Worthy Cap vs. Aquaman

Originally posted by h1a8

1. I did. I gave the IM example of him scanning ONLY the armor and Jarvis stating that there is no way to penetrate it. But in a later scene IM easily busts through the underbelly. But the real proof is that Armor >>>>areas not protected by common sense. If you believe that the armor served no purpose (didn't make the leviathan more durable) then you have to prove that since that goes against the status quo.

2. Well visually see the laser hit only the armor. How do you explain IM busting through the underbelly then? Jarvis was referring to the laser penetrating the armor.

3. Doesn't matter as IM shouldn't be able to go through the underbelly if the scan was correct and referred to also the underbelly.

4. Hold more charge as a temporary battery. This is moot since Cap's lightning didn't appear to be as strong as Thor's lightning.

1. Prove that a. The underbelly is not part of the armor and 2. a clip of jarvis scanning only the armor.

2. Busting up the leviathan from the inside does not prove that the exterior of the underbelly is unarmored. Fail.

3. IM never went through the underbelly's armor. Stop making stuff up.

4. Thor has continuous access to lightning. Why would he need something to "hold more charge". Besides, a building is not a battery. You can run electricity around it but there's nothing there to amplify it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Wait wait wait, if you guys are claiming the Leviathan is just as durable on the inside as out, then how do you explain Iron Man being able to blow one up from the inside when he clearly couldnt from the outside?

That's not what we are saying, we are talking about it's underbelly. not it's insides.

Tony asked Jarvis to find him a soft spot, when Jarvis couldn't. Tony had to attack from the inside. As usual h1 is lying

….

Originally posted by Silent Master
That's not what we are saying, we are talking about it's underbelly. not it's insides.

Ah right.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That's not what we are saying, we are talking about it's underbelly. not it's insides.

Tony asked Jarvis to find him a soft spot, when Jarvis couldn't. Tony had to attack from the inside. As usual h1 is lying

This is incorrect. Tony tried a laser on the armor part. Jarvis replied, "sir you will loose power before you penetrate that shell."
Later Tony went inside the Leviathan and came out through the underbelly.

There was no scan done.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is incorrect. Tony tried a laser on the armor part. Jarvis replied, "sir you will loose power before you penetrate that shell."
Later Tony went inside the Leviathan and came out through the underbelly.

There was no scan done.

You're a liar. Tony asked Jarvis to find him a soft spot. Tony flew inside the Leviathan because he couldn't damage the outside.

Originally posted by FrothByte
1. Prove that a. The underbelly is not part of the armor and 2. a clip of jarvis scanning only the armor.

2. Busting up the leviathan from the inside does not prove that the exterior of the underbelly is unarmored. Fail.

3. IM never went through the underbelly's armor. Stop making stuff up.

4. Thor has continuous access to lightning. Why would he need something to "hold more charge". Besides, a building is not a battery. You can run electricity around it but there's nothing there to amplify it.

We clearly see that the leviathan is heavily armored on the top. There is no armor on the bottom. Even if you claim that the underbelly is as durable as the top portion then Tony was still able to penetrate through it. Hell, in the Hulk scene Tony blew up a leviathan after Hulk flipped it over.

So what is shown >>>>> what is said if they both contradict each other.

You have to prove that Thor has indefinite access to lightning without charging Mjolnir. Because we see him charging up Mjolnir multiple times.
This means that the scenes Thor wasn't shown to charge up was because Mjolnir already had charge stored.

If Tony could damage it's underbelly, why didn't he attack the underbelly instead of flying inside?

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're a liar. Tony asked Jarvis to find him a soft spot. Tony flew inside the Leviathan because he couldn't damage the outside.

Jarvis didn't reply back.
Doesn't matter as Tony penetrated from inside = penetrating from the outside if we are using the same material.

Tony couldn't damage the armor. But when Hulk exposed the flesh of the Leviathan (the armor peeled away) Tony easily blew it up.

So the flesh = armor in durability is false.

Originally posted by Silent Master
If Tony could damage it's underbelly, why didn't he attack the underbelly instead of flying inside?

Because it's a movie. A lot of stupid shit happens.
You didn't know this?

I think we've given you enough rope. Their underbelly was armored as anyone that's watched the movie can tell you.

Also, More proof that h1 is a liar

Originally posted by h1a8
1. I did. I gave the IM example of him scanning ONLY the armor

Originally posted by h1a8
There was no scan done.

Originally posted by h1a8
We clearly see that the leviathan is heavily armored on the top. There is no armor on the bottom. Even if you claim that the underbelly is as durable as the top portion then Tony was still able to penetrate through it. Hell, in the Hulk scene Tony blew up a leviathan after Hulk flipped it over.

So what is shown >>>>> what is said if they both contradict each other.

You have to prove that Thor has indefinite access to lightning without charging Mjolnir. Because we see him charging up Mjolnir multiple times.
This means that the scenes Thor wasn't shown to charge up was because Mjolnir already had charge stored.

