Ozymandias vs. Black Panther

He even agrees that I'm correctly citing his argument.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes it does, your logic was that a human withstanding that type of hit means either the human was protected or the person that hit them doesn't have supestrength. I can quote the post where you say it.

I picked the second option for Ozy.

Originally posted by h1a8
Yes, that's my argument. How does the conclusion that Ozy does not have super strength follow?

The fact that he claims not to be able to see how his logic could indicate a lack of super strength for Ozy is laughable.

Originally posted by Silent Master
He even agrees that I'm correctly citing his argument.

The fact that he claims not to be able to see how his logic could indicate a lack of super strength for Ozy is laughable.

You are using faulty reasoning. It is the writer's intentions that Ozy is superfast and superstrong. It is not the writer's intentions that Tony is super durable.

Finally, you can't pick and choose in an "or" argument. You have to deduce which is true (only one of them is true). In Tony's case, Bucky is superhumanly strong but the movie protected Tony (the other option is proven false). The same logic is given to Ozy. He is superhumanly strong but Rorschach was protected.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
You're the only idiot, and didn't prove shit. You spewed your opinion on their speed, while ignoring all the evidence other people presented. You also ignored that even after Cap stole a car, he still had trouble catching up, even though Bucky was still on foot for quite some time until eventually stealing a bike. Or how T'Challa managed to keep up with Cap's car, from behind, on foot, and jump onto it. And when Nibedicus actually BZ challenged you on it, and your claims on the car speeds, you ran away like a coward. Instead of actually putting your claims up to proper scrutiny, you tried to invent some conspiracy theory against you. So, you pretending like you won that debate, when you actually ran when it came down to putting your money where your mouth is, is hilarious.

You want to talk about writer's intent? The writer's intent in that scene is blatantly obvious. So obvious that you are the only person I have ever seen to draw your conclusion. Everyone else reached a different conclusion. Which shows just how well the writers did, in fact, convey their intent. That only one dumbass troll couldn't understand it.

It was heavy traffic. I gave footage of how close the cars we were. I gave proof that cars were able to react and weave out of the way when Bucky dropped. I showed scenes where you can see the speed in relation to the columns. Later in the scene the cars sped up because traffic became lighter.

Overwhelming evidence was given. You act as there is no such thing as heavy traffic and traffic is slow. I travel in heavy traffic every day coming from work. It's many times I'm moving 5mph-10mph. Everyday!

Originally posted by KingD19
According to h1. h1 is always right. We are always wrong. Unless we agree with him 100%. Then we are right too. Otherwise, no. Facts don't matter. Direct producer/creator/actor statements don't matter. Feats don't matter. All that matters is h1 is right to h1 and refuses to be wrong regardless of how wrong he actually is.

Imp. Seriously. What the f*ck?

You guys use faulty logic.

Originally posted by h1a8
You are using faulty reasoning. It is the writer's intentions that Ozy is superfast and superstrong. It is not the writer's intentions that Tony is super durable.

Finally, you can't pick and choose in an "or" argument. You have to deduce which is true (only one of them is true). In Tony's case, Bucky is superhumanly strong but the movie protected Tony (the other option is proven false). The same logic is given to Ozy. He is superhumanly strong but Rorschach was protected.

Looks like King called it. BTW, you only care about "writer's intention" when it suits you, otherwise you ignore it.

Originally posted by KingD19
See that's logical. But we're dealing with h1. So what he means is, something proves either A or B...whichever I(h1) chooses, is what's proven and the other is invalid. I won't prove my stance, but I will say over and over again I'm right and ignore all evidence to the contrary.

Originally posted by Silent Master
It is rather amusing watching him make an argument that he says proves one of two things, he then picks the option that helps his case and when you naturally pick the other option, he claims you are no longer following his logic.

He doesn't seem to comprehend that by saying something proves either A or B, he is admitting that both A and B are valid answers.

A and B are possibilities. That does not mean both A and B are both true. One of them is. I didn't pick, I proved one was false and it leads to the other choice.

Originally posted by h1a8
A and B are possibilities. That does not mean both A and B are both true. One of them is. I didn't pick, I proved one was false and it leads to the other choice.

Yea...you "proved" it by ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

So, using your logic. I proved that Ozy has no enhanced stats.

Originally posted by FrothByte
1. You mean your trollish "proof" that you conjured from thin air and everyone laughed at?
2. Yes and? Moving your hand is many times easier than running.
3. I'll believe it when I see it. Prove that Ozy is stronger than Tchalla.
4. Guess you missed the part where BP put Bucky in an armbar or when Bucky couldn't stop BP's claws from inching towards his throat or when BP was able to pull down Cap's shield.

