What I find utterly hilarious is how he throws out the word "trolling" at a post not even directed at him, going off about how no one said statements trump feats (even though he has basically been using that exact line of reasoning throughout this thread), yet he doesn't consider him blatantly changing the wording of my statements to skew their meaning in another thread as trolling. The guy is a massive hypocrite and a liar. Which is why I put him on Ignore.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
What I find utterly hilarious is how he throws out the word "trolling" at a post not even directed at him, going off about how no one said statements trump feats (even though he has basically been using that exact line of reasoning throughout this thread), yet he doesn't consider him blatantly changing the wording of my statements to skew their meaning in another thread as trolling. The guy is a massive hypocrite and a liar. Which is why I put him on Ignore.
Originally posted by Silent Master
The idea that you can't compare different feats is ridiculous.Example, lifting a bicycle is completely different than pulling an aircraft carrier down the highway. Yet it is very easy to determine which is the better strength feat.
Okay statement boys.
Either way, i haven't gotten any points why Vibranium is stronger from you.
You claim that a comparisson can be made based on movie feats, yet you have not brought any points.
So again, we are on limbo.
I have given my points, it's turn for you to give yours.
Originally posted by Silent Master
We've listed them multiple times, you ignoring them isn't the same as us not giving them.
In the same way i've rebuked all your feats. You've given feats that can't determine which is stronger (Like Thor's charged hammer, which doesn't prove anything since Adamantium has never met a charged hammer and therefore the outcome is unknown).
So again, until you can bring movie feats that can compare Adamantium and Vibranium, then we will be talking.
Originally posted by Silent Master
You haven't "rebuked" anything. we have seen the amount of damage Thor's charged hammer strikes can cause, so we can compare that level of damage to the things adamantium has withstood.You not being able to understand something isn't the same as "rebuking" it.
No. Not being able to prove that one thing won't endure the other makes it invalid.
Why wouldn't Adamantium withstand it!? Again, it is virtually Undestructible.
So you have not a point, you have a belief. And beliefs aren't viable for debating friend.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Again, your inability to understand how comparisons work doesn't mean we haven't provided valid evidence.
No. You want to say that Vibranium > Adamantium because Thor's charged hammer would break Adamantium. WTF!? It's clear you are the one who doesn't understand how comparissons work.
HAHAHA! Guess what i found!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wQCJs07FUQ
minute 1:30. BOOM YAH!
Originally posted by Silent Master
We get it, you don't know how comparisons or debates work.
Done silent. You have lost this.
I've given you movie statements, and now a writer from marvel just confirmed Adamantium stronger.
It's clear you are retarded.
You have given no real movie feats to compare each other. You have only focused on degrading me whereas my points have sunk yours.
You are done dude!
I don't have to prove anything else. Bye bye.
Using the Marvel stance concerning the comics on this argument is stupid.
The stance on comic book rules doesn't apply to the movies.
Marvel has even gone out of it's way to prove that the movieverses are sperate and have nothing to do with each other.
Just like Ultron being created by Hank Pym in the comics means nothing in the MCU.
