- 428
- 38
Proof her giant is 2km? Her stating something doesn't make it a fact at all. Her quirk has limits. You first have to provide evidence for your claimProve overexaggeration creates a limit for her air constructs
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.
Proof her giant is 2km? Her stating something doesn't make it a fact at all. Her quirk has limits. You first have to provide evidence for your claimProve overexaggeration creates a limit for her air constructs
Your the one claiming it can’t be 1000x her size. You’re the one going against the manga. Burden of proof is on you. Just because it has limits doesn’t mean the air constructs size is limited. You have to prove that.Proof her giant is 2km? Her stating something doesn't make it a fact at all. Her quirk has limits. You first have to provide evidence for your claim
I interpreted it as her dying cause of the other quirks new order was fighting against.It didn’t, she literally died from it and says it exceeded the cap
proof that her limits are below 2km? You stating something doesn't make it a fact at allProof her giant is 2km? Her stating something doesn't make it a fact at all. Her quirk has limits. You first have to provide evidence for your claim
Then you’re wrong, she died from decay.I interpreted it as her dying cause of the other quirks new order was fighting against.
Burden of proof is on the one that makes a statement. I am only contradicting the proof with my points by giving a possibility that it might not be accurate. Now you gotta prove it is otherwise you lost the debateYour the one claiming it can’t be 1000x her size. You’re the one going against the manga. Burden of proof is on you. Just because it has limits doesn’t mean the air constructs size is limited. You have to prove that.
Your skeptical headcanon is not evidence of her air construct being reduced in size.
Doesnt he have to practically Pont his hand on the direction he wants to use decay in?Then you’re wrong, she died from decay.
Your points contradict nothing. So I don’t have to provide anything. Because you haven’t even gotten past her Rule.Burden of proof is on the one that makes a statement. I am only contradicting the proof with my points by giving a possibility that it might not be accurate. Now you gotta prove it is otherwise you lost the debate
He grabbed her face.Doesnt he have to practically Pont his hand on the direction he wants to use decay in?
Man the statement is she is 2km burden on proof is on you. You mention the rule and I state why it MIGHT be false. It doesnt necessarily need to be false to be a contradiction. You then have to debunk my contradiction. If you fail to do so you lostYour points contradict nothing. So I don’t have to provide anything. Because you haven’t even gotten past her Rule.
Lost the debate? Who are you, SeththeProgrammer?
Gon read manga again. She only started dying way after that. Shigaraki was already attacking some random fodder in the meanwhileHe grabbed her face.
You don’t even read this manga do you?
Star and Stripes, a character from My Hero Academia, stated, with her reality warping quirk New Order, that an air construct 1000x her size would be formed.Man the statement is she is 2km burden on proof is on you. You mention the rule and I state why it MIGHT be false. It doesnt necessarily need to be false to be a contradiction. You then have to debunk my contradiction. If you fail to do so you lost
She was decaying the entire time he started exploding and prepared to use New Order.Gon read manga again. She only started dying way after that. Shigaraki was already attacking some random fodder in the meanwhile
You don't understand how this works still. I only need to give a potential way to refute it of being a fact. The simple fact that it might be lower than that is enough for a contradiction. If you try to debunk this contradiction you need something that can't be contradicted to back up your point. Simply saying "it might be 2km tho" In practical sense mean you can't prove it. Imagine someone giving you a fact telling you it's 100%true and then tells you it's actually just 50/50. By saying "she said it's that size" you are going back to the original claim and ignoring my POTENTIAL contradiction of your point. You would need to refute my contradiction for your poimt to still stand. Look I am just saying that calcing the size will give more accurate results until 2km is stated. Otherwise the 2km is not proven.Star and Stripes, a character from My Hero Academia, stated, with her reality warping quirk New Order, that an air construct 1000x her size would be formed.
Prove that the construct that formed immediately after this application of her power was not 1000x her size.
She only started decaying much after her quirk was taken and why would she still decay after he stopped?She was decaying the entire time he started exploding and prepared to use New Order.
You can literally see the decay lines on her face.