1. I provided many things.
2. True. But it has to be proven if T'Challa can even move is hands even close to bullet speeds. Running even 60mph doesn't prove that.
3. Ok good to know that you don't know this basic fact. Ozy strength feats are greater.
4. Putting someone in an armbar has nothing to do with being stronger. Women have put much stronger men in armbars. Remember the wrist is very weak.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yea...you "proved" it by ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

So, using your logic. I proved that Ozy has no enhanced stats.

What evidence did I ignore that explains why Tony didn't get koed or his face broke?

You just stated it, you didn't prove anything. You cearly stated "I pick" that's not proof.

Originally posted by h1a8
What evidence did I ignore that explains why Tony didn't get koed or his face broke?

You just stated it, you didn't prove anything. You cearly stated "I pick" that's not proof.

For one, All of the feats of Bucky's metal arm.

I "proved' as much as you did.

Originally posted by Silent Master
For one, All of the feats of Bucky's metal arm.

I "proved' as much as you did.

How does that explain what happened to Tony?

I stated the other strength feats proving that Ozy has superhuman strength. I stated because of Bucky's other strength feats then he has superstrength. Therefore that other option is invalid.

Originally posted by h1a8
How does that explain what happened to Tony?

Tony wasn't hit with the metal arm

I stated the other strength feats proving that Ozy has superhuman strength. I stated because of Bucky's other strength feats then he has superstrength. Therefore that other option is invalid. [/B]

All the feats you listed were just example of "the movie's physics".

Originally posted by Silent Master
Tony wasn't hit with the metal arm

All the feats you listed were just example of "the movie's physics".

But he was hit by a superhuman.

Which show that both are strong.

Originally posted by h1a8
But he was hit by a superhuman.

Which show that both are strong.

He wasn't hit by the metal arm.

Not seriously injuring humans shows that they're strong?

Originally posted by h1a8
What evidence did I ignore that explains why Tony didn't get koed or his face broke?

You just stated it, you didn't prove anything. You cearly stated "I pick" that's not proof.

The evidence that trained fighters don't put their full strength behind every hit and that some hits are weaker than others due to body mechanics and physics

Originally posted by h1a8
1. I provided many things.
2. True. But it has to be proven if T'Challa can even move is hands even close to bullet speeds. Running even 60mph doesn't prove that.
3. Ok good to know that you don't know this basic fact. Ozy strength feats are greater.
4. Putting someone in an armbar has nothing to do with being stronger. Women have put much stronger men in armbars. Remember the wrist is very weak.

1. You provided a lot of imaginary stuff made up by you.
2. You completely missed the point and are now straw manning
3. And I'm asking for proof. Same way the rest of us provide proof when we claim something. only trolls don't provide proof.
4. Ànd there you have it, further proof that h1 knows nothing about fighting. Armbars have nothing to do with a wrist's strength.

Originally posted by FrothByte
The evidence that trained fighters don't put their full strength behind every hit and that some hits are weaker than others due to body mechanics and physics

Bottom line is that he's using Tony not being seriously injured as a basis for invalidating feats for character BP.

Therefore we can do the same, as such I'm using the characters not being seriously injured as basis for invalidating Ozy's feats.

h1 should probably Google the difference between an armbar and a wristlock.

Originally posted by Silent Master
h1 should probably Google the difference between an armbar and a wristlock.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Bottom line is that he's using Tony not being seriously injured as a basis for invalidating feats for character BP.

Therefore we can do the same, as such I'm using the characters not being seriously injured as basis for invalidating Ozy's feats.

You can do so but there has to be a logical connection.

Tony invalidates BP taking the metal arm. They are logically connected (durability compares to durability).

Tony feat does not invalidate Bucky's strength. They are not logically connected since there is other evidence supporting Bucky's strength.

My logic suggests that Bucky is still strong. That same logic applies to Ozy.

Originally posted by FrothByte
The evidence that trained fighters don't put their full strength behind every hit and that some hits are weaker than others due to body mechanics and physics

Bucky used nearly his full strength as I have proven. You keep trolling and talking about others. Talk about Bucky, no one else. Did he or didn't he use nearly full might? The elbow was delivered viciously to the face.

Let's take your points one at a time.

1) "Tony invalidates BP taking the metal arm."
Answer: Tony wasn't hit with the metal arm, So you're wrong.