Kurse vs Hela

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You have been consistent at shifting burden of proof. To prove a negative. That alone invalidates your entire argument. It doesn't matter how "consistent" your posts are, they are all consistently absent of any evidence.

When pressed to support your position, you just want to avoid having to provide any kind of proof.

You are claiming a feat is invalid (a positive claim) because "we do not know if there is anything else" (a non-position) is tantamount to saying that we should burn all women because we do not know if they are witches. And as proof you present: because, well we think witches are women, even though we don't even know if witches exist. <=== Utter insanity. This. This is the type of "debating" that you are demonstrating right now.

You claim "ambiguity" but provide ZERO factors supported by logic and evidence that can give ambiguity to the "feat". Saying "well she's magic" over and over proves nothing.

False analogy. Your example does not help you at all as it does not show a lot of what happened. The ambiguity is caused by the lack of evidence due to the missing timeline between him coming in and her getting stabbed. And this is provable simply by looking at the evidence in front of us. Thus, we cannot CLAIM that he stabbed her because there is no evidence. And we cannot make unsupported claims like "well, he's a murderer!" (or "the feat is invalid"😉 until we provide evidence that he did. Your example helps my argument more than yours because this is LITERALLY what I have been saying. We cannot make claims when we have no evidence.

A person who does not have the evidence of the husband actually murdering his wife could adopt a non-position of saying "well, I don't have evidence! So we can't say the husband is a murderer. (w/c is a positive claim)"

The same way a person who does not have the evidence of the a strength "feat" being affected by magic could adopt a non-position of saying "well I don't have evidence! So we can't say the "feat" is invalid (w/c is a positive claim)"

I hope that clears thnigs up for you.

And of course we KNOW the whole picture, the picture is in video and is happening right before our eyes and we can replay it over and over. You just don't want to accept it because your opinion is biased by your opinion of her other showings and how strong she should be based on the other showings. But if you take the showing at face value there is ZERO ambiguity here.

A closer analogy to our debate is if we see the husband actually stabbing his wife and you are claiming that ghosts made him do it because it's possible that the house could be haunted (even tho you don't even have evidence of even this). And then you are asking me to disprove the existence of ghosts. <=== This. This is the type of "logic" you are exposing me, too. /facepalm

Fine, I will take your challenge to make the "feat" valid. This is the BZ:

"Based on evidence, the Hela Mjolnir crush is a valid strength "feat"." (y/n)

I will take yes.

Do you accept?

Again, you are asking me to bring evidence out of an inconclusive feat. Which is basically my entire argument here.

You are partially correct.

And yet, fail to realize that you can't say the husband is innocent either, in other words you are resulting in a type 2 error. In other words, the evidence doesn't prove anything!

If you feel like you can quantify the feat, then I'm in.

Let's make this simple, he's asking what evidence makes the feat inconclusive?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Let's make this simple, he's asking what evidence makes the feat inconclusive?

Not knowing if the feat is one of pure strength or if magic played a role.

In which case, we can't draw numbers from the feat.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Not knowing if the feat is one of pure strength or if magic played a role.

In which case, we can't draw numbers from the feat.

We can't draw numbers from the feat either way. All we can say is that it's more impressive than any strength feat Kurse has.

Oh and yes it's pure strength. She doesn't use any other power, why complicate it?

Originally posted by Surtur
We can't draw numbers from the feat either way. All we can say is that it's more impressive than any strength feat Kurse has.

Oh and yes it's pure strength. She doesn't use any other power, why complicate it?

If the feat is one of pure strength, then we can estimate Hela's strength based on the metal's properties (Which clearly is way stronger than any metal on earth).

We don't know that, at least visually you can assume it to be mere strength.

But considering Hela's background and knowning that Mjolnir can be influenced by magic, I don't think it to be mere strength.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Not knowing if the feat is one of pure strength or if magic played a role.

In which case, we can't draw numbers from the feat.

What evidence do you have that magic might have played a role.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
If the feat is one of pure strength, then we can estimate Hela's strength based on the metal's properties (Which clearly is way stronger than any metal on earth).

