makhai

This user has not updated recently.

3389 0 37 42
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

makhai's forum posts

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By makhai

LOL. You using still images from a trailer of the movie is invalid.

Again, I never said and you never proved that it was from a trailer. You seem to be making a habit of making claims that are patently false.

It's common sense that trailers don't 100% reflect the final product that is the movie, and it's proven that some of the scenes in the trailer don't reflect in the actual film.

Again, where did you prove that it was from a trailer and not simply an editor error, as your compatriot had claimed?

Also, the fact that you're trying to change the subject by bringing up past events shows how piss poor your argument is and how truly bad you are as a debater, it's irrelevant. This is neither here or there. If you can't stay on topic go back to the basics.

No, I was putting a spotlight on your motivations, which clearly made this personal for you. I would hate for people to get the wrong impression of you.

Don't play dumb, dude. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Look at those marks, look how thin they are, look how they are spaced out, how can Ironman make these marks?

Look, you simply never supported your argument well enough to justify my concession. You never do and I imagine you will never gain such an ability. Others had to come and do it for you. Iron Man could have easily made those same markings with nothing more than a punch. The spacing would have been the same and his knuckles would be metal, making the ability to mark the shield possible.

I mean I already proved you wrong on the fact that he didn't make these marks at all...so I guess it doesn't matter, unless you use that big ole brain of yours.

You didn't prove anything. Others did. You don't deserve credit for anything other than showing everyone that you have some kind of immature issue with me.

Don't make me repeat myself.......

About what? You clearly don't understand how metal rubbing against metal can leave superficial markings.

I wasn't trying to prove that Panther damaged the shield...but rather your reasoning on how these scratches got there.

Which you never proved at all. You can't use contested evidence as factual evidence.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@makhai said:
@power_titan said:

@makhai

I already explained to you the bullet marks and the shield picture you posted with nearly all the paint worn off and all the scratches is from a movie poster and not from the WS movie itself. The picture I showed you of the shield with claw marks in the metal is from the actual movie itself.

Not all the pictures are reflecting bullet marks and the movie poster only adds a bit more flash to the rest of the evidence you refuse to acknowledge. Now who is in "won't admit I am wrong no matter what" mode?

The claw marks do not show grooves in the metal itself. It was never stated to have damaged the shield and I have shown you an overwhelming amount of evidence that proves that the white portion of the shield is just as prone to markings as the red portions.

The metal portion of the shield (it is not white as you misstate it to be it is metallic) shows claw grooves in it. The shield only shows marks when it is dirty where the dirt is scraped off or there the bullets scrape the dirt off and leave residue in your pictures and is just dirt/grime/lead/powder. The claw marks, however, show up on a clean shield and cut into the metal can be seen by the angle of view.

I only just began discussing the matter with you. Show me his shield afterwards where the claw marks are buffed out and I will certainly concede.

Oh boy, more of the "won't admit I am wrong no matter what" nonsense. Now you are getting into splitting hairs over the color of the shield lol Jesus. Besides, I already gave you a logical explanation that you completely ignored. Polish could easily explain markings on the clean, white portion of the shield. Furthermore, there was several other pictures that I posted that debunk your claims that again, you simply ignored. When you can prove that the markings are still in the shield after being in the care of Tony, I will concede to you.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Bah, alright then.

Anyone who wants to just battle for funz hit me up on PM.

You bring up a neat idea. This is probably going to be my last tournament for a while. I am going to be away to prep for the MCAT. So while this tournament is going and while I am waiting to find time to start a new tournament, this thread can be used to challenge users casual matches. Before I leave, I will post the names of all those who have participated in the tournament, so potential challengers can be more easily found.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By makhai

@power_titan said:

@makhai

I already explained to you the bullet marks and the shield picture you posted with nearly all the paint worn off and all the scratches is from a movie poster and not from the WS movie itself. The picture I showed you of the shield with claw marks in the metal is from the actual movie itself.

Not all the pictures are reflecting bullet marks and the movie poster only adds a bit more flash to the rest of the evidence you refuse to acknowledge. Now who is in "won't admit I am wrong no matter what" mode?

The claw marks do not show grooves in the metal itself. It was never stated to have damaged the shield and I have shown you an overwhelming amount of evidence that proves that the white portion of the shield is just as prone to markings as the red portions. Frankly, there is no way to prove your argument until there is a future installment of the franchise that has the shield in it. I'll be waiting if you want to massage your own ego then.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By makhai

@power_titan: Not good enough? Okay. Here is another set of examples for you to try to dismiss.

