Darth Krayt and Darth Caedus vs Tulak Hord, Aloysius Kallig, Karness Muur

Started by The_Tempest11 pages

Double standards galore and now shifting of the burden of proof?

Ironic that this is Neph on a good day.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The salt is real.

Well actually its stated that he defeated thousands in those two battles and at Chabosh that there were a thousand there. So logically Yn would have to also be a thousand. 😖hrug:

I think you might have missed the full stop at the end of the first sentence. It seperates it from the second one. Just because it says he had an army which helped him achieve victory doesn't mean they were present at his back at all times or in both occasions. They were present at Chabosh, not Yn. Which satisfies the burden of the sentence. Or, if they were at Yn, they were the ones being besieged and Hord took it upon himself to break the siege by himself.

...Uh, when is that even remotely stated.

All Khem Val ever says is that Hord single-handedly broke the Siege of Yn.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
@Jman, Neph and Myth are literally debating whether a made up feat is made up or not, yah.

But actually the SWTOR Codex indicates an army was present in both battles:
And then Khem contradicts himself by claiming that despite Hord breaking the siege single-handedly, he was present and fought in the battle. mmm

Yeah, breaking the siege isn't winning the battle.

Originally posted by MythLord
I cannot prove a negative, darling. And wait, where's the proof he did? The only "proof" is Khem Val, who likely lied. Other than that what backs it up? His hype that just has him as being "incredibly strong"?

Now we're back to square one.

If you're arguing that he didn't do it then you do actually need to have an argument rather than just saying Khem "likely lied". You've got ****-all nothing and in essence this entire discussion is just a massive waste of time.

I already told you at the start, Khem's statement is worth infinitely more than "uM, well maybe he didn't do it...." You haven't disproved it other than to say you think it's dumb. Which I'm sorry to hear about but really isn't interesting enough to maintain my goodwill sufficiently to keep wasting time on your tantrums.

Originally posted by MythLord
His abilities are that he's "extremely strong". That doesn't make it plausible. Meanwhile scientists are slowly mastering genetic engineering, so a walking potato would one day be actually plausible.

What I'm saying is the chance that potato will walk is greater than the chance that Hord can solo a thousand Jedi.

Why isn't it plausible? Just because you don't like it? Sorry, but that's not good enough sweetheart. Come back when you actually have something to say that's more than absurd drivel and concessions.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
...Uh, when is that even remotely stated.

All Khem Val ever says is that Hord single-handedly broke the Siege of Yn.

Swtore and the codex, iirc. One quote says he fought a thousand at Chabosh and another says he fought thousands all together.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I think you might have missed the full stop at the end of the first sentence. It seperates it from the second one. Just because it says he had an army which helped him achieve victory doesn't mean they were present at his back at all times or in both occasions. They were present at Chabosh, not Yn. Which satisfies the burden of the sentence. Or, if they were at Yn, they were the ones being besieged and Hord took it upon himself to break the siege by himself.
😕

What a completely meaningless thing to say lol, the first sentence sets the contexts for the second one i.e. the battles of Yn and Chabosh, in which he had an army of dark side warriors at his side. You are welcome to contrive various workaround to make it fit but it remains a fact that the most obvious and straightforward reading is that he fought both these battles with them at his side.

Khem casts a measure of doubt on this reading, but compromises his own reliability by contradicting himself, in which case I'm inclined to believe the simple reading is the correct one.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
As far as Hord TK'ing a capital ship, how do we know he didn't merely TK the controls?

Or is that just when PT Force users do it?

Thats definitely a possibility, I mean, Khem Val can't exactly see inside the ship.

Although I'd put Khem Val above K'Kruhk, let-alone Tulak Hord, which makes it at least a plausible possibility that he could have dragged it out of the sky.

Holisticially, he could do all these things.

I'll never understand the hate of the Ancients.

Hell, when I provided Myth proof that Ragnos' equipment amps him, he continually said it didn't, for no reason, despite me showing quotes of it amping him.

Originally posted by Nephthys
If you're arguing that he didn't do it then you do actually need to have an argument rather than just saying Khem "likely lied". You've got ****-all nothing and in essence this entire discussion is just a massive waste of time.

I already told you at the start, Khem's statement is worth infinitely more than "uM, well maybe he didn't do it...." You hasn't disproved it other than to say you think it's dumb. Which I'm sorry to hear about but really isn't interesting enough to maintain my goodwill.

