Originally posted by h1a8
Lol I did not even attempt to quantify it. I just said that they were moving at less speed than what you think (Silent).I already said they still were moving faster than sound but that it is irrelevant to the thread.
You have no means of disproving/correcting the numbers so you predictably fall back on pure speculation to muddy evidence while lowballing then trying to shift burden of proof (like always). It’s an old and weak tactic and everyone already knows this is the only thing you fall back onto when you have nothing and get caught trying to pass BS as facts.
Stop being so predictable. Geez.
Originally posted by Silent MasterI can say "thank you for admitting that you are mostly wrong." But that doesn't make it true.
Thank you for admitting HT was traveling between 11,000 and 15,500mph during that section of the flight scene which you claimed to have watched in it's entirety.
You can say untrue things all you want. Has no bearing on the truth.
Originally posted by h1a8
I can say "thank you for admitting that you are mostly wrong." But that doesn't make it true.You can say untrue things all you want. Has no bearing on the truth.
Difference is we've shown our work in regards to coming up with those numbers and you've been completely unable to refute our conclusions.
Therefore the 11000 to 15500 number stands.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Difference is we've shown our work in regards to coming up with those numbers and you've been completely unable to refute our conclusions.Therefore the 11000 to 15500 number stands.
Our work? You did nothing.
His work his had a faulty premise. Therefore making the estimate faulty.
But it doesn’t matter as everyone here excepts that he moved faster than sound INBTHAT SCENE.
Now it doesn’t matter if he moved faster than light in that scene as it has no bearing on the thread whatsoever. So you can choose any speed you like in that scene, I won’t argue against it. Still wouldn’t change the conclusion.
Originally posted by h1a8
Your calculation depends on the characters being normal size in comparison to the land from the perspective we saw. The characters were larger than normal in comparison to the land. That alone disproves your calculation.
Citation needed on physical laws that prove relevance of above claims?
You know how science works right?
He also claimed to be able to punch 2-3 times faster than the fastest punch ever recorded. He's full on retarded. Not internet retarded either. I mean someone with downs syndrome who learned how to type well got on a computer and found this site. And his owners let him stay on it so he doesn't direct his tard rages towards them.
I would not be surprised if he was a fully functioning downer. I don't know why you guys have been arguing with him for years, but I think it hilarious that he found this forum(movie vs). Works out better since his captors only have to put on a movie for him so at least he can pretend he knows as much as everyone else. But that little tard itch somewhere in his brain just locks away that full comprehension to him. No matter how many times he watches the movie while sucking on a full stick of butter, there is always a little bit shut out forever. No matter what, he will never fully understand every part in a movie, but by golly do they put a big old goofy tard smile on his face.
Originally posted by h1a8
Trolling huh I see. Do you actually disagree with the argument? Or you just arguing just to be arguing?
Projecting much?
You make a claim and refuse to even cite what physical law you derived it from. You’re basically just talking out of your butt as usual.
I challenge you to prove that your so-called “argument” (more like a desperate guess, really) affects the calcuations in a significant way.
Otherwise, admit that you don’t really know what you are talking about.
You didn't answer my question.
If you legitimately disagree with the laws of perspective then say so.
I don't actually think you are dumb to believe a helicopter seen flying across the moon in the sky means that the helicopter actually traveled the radius of the moon.
So basically you are trolling at this point.
Originally posted by h1a8
You didn't answer my question.
If you legitimately disagree with the laws of perspective then say so.I don't actually think you are dumb to believe a helicopter seen flying across the moon in the sky means that the helicopter actually traveled the radius of the moon.
So basically you are trolling at this point.
You understand that me asking you to substantiate your claim is the answer to your question, right? And for as long as you refuse to, it only proves you are talking out of your butt?
Kinda laughable as I asked you a question and you refuse to answer it.
Nice to apples to oranges. We are not talking about a helicopter in relation to the moon.
Well, that’s where you and I differ, I actually think you’re dumb and lazy.... and trolling.