You literally don’t NEED to calc the size when her quirk WORKS OFF OF STATEMENTS. Your whole argumentative basis is just your own head canons on how her power works.You don't understand how this works still. I only need to give a potential way to refute it of being a fact. The simple fact that it might be lower than that is enough for a contradiction. If you try to debunk this contradiction you need something that can't be contradicted to back up your point. Simply saying "it might be 2km tho" In practical sense mean you can't prove it. Imagine someone giving you a fact telling you it's 100%true and then tells you it's actually just 50/50. By saying "she said it's that size" you are going back to the original claim and ignoring my POTENTIAL contradiction of your point. You would need to refute my contradiction for your poimt to still stand. Look I am just saying that calcing the size will give more accurate results until 2km is stated. Otherwise the 2km is not proven.
She only started decaying much after her quirk was taken and why would she still decay after he stopped?
Again a contradiction doesn't need to be 100%true. The simple chance of something else happening is still a contradiction. To make a Pont simply needs more evidence than a contradiction. If I can give at least one reason why the size should be incorrect it's still a pint you would need to refute entirely for the contradiction to be false. I have had several arguments in this thread we are only discussing one of them which you guys still can't 100% refute. I already explained why there is a possibility of her statetements being inaccurate, mainly the fact that it might have been bajve her limit. Bringing this argument up alone would need you to refute it which you didn't do yet(other than stating I am wrong without backup)You literally don’t NEED to calc the size when her quirk WORKS OFF OF STATEMENTS. Your whole argumentative basis is just your own head canons on how her power works.
All of that is irrelevant and proves nothing. I literally gave you the floor to explain yourself and you just spewed baseless headcanon. In your own words “you just lost the debate.” The side that is with the construct being 1000x in size is not based on any possibilities at all. There are no maybes. She said it so it is so, as nothing contradicts it.You don't understand how this works still. I only need to give a potential way to refute it of being a fact. The simple fact that it might be lower than that is enough for a contradiction. If you try to debunk this contradiction you need something that can't be contradicted to back up your point. Simply saying "it might be 2km tho" In practical sense mean you can't prove it. Imagine someone giving you a fact telling you it's 100%true and then tells you it's actually just 50/50. By saying "she said it's that size" you are going back to the original claim and ignoring my POTENTIAL contradiction of your point. You would need to refute my contradiction for your poimt to still stand. Look I am just saying that calcing the size will give more accurate results until 2km is stated. Otherwise the 2km is not proven.
She only started decaying much after her quirk was taken and why would she still decay after he stopped?
No not at all. This has nothing to do with headcanon more than relying on the proven statement that she has limits. It's not necessarily true but the possibility itself disproves your statement until you refute it.All of that is irrelevant and proves nothing. I literally gave you the floor to explain yourself and you just spewed baseless headcanon. In your own words “you just lost the debate.” The side that is with the construct being 1000x in size is not based on any possibilities at all. There are no maybes. She said it so it is so, as nothing contradicts it.
You have failed to disprove that premise.
All you offer is headcanon, a bunch of what ifs and skepticism, not for the air construct, but for your own argument, with no actual backing behind any of it. Your arbitrary belief of “maybe it isn’t that way” is irrelevant.
Decay isn’t instant unless he wants it to be, and he was more focused on taking her quirk than decaying her. Also Decay still works after he lets go, that’s one of the core mechanics of it.
Well the thing is that your argument use just as many what ifs.When you argue against something, your argument should never be “well there’s a CHANCE that maybe, possibly it could not be correct, so we should ignore the possibility of it being correct completely.”
That is, quite frankly, foolish beyond measure.
We go with the smart choices here when we can. Not the ones shrouded in a dozen what if statements on possible limitations.
The limits on her quirk have nothing to do with how big her air construct can be. You don’t understand that.No not at all. This has nothing to do with headcanon more than relying on the proven statement that she has limits. It's not necessarily true but the possibility itself disproves your statement until you refute it.