Khem Val has constantly contradicted himself in the past, is Hord's lapdog pet, and obviously enjoys giving his master a good old fashioned wank-job.
I trust him on this subject as much as I'd trust you if you tell me burning metal is similar to overpowering a lightsaber blade.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Why isn't is plausible? Just because you don't like it? Sorry, but that's not good enough sweetheart. Come back when you actually have something to say that's more than absurd drivel and concessions.

I explained why it isn't plausible. And what concessions, Neph? I know it must be hard to read at the level you're operating on, atm, but can you try to comprehend, plz.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Although I'd put Khem Val above K'Kruhk

K'kruhk would kick Val's shit in, lmao.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Hell, when I provided Myth proof that Ragnos' equipment amps him, he continually said it didn't, for no reason, despite me showing quotes of it amping him.

Wut?

Originally posted by MythLord
K'kruhk would kick Val's shit in, lmao.

Wut?

"Powerful dark side artifact" means an amp to the person using it.

It was in our argument in the Luke vs Ancients thread.

Plain and simple.

Anyway, you gave valid reasons, except, Beni and you misinterpreted Val talking about Yn.

Breaking the siege (again) isn't winning the battle.

It just means he charged head-first into the army single-handedly and fought off their front lines.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
"Powerful dark side artifact" means an amp to the person using it.

It was in our argument in the Luke vs Ancients thread.

Plain and simple.

You think I remember all our arguments? Lmao. What was the topic in question? Just Luke vs Ragnos, or...? I'm pretty sure I never questioned Marka amping himself off of artifacts, I just noted it wouldn't make him on par with Jacen, who got whooped by Luke.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Anyway, you gave valid reasons, except, Beni and you misinterpreted Val talking about Yn.

Breaking the siege (again) isn't winning the battle.

It just means he charged head-first into the army single-handedly and fought off their front lines.

So he charged at a thousand Jedi, and fought off a few? Guess that works, and it makes more sense than Neph arguing he can solo a thousand Jedi cuz he's incredibly strong!

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Anyway, you gave valid reasons, except, Beni and you misinterpreted Val talking about Yn.

Breaking the siege (again) isn't winning the battle.

It just means he charged head-first into the army single-handedly and fought off their front lines.

True, but that only diminishes the feat.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
😕

What a completely meaningless thing to say lol, the first sentence sets the contexts for the second one i.e. the battles of Yn and Chabosh, in which he had an army of dark side warriors at his side. You are welcome to contrive various workaround to make it fit but in remains a fact that the most obvious and straightforward reading is that he fought both these battles with them at his side.

Khem casts a measure of doubt on this reading, but compromises his own reliability by contradicting himself, in which case I'm inclined to believe the simple reading is the correct one.

No it doesn't. As I said, there's no need in the statement for the army to have been present at all times or at both battles. Merely him using one at some point fulfills the requirement of the statement.

The fact is that Khem does indeed contradict your reading and your supposition isn't equal to his testimony. Nor does Khem contradict himself, that's once again just your supposition. Even if Khem was present he needn't have fought in the actual battle. You dismiss me for contriving workarounds, but the fact is that those workarounds do exist and Khem's statement supports them. Therefore there's no need for any contradiction to take place between any of the sources, which is unequivocally the more straightforward and correct reading compared to your interpretation.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
True, but that only diminishes the feat.
Yeah, but it would mean he had to fight through part of the army on his own, with Khem Val and the rest following after.

Which still makes it impressive.

Originally posted by Nephthys
It is an absurdity, and verifiably a lie.

No, it isn't an absurdity, bcz my Dog is super strong, he could solo 25 mans with ease. Also, I saw it with my own eyes!

Originally posted by Nephthys
No it doesn't. As I said, there's no need in the statement for the army to have been present at all times or at both battles. Merely him using one at some point fulfills the requirement of the statement.

The fact is that Khem does indeed contradict your reading and your supposition isn't equal to his testimony. Nor does Khem contradict himself, that's once again just your supposition. Even if Khem was present he needn't have fought in the actual battle. You dismiss me for contriving workarounds, but the fact is that those workarounds do exist and Khem's statement supports them. Therefore there's no need for any contradiction to take place between any of the sources, which is unequivocally the more straightforward and correct reading compared to your interpretation.

Honestly, thats stupid.

Khem Val isn't gonna hang back unless Hord directly orders him to.

I doubt he would, given the odds.

👆

Even Jmangoham realizes this, Neph. Y cant u?

