Cybertron Vs Krypton Vs Asgard + Svartalfheim

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
It took you an entire week to come back with nothing but rehash? Damn dude,leave it be if you really can't be bothered reading then simply recycling old shit.

I made perfectly clear the first time what I thought. The fact is, you don't read, and then try to piss on me by trying to force me to repeat myself ad nauseum. I'm not in the business of rehashing and repeating like a tape recorder for your amusement. Thats not asking for clarification, thats bad faith debating.

Frankly, at this stage, after simply driving a plethora of assumptions, then bad faith debate tactics while trying to "catch me out" by repeatedly asking me to repeat a perfectly clear argument is bullshit, and I believe you should retract and apologize for trying to f@ck me over.

This entire diatribe proves 2 things. #1: you either have the reading comprehension of a carrot, or you deliberately are not reading anything I say. #2: Once again, you are applying out of context situations that are completely different to what I am actually saying. I already spoke regarding the World Engine. The rest is completely irrelevant to this debate. If I went by pure character statement like you, I could pull so much shit out of transformers lore to squash the other two forces combined.

Ironic coming from someone who went wild for 2 pages because I said visuals take precedence over character statement. Are you saying that characters within the narrative, who are fallible BTW, are actually a better source than what we see on screen with our own eyes?

Here's the situation you face right now Froth. You claim that bifrost destroys planets entirely based on one liner statements from Thor and Loki, right? They are experts in the subject field apparently right? Ok.... The thing is, this would actually hold more weight IF and only IF they actually explained one prior time that bifrost has done this.

The World Engine, even though I never SAID it would complete the terraforming on it's own (Once again, you put words in my mouth) We get an explanation that the Kryptonians have completed Terraforming projects before, hence why they had colonies. So we know they CAN do it, just not HOW they did it.

And even though this is off topic, Galactus has a history of planetary consumption, as explained by Surfer. This is more than simple character statement and a one line effect, because Surfer explains the history in detail. Thats much more powerful evidence than a four word tagline. We get a sense of scale and measure through the details.

Wow, all that blurb of text and you still can't give a straight answer. But then what did I expect from a guy who keeps saying he's done yet somehow continues to reply?

Basically at the end of it all, what you're saying is that visuals only take precedence over character statements if they're one liners. However if there are 2 or more lines to explain it then it doesn't apply.

Lol. What silly logic. Just because someone doesn't give a detailed explanation of a fact doesn't change it being a fact. Loki, Thor and Heimdall are some of the highest ranking Asgardians yet you seem to think they don't know what they're talking about. Heck, Heimdall is the bifrost keeper yet you seem to think he doesn't know what he's saying when he says the bifrost when left uncheck will destroy a world.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Wow, all that blurb of text and you still can't give a straight answer. But then what did I expect from a guy who keeps saying he's done yet somehow continues to reply?

How many straight answers do you f@cking want? Seriously?! How is this NOT Clear to you?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Basically at the end of it all, what you're saying is that visuals only take precedence over character statements if they're one liners. However if there are 2 or more lines to explain it then it doesn't apply.

I'm saying that without at least detailed explanation as to HOW it works, why should a singlar one liner take presedence over what we see? I want you to EXPLAIN that $h!t to me immediately. Why should we take thor and Loki's word as gospel truth of a high ended feat without so much as an indication as to how or why? Without that, the best you can hope for is inconclusive negative evidence. And without that, there is no way to say wether or not the Kryptonians would survive or not. Basically put, Bifrost is a non-argumentative point, and it's use as an "I-Win" button by yourself is hilarious.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Lol. What silly logic. Just because someone doesn't give a detailed explanation of a fact doesn't change it being a fact. Loki, Thor and Heimdall are some of the highest ranking Asgardians yet you seem to think they don't know what they're talking about. Heck, Heimdall is the bifrost keeper yet you seem to think he doesn't know what he's saying when he says the bifrost when left uncheck will destroy a world.