Also didn't know that about decay but she says "I am almost destroyed of fighting all the quirks" I thought that reffered to her
What what if’s am I using? She said something so I’m saying she’s right. You have said nothing to prove she’s wrong, other than using headcanon to say there’s a possibility she might not be right, but you can’t prove it.Well the thing is that your argument use just as many what ifs.
Mine uses "what if due to her limits its not a full 2km"
Your what if is "what if she measured her limits and 1000 times her was exactly that" rather than my assumption. There is no headcanon involved. Until you can refute that point there is no reason to refuse that contradiction.
1. So by your logic it might as well be planetary in size? Limitations apply to both her strength and environmental manipulating just not in the same amount. That's the theory shigaraki madeThe limits on her quirk have nothing to do with how big her air construct can be. You don’t understand that.
Possibility does not refute anything. That is why you accomplish nothing.
What what if’s am I using? She said something so I’m saying she’s right. You have said nothing to prove she’s wrong, other than using headcanon to say there’s a possibility she might not be right, but you can’t prove it.
That is baseless headcanon.
I’m convinced this is a troll. You’re not supposed to assume that her statement isn’t factual by default, it has to have something that contradicts it (which it doesn’t). Size inconsistency is merely a drawing problem from Hori and doesn’t have an issue with her statement being factual or not.Where does the statement come from. She never said it's size Was 1000 times hers as a fact. She only used a rule in which it might as well not be. It's not a Statement. In fact she didn't even know it's size until she used it bro
And you can’t prove how hard that applies to her giant. Meaning your argument is wrong.1. So by your logic it might as well be planetary in size? Limitations apply to both her strength and environmental manipulating just not in the same amount. That's the theory shigaraki made
2. If there is a possibility of your argument being wrong it means there is also just a possibility for it being right you realize that? You can't present a 50/50 as a fact. Possibility of you being wrong does contradict it until you prove it's not a contradiction
3. Where does the statement come from. She never said it's size Was 1000 times hers as a fact. She only used a rule in which it might as well not be. It's not a Statement. In fact she didn't even know it's size until she used it bro
Yes I do something that does. Her limits. In this case You are the one assuming the size cause because of said limitations 2km MIGHT be wrong.I’m convinced this is a troll. You’re not supposed to assume that her statement isn’t factual by default, it has to have something that contradicts it (which it doesn’t). Size inconsistency is merely a drawing problem from Hori and doesn’t have an issue with her statement being factual or not.
Her limits is what she can do with non-organic matter.Yes I do something that does. Her limits. In this case You are the one assuming the size cause because of said limitations 2km MIGHT be wrong.
1. This is your contradiction to my contradiction so again burden of proof lies on you by making that nlfAnd you can’t prove how hard that applies to her giant. Meaning your argument is wrong.
Except this isn’t a 50/50. It’s is a guarantee that the air construct is 1000x her size until you actually give a good argument why it isn’t.
Her power is made it so. It’s your job to prove that the limits of her quirk applied and made the construct smaller. There is no reason why it can’t be 1000x.
We have possibly and likely ratings for this type of thingYou can't present a 50/50 as a fact. Possibility of you being wrong does contradict it until you prove it's not a contradiction
Where is it said it's only organic matter that is limited? Burden of proof on your assumptionHer limits is what she can do with non-organic matter.
How do you get from that to a limit on the size of her giant? Where does the belief that she cannot make it 1000x size come from?
Imagine thisWe have possibly and likely ratings for this type of thing
Pretty sure we have bigger jumps in these type of ratings, it's not even a problemImagine this
At least City level
Possibly island level.
What a small jump lol
No, it’s on you. There is no NLF here. She said something and did it. You’re claiming what she did wasn’t what she said. Prove that1. This is your contradiction to my contradiction so again burden of proof lies on you by making that nlf
2. I did
3. Because the quirk has limits. She states she got to her physical Amp limit when trying to stop shigarakis quirk meaning that imposing a rule too high would make her reach the limits. This might be a contradiction
Yes it's kinda irrelevant as it practically scales to Noone thoAre we still having this same "the 7-A+ feat is wrong" argument?