims without offering any evidence to support them, such as the bullet-time, and then telling other people to prove negatives to those claims. It is your responsibility to prove your own claims to be right. Not tell other people to disprove them, while you sit back and do nothing. But you expect us to go along with your opinion/interpretation like it is fact, and then debate according to that. And I never posted any specifics on exactly how long it takes him to amp. So you claiming I did is a lie, on top of everything else. So you did prove my point, by again doing the exact thing I said you were. What my own stance is on his bullet time is irrelevant in this thread, providing I don't make claims about it. I didn't. You did. So any burden of proof is on you.

But of course, you are the guy who also claimed Thanos was never described as "the most powerful being in the universe" (which Inhuman proved wrong immediately after), and also the guy who claimed that the Sokovia explosion would not have done significant damage to Cap, but that Nicholas Cage with brass knuckles could. At this point, your opinion means less than dog shit to me.

Originally posted by Dexx-Planet86
preston uses gun kata to dodge wesleys bullets and puts a bullet in his skull lol

Gun Kata doesn't work against a guy who sees you in slow motion and can send bullets along literally otherwise impossible trajectories, which would make them unpredictable.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Nope. All I said is that Gibson wins, and that [B]you are making claims without offering any evidence to support them, such as the bullet-time, and then telling other people to prove negatives to those claims. It is your responsibility to prove your own claims to be right. Not tell other people to disprove them, while you sit back and do nothing. But you expect us to go along with your opinion/interpretation like it is fact, and then debate according to that. And I never posted any specifics on exactly how long it takes him to amp. So you claiming I did is a lie, on top of everything else. So you did prove my point, by again doing the exact thing I said you were. What my own stance is on his bullet time is irrelevant in this thread, providing I don't make claims about it. I didn't. You did. So any burden of proof is on you.

But of course, you are the guy who also claimed Thanos was never described as "the most powerful being in the universe" (which Inhuman proved wrong immediately after), and also the guy who claimed that the Sokovia explosion would not have done significant damage to Cap, but that Nicholas Cage with brass knuckles could. At this point, your opinion means less than dog shit to me. [/B]

I have absolutely no clue to what you are talking about. Seriously!
Just rambling as far as I'm concerned.

Wesley doesn't win because he will be shot instantly after the bell. If you disagree then debate the point. Stop rambling. This is not a court of law.
We are here to ascertain the truth, not to win a debate at the cost of accepting lies.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Can you prove that he always took more than a few seconds to amp?

Originally posted by KingD19
Gun Kata doesn't work against a guy who sees you in slow motion and can send bullets along literally otherwise impossible trajectories, which would make them unpredictable.

Lies, like you claiming that your opinion and facts are one and the same?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Lies, like you claiming that your opinion and facts are one and the same?

Originally posted by h1a8
Prove they are lies. Show me evidence that contradicts my statement.

You're seriously asking me to prove that your opinions are actually opinions?

Originally posted by h1a8
I have absolutely no clue to what you are talking about. Seriously!
Just rambling as far as I'm concerned.

This is how most people consider your posts.

Originally posted by h1a8

Wesley doesn't win because he will be shot instantly after the bell. If you disagree then debate the point. Stop rambling. This is not a court of law.
We are here to ascertain the truth, not to win a debate at the cost of accepting lies.

Oh, the irony.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're seriously asking me to prove that your opinions are actually opinions?