So, rank determines expertise on WMDs? Excellent. Lets call up Trump and see if he knows how to build a nuclear bomb himself then.

The point, as has so gloriously sailed over your head, is that you cannot explain HOW Bifrost works, since the Asgardians themselves DIDN'T explain it, your use of it is a non-point. Congratulations, you argued yourself into a hole.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
How many straight answers do you f@cking want? Seriously?! How is this NOT Clear to you?

I'm saying that without at least detailed explanation as to HOW it works, why should a singlar one liner take presedence over what we see? I want you to EXPLAIN that $h!t to me immediately. Why should we take thor and Loki's word as gospel truth of a high ended feat without so much as an indication as to how or why? Without that, the best you can hope for is inconclusive negative evidence. And without that, there is no way to say wether or not the Kryptonians would survive or not. Basically put, Bifrost is a non-argumentative point, and it's use as an "I-Win" button by yourself is hilarious.

So, rank determines expertise on WMDs? Excellent. Lets call up Trump and see if he knows how to build a nuclear bomb himself then.

The point, as has so gloriously sailed over your head, is that you cannot explain HOW Bifrost works, since the Asgardians themselves DIDN'T explain it, your use of it is a non-point. Congratulations, you argued yourself into a hole.

I love how you keep ignoring that Heimdall, the actual operator and guardian of the Bifrost, explained that the Bifrost will destroy a world if left uncheck.

I also love how you're basically saying that you know more about how the bifrost works than the characters in a show (and by extension the writers and director).

I see through what you're trying to do. Basically, the Asgardians have a ridiculously powerful weapon that gives them a massive upperhand against the other armies and you don't like that. So you try to undermine it.

Because yes, the bifrost IS a 1-click win device. If the armies start their war from their worlds then Asgard can simply blast them from the safety of Asgard. Don't care if you think it only destroys the surface of a planet (something which you have zero proof of btw) it still boils down Asgard having a long distance weapon the others do not.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I love how you keep ignoring that Heimdall, the actual operator and guardian of the Bifrost, explained that the Bifrost will destroy a world if left uncheck.

Did he? Where? All he said was that it would, not how it would do so.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I also love how you're basically saying that you know more about how the bifrost works than the characters in a show (and by extension the writers and director).

I did? Where? I said nobody here knows how it works because it was never shown or explained. Once again, you go for the classic of putting words in people's mouths. Stop doing that.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I see through what you're trying to do. Basically, the Asgardians have a ridiculously powerful weapon that gives them a massive upperhand against the other armies and you don't like that. So you try to undermine it.

Nope. Personally I don't care who wins the debate. what I do hate is running on assumption and speculative inconclusive non-evidence. As I said, I could pull so much Deus Ex Machina out of Transformers lore to utterly smash both the other contestants, but you notice I'm not doing that?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Because yes, the bifrost IS a 1-click win device. If the armies start their war from their worlds then Asgard can simply blast them from the safety of Asgard. Don't care if you think it only destroys the surface of a planet (something which you have zero proof of btw) it still boils down Asgard having a long distance weapon the others do not.

Ahahahahahaaaa! 0% proof eh? Even though this is LITERALLY all we bore witness to Bifrost actually do? Thats a hoot. I don't need to disprove Bifrost being able to destroy a planet, you need to prove it can, beyond a 4 word sentence. Otherwise all you can do is speculate that it can do so EFFECTIVELY. I mean Krypton has space travel, if Bifrost is not an insta planet pop like the Death Star, then explain to me how long it takes to mulch a planet. Both Krypton and Cybertron can evacuate and continue the war without much trouble or loss of population.

That is the problem with making an assumption about how Bifrost works - you DO NOT KNOW AND CANNOT PROVE that it will do more than slowly mulch 2 abandoned planets surfaces. Because this is all we've ever seen of it, and if it takes as long as we saw it do, then planetary evacuations are not only possible, but assured. So much for your "I Win" clause, because once again, you talk yourself into holes.