- 181
- 278
No.this is overkill
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.
No.this is overkill
They absolutely are. Asking for evidence of a specific claim is one thing. Saying "Perpetua was trying to impress the Source with how powerful she was" and claiming its my responsibility to demonstrate why that's complete nonsense is asking me to read the comic for them.They’re not asking you to read the comic for them.
You said far more than simply call it nonsense.Saying that an argument is nonsense is not a personal insult, and taking it as one is a choice on your part.
How does that equate to declaring myself as the winner? I don't even believe winners exist in this kind of debates without concession.And saying things like "well you must lack evidence which is why you are just saying it's nonsense!" is exactly the kind of thing I am referring to when I talked about "declaring yourself the winner."
It is also not everyone else's job to make claims in my CRTs that they cannot prove.It is not everyone else's job to read the source material for you
You are oversimplifying my argument, and even then, it's nowhere close to being right.Anyone who says with a straight face that it's "the supercelestials just appeared out of nowhere and started working for the Presence, he probably didn't create them" isn't trying to have a reasonable discussion.
Asking for proof equals to arguing in bad faith now? I would argue making claims you cannot prove, and then trying to force them into acceptance is arguing in far more bad faith.It's just not worth anyone's time to engage with something like that, because you're not arguing in good faith.
Exactly.Providing scans for claims is the backbone of this community…
The argument reading this is repeated of the same point addressed by the claim maker. The topic was already felled out with just scaling up the character based on interpretation of what was seen in the comics. This is a persona non grata for the claim since the opposition is responding to it.Providing scans for claims is the backbone of this community…
This is the kind of thing I'm referring to. You're completely misrepresenting what I said.Asking for proof equals to arguing in bad faith now?
Sure, so I'll wait for some scans that say only half of the Source Wall is in the Presence's creation, scans that says the Supercelestials came into existence by themselves from nothing, scans that say that Lucifer, Michael, and Dream weren't aware of anything above the Sphere of the Gods, scans that say the Hands are stronger than the Source, et cetera et cetera.Providing scans for claims is the backbone of this community…
Can you word this better?The argument reading this is repeated of the same point addressed by the claim maker. The topic was already felled out with just scaling up the character based on interpretation of what was seen in the comics. This is a persona non grata for the claim since the opposition is responding to it.
One person saying "what I am saying is right" and another person saying "there's an equal interpretation and we take the lower one" doesn't make the former person's argument stronger. We say there are two interpretations because either possibility could happen equally, and in such a case, we take the lower interpretation.Both sides need more evidence but Deagonx has answered the question at hand and the other side is accused based on what he “interprets” as when asked in that same manner has not only based on “it should be” rather than it is.
There's no evidence that the full Source Wall is a part of his creation, and the wiki clearly distincts and separates the layers of the Source Wall. I proved my point with POTM's blog and an analogy, neither of which has been responded to.When ask if the Creation scaled to the Source Wall, one only claims that Source Wall has level, without concise evidence to support that the “small” section was the Presence rather than disapproving why he didn't create the outer one in the Map. There's no evidence it was lower level, so it wa
See, this is what I am talking about. Everyone says it's a misinterpretation, misunderstanding, or sometimes willful ignorance, but when asked for proof, no one is willing.This is stemming from what “evidence is at hand” to disprove especially given the claim doesn't make sense since the scan can be disproved of the data. It's a clear distinction ow lay or misinterpretation of the understanding of the Vertigo Universe.
How?This is the kind of thing I'm referring to. You're completely misrepresenting what I said.
