Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
motifian

Member Since: Sat Jun 10, 2017
Posts: 1,070
In Reply To
zvelf

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,104
Subj: Re: lol
Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 at 02:17:18 am EST (Viewed 60 times)
Reply Subj: Re: lol
Posted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 at 09:38:00 am EST (Viewed 79 times)



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Your scans just reinforce my points! I never said child Zeus didn't have Zeus' power, just that he's in the form of a human child who lacks experience with those powers, hence, Typhon wasn't facing a normal Zeus and so you shouldn't act like he was. In the scan, child Zeus has to be told how to use his power to see the axis mundi. Before that, child Zeus, says, "This is just a building."
      Eh, you said he was human child which he never was. Here Hercules explains what happened.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        http://2.bp.blogspot.com/QGx5UuMeuRwNC7T07wrIEVlSuo0X-1Q6kmi5vY_dNTEfWVeHumwi3wt_xaVFq8LI4NXR5ai3P6nU=s1600

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Zeus was deaged, not turned into a human.



    Quote:
    Even before I clicked on that link, somehow I knew you were going to be grasping at straws. That scan doesn't say that. It only says the waters of Lethe transformed Zeus into the body he's in now. However, this scan plainly states that Zeus is a "HUMAN child". Now why would Greg Pak use that language if Zeus were not a HUMAN child?


Because he wasn't a human child. Typhon did not know Zeus had been just amnesiac.

A human child does not gets Zeus power. That in itself makes no sense.


    Quote:



    Quote:


      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Your whole point here is that Hercules > Typhon > Zeus. Typhon had beaten Hercules to a pulp until Hercules used the waters of Lethe to make Typhon amnesiac. Only then was Hercules able to beat Typhon so Hercules only beat Typhon circumstantially, not through his own power alone. Hence, your claim is misleading.
              There is nothing misleading. I just said how does it feels to receive your own medicine?
            In the context of accusing me of being misleading (which I wasn't), you admitted to doing the same thing. That's what "getting a taste of your own medicine" means!
          So you accept that you were misleading? Because I never said so.
        Wow, that's some lack of reading comprehension. I just plainly stated that I was not being misleading and you follow that up with "you accept that you were misleading?" So now you're saying that you never said that I'm misleading? Then you must think everything I posted is accurate. Yay, I win the debate.
      So how does a "taste of your own medicine" means I was misleading?
    You already asked that question and I already explained it. It's all explained in the quotes above.
      Quote:

        Quote:
        No, I just used your logic to show Odin is a weakling.

      Except that wasn't what you were trying to show. You used the Odin example as an analogy to show why Wonder Woman wasn't hurt.[

    Where did I say that? I said she wasn't weakened.
      Quote:



      You were saying Wonder Woman wasn't hurt by Darkseid's blindside just as Odin wasn't hurt by Thor knocking him down. But now you've been plainly revealed to be using a double standard.
      One of the reasons I debate people in depth is because I have a fascination with how the human mind works, particularly when it comes to irrationality. I am personally very oriented toward pure logic, nearing Mr. Spock levels, which is probably not emotionally healthy.

    This is just hilarious. Happy to meet you Mr Nimoy.
      Quote:


      I don't normally get very emotional except for being incredulous if that's an emotion. I know people much smarter than me but I do consider myself reasonably smart and expect others to respond on a similar intellectual plane, and I'm astounded by outright stupidity. In any case, given my perspective, I am very puzzled by just how illogical people can be. So many people have an end goal belief and then choose their reasons to fit that goal rather than going the opposite route, the logical route of looking at all the reasons to support or not support something and then choosing to support or not support it based on those reasons. Doing the former, choosing your reasons on the fly, like you seem to do all the time, leads to the ridiculous contradictions I've been pointing out.


Am I supposed to care about all this nonsense?

Are you just trying to bore me now?


    Quote:
    Even more fascinating is that you refuse to admit you're ever wrong about anything and so you keep doubling down on absurdities and obfuscate and distort until you don't even know what you're arguing any more. You first brought up the Thor knocking over Odin example to demonstrate that Odin wasn't hurt just like Darkseid knocking down Wonder Woman didn't mean she was hurt. But your Marvel hatred is so strong, that morphed into you thinking Odin was hurt and that Odin is a weakling. And then I brought up the example of Wonder Woman knocking down Zeus, and your only defense was that Zeus fell on his back so it's meaningless but Odin fell on his knees and so he's "seriously hurt." Come on! Then you literally ended up responding to your own insult that you tossed at me, mistakening it as something I said to you in our last thread. My writing style isn't even like yours. And after you accused me of hating DC and I showed you numerous posts in which I praised or advocated for DC characters, you stated that I wasn't sincere in these posts and was only doing so with an ulterior motive. I've been posting here for about 15 years, and you think I've been secretly lying about DC characters for all that time? That's just crazy talk.

You can try to rationalize it any way you want, you do hate DC characters when it comes to your favorite marvel characters.

Especially Darkseid.

Are you surprised someone called you out on your blatant bias?
    Quote:



    I seriously hope you're not like this in real life because otherwise your life is just a series of continuously deluding yourself and making up reasons to support a choice already made instead of considering reasons to make a choice.


You're getting personal once again Mr Nimoy. Awfully personal.

Tsk, Tsk.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Or when between losing the argument or being a hypocrite, you chose to be a hypocrite by claiming Thor knocking down Odin shows Odin to be a weakling but Wonder Woman knocking down DC Zeus means nothing.
              Because both are not similar. Zeus wasn't on his hands and knees.
            Right, because if you fall forward, you're a weakling and if you fall backward, getting knocked down means nothing. It's pretty clear you're the one getting the drubbing here.
          Being on his knees and hands shows he was significantly hurt. It's a staple of comics.
        Another made up rule by you. I guess Darkseid was seriously hurt when he tripped on some steps!
      He was totally Depowered, so yes. It's a sign of weakness.

    Hilarious. Darkseid was obviously not seriously hurt as he got right back up. So much for your nonsense rule.

Are you alright? What do you think you're saying here?



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:

              Quote:
              You said she was vastly weakened without showing any proof.
            Here it is again:
          That's not a proof of being weakened. She is just stunned and recovered fairly quickly.
        You just stated about Odin, and I quote, "Being on his knees and hands shows he was significantly hurt. It's a staple of comics." I just showed you Wonder Woman being on her hands and knees after getting blindsided by Darkseid's omega beams. Now you're saying, "That's not a proof of being weakened. She is just stunned and recovered fairly quickly." Hypocrisy much? So I can add this to the long list of all the evidence of you lacking credibility.
      So Odin was as weakened by one shot from Thor as Diana was weakened by Darksied? Are you saying Diana is equivalent to Odin now? Because Darkseid is stronger than Thor.

    I'm not saying any of those things. You're the one who arbitrarily made up a rule that "being on his knees and hands" means being "significantly hurt. It's a staple of comics," except that rule plainly goes against the original point you were trying to make - that Diana wasn't injured at all when Darkseid blindsided her. So you're caught applying one standard for Odin and another to Wonder Woman, which is of course what you do in all your posts regarding Marvel and DC characters so you have no credibility.


Now you are just flip flopping all over the place. Take a stand and stick to it.

If Diana was weakened because she was on her hands and knees, so was Odin. You can't have it both ways.

Diana wasn't injured, she was stunned only and recovered quickly. Anything else is pure conjecture on your part.



Posted with Opera 9.80
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software