Can Zod replicate Kurse's Mjolnir feat?

Originally posted by h1a8
@Nibedicus
Stop being denseand trolling the thread. The assertion is about the limitations of Mjolnir, not the capability of a steel door.

"Mjolnir can't do something" doesn't need to be proven. It's just true unless proven otherwise.

You're an idiot. We know, you know it, everyone knows it.

Originally posted by h1a8
I believe a steel door would stop Mjolnir from returning on the first attempt.

Is a declarative statement. It is establishing an exact limitation and even after you reworded it into the negative sense, the intention of your post is already perfectly clear, you are trying to establish a definitive limit to lowball something you don't like being the dishonest troll you are.

Here let me help you:

If you wanted to argue within the premise of a negative, the correct way of stating it would have been (and though I would still disagree, as I've already previously posted proof via writer's intent on page 4 of this thread):

"There is no evidence (that I know of) of Mjolnir's return enchant being able to go thru even a steel door."

That at least would be more credible due to it sticking to what you know (or think you know) and it's openness to evidence. But declaring a limit without full knowledge of what evidence exists out there is just you being your usual disingenuous self.

Seriously, it's like you must get turned on when people tear you down, it's the only explanation. This must be some sort of weird kink for you.

Masochistic indeed.

H1 needs to stop lying, his original statement wasn't "Mjolnir can't" it was "a steel door would".

Originally posted by h1a8
I believe a steel door would stop Mjolnir from returning on the first attempt.

44 secs in...

YouTube video

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You're an idiot. We know, you know it, everyone knows it.

Is a declarative statement. It is establishing an exact limitation and even after you reworded it into the negative sense, the intention of your post is already perfectly clear, you are trying to establish a definitive limit to lowball something you don't like being the dishonest troll you are.

Here let me help you:

If you wanted to argue within the premise of a negative, the correct way of stating it would have been (and though I would still disagree, as I've already previously posted proof via writer's intent on page 4 of this thread):

"There is no evidence (that I know of) of Mjolnir's return enchant being able to go thru even a steel door."

That at least would be more credible due to it sticking to what you know (or think you know) and it's openness to evidence. But declaring a limit without full knowledge of what evidence exists out there is just you being your usual disingenuous self.

Seriously, it's like you must get turned on when people tear you down, it's the only explanation. This must be some sort of weird kink for you.

Take a deep breath Nibe. Dont want to get a heart attack.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You're an idiot. We know, you know it, everyone knows it.

Is a declarative statement. It is establishing an exact limitation and even after you reworded it into the negative sense, the intention of your post is already perfectly clear, you are trying to establish a definitive limit to lowball something you don't like being the dishonest troll you are.

Here let me help you:

If you wanted to argue within the premise of a negative, the correct way of stating it would have been (and though I would still disagree, as I've already previously posted proof via writer's intent on page 4 of this thread):

"There is no evidence (that I know of) of Mjolnir's return enchant being able to go thru even a steel door."

That at least would be more credible due to it sticking to what you know (or think you know) and it's openness to evidence. But declaring a limit without full knowledge of what evidence exists out there is just you being your usual disingenuous self.

Seriously, it's like you must get turned on when people tear you down, it's the only explanation. This must be some sort of weird kink for you.

This is not school. The idea was about the limitation of Mjolnir. It's common sense. Mjolnir can't pass through a sheet of paper if it can't be proven.
Mjolnir can't do anything if it can't be proven. That's the bottom line.
It's a negative (what Mjolnir can't do). Since this thread is about Mjolnir.

H1 needs to stop lying, his original statement wasn't "Mjolnir can't" it was "a steel door would".

Originally posted by h1a8
I believe a steel door would stop Mjolnir from returning on the first attempt.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is not school. The idea was about the limitation of Mjolnir. It's common sense. Mjolnir can't pass through a sheet of paper if it can't be proven.
Mjolnir can't do anything if it can't be proven. That's the bottom line.
It's a negative (what Mjolnir can't do). Since this thread is about Mjolnir.

Wrong.

Wrap your head around this concept:

1) A steel door would stop Mjolnir.
2) Mjolnir would punch thru a steel door.

Absence of evidence does not prove either. Both are unproven. One can’t make either declaration, else they need to provide proof.

Even when expressed by a weasel into the negative sense, both would be considered unproven. Not wrong. Thus your argument is invalid as well.

Thus we are just are right in disregarding your weasel points since you refuse to provide evidence.

You’re just being a lazy weasel and trying to test out your new MO of trying to slime your way out of providing evidence. Stop being lazy, stop being a weasel and stop being dishonest.

This is not school.
This is a debate forum.
Objects and characters don't get abilities without proof. Who cares how I worded it?
That's the bottom line. You are an idiot talking about irrelevant stuff. My stance is firm on the matter. You are wasting your time.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is not school.
This is a debate forum.
Objects and characters don't get abilities without proof.
That's the bottom line. You are an idiot talking about irrelevant stuff. My stance is firm on the matter. You are wasting your time.

You do not make the rules of logic. So we will just point at you and laugh at your dishonest attempts at lowballing.

Of course you are a waste of time. You are too dumb to make salient points, too stubborn to learn from your mistakes and too lazy to try and get any better.

You have my pity, though.

Originally posted by Silent Master
H1 needs to stop lying, his original statement wasn't "Mjolnir can't" it was "a steel door would".

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You do not make the rules of logic. So we will just point at you and laugh at your dishonest attempts at lowballing.

Of course you are a waste of time. You are too dumb to make salient points, too stubborn to learn from your mistakes and too lazy to try and get any better.

You have my pity, though.

Rules of logic are irrelevant. This is fiction, not real life. Shit in fiction DON'T GET ABILITIES UNLESS PROVEN. DEAL WITH IT.

Originally posted by h1a8
Rules of logic are irrelevant. This is fiction, not real life. Shit in fiction DON'T GET ABILITIES UNLESS PROVEN. DEAL WITH IT.

Then prove that a steel door has the ability to stop Mjolnir. Like you originally said

Originally posted by h1a8
Rules of logic are irrelevant. This is fiction, not real life. Shit in fiction DON'T GET ABILITIES UNLESS PROVEN. DEAL WITH IT.

Ladies and gentlement, h1 now admits to ignoring logic.

Let’s give him a big hand for at least being honest now.

It's about the spirit of what someone says, not the English grammar of how they said it.

In critical thinking this what you are doing is called "nitpicking".
Nitpicking is a fallacy. It doesn't actually rebut the argument.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Then prove that a steel door has the ability to stop Mjolnir under those particular circumstances. Like you originally said

I don't need to. The negative is automatically true unless evidence is presented to show otherwise.

The video of Mjolnir reaching Thor in the Hulk fight might be sufficient evidence. I'm still analyzing it. I can barely hear anything. I'll try headphones.

Yes, h1 considers logic “nitpicking”.

I mean who cares about proper logic when there is all these lowballing opportunites to be made, amirite?

Oh just so you know, grammar =/= logic. We are correcting one and not the other. Might want to look that up. I know words are confusing for you sometimes.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't need to. The negative is automatically true unless evidence is presented to show otherwise.

The video of Mjolnir reaching Thor in the Hulk fight might be sufficient evidence. I'm still analyzing it. I can barely hear anything. I'll try headphones.

Without proof, your statements are just the ramblings of an extremely biased troll

Originally posted by Silent Master
Without proof, your statements are just the ramblings of an extremely biased troll

And frogs are actually intelligent aliens that developed warp drive to observe us. See, I can say silly things too.

Originally posted by h1a8
And frogs are actually intelligent aliens that developed warp drive to observe us. See, I can say silly things too.