Don't have to, you haven't proved the entire thing is. I am claiming equal interpretation, not a truth. I only have to prove the possibility exists, and that it has a strong basis, which I already have.Sure, so I'll wait for some scans that say only half of the Source Wall is in the Presence's creation
How about you show scans the Presence created them? You made the positive claim.scans that says the Supercelestials came into existence by themselves from nothing
That's a negative claim. I don't have to prove it. Plus even if they were knowledgeable, your reasoning with them hasn't been proven. We asked for scans and you dodged.scans that say that Lucifer, Michael, and Dream weren't aware of anything above the Sphere of the Gods
I guess zero equals to numerous these days?Numerous scans, in fact, have been provided for a lot of the main claims
And we have proven it's just as possible, if not more possible, for only a part to be there.We've proven the Source Wall is part of the Presence's creation,
Capwe've proven that Destiny's book contains the entire multiverse,
No, you have only proven the Source is from whom Perpetua got her raw materials to create the Multiverse, which I never disagreed with in the first place. It was explicitly stated that Perpetua took the raw materials for the Multiverse from the Source, but shaped them into a Multiverse with her own powers.that Perpetua says the Source is where she gets her power
I countered this and you accused me of false equivalency and ignoring the context, without explaining your reasoning for them.Like claiming the Supercelestials simply appeared out of nowhere, rather than the far more reasonable interpretation that the Source/Presence created the Supercelestials, (since they work for the Source/Presence, create multiverses on it's behalf, and receive their power to do so from the Source/Presence),
This is not at all what the situation is. We have proven things over and over again with different claims, to the point of tedium, and as soon as one is proven you jump to another nonsense interpretation and once again declare that it everyone else's job to explain it to you.See, this is what I am talking about. Everyone says it's a misinterpretation, misunderstanding, or sometimes willful ignorance, but when asked for proof, no one is willing.
It doesn't matter if it's nonsense or not, if you make a claim, you have to prove it. If you don't want to, why are you making it in the first place?This is not at all what the situation is. We have proven things over and over again with different claims, to the point of tedium, and as soon as one is proven you jump to another nonsense interpretation and once again declare that it everyone else's job to explain it to you.
More false accusations. No one's forcing you to make claims you can't prove.and then declaring yourself the winner when they get tired of it.
It is clear and concise but if you wish a simplified synonymous version of this. It summed up as falling from what the topic is about “downgrade” is now prelavent in just downscaling a character. Since the events of Vertigo aren't linked thus making assumption based on what is seen as misinterpretation of the scans you provide with some subside to a reasonable reason but that's without looking at it from the perspective of how it is written.Can you word this better?
(“What I am saying is right”) This especially isn't an argument since with evidence it provides an example of just partial indicative reasoning for what could be when providing evidence.One person saying "what I am saying is right" and another person saying "there's an equal interpretation and we take the lower one" doesn't make the former person's argument stronger. We say there are two interpretations because either possibility could happen equally, and in such a case, we take the lower interpretation.
His Creation is reference to the Vertigo story that made him stabilize all logic and ideas as nothing was left out. (Lucifer #68-69). This is evident enough since he doesn't leave variables out because all possibilities were already predetermined.There's no evidence that the full Source Wall is a part of his creation
and the wiki clearly distincts and separates the layers of the Source Wall.
The analogy must be concise to the context of set given notion or else this is a “red herring” the actual way to use the word you and your friend keep repeating. Let us see this “blog” that shows this if not your adding points that do not contribute to anything recollective of premise of that same claim you made.I proved my point with POTM's blog and an analogy
In this same manner apply to you. If you are to have this view then this argument should be closed. Evidence provided isn't a necessity when making that base claim that already shows it. Unless you want to spoon-feed the info as if we could not see you either read it or you make the point addressing the rebuttal and work from there. There really is no proof of the Presence “creating a lesser” so this hypocrisy lies on you.See, this is what I am talking about. Everyone says it's a misinterpretation, misunderstanding, or sometimes willful ignorance, but when asked for proof, no one is willing.
Of course, they are free to concede.Nobody "has to" do anything simply because you demand it.
I don't care if you think I argue in bad faith or if I willfully ignore the storyline. If you make a claim you have to be willing to prove it.Again, you are willfully misunderstanding the point and trying to pretend this is about an unwillingness to prove claims or provide evidence, rather than an unwillingness to engage with bad faith arguing and willful ignorance of the storylines.
Of course, they are free to concede.
This is exactly the issue. The options are not "satisfy your personal demands" or "concede the argument." You are imagining arbitrary rules for the discussion which don't exact.If you make a claim you have to be willing to prove it.