Nope, we don't clearly see it. In fact everyone here agrees that it's fully armored exteriorly, you're the only one claiming the underbelly is not armored.

As for IM blowing it up, guess you missed the part where he shot his missile through a gap in the leviathan's armor huh?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Nope, we don't clearly see it. In fact everyone here agrees that it's fully armored exteriorly, you're the only one claiming the underbelly is not armored.

As for IM blowing it up, guess you missed the part where he shot his missile through a gap in the leviathan's armor huh?

Oh now I understand you. You are saying that the underbelly is armored. I thought you were arguing that it's flesh was as durable as its armor.

Well that's easily disproven.
I posted a screen shot a while ago showing no armor on the bottom.

But for now let's assume that you are correct. Leviathans are armored underneath too.

How would you explain Tony still penetrating the armor from underneath when he went inside the Leviathan?

Originally posted by Silent Master
I think we've given you enough rope. Their underbelly was armored as anyone that's watched the movie can tell you.

Also, More proof that h1 is a liar

When you said scan I thought you were referring to the scene were IM used his lasers. I already corrected my mistake in an earlier thread. I clearly stated that there no was no scan.

You said that there were. So you lied.

Originally posted by h1a8
Oh now I understand you. You are saying that the underbelly is armored. I thought you were arguing that it's flesh was as durable as its armor.

Well that's easily disproven.
I posted a screen shot a while ago showing no armor on the bottom.

But for now let's assume that you are correct. Leviathans are armored underneath too.

How would you explain Tony still penetrating the armor from underneath when he went inside the Leviathan?

The clip you posted proved that the leviathan's underbelly was a different kind of armor, not that it was unarmored. After all, the leviathans were smashing through buildings with their underbellies and they weren't getting hurt.

As for IM, he blew apart the flesh that was holding the armored plates. No flesh, nothing for armored plates to hold on to. Therefore, a big gaping hole.

Originally posted by FrothByte
The clip you posted proved that the leviathan's underbelly was a different kind of armor, not that it was unarmored. After all, the leviathans were smashing through buildings with their underbellies and they weren't getting hurt.

As for IM, he blew apart the flesh that was holding the armored plates. No flesh, nothing for armored plates to hold on to. Therefore, a big gaping hole.

You basically ignored what I said.
Read the part where I stated let's assume that the bottom is armored.

Originally posted by h1a8
You basically ignored what I said.
Read the part where I stated let's assume that the bottom is armored.

I did, you just didn't get it. Here, let me repeat for you slowly.

IM blew apart the flesh underneath the armor. He blew this up from inside the leviathan. That armor is attached to the flesh. If you blow up the flesh (from inside) the armor has nothing to attach to and thus will go flying away. IM never pentrated the belly armor, he penetrated the inside flesh.

Is it clear now or do I have to spell it out even more?

The movie clearly shows that the entire Leviathan was armored, it also shows Iron Man's missile during the bridge scene only worked because the Hulk's punch created a gap in the armor.

H1 has no idea what he's talking about.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I did, you just didn't get it. Here, let me repeat for you slowly.

IM blew apart the flesh underneath the armor. He blew this up from inside the leviathan. That armor is attached to the flesh. If you blow up the flesh (from inside) the armor has nothing to attach to and thus will go flying away. IM never pentrated the belly armor, he penetrated the inside flesh.

Is it clear now or do I have to spell it out even more?

I disagree with that. It appeared that the armor was busted up as well.

I posted a scene where no armor was shown (scene right before Hulk punched it). I just watched another scene where there were rings of armor on the bottom but half the flesh was exposed. Exposed parts of flesh on the bottom lowers the feat.

Also Cap's lightning wasn't as powerful as Thor's lightning in that scene. So all of this is moot.

So all future posts will only discuss the fact that the blast by Thor isn't practical to Cap in a real fight. Thor absorbed a shitload of lightning for multiple seconds using a building. That isn't afforded to Cap here. So the feat is irrelevant to Cap.

Originally posted by h1a8
I disagree with that. It appeared that the armor was busted up as well.

I posted a scene where no armor was shown (scene right before Hulk punched it). I just watched another scene where there were rings of armor on the bottom but half the flesh was exposed. Exposed parts of flesh on the bottom lowers the feat.

Also Cap's lightning wasn't as powerful as Thor's lightning in that scene. So all of this is moot.

So all future posts will only discuss the fact that the blast by Thor isn't practical to Cap in a real fight. Thor absorbed a shitload of lightning for multiple seconds using a building. That isn't afforded to Cap here. So the feat is irrelevant to Cap.

In other words, you concede that the underbelly of the leviathans are armored. Glad we cleared that up.

Also, unless you can come up with proof that buildings can actually amplify the amperes or voltage of an electric charge, I suggest you stop making stuff up about Thor charging his lightning through the building.