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

The last one is an actual movie prop at auction. It's not that I am in some kind of mode, it's simply that I have no reason to admit that I am wrong when it is you who is wrong and refuses to concede. If paint isn't good enough, we could just as easily say polish. Not that it should matter because the end result would be the same. When a metal surface with polish is scratched, it leaves a mark even if the metal itself isn't scored. Paint, polish, it doesn't matter.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@makhai said:

Not that this matters anyway since these pictures have not illustrated that the metal itself has been scored. At best, it only proves that Black Panther scratched paint. Big deal, so do bullets.

No Caption Provided

Wrong!

No Caption Provided

We clearly see markings on the white portions. Just bullets. Mere bullets...

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By makhai

Accept your faults. dude. You used invalid information.

Which fault is that? The information was not invalid. Furthermore, I readily admitted where I retrieved it from. Even if you debunked my evidence, that is not a reflection on me because I already stated that I could not vouch for it as lifted directly from the movie. So essentially, you decided to make personal what wasn't necessary. Clearly this is because I shamed you in a past argument concerning your negative opinion of a certain moderator.

He does if he wants to make those kinds of marks.

Have you... actually seen what happens to paint when metal rubs against metal? I mean this is kind of a basic, common knowledge kind of thing that I am incredibly saddened needs to be explained but...

And why would he scratch it? He never attacks in the manner that it is possible for these marks to appear.

Any metal on metal contact causes more than enough friction to rub mere paint off. Holy Christ...

Here are the marks literally right after Black Panther scratching it. This was way before fighting Tony.

And? Even if you are correct about the shield markings, you have failed to prove that the shield itself was cut.

@nomar said:

@heatblaze123: You're wasting your time. You can't debate with someone who is doing the equivalent of plugging their ears and going 'lalala'. He knows what he's doing. It's an editing error and he's gonna run with it.

Oh wow. I really must have hurt your feelings for you to be this passive-aggressive. I am very sorry you were so hurt by my total lack of intimidation of you that you had to throw shade at me through a conversation with someone else. Also, a quick review of your posting history shows me you are guilty of the exact same thing you are accusing me of. You never once seek any kind of common ground, compromise, or understanding. You just spew hate and given your sporadic posting history, over an incredibly large span of time, I think it is safe to assume you may be an alt that you use because you lack the courage to act in such a way with your main.

Not that any of this matters anyway since these pictures have not illustrated that the metal itself has been scored. At best, it only proves that Black Panther scratched paint. Big deal, so do bullets.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

This is so dumb. You can't use still images from the trailer because most of the time it's heavily altered and/or largely different from the actual film. While I do agree with the notion that we can't know for certain if he scratched his shield or just the paint, the implication that those scratches coming from Ironman..is stupid. Why on earth would Ironman make these marks? There's no scene where he scratches the shield or anything similar, this is all from Panther. Also it goes without saying he had those marks on his shield way before his fight with Ironman, and only after his fight with Panther.

No Caption Provided

How is it stupid? You know what is stupid? Not knowing that metal can scratch paint. That is true stupidity. Iron Man doesn't need claws to scratch paint. The simple fact that he has a prolonged fight with Cap, where he struck and was struck by the shield is enough to question where the marks came from. Show me the scene before their fight where the shield had the claw marks. That is evidence. Showing me the shield after Cap hit and blocked dozens of attacks from Iron Man is not satisfactory evidence.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

It needs to be established which version of the characters are being compared. People have been all over the place with scans, casually mixing up Elseworlds and New 52 stories.

Anyway, I read through every single post in this thread. I'll chronicle some of it so others don't have to read through it.

  • The OP posted a question he had no interest in debating about. Not one post did he concede a single point, despite blatantly making up evidence (e.g. Thor can move 100s of planets at once). Whenever someone would bring up an argument for Wonder Woman, he'd shut it down by saying Thor magically has the Odin-Force or Power Gem. Not only that, but he went on to say that Thor would easily dispose of SA Superman. When that was refuted, he kept changing which Thor it was (i.e., suddenly it was Rune King Thor). The most absurd argument brought up was probably Thor being universal with the power to demolish the COIE Anti-Monitor without trying. Regardless, what was even more annoying, was sifting through the remnants of grammar between the OP and the main person he was arguing with. At times it was completely incoherent.
  • After that, the feat where Superman and Wonder Woman lifted the Spectre was discussed. Basically a lot of nonsense going around on both sides, seeing that it's a really hard thing to quantify. Someone proposed the Spectre had infinite weight because he was said to contain "eternity", so there was a bit of a pseudo-intellectual philosophical bickering going on.