This should be common sense. I don't know any angle myself of disapprove this point. This is the underline basis we all have to follow and should have been since the beginning. Adding another topic to add upon this argument is not necessary.This is exactly the issue. The options are not "satisfy your personal demands" or "concede the argument." You are imagining arbitrary rules for the discussion which don't exact.
Here's the actual rule: "Make an argument that is convincing and reasonable to staff members who are knowledgeable about the verse." Believe it or not, constantly coming up with bad-faith takes likes "the Supercelestials probably created themselves, they weren't created by the deity they work for" is not going to convince anyone. Demanding they need to "prove" the Source/Presence created the race of beings that it has go around creating multiverses, and saying they have to concede if they don't, will not magically convince users who know better.
They are not my personal demands, they are how the wiki functions. When you make a claim, you have to prove it, that's the most fundamental and basic thing in debating.This is exactly the issue. The options are not "satisfy your personal demands" or "concede the argument." You are imagining arbitrary rules for the discussion which don't exact.
Firstly, I am not sure why you are always bringing this up. It's not even related to the main CRT. Secondly, you literally just said my counter was nonsensical, false equivalent, and an ignorance of the context. You never addressed it.Here's the actual rule: "Make an argument that is convincing and reasonable to staff members who are knowledgeable about the verse." Believe it or not, constantly coming up with bad-faith takes likes "the Supercelestials probably created themselves, they weren't created by the deity they work for" is not going to convince anyone.
The wiki functions based on staff consensus, that's it.They are not my personal demands, they are how the wiki functions. When you make a claim, you have to prove it, that's the most fundamental and basic thing in debating.
Because it's an incredible example of the kind of silliness you are demanding everyone else has to prove wrong.Firstly, I am not sure why you are always bringing this up
Yes. That's my point. That wasn't the first claim you made like that. I am not interested in personally correcting every single bad take you have about DC. It's tedious and these arguments aren't likely to be accepted either way.Secondly, you literally just said my counter was nonsensical, false equivalent, and an ignorance of the context. You never addressed it.
I think it better to do and nitpick to show the evidence, if not he will repeat the same point till someone concede. Arguments should never be conceded until all basis were covered, I know it's tedious but his asking for the evidence might as well do it. In that same manner, he would have to dismiss the point, so it is better, or else the same things will repeat. If need be a Staff can oversee this instead and I'm pretty sure you follow the guideline as such.The wiki functions based on staff consensus, that's it.
Because it's an incredible example of the kind of silliness you are demanding everyone else has to prove wrong.
Yes. That's my point. That wasn't the first claim you made like that. I am not interested in personally correcting every single bad take you have about DC. It's tedious and these arguments aren't likely to be accepted either way.
Evidence is literally the foundation stone of the wiki.The wiki functions based on staff consensus, that's it.
You claimed the Presence created them, disagreeing with you isn't silly, it's the logical approach considering your lack of evidence.Because it's an incredible example of the kind of silliness you are demanding everyone else has to prove wrong.
In that case you risk making Argument from Incredulity.Yes. That's my point. That wasn't the first claim you made like that. I am not interested in personally correcting every single bad take you have about DC. It's tedious and these arguments aren't likely to be accepted either way.
I don't know what a "foundation stone" is, but I can confidently say that staff consensus is how CRTs are approved or rejected, not whatever arbitrary debating rules you have imagined in your head, nor does naming fallacies you read about on wikipedia make you correct when you're saying something wrong.Evidence is literally the foundation stone of the wiki.
Claiming that a race of "super celestials" who go around creating multiverses on behalf of the Presence "probably created themselves" rather than having been created by the Presence himself is absolutely silly.disagreeing with you isn't silly,
Why would it being Vertigo change anything and why exactly is it interpreted differently? Please Elaborate.Ex: Time and Space are extensions of his Will isn't 1-A, but this is Vertigo and how it's interpreted is different since not all “Time” is the same. I do agree it's not 1-A, but it's higher than given credit for.
