Then there is this
http://i.imgur.com/BqOJc09.gifv
Then there is this
http://i.imgur.com/BqOJc09.gifv
Well, that's why I said in a much earlier post that the fight was all over the place. Either way, it's largely irrelevant. Bane is not even remotely comparable to Iron Man.
And Cap stopping a flying Iron Man actually makes no sense from a physics point of view. Cap wasn't holding onto or bracing against anything. So, his strength level should have been irrelevant, and he should simply have been pulled along.
See movies are just as inconsistent as comics. Power levels fluctuate greatly from scene to scene and from movie to movie. We can't use feats to equate other showings when there is a gross contradiction.
I'm convinced that IM in the first movie was superior than IM in civil war or the avengers movies (at least in offense). Hell Thor is superior in his first movie than Thor from any avenger movie.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Well, that's why I said in a much earlier post that the fight was all over the place. Either way, it's largely irrelevant. Bane is not even remotely comparable to Iron Man.And Cap stopping a flying Iron Man actually makes no sense from a physics point of view. Cap wasn't holding onto or bracing against anything. So, his strength level should have been irrelevant, and he should simply have been pulled along.
Spoiler:
I know you agree with that, just wanted to post it.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Bane is not even remotely comparable to Iron Man.
Originally posted by h1a8
See movies are just as inconsistent as comics. Power levels fluctuate greatly from scene to scene and from movie to movie. We can't use feats to equate other showings when there is a gross contradiction.I'm convinced that IM in the first movie was superior than IM in civil war or the avengers movies (at least in offense). Hell Thor is superior in his first movie than Thor from any avenger movie.
Cap wins 10/10.
This is Impediment's forum, so I will hold off nodding. But when I have to sort through several posts to delete personal links which shouldn't have been posted I am very tempted to hit the temp ban. Silent Master, debate the top and stop the nonsense. Everybody has been here long enough to know how most other people will post.
h1a8 has told us before that he's a teacher, so I wasn't posting anything he hasn't already told us. However I won't post anymore off board links like that.
Originally posted by h1a8
That means you didn't understand. I'm used to it as I teach math. To shoot a bullet into the same bullet hole without increasing the hole size requires mm or better accuracy. For example, being slightly off from pure center would make the hole larger (hitting off center of the hole). DS shot many bullets in the same hole without making the hole larger.
Originally posted by h1a8
I'm a teacher, I teach. It's my purpose.
h1a8
I already teach during the week
Originally posted by h1a8
I'm a math and science teacher. I can calculate with a good estimate of all the quantifiable feats you named. None of them come even to a trillionth of the power that Hulk display. If you disagree then please choose a feat by Thor. I promise to give you accurate estimation of the feat along with Hulk's feat. We can have fellow math/science members here review the findings. That way you will be convinced that if WBH sneezes Thor will die. Lol just kidding.
h1a8
I'm a math/science teacher
Originally posted by h1a8
LOL Im a math and science teacher. I can't help it.
You should have just posted those quotes, not a link to a site I was involved in. It exposes my other hobby (which is information I didn't want revealed here).
Anyway, Bane is super smart. He goes into the fight knowing what Steve is capable of. He knows that he has to rely on skill and avoid, at all costs, being hit.
Steve will most likely pull his punches, unless you think that he was hitting those humans (who survived) with all his power.
YouTube video
If this is what we call pulling punches, it doesn't matter. Bane still goes flying.
Originally posted by Silent MasterYou flamed me. You seem to always flame. You rarely actually debate the topic. You throw insults, flame, troll, ignore evidence, etc.
Lol, that's your excuse for crying like a little baby. That I exposed a hobby? You could have just asked me to take it down.
If you disagree with someone's argument then you explicitly say why or offer a rebuttal. Why always flame and troll?
Originally posted by h1a8
You flamed me. You seem to always flame. You rarely actually debate the topic. You throw insults, flame, troll, ignore evidence, etc.If you disagree with someone's argument then you explicitly say why or offer a rebuttal. Why always flame and troll?
You flame and troll all the time, yet you don't see any of us reporting you.
Originally posted by Silent MasterProve that I troll. You know trolling is intentional right. I actually believe everything I argue. I will never intentionally troll. If I have good readon for something then I'm going to argue it.
Not only do you flame and troll, you also lie and the above post is proof of it.
I have flamed on occasion, but usually after I was flamed (call someone dumb). But this is extremely rare. I have probably said something flame worthy less than 5 times since I became a member on KMC(2005). You flame in more than 50% of your posts. I let so many go. But it gets abusive after a while.
Originally posted by Silent MasterWhy would I lie? I swear that everything I argue I actually believe. I never once argued for a result in a fight I didn't believe.
You're already making excuses, you've basically said that no matter what information I provide you'll just claim it wasn't intentional and therefore not technically trolling.This little semantics game you're trying to play right now, is all the proof I need that you're a troll.
If I said dumb things or was wrong then clearly it wasn't intentional.
If you can quote an argument I made that you believe I was intentionally trolling then we can have a judge of honest members decide if they think I was trolling. If they don't think I was trolling then that's evidence to support that I wasn't.
Originally posted by h1a8
Why would I lie? I swear that everything I argue I actually believe. I never once argued for a result in a fight I didn't believe.If I said dumb things or was wrong then clearly it wasn't intentional.
If you can quote an argument I made that you believe I was intentionally trolling then we can have a judge of honest members decide if they think I was trolling. If they don't think I was trolling then that's evidence to support that I wasn't.
Even if we believe you, the forum rules clearly state that on screen feats rule all and you argue that we should ignore screen feats and instead base everything on what you believe are the writer's intention. thus almost every one of your posts is trolling as you're knowingly and intentionally breaking the forum rules.