We don't know that, at least visually you can [B]assume it to be mere strength.

But considering Hela's background and knowning that Mjolnir can be influenced by magic, I don't think it to be mere strength. [/B]

Lol what? What numbers would you assign to it as a pure strength feat?

Originally posted by Silent Master
What evidence do you have that magic might have played a role.

Hela's hands pulling knifes from thin air and turning her hair into spikes by merely touching it.

Also:

Hela to Thor while holding Mjolnir:

Darling, you have no idea what's possible

We definitely don't know the extent of Hela's magic and power.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Again, you are asking me to bring evidence out of an [B]inconclusive feat. Which is basically my entire argument here.

You are partially correct.

And yet, fail to realize that you can't say the husband is innocent either, in other words you are resulting in a type 2 error. In other words, the evidence doesn't prove anything!

If you feel like you can quantify the feat, then I'm in. [/B]

I am not asking you to bring evidence of an inconclusive "feat", I am asking you to bring evidence to prove the "feat" is inconclusive.

You presented a false analogy with clear evidence gaps that does not represent the debate we are having. And you did not properly represent your position in this debate. You cannot take a non-position stance (I do not know if there are any factors involved in the "feat"😉 and then make a positive claim (thus the "feat" is invalid"😉.

You cannot go "We do not know who murdered the wife" (a non-position), thus "the husband is innocent" (an active claim).

And even worse, we actually HAVE proof in front of us. We see everything happening. So a more accurate depiction of our argument is this:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
we see (and have pictures of) the husband actually stabbing his wife and you are claiming that ghosts made him do it because it's possible that the house could be haunted (even tho you don't even have evidence of even this). And then you are asking me to disprove the existence of ghosts. <=== This. This is the type of "logic" you are exposing me to. /facepalm

Now I have to "quantify the feat"? Why the goalpost move? Quantification of the "feat" isn't even part of our debate and now you want that added in? I am feeling that you are afraid of accepting the BZ because you know I can prove my side of it so you are inserting unreasonable conditions that aren't even part of our discussion.

No. You insist that the "feat" is invalid as a strength "feat". I disagree. That is the BZ. I have already given you so much leeway, it's not even funny. Stop ducking and accept the BZ.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol what? What numbers would you assign to it as a pure strength feat?

If you bend an iron bar with your bare hand, you can calculate the strength applied by the hand based on the tensile strength of steel.

In this case, Uru is a metal definitely stronger than Titanium. So, if we use Titanium as the parameter, we can draw numbers for how strong Hela's hand is.

Then...Oh well, we know that an arm>>>>>>>hand.

So, Hela's strength would be immense.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
If you bend an iron bar with your bare hand, you can calculate the strength applied by the hand based on the tensile strength of steel.

In this case, Uru is a metal definitely stronger than Titanium. So, if we use Titanium as the parameter, we can draw numbers for how strong Hela's hand is.

Then...Oh well, we know that an arm>>>>>>>hand.

So, Hela's strength would be immense.

"immense" is not a number.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Hela's hands pulling knifes from thin air and turning her hair into spikes by merely touching it.

Also:

Hela to Thor while holding Mjolnir:

How is that evidence that Hela might have used magic to help crush Mjolnir?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You cannot take a non-position stance (I do not know if there are any factors involved in the "feat"😉 and then make a positive claim (thus the "feat" is invalid"😉.

Okay, it's clear where you are misinterpreting things here.

A positive claim would be to say that the feat requires PURE strength. Another positive claim would be to say that the feat requires PURE magic. A positive claim would be to say that the feat requires BOTH magic and strength.

I am not making a positive claim, I am making a neutral claim (The variables of the feat are UNKNOWN). That's why I have repeatedly said that the feat doesn't prove anything!

Originally posted by Nibedicus
[BYou cannot go "We do not know who murdered the wife" (a non-position), thus "the husband is innocent" (an active claim).

And even worse, we actually HAVE proof in front of us. We see everything happening. So a more accurate depiction of our argument is this:[/B]

.....Read again, I never said that.