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Anyway, you gave valid reasons, except, Beni and you misinterpreted Val talking about Yn.

Breaking the siege (again) isn't winning the battle.

It just means he charged head-first into the army single-handedly and fought off their front lines.

Unfortunately you're the one misinterprating things, because Khem claims that he broke the siege singlehandedly and then continued on to Chabosh, leaving nothing but jedi blood in his wake.

Originally posted by MythLord
Khem Val has constantly contradicted himself in the past, is Hord's lapdog pet, and obviously enjoys giving his master a good old fashioned wank-job.
I trust him on this subject as much as I'd trust you if you tell me burning metal is similar to overpowering a lightsaber blade.

You're lying about him contradicting himself and the only reason he loved Hord so much is because he was so strong. Lying about his strength would indeed be a contradiction. There's ultimately no reason to disbelieve him other than that you want to.

Originally posted by MythLord
I explained why it isn't plausible. And what concessions, Neph? I know it must be hard to read at the level you're operating on, atm, but can you try to comprehend, plz.

No you didn't. You pissed and moaned that you didn't think it should be possible. Surprisingly, your opinion isn't evidence for much. And you conceded that your idiotic potato thing was impossible, effectively demonstrating the difference between an actual absurdity and your biased opinion of what should be one.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Honestly, thats stupid.

Khem Val isn't gonna hang back unless Hord directly orders him to.

I doubt he would, given the odds.

Given Hord won, it's not so stupid and the odds not so great. Hord could have wanted to show off.

Originally posted by Nephthys
No it doesn't. As I said, there's no need in the statement for the army to have been present at all times or at both battles. Merely him using one at some point fulfills the requirement of the statement.

The fact is that Khem does indeed contradict your reading and your supposition isn't equal to his testimony. Nor does Khem contradict himself, that's once again just your supposition. Even if Khem was present he needn't have fought in the actual battle. You dismiss me for contriving workarounds, but the fact is that those workarounds do exist and Khem's statement supports them. Therefore there's no need for any contradiction to take place between any of the sources, which is unequivocally the more straightforward and correct reading compared to your interpretation.

Uhuh, point is its a contrived reading because the entry doesn't specify one or the other, and in that way you're constructing contexts.

And lmao, Khem reminds you he fought in the battle of Yn ad verbatim, its literally his f*cking catchphrase. Here let me jog your memory:

"Together, Tulak Hord and I devoured our enemies at the battles of Yn and Chabosh and brought the entire Dromund system to its knees. And now I await his return."
"I am Khem Val, servant of Tulak Hord, devourer of the rebels at Yn and Chabosh, consumer of the Dromund system. And I am hungry."

And no, fighting at just one does not fulfil the burden of the testimonAY!

But yeah, Jman has offered the best reading so far, that Tulak just beat them back, not defeat them. That or Khem is a big fat liar who can't be trusted on the topic of his master. 🙂

Originally posted by Nephthys
Unfortunately you're the one misinterprating things, because Khem claims that he broke the siege singlehandedly and then continued on to Chabosh, leaving nothing but jedi blood in his wake.

You're lying about him contradicting himself and the only reason he loved Hord so much is because he was so strong. Lying about his strength would indeed be a contradiction. There's ultimately no reason to disbelieve him other than that you want to.

No you didn't. You pissed and moaned that you didn't think it should be possible. Surprisingly, your opinion isn't evidence for much. And you conceded that your idiotic potato thing was impossible, effectively demonstrating the difference between an actual absurdity and your biased opinion of what should be one.

Given Hord won, it's not so stupid and the odds not so great. Hord could have wanted to show off.

Mmkay, so thats a lie.

Thats a possibility, but its an unlikely one.

Could I have a quote for Hord slaughtering thousands of Jedi?

I don't think a single source has ever said such a thing.

Originally posted by Nephthys
You're lying about him contradicting himself and the only reason he loved Hord so much is because he was so strong. Lying about his strength would indeed be a contradiction. There's ultimately no reason to disbelieve him other than that you want to.

Yes I lied! I was taught that art by Khem Val.

Originally posted by Nephthys
No you didn't. You pissed and moaned that you didn't think it should be possible. Surprisingly, your opinion isn't evidence for much. And you conceded that your idiotic potato thing was impossible, effectively demonstrating the difference between an actual absurdity and your biased opinion of what should be one.

I never said it's impossible, and it isn't. Walking potatoes shall remain a thing as long as Hord killing a thousand Jedi singlehandedly remains a thing. Get with the times.