What I will say about the feat itself is, we don't know how much the Spectre weighs. All we know is he's heavy enough for not only Wonder Woman, but Superman as well to struggle greatly. Neither of them showed to falter anymore than the other, meaning they were lifting about the same amount. Another thing we can ascertain about this incident is, if both heroes are struggling so greatly to lift the Spectre with all their might, and can barely move him at all, then he weighs more than anything they've previously lifted individually. So while we may not be able to quantify how much his mass or anything like that is, we can say he's one of the heaviest, if not the heaviest thing they've lifted.

  • So the OP continually prattled on about Thor manhandling the snake around the Earth, claiming it was "the weight of the Earth". However, it was debunked several times later (see: post #472), despite being ignored by the majority, that the snake could not rationally weigh anywhere near that amount. It was calculated that "33% of the moon exceeds the weight of the Midgard Serpent by over 2.3 billion times." And that's being generous for the snake's unknown variables.
  • At some point it was addressed that you can't use one feat to determine the outcome of this sort of question, as a consistency must be determined. As such, Thor's next greatest feat presented was throwing a bunch of debris off him while resisting the gravity of a neutron star, which wasn't even remotely comparable to Wonder Woman pulling the Earth. The most common counterpoint brought up to that was how it's unknown what the strength distribution was between Superman, Wonder Woman and the Martian Manhunter. In response to that, mathematically, the numbers were shown to make no significant difference even if Superman and J'onn were pulling 1000 times more than her together. That retort however, was ignored by pretty much everyone.
  • For some reason, people were arguing about whether or not the Roman and Greek gods were the same (they split up due to Darkseid's handiwork), and whether Diana had Gaea's strength. Turns out, she does. Many misconceptions were thrown around, such as Wonder Woman being made of clay, despite that being a ruse to mask her tryst with Zeus.
  • Then the comparisons and contrasts between lifting strength and striking power were elaborated on. A point that was never refuted was that if Character A takes a nuclear bomb to their face, at ground zero, and consistently exhibits feats of that magnitude, then in order for them to be significantly damaged, a greater output of power must be exerted from Character B. This was used to show that since Wonder Woman has tanked far more powerful attacks than Thor, such as from Superman, then logically, their strengths are comparable. A lot of people were disputing Wonder Woman being close to Superman in strength, but virtually every character with an informed opinion on the two, that's made a statement about their strengths to each other, has stated they're roughly equal. Not only that, but a number of guidebooks also support that notion.
  • Scans were brought up for both characters, mostly demonstrating Diana has far more consistency in her strength. The OP returned and started talking about Thor getting power boosts and repeating the serpent is the weight of the Earth. He went on and on and on about how SA Superman is weaker than Thor with the Power Gem... despite there being no relevance for it. Scans were grossly taken out of context, despite the context having been explained prior and all previous counters were ignored as though they were never read, thus the OP repeated the same points he initially made... over... and over... and over.
  • Skipping ahead, someone posted scans from crossovers, comparing and contrasting how Wonder Woman did against foes Thor had fought. The latter didn't fair too well. A variety of points about durability and striking power were brought up... and ignored, again.
  • Someone also made a completely asinine remark that debates are purely conjectural; therefore Thor should be able to create his own powers in battle to suit whatever comes his way. Essentially, Thor can do whatever he wants, due to a misconception of how debates should work. I can understand why they may have erroneously came to such a misunderstanding, considering how awful most of the arguments on both sides here have been in this thread, but it's still not warranted.

Overall, what I've learned from this thread is:

There's a strong correlation between having an anime avatar, having bad grammar and making little to no logically sound arguments.

You should be paid for this. Also, thank you.

Avatar image for makhai
makhai

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

42

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@makhai: I told you in the PM that in the case I couldn't have Hoopa then I chose Scolipede.

And? I was only going to check to make sure no one else had taken pokemon during the draft. The format is OU. Your team must check through validation to play in OU. What did you expect to happen when you went to fight someone and SHOWDOWN denied you? How was that supposed to be my fault? I don't control Showdown.