Luke Cage vs. Loki

^ You are not stating a negative. You said it takes less than 2 tons for Loki to manhandle Thor like he did. That's not a negative. Now you're trying to backtrack and reword your sentence to make it look like a negative, well all that does is make you look completely stupid since we all can go back a few pages and see your original statement.

Now, here's my statement: You don't know what the hell you're talking about. That's a negative and doesn't need proof. If you disagree, please provide proof that you actually know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by h1a8
You can’t prove a negative.
Loki didn’t use more than 2 tons because there is no evidence to suggest that he did. It’s simple.

If you disagree, then provide evidence to support that Loki used more than 2 tons to achieve the feat.

Your claim wasn't a negative, so you have to prove it.

Originally posted by FrothByte
^ You are not stating a negative. You said it takes less than 2 tons for Loki to manhandle Thor like he did. That's not a negative. Now you're trying to backtrack and reword your sentence to make it look like a negative, well all that does is make you look completely stupid since we all can go back a few pages and see your original statement.

Now, here's my statement: You don't know what the hell you're talking about. That's a negative and doesn't need proof. If you disagree, please provide proof that you actually know what you're talking about.

Ok. Prove that it takes less than a trillion tons to do what Loki did. Can you?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Your claim wasn't a negative, so you have to prove it.

It is. It's implied.

Loki DIDN'T apply 2 tons or more.

That's a negative. Negatives can be disproven but not proven.

Originally posted by h1a8
It is. It's implied.

Loki DIDN'T apply 2 tons or more.

That's a negative. Negatives can be disproven but not proven.

Saying that the feat required less than 2 tons of force isn't a negative. you're just trying to weasel your way out of having to back a claim.

Originally posted by h1a8
It takes less than 2 tons of strength to replicate Loki's feat. Cage's feat shows strength above 50 tons (feat is beyond 10 tons and casual means he can apply 5x more force).

Prove it

Originally posted by Silent Master
Saying that the feat required less than 2 tons of force isn't a negative. you're just trying to weasel your way out of having to back a claim.

Prove it

It is. I rephrased the statement to show the implied negative.

“Loki DIDN'T apply 2 tons or more.”

Originally posted by h1a8
It takes less than 2 tons of strength to replicate Loki's feat. Cage's feat shows strength above 50 tons (feat is beyond 10 tons and casual means he can apply 5x more force).

The above is not a negative claim and thus the burden is on you to prove it.

Attempting to re-word your claim to avoid the burden of proof is a troll move, are you a troll?

Originally posted by Silent Master
The above is not a negative claim and thus the burden is on you to prove it.

Attempting to re-word your claim to avoid the burden of proof is a troll move, are you a troll?

Originally posted by h1a8
Rewording without changing the meaning is always valid.

I challenge you to a battlezone in regards to whether or not your orignal claim was a negative.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I challenge you to a battlezone in regards to whether or not your orignal claim was a negative.

Loki stomps and its not even hard.

Originally posted by h1a8
It takes less than 2 tons of strength to replicate Loki's feat. Cage's feat shows strength above 50 tons (feat is beyond 10 tons and casual means he can apply 5x more force).

Prove it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove it.

It DOES NOT take 2 or more tons to achieve the feat.

This is a negative.

Originally posted by h1a8
It takes less than 2 tons of strength to replicate Loki's feat. Cage's feat shows strength above 50 tons (feat is beyond 10 tons and casual means he can apply 5x more force).

The above claim is not a negative statement and thus it requires proof.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The above claim is not a negative statement and thus it requires proof.

Which means exactly

It DOES NOT take 2 or more tons to achieve the feat.

This is a negative.

Originally posted by h1a8
Which means exactly

It DOES NOT take 2 or more tons to achieve the feat.

This is a negative.

Back up your claim.

I've seen H1 pull some utterly pathetic tactics to try and back out of things (including the whole forum-wide conspiracy thing against him he made up), but this one takes the cake.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Back up your claim.

The idiot doesn't realise that, using his own argument, someone else can just say it doesn't take less than 2 tons to achieve. And then, by H1's current standards, they are not required to prove their claim. Though there is already showings where Thor (the guy Loki was muscling around) physically scuffled with the Hulk, all of Cap's feats (who Loki toyed with), as well as other feats from Asgardians (like bending tactical knives, busting through concrete, kicking camper trailers so they skid like 20 feet etc.) which suggest over 2 ton level strength for those characters (people Loki can physically compete with). Which is infinitely more evidence in support of 2+ tons than anything H1 has presented for his claim... Considering he has presented literally nothing, and admitted to making up the 2 ton number.

It is up to someone to prove the negative wrong.

So prove that it took more than 2 tons.

Edit: Feats are not shared. Loki is a frost giant. Asgardians are made of different races of beings, with different strengths. Even within a race there are differences.

ABC logic does not work since Hulk treated Loki as a play toy.
Loki had a difficullt time with Cap. Cap hits were affecting him, just not a whole lot. Loki failed to put Cap down after several hits. He's not much above Cap.

Originally posted by h1a8
Ok. Prove that it takes less than a trillion tons to do what Loki did. Can you?

Yes, I can actually. But I don't need to prove it and I won't, you know why? Because I never made that claim. You can't ask me to prove something I never made a claim for. You're the one who made the claim, you provide your proof.