Originally posted by h1a8So King Shark scales off Wonder Woman but Batman isn't within the vicinity of Wolverine.
If you disagree that Wolverine is strong enough then he's still stronger than them. They don't get his feats when they are weaker.
Funny how the rules change depending on who h1 argues for.
Originally posted by h1a8
Easily. They are not as strong as Wolverine, who himself isn't strong enough.
If you disagree that Wolverine is strong enough then he's still stronger than them. They don't get his feats when they are weaker.
But....
Originally posted by h1a8
Batman doesn't count. He's the anomaly. He can be in the vicinity of Superman for all we care. He survived a beating from Superman. You can use the same logic on him.And stop analyzing my arguments without having some skin in the game.
Make a claim to what you think (your opinion on matters) then you are free to discuss things with me.It's easy as hell to find flaws in others arguments as long as you never have one yourself. Imo that's a form of trolling.
In debating, you suppose to represent a claim. Not have a claim and yet nitpicking other's claims.
Bats can be in the vicinity of Superman, no?
Originally posted by Smurph
So King Shark scales off Wonder Woman but Batman isn't within the vicinity of Wolverine.Funny how the rules change depending on who h1 argues for.
Using DarkSaint85 arguments.Shame on you. You are a weak debator.
Being in the vicinity has nothing to do with whose stronger. That term is general and applies to anything.
KS is in the vicinity of WW in strength (not speed, not skill, etc) but weaker than her.
Batman being the vicinity of Wolverine in strength doesn't mean he is as strong.
Originally posted by h1a8
Using DarkSaint85 arguments.Shame on you. You are a weak debator.Being in the vicinity has nothing to do with whose stronger. That term is general and applies to anything.
KS is in the vicinity of WW in strength (not speed, not skill, etc) but weaker than her.
Batman being the vicinity of Wolverine in strength doesn't mean he is as strong.
If it applies to anything and is so general, then it's meaningless.
Batman has thrown down several times with WW, with the context being she was more bloodlusted, and he had more extended encounters.
But how is KS taking an elbow from WW which causes him to lose his grip and go Huurk make him in forum WW's vicinity strength wise?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
But....Bats can be in the vicinity of Superman, no?
Batman can be in the vicinity of any being in specific things .He's Batman.
Its funny how you love to use Batman as an example to argue.
Knowing that he has feats well beyond human level.
So either you are assuming he's human level and his superhuman feats are PIS or otherwise.
Originally posted by h1a8
You have to specific about”vicinity ".
We have strength, durability, speed, skill, etcBatman can be in the vicinity of any being in specific things .He's Batman.
Its funny how you love to use Batman as an example to argue.
Knowing that he has feats well beyond human level.
So either you are assuming he's human level and his superhuman feats are PIS or otherwise.
Well he's in the thread, so.....I guess I *shouldn't* mention him?
So you in one sentence argue we need to be specific about the characteristic.......
Then say he can be in this vicinity of anyone, lol.
Originally posted by h1a8I'm not using Darksaint's arguments. Rather, Darksaint and I both happen to think that you're a hypocritical dipshit.
Using DarkSaint85 arguments.Shame on you. You are a weak debator.Being in the vicinity has nothing to do with whose stronger. That term is general and applies to anything.
KS is in the vicinity of WW in strength (not speed, not skill, etc) but weaker than her.
Batman being the vicinity of Wolverine in strength doesn't mean he is as strong.
KS is in the "vicinity of WW" because... she elbowed him in the gut? Are you embarrassed that that's your argument? You should feel a little embarrassed.
KS got elbowed by Diana so he's a class 100 that Kingpin can't touch. But Hulk getting stabbed by Wolverine has no bearing on whether he could get stabbed by Batman. This whole "vicinity" concept is awfully useful when it suits you and awfully meaningless otherwise.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Well he's in the thread, so.....I guess I *shouldn't* mention him?So you in one sentence argue we need to be specific about the characteristic.......