What do you mean?To explain it read the comics if your are referring #20 of Lucifer there are more explanation to how this such as abstract concept like Time is defined unlike that of DC
What "Proven facts"? Facts are facts and truths that can't be interpreted differently. Deagon said Source likely created Hands because they work for it, is that a fact? No, just an assumption. Deagon also said Presence or his sons created Source Walls, but Transcending proved there are different levels of Source Walls, and there's no reason to assume that they created the highest Source Wall, especially since we know that it was Raptor that created Source Wall. None of that was facts.If you are referring to Deagon on the first basis claim, then your point is dismissed as our proven facts can be dismissive of that same point. Thus creating a fallacy. If you're being even-handed on this and this refers to one side in the first claim and the second then it doesn't prove anything of your claim because of what you “interpret” as to what is based on evidence. Providing a basis claim without the regal context of the story is as one would say “Nothing is if not proven correct.”
OK, why does this mean he created full Source Wall?His Creation is reference to the Vertigo story that made him stabilize all logic and ideas as nothing was left out. (Lucifer #68-69). This is evident enough since he doesn't leave variables out because all possibilities were already predetermined.
There's nothing that suggest that they created full Source WallThe real question here is how you dismiss this based on how it was interpreted on evidence that suggests otherwise.
Again, we don't need evidence, Transcending already proved there are different levels of Source Wall's and even the wiki acknowledges this. Equal interpretation exist, and our interpretation at least has actual basis unlike you guys.Thus, choose your point of “Presence creating a smaller section”(Need evidence of this rather than what you interpret with Source Wall level at each dimensional hierarchy) or The Presence is “not that power to create it based on the Cosmic Raptor showing” (Working on behalf of the Source sent by the Judges using Perpetua to force her into the Wall that came into existence, evident that if he was created by the Source anything he does refers back to him). You need a lot more concise view on this or your claims are without reasonable prejudice towards a character based on fallible points.
In equal interpretation, you don't need evidence. If there's 2 interpretation, we take lower one. But even ignoring the "we take lower interpretation" part, our interpretation has basis like Raptor creating Wall, and realms like Inizami's and Dreaming being beyond creation despite being a part of Sphere of Gods.Does this answer to why the Presence didn't? Simply to assume he made a lesser layer? If so where is this evidence based on? This needed to be answered long ago without the point of saying it because Source Wall has different layers and the Presence didn't. To add the only made smaller section. Need more to what you're referring to about what The Presence contributed, which I suggest you show to disapprove of the rebuttal Deagon made. Or else it is anyone's views how they interpret this claim.
How is it not concise and how does it follow the context? Elaborate.The analogy must be concise to the context of set given notion or else this is a “red herring” the actual way to use the word you and your friend keep repeating. Let us see this “blog” that shows this if not your adding points that do not contribute to anything recollective of premise of that same claim you made.
There's no proof that he created higher one either. It's not hypocrisy on his part, it's Deagon who said that he doesn't need to prove because what Transcending said was "nonsense" to him without any reason.In this same manner apply to you. If you are to have this view then this argument should be closed. Evidence provided isn't a necessity when making that base claim that already shows it. Unless you want to spoon-feed the info as if we could not see you either read it or you make the point addressing the rebuttal and work from there. There really is no proof of the Presence “creating a lesser” so this hypocrisy lies on you.
It's a term from Final Crisis, where the New Earth was described as a foundation stone. What this means is that evidence is what supports the wiki, and without it, the wiki wouldn't be able to function properly.I don't know what a "foundation stone" is
Staff consensus does decide CRTs, but good staff members make their opinion based on the evidence and not their personal opinion.but I can confidently say that staff consensus is how CRTs are approved or rejected, not whatever arbitrary debating rules you have imagined in your head
Most of the fallacies I have mentioned exists in this wiki's own Fallacies page.nor does naming fallacies you read about on wikipedia make you correct when you're saying something wrong.
I countered this with Jason Momoa. Working for someone doesn't equate to being created by them.Claiming that a race of "super celestials" who go around creating multiverses on behalf of the Presence "probably created themselves" rather than having been created by the Presence himself is absolutely silly.
What this means is that evidence is what supports the wiki, and without it, the wiki wouldn't be able to function properly.
