Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree you can argue both sides, that is what we are doing.Not really.
You can argue both your argument and mine, that it's
A. An inconsistency
B. Him moving it
All of those shots occur prior to the moon separating, unless there’s another shot im not aware of. So I’m really not seeing the point of this point.We see many different things in comparison to the gap. The bijuu that was next to the diameter of the cut that wasn't that big being compared to a cut that can be calced to thousands of meters in size, the sword that we can measure from, even the fragments itself, and much more.
Not at all, they would just simply move with the moon. But even granting the center was in danger, it’s protected by a strong chakra that can withstand the moon’s destruction. So the center would be fine.They would fly to other sides inside the moon. The artificial sun, the fortress, everything inside the moon would've been destroyed and sent flying.
I can tell you that. The distance from earth to the moon is like 100s of 1000s of kilometers, taking on an extra 61 km (the split separation) is so insignificant. It’s like saying 180.02 cm is extremely taller than 180 cm. Like it is just isn’t significant at all. And if it was significant, I can just grandstand that the Tenseigan would pull it back together anyway.You can't tell me that yanking something back just to push it back to the direction you pulled it from is that insignificant from just pushing it forward.
That's like me saying that lifting a weight up 4 more meters from 4m off the ground and pushing it down 8 meters would be the same as just pushing it down 4 meters instead of pulling it up more.
No matter how many times you attempt to misrepresent my argument by saying I’m arguing “what could’ve happened” doesn’t change the fact I’m arguing “what likely happened”.Your arguments are "what could've happened".
You're saying likely because you have the notion that your interpretation of the split's changes were the most supported, as saying "something happened" > "it's an inconsistency".
You're looking at only the split.
Things being compared to the moon's split like Kurama, the golem, the sword, and more.
You're saying "the moon split, one time it's showed to be big, next time it's showed to be smaller, so I'll say that instead of an inconsistency, the size just changed in canon".
There are later instances of the moon split being larger than it is in later scenes, although not to the extent of hundreds of kilometers.
We see those pieces not come together, we watch the pieces stay stagnant even though they could've freely closed the gap, just like the assumption you're giving is saying.
Those didn't come together.
Saying "there's a gap and different distances, he could've pulled it together", when we see another gap with different distances and we don't see those pieces move together should say something
This point fails because that’s a close up of the blade, you can optically resolve it. My point is exclusive to the far away shots where it cannot be so easily resolved.There are dozens of different ways to comment on the size of the technique, aka the sword.
The sword's width being the split distance, as we see every part the light touches is destroyed.
Noticing its dimensions and looking at the outline of the blade vs the small light coming from the sides of it
The beam size isn’t uniform, it’s thinner by Toneri’s hand than it is at the tip, it’s like a really long slice of pizzaWhy not just figure out the beam size when Naruto is charging it? Isn't it like only 3 Naruto lengths or something?
Banger of an analogyThe beam size isn’t uniform, it’s thinner by Toneri’s hand than it is at the tip, it’s like a really long slice of pizza
I guess put it for possibly
I guess put it for possibly
I'm fine with "Possibly" at most.Damage you chill with that?
Cool, can we then conclude this thread and I’ll ask Wrath to link this thread in his calc as the justification for it being possibly, this way we don’t forget in the future. Then I’ll put the calc on the vs page.I'm fine with "Possibly" at most.
Tragic
Oh indeed, I'm still not wrong. I assume the "possibly" is being conceded out of a desire to conclude the topic.snip
You will not see the pearly Gates of HeavenOh indeed, I'm still not wrong. I assume the "possibly" is being conceded out of a desire to conclude the topic.
I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.You will not see the pearly Gates of Heaven
NopeI assume the "possibly" is being conceded out of a desire to conclude the topic.
Check the reacts.Nope
?Check the reacts.
"Let me in coach"Deagonx, hop in VC so I can slam you on this topic
The evilest beings on this forum, Deagonx and Damage
Deagonx, hop in VC so I can slam you on this topic
Ah yes, VC debates, where winners and losers are determined by who interrupts faster or argues more angrily. Why take time collecting evidence or writing a structured rebuttal when you can just bicker circularly and post a 2 hour video of it on youtube.Deagonx, hop in VC so I can slam you on this topic
-Ah yes, VC debates, where winners and losers are determined by who interrupts faster or argues more angrily. Why take time collecting evidence or writing a structured rebuttal when you can just bicker circularly and post a 2 hour video of it on youtube.
sounds to me like you hate circlesWhy take time collecting evidence or writing a structured rebuttal when you can just bicker circularly and post a 2 hour video of it on youtube.
Thats a good emoji of a VC debater.
It's okay the thread is concluded or something.You guys are derailing
It's your thread, nobody caresYou guys are derailing
I'm derailing your m-You guys are derailing
Deceived .05 seconds before getting slammed trying to debate two series he's never seen before.Deceived, known VC debater and packer, slayer of Godernet on Crocodile vs Baryon Mode Naruto.