Then say he can be in this vicinity of anyone, lol.
But you are using Equivocation.
You are assuming Batman is superhuman and normal human at the same time. This is a fallacy. If he is superhuman by a good margin then there is no contradiction using him as examples. But if he isn't then using any examples of him being superhuman by a good margin destroys your whole point.
Originally posted by h1a8
But you are using Equivocation.
You are assuming Batman is superhuman and normal human at the same time. This is a fallacy. If he is superhuman by a good margin then there is no contradiction using him as examples. But if he isn't then using any examples of him being superhuman by a good margin destroys your whole point.
My point being that this is a good thread and that Batman and Punisher have the feats to lose round 1, get some wins in round 2 and win round 3 (thus making it balanced)?
How is that destroyed?
My argument on this forum for YEARS is that he Batman does things no human can do. DC can call him 'merely human' all they like, but he has feats - nay, the very concept of Batman - is beyond human.
YOU are projecting here, and projecting your mistake that he's 'only human'. He's not.
Punisher too, to a lesser degree (but then he has far fewer appearances).
Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
I mean, didn't Batman just throw KC Supergirl by using Kryptonian martial arts in recent WF issue?If we go by mere definition of human or superhuman, then Batman, a mere human, just did this to a supposed superhuman, by using an alien martial art
How strong is this version of KC Supergirl?
Originally posted by carver9
How strong is this version of KC Supergirl?
Superhuman/gods/or just a human with some advantage(like years of training) just titles, what we should look at is feats performed by certain characters
Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Missed point here Carver. The point is the simple definition of human and superhuman not holds much weight in terms of determining fiction characters' power levelsSuperhuman/gods/or just a human with some advantage(like years of training) just titles, what we should look at is feats performed by certain characters
And Hulk surviving the weight of a sun on him without a scratch should be proof that they can't hurt him, right?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
My point being that this is a good thread and that Batman and Punisher have the feats to lose round 1, get some wins in round 2 and win round 3 (thus making it balanced)?How is that destroyed?
My argument on this forum for YEARS is that he Batman does things no human can do. DC can call him 'merely human' all they like, but he has feats - nay, the very concept of Batman - is beyond human.
YOU are projecting here, and projecting your mistake that he's 'only human'. He's not.
Punisher too, to a lesser degree (but then he has far fewer appearances).
Ok so your take is that he's superhuman by a good margin. Therefore your points of low balling characters who Batman bested or significantly affected is null and void.
In all honesty. They have a good chance in fight 3.
They have absolutely no chance in 1 or 2.
Originally posted by h1a8
Not all the time. Do your research.
Says the guy who hasn't read a comic in whole decades.
Take your own advice and stay out of these threads if you have nothing to contribute, rather than being contrarian simply for the sake of being contrarian. It never works out well for you, neither here nor in the movie forum. It fails to win people over to your way of thinking.
And everyone can tell you're completely clueless about the subject.
Wolverine being capable of cutting through nigh-indestructible omnium like a hot knife through butter was big news for you. And that's not even in TOP10 of his feats.
Originally posted by StiltmanFTWWhat are Omnium feats. Sounds like one of the many fictitious metals stronger than steel but unknown strength.
Says the guy who hasn't read a comic in whole decades.Take your own advice and stay out of these threads if you have nothing to contribute, rather than being contrarian simply for the sake of being contrarian. It never works out well for you, neither here nor in the movie forum. It fails to win people over to your way of thinking.
And everyone can tell you're completely clueless about the subject.
Wolverine being capable of cutting through nigh-indestructible omnium like a hot knife through butter was big news for you. And that's not even in TOP10 of his feats.
Plus thickness of metal scales to its durability.
Originally posted by h1a8
What are Omnium feats. Sounds like one of the many fictitious metals stronger than steel but unknown strength.
Originally posted by h1a8
Plus thickness of metal scales to its durability.
One foot thick:
Congratulations, you played yourself again. Never change, h1.
Now go be retarded somewhere else.