Originally Posted by 36hypno
You can't just pull info from the comics when it pleases you. We have been sticking to the movies because this whole argument started off of characters from the movies. You however choose to ignore movie comparisons and base your opinions off who knows what. I only quoted that to put your hypocrisy on full display. See below.
How else are we going to establish who is stronger? A freshly made fictional alien species or a 70+ year old fictional alien species that have been portrayed in several movies? Even if you want to ignore your common sense since you just seem to be drawn to ignoring things, feats in the movies themselves show the difference but I already told you what to do in regards to the movies. I'll be sure to pm you the dvd bootleg when the link is online. You can say we've been sticking to the movies but I question if you actually remember what happened in them if you're questioning which alien species is stronger. I mean RFX straight up said the Avengers would have a harder time fighting the kryptonians than the chitauri. That's basically saying the kryptonians are stronger, because they are. It seems I have to go back to the drawing board for you to understand that. That was never an issue previously. I already finished your ridiculous talk about Johnathan Kent and now you've jumped on to the talk about who would beat who and are so lost it's embarrassing.
This is another example of you making up arguments out of irrelevant **** that needs not be questioned. I'm not surprised you find it funny though.
Kryptonians > Chitauri.
This is what you originally told me man:
I'm still not getting your argument of IM vs The Avengers.
Then stay out of it.
Eh the same IM suits that were taking blows from Thor can't take blows from those 3 now? When they're not even fully powered? Them suits would do the job.
Your words again. How are you able to make that comparison? Based off what? The comics? That comparison was across two movies and based off of what? When I make a comparison of events in the same movie I am some how grasping. Hypocrisy at its finest.
What exactly are you proving here? Thor came to blows with IM in Avengers. Not just survive but fight back. With the person I was already speaking with, we've already established that Thor along with Hulk would hold his own against the 3 kryptonians. That was never a question. So if Thor can fight them and IM has survived blows from Thor why can't IM survive their attacks?
Is this logic that difficult for you to follow? I think you're completely out of your depth here. Your pulling quotes from a discussion you weren't involved in and one I think you didn't even bother to read to try and prove something you can not prove. Not even making much sense let alone a point. You're not pointing out anyting by bringing up my old posts. If anything I'd rather you try to make sense of the other crap you've been arguing and why it's relevant to anything I've been saying.
It's not about him not being a tech genius. Your arguments you've made are based off the assumption that Tony Stark enters the fight knowing the very weak point to attack a being who he doesn't yet even know is invulnerable. That's ridiculous son. As RFX already tried to explain to you he wouldn't even inflict enough damage to them to figure out that weakness before he is murked.
So he doesn't have eyes? He can't see the gas mask helmets? He can't realize they're aliens at any point in the fight? It's clear you just have a different uninformed version of how things would go down, not surprised given the other things you've tried to pass off as logical and reason based.
For the record Tony doesn't hack squat, Jarvis does.
Who created Jarvis? You thought Jarvis created himself? He's a byproduct of Tony Stark. Another accessory to his suit and when he creates other things. Honestly, for the record?
Sounds like you need to
I'm not the one disputing what actually happened in the movies or making things up or poorly describing and interpreting events though.
Pass that bruh..... See below how you soundPass that bruh..... See below how you sound
This is called deflection. You still haven't taken the time to comprehend anything yet
Irrelevant huh? Keep reading your own words
This whole invulnerable talk is your argument not mine.
I already did so keep reading
No you haven't but that you think that you did lets me know you're not actually reading the posts in their entirety.
Another tangent?...son you seem lost in your own arguments so let me help you out
All you bruh.
What that got to do with who is invulnerable? I mentioned the gun and disputed you thinking the blast from the gun is the same thing as a blast from the ship. You failed at addressing that. All you kept saying is they were the same after initially saying "correct me if I'm wrong" and I did and suggested you re-watch MOS. It's simply you not actually comprehending scale and the difference between a handgun and a ship's cannon/weapon port. Yet you think they're comparable for some reason when the movie isn't supporting it. If they were comparable everybody who got shot by Lois would've got sent flying out of the ship instead of to the ground.
My response. We're talking laser type blasts
Like I said a lot of ifs and things I
didn't say. Who said anything about weak blasts? Why are you asking me if getting hit by that blasts makes them immortal? The Earth atmosphere has nothing to do with what I said about Lois and the gun or what she did and what the soldiers on the ship were incapable of doing. They all had their helmets at the time and if they weren't on go up within a second.
You even tried to compare it to a hand gun.
No I didn't. This is more of the assuming and misinterpreting instead of asking so things can be made clear to you. I didn't compare anything to a handgun. You can't find that post cuz it never happened. I referred to the gun Lois had as a handgun, it's a gun that shoots a blast that fits in her hand. Me calling it a hand gun is not me comparing it to a hand gun. Only a stupid person would think that and run with it. I would say I'm amazed but these are the things you have continually misunderstood for like 5+ pages now.
Then I tried to tell you it was a logical conclusion based on facts from the movies.
Which it wasn't.
What I wrote based off scenes from the movie seems very unreasonable? Ok.
It's not my fault you can't watch the movie, understand what happens in the movie and then form coherent speculation let alone theory or begin to measure scale in a comparison to two different types of weapons and remain reasonable at the same time.
My response. I think this is when you started rollin up
You seem to even forget what you type son. Do better. I really am done now bruh. I refuse to continue to feed the troll.
Which wasn't relevant to what I was talking about and arguing for. You just started stating **** nobody disputed. Who said anything about them not having their helmets or yellow sunlight? I think you see me mention something or point out something and just jump at any chance to reply without thinking it through.
I'm pretty sure despite going back to my post to quote me you don't even know why I brought up Lois on the ship with the gun. Tony Stark and his 40+ suits don't have the time to fight Faora/Namek but Lois is shooting down soldiers on the ship with ease cuz a hologram tells her where to shoot, now suddenly her reaction time is superior. Lois was brought up simply to talk about what she did and how she did it to put emphasis on what Tony would do in his suit with his repulsor blasts. Then instead of addressing that you spend paragraphs upon paragraphs talking about the blast from the ship and the blast from the gun cuz you can't tell the difference between scale and stating undisputed facts about them being in yellow sunlight on the ship after it was changed to Earth's atmosphere after asking me if they're invulnerable.
By the way, if you were actually done, you wouldn't need to keep saying you're done. You refuse to continue but can't resist
Ol contradicting hypocritical lookin boy. Can't even gracefully bow out.