Your opinion on how the wiki works or what "good staff members" should do really doesn't change anything Your argument has to be persuasive and reasonable to the staff, not simply satisfy your personal rules for how a debate should work.Staff consensus does decide CRTs, but good staff members make their opinion based on the evidence and not their personal opinion.
Yes, I recall, you argued that because humans can have bodyguards who are stronger than them, it's possible that the Source/Presence is neither stronger than nor responsible for creating the race of multiverse-creating super celestials who revere the Source as their deity, literally die carrying out it's orders (with Perpetua being the sole rebel), act based upon it's will and judgment, and who is literally identified as being the Source of their power, and from whom they receive the materials and energy needed to create the infinite multiverses in the Greater Omniverse, which the Source is at the center of. In fact, you even said the Super celestials probably created themselves.I countered this with Jason Momoa. Working for someone doesn't equate to being created by them.
They are not my personal rules, they are the actual rules. Working without focusing on evidence goes against what the wiki itself says(with stuff like Argument from Incredulity). If my argument has evidence, it's valid. If yours doesn't, it's invalid. Plain as that.Your opinion on how the wiki works or what "good staff members" should do really doesn't change anything Your argument has to be persuasive and reasonable to the staff, not simply satisfy your personal rules for how a debate should work.
You are confusing me with @Beyond_transcendingYes, I recall, you argued that because humans can have bodyguards who are stronger than them, it's possible that the Source/Presence is neither stronger
The Monitor Brothers viewed the Source as their deity, not The Hands, who are actually the Judges of the Source. Plus considering someone a deity doesn't mean that person created you, the Monitor Brothers being fine examples.than nor responsible for creating the race of multiverse-creating super celestials who revere the Source as their deity
You do realize a lot of The Hands came in Death Metal #7? Alive and well?literally die carrying out it's orders (with Perpetua being the sole rebel
So if I follow the will and judgement of the Supreme Court, I was created by them?act based upon it's will and judgment
Never stated, they only got the raw materials for the Multiverse from the Source. It was shaped into existence by The Hands' own powers.and who is literally identified as being the Source of their power
It's certainly possible. The Source was never stated to be their creator, and your arguments are Non-Sequiturs. The exact origin of the Hands haven't been revealed, but I am saying it's possible because lots of other characters have come into existence without a creator, the Source itself being an example.In fact, you even said the Super celestials probably created themselves.
Once again, making up rules about how you think arguments should work does not mean a CRT is correct nor that it needs to be approved simply because you don't think I've followed your rules. It needs to be considered persuasive and accurate by knowledgeable staff members. That is how this works.If my argument has evidence, it's valid. If yours doesn't, it's invalid.
Yep, exactly the kind of bad-faith silliness that I am not interested in dealing with. I'll wait for a staff member to offer their input.Plus considering someone a deity doesn't mean that person created you, the Monitor Brothers being fine examples.
You do realize a lot of The Hands came in Death Metal #7? Alive and well?
So if I follow the will and judgement of the Supreme Court, I was created by them?
Never stated, they only got the raw materials for the Multiverse from the Source. It was shaped into existence by The Hands' own powers.
It's certainly possible. The Source was never stated to be their creator, and your arguments are Non-Sequiturs. The exact origin of the Hands haven't been revealed, but I am saying it's possible because lots of other characters have come into existence without a creator, the Source itself being an example.
Why would it being Vertigo change anything and why exactly is it interpreted differently? Please Elaborate.
Explain up above as the motifs of my statements regarding how Time is not always defined the same in the context of story, which should be easily seen. You can get more examples by reading the story in full retrospect.What do you mean?
I had to make sure what you said was what I mentioned but I realize the confusion. Here is what I said and please read this properlyWhat "Proven facts"? Facts are facts and truths that can't be interpreted differently.
Deagon said Source likely created Hands because they work for it, is that a fact?