I clearly said that the husband wouldn't be guilty nor innocent (neutral position). That's what would happen at court, the evidence would be futile to draw a veredict.

I hope this clears things for you

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Now I have to "quantify the feat"? Why the goalpost move? Quantification of the "feat" isn't even part of our debate and now you want that added in? I am feeling that you are afraid of accepting the BZ because you know I can prove my side of it so you are inserting unreasonable conditions that aren't even part of our discussion.

No. You insist that the "feat" is invalid as a strength "feat". I disagree. That is the BZ. I have already given you so much leeway, it's not even funny. Stop ducking and accept the BZ.

Come on Nibe, again, you are clearly misinterpreting things up here fellow.

My claim doesn't focus on the feat proving a side, but on the feat being invalid (That it proves no side at all).

Quantification is the only thing that would make the feat valid. Again, we are at a MVF. We need to compare Kurse strength to Hela's, ergo, we need to know how strong Hela is. That can only be achieved by either proving the feat is one of MERE strength or knowing how much physical strength Hela applied to Mjolnir.

And again, that has been my point since the beginning.

Originally posted by Surtur
"immense" is not a number.

I am not going to calculate it. I just know that if I do, Hela's strength would outmatch anything seen in the MCU.

Originally posted by Silent Master
How is that evidence that Hela might have used magic to help crush Mjolnir?

......

She's can perform magic tricks, ergo, she could have used magic in the feat....

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
......

She's can perform magic tricks, ergo, she could have used magic in the feat....

What magic tricks can she perform that would help her destroy Mjolnir?

Originally posted by Silent Master
What magic tricks can she perform that would help her destroy Mjolnir?

That's the thing, we don't know. Again, Hela's extent over magic is unknown.

If I were to know, I would be claiming that magic was used, and not that the feat is invalid for not concluding on anything.

double post

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
1) Okay, it's clear where you are misinterpreting things here.

A positive claim would be to say that the feat requires PURE strength. Another positive claim would be to say that the feat requires PURE magic. A positive claim would be to say that the feat requires BOTH magic and strength.

I am not making a positive claim, I am making a neutral claim (The variables of the feat are UNKNOWN). That's why I have repeatedly said that the feat doesn't prove anything!

2) .....Read again, I never said that.

I clearly said that the husband wouldn't be guilty nor innocent (neutral position). That's what would happen at court, the evidence would be futile to draw a veredict.

[B]I hope this clears things for you

3) Come on Nibe, again, you are clearly misinterpreting things up here fellow.

My claim doesn't focus on the feat proving a side, but on the feat being invalid (That it proves no side at all).

4) Quantification is the only thing that would make the feat valid. Again, we are at a MVF. We need to compare Kurse strength to Hela's, ergo, we need to know how strong Hela is. That can only be achieved by either proving the feat is one of MERE strength or knowing how much physical strength Hela applied to Mjolnir.

And again, that has been my point since the beginning. [/B]

1) You made a "neutral claim" (We do not know if magic was involved...) THEN inserted a positive claim right after it (thus the "feat" is invalid). I think my explanation was clear enough about this, how are you missing this?

I feel you are wasting my time by going in circles now.

2) Wrong. The "feat" proving either of our "sides" (that magic is involved or not) AND it being valid/invalid are separate claims. You refused to prove one claim and used that as proof for another claim.

3) Which is a misrepresentation of the debate we are having. Again, you made a neutral claim then inserted a positive claim right after. I merely represented it with a more proper analogy.

4) Wrong. The "feat" is validated by the presence (or absence) of evidence making it valid. Quantificaiton comes after the acceptance of the "feat" being valid. Else I'd be wasting my time trying to quantify a "feat" you're not even willing to accept as valid, won't I?

Enough stalling. Last call.

"Based on evidence, the Hela Mjolnir crush is a valid strength "feat"." (y/n)

I will take yes.

Do you accept the BZ or not?

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
That's the thing, we don't know. Again, Hela's extent over magic is unknown.

If I were to know, I would be claiming that magic was used, and not that the feat is invalid for not concluding on anything.

We go by feats, if she never showed magic that would help her crush Mjolnir, then she doesn't have any.