The possibility of the Vertigo Universe using the 3 main powerhouses to create the Source Wall is more logical than just theory because each Creation is separate from the others. The Void is the only thing that separates them, thus making the equivalent of the Map isn't outside the realm of “possibilities” and is more logical than saying otherwise. Or else “all-encompassing or the Totality would be indicative of that.Deagon also said Presence or his sons created Source Walls, but Transcending proved there are different levels of Source Walls, and there's no reason to assume that they created the highest Source Wall, especially since we know that it was Raptor that created Source Wall.
None of that were facts.
Except we don't need evidence, equal interpretation is a thing. Interpretation with actual basis > interpretation without basis.
OK, why does this mean he created full Source Wall?
Again, we don't need evidence, Transcending already proved there are different levels of Source Wall's and even the wiki acknowledges this.
The exact definition of what I have to say that the other hasn't. This is invalid reasoning as this adds subjective view of this based on some solemnly claim.Equal interpretation exist, and our interpretation at least has actual basis unlike you guys.
In equal interpretation, you don't need evidence. If there's 2 interpretation, we take lower one.
Except on your first point is a misnomer of misguided claim and acting as it's the basis of claim to which provides evidence on nothing given those for.But even ignoring the "we take lower interpretation" part, our interpretation has basis like Raptor creating Wall, and realms like Inizami's and Dreaming being beyond creation despite being a part of Sphere of Gods.
How is it not concise and how does it follow the context? Elaborate.
There's no proof that he created higher one either.
it's Deagon who said that he doesn't need to prove because what Transcending said was "nonsense" to him without any reason.
This is moving the goal post and trying to flip the burden of proof. They already proved that the Source Wall has levels. Meaning the Presences creation containing the Source Wall doesn’t necessitate that it scales to the entire map, as it’s very much possible for the Presence’s creation to contain the Source Wall at the lower realms.When ask if the Creation scaled to the Source Wall, one only claims that Source Wall has level, without concise evidence to support that the “small” section was the Presence rather than disapproving why he didn't create the outer one in the Map. There's no evidence it was lower level, so it was never responded to in the same manner.
No, they haven't.They already proved that the Source Wall has levels.
A "valid possibility" which directly contradicts the information we have about the Presence's creation and the book of Destiny, and one that requires several counter-intuitive leaps in logic about why the will of the Presence would be necessary to sustain the existence of only specific sections of a structure but not the structure itself, and requires assuming "the Source Wall" doesn't mean the Source Wall, just specific portions of it.was simply a valid possibility
This is readdressing the point that refers to what the Presence has made based on the claim made to suggest that he could(Deagon) so he made a lower(The Transcending duo). This can be answer with the proof from each point. For one the burden of proof would fall on the one making the points regarding the level to sanction away from who made the claim the Source has different level(no one denied this point) and thus the Presence created that(The claim made by the duo) This become their reliability to prove this against Deagon. They only said the same point as earlier “he created it on a lower section” based on little concise evidence to support this. False Dilemma of possibilities. Deagon should be responsible for debunking this notion, he at least addressed the opposition to that idea, in doing so they need proof that the Presence had only created a smaller section.This is moving the goal post and trying to flip the burden of proof. They already proved that the Source Wall has levels.
Meaning the Presences creation containing the Source Wall doesn’t necessitate that it scales to the entire map, as it’s very much possible for the Presence’s creation to contain the Source Wall at the lower realms.
So what Transcending and Beyond Transcending were arguing was simply a valid possibility.
They are under no obligation to further prove this valid possibility is the correct interpretation as that’s not what your original argument required to be addressed.
The only one under a burden proof is you guys as you are the one’s claiming the Presences creation scales to the Source Wall at every level.
Well putTo make counterargument they address the opposite based on just “possibilities” unless they can have proof of it then their idea was dismiss thus never a valid possibility in the first place.
In the end it's still POV, Deagon does the logical approach, and the Duo the possibilities as just dull opposition to Deagon. No real basis claim other than just a counterargument to supplement a claim that doesn't sound to logical nor have any proof of.
As in "creation" we mean the Multiverse right?Noice argument
Yes Mike Carey has made it explicitly clear he uses Cosmos/Universe/Totality/Multiverse/Creation to be synonymous with the idea of them being all-encompassing.As in "creation" we mean the Multiverse right?