• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Downgrades (4kids)

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Xcano

Don't strawman the arguments done in the thread, and don't be dishonest by comparing something that's clearly tied to the plot and Shredder himself to a clear comedic scene, or a children's cartoon (I hear Arthur has feats, tho).
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
@Xcano
Don't strawman the arguments done in the thread, and don't be dishonest by comparing something that's clearly tied to the plot and Shredder himself to a clear comedic scene, or a children's cartoon (I hear Arthur has feats, tho).
Click to expand...
Being "tied to the plot" doesn't change anything. Both the Arthur scene and this scene are both just done to convey mood. It's simply a trope. There's a whole page filled with shit like this. Why should I believe Shredder is doing this when none of the characters say that or even imply it?

If you want evidence of it being an outlier I can pull up literally any random episode where they fight Shredder if you want. I don't have the best memory of the series, admittedly, but they rarely go beyond Wall level in a typical episode.
 
"Being "tied to the plot" doesn't change anything. Both the Arthur scene and this scene are both just done to convey mood"

No they aren't. You are just pulling this idea out thin air, even though it's already been debunked multiple times.

"Why should I believe Shredder is doing this when none of the characters say that or even imply it"

Because otherwise you'd have to believe that the moon moved at Massively Hypersonic speeds coincidentally as Shredder took over Japan, and then coincidentally stayed locked in an eclipse for years while he ruled, and then coincidentally returned to normal as he was defeated.

We are not analyzing TMNT as a piece of fiction, we are analyzing it as its own universe with its own rules. Mike Wong again, already explained this concept in 2002. Surprised you don't get it.

It makes far more logical sense in-universe to infer it's Shredder's doing.

Also, are you really going to use the "Pick a random episode / issue" fallacy as an argument. You are basically saying that in order to debate a character, you shouldn't randomly watch scenes rather than the entirety of the series. By your very same logic, Goku shouldn't be Universe level or Planet level, because the most you see in 99% of the series is Tier 8 destruction.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
I read and I did neither. Dunno what you are trying to start here, other than strawmaning mine and other arguments.
Click to expand...
He's not trying to say you did those fallacies(well the red herring he might be aiming at you) , but what he's implying is that the argument used to defend shredders feat is folly'd because of this fallacy used in fictions.
 
"It makes far more logical sense in-universe to infer it's Shredder's doing."

It makes far more logical sense to assume Shredder is actually an idiot and wasted massive amounts of energy on a scale never displayed again to possibly maybe scare people (Which itself is just headcanon) rather than just that, having happened some 2000~ years ago, the feat is exaggerated and/or was caused by any of the other random magics in the verse?

"Goku shouldn't be Universe level"

You're so so right.
 
@Grudge

He literally addressed Matt in his comment, don't see who else he could be talking to.
 
@Grudge

So I guess Red Herring would be akin to what Xcano did, bringing up a children's cartoon and pointing out to a TV Tropes page, while completely ignoring the actual argument that involves the scene and the plot of TMNT.

As for why this isn't Post Hoc, already explained above.
 
@Xcano

No. It makes far more logical sense to assume that a naturally impossible event that happened when Shredder came into power and lasted until his defeat was caused by him.
 
"It makes far more logical sense to assume Shredder is actually an idiot and wasted massive amounts of energy on a scale never displayed again"

Or maybe this type of energy just isn't massive to him.

"possibly maybe scare people (Which itself is just headcanon)"

Not really a headcanon, just a logical assumption. A year-long eclipse would make people crap their pants.

"rather than just that, having happened some 2000~ years ago, the feat is exaggerated and/or was caused by any of the other random magics in the verse"

Now that is asinine because we actually see the feat in a flashback rather than being just a statement, and we have no indication that this was done by anything else, which would be creating a crackpot theory just to downplay.

Also, lol at the Dragon Ball downplay.
 
"So I guess Red Herring would be akin to what Xcano did, bringing up a children's cartoon and pointing out to a TV Tropes page, while completely ignoring the actual argument that involves the scene and the plot of TMNT."

  • Me: Chances are the feat is just done symbolically and/or for dramatic flair, here are some comedic analogies as to why
  • You: What? Sorry? I can't read? What does that have to do with the point. Sounds like a red herring to me.
"No. It makes far more logical sense to assume that a naturally impossible event that happened when Shredder came into power and lasted until his defeat was caused by him."

I would say that, the feat being legend in the first place, it makes more sense for it to have never happened at all rather than headcanon a million assumptions to make this work.
 
@Xcano

Thanks for saying I can't read, that added a lot to the discussion.

"Chances are the feat is just done symbolically and/or for dramatic flair"

Really wasn't.

"I would say that, the feat being legend in the first place, it makes more sense for it to have never happened at all rather than headcanon a million assumptions to make this work."

Except it was shown to happen literally.
 
It shows a story someone is telling, that doesn't mean it happens literally. If a character has a flashback to the time their mom was killed that doesn't mean every detail is 100% accurate, that just means they're showing us this character's best memories of what happened.

But this happened like 2000 years ago. There's pretty much nobody to remember it at all. This is someone repeating a story told by someone else who heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else etc. etc. until the modern day.
 
"It shows a story someone is telling, that doesn't mean it happens literally. If a character has a flashback to the time their mom was killed that doesn't mean every detail is 100% accurate, that just means they're showing us this character's best memories of what happened."

If a scene is visually shown in a flashback, then it is showing something that happened in the past as it happened. If they wanted to indicate that this was a legend or a myth or hearsay, they could have easily done it by changing the artstyle, but they didn't.
 
"If they wanted to indicate that this was a legend or a myth or hearsay, they could have easily done it by changing the artstyle, but they didn't."

Excuse me what? It's not okay for us to say "this is obviously just symbolic and/or for dramatic flair" but it's okay for you to say that the feat is legit because of some obscure trope about art styles?
 
"It's not okay for us to say "this is obviously just symbolic and/or for dramatic flair" "

It's not because it isn't.

"but it's okay for you to say that the feat is legit because of some obscure trope about art styles?"

Not my exact point. My point is that if the show wanted to make it clear that this wasn't a literal depiction of the past but rather an ancient legend not meant to be taken literally, they would have done it. Out of the top of my head, they could have changed the artstyle in the flashback to make it like a moving japanese painting, or maybe just show it through a narration and still images, or maybe have the characters state that this is a legend and uncertain.

But the show didn't. The show just showed a flashback. So it's literal.
 
"It's not because it isn't."

It is because it is.

"Not my exact point. My point is that if the show wanted to make it clear that this wasn't a literal depiction of the past but rather an ancient legend not meant to be taken literally, they would have done it."

I thought we were treating this as it's own real separate universe and we were discarding all author intent and involvement?
 
I don't want to bring in my opinions on which is right on this (I swear, this thread ruins my childhood more for every single new comment). But I want to say that most likely, The Ninja Tribunal arc is technically not canon. 4Kids scrapped it near the end of development and officially released Fast Forward (gay series) instead, they had to release the (only mostly-finished) finished lost episodes way later on DVD. So IDK if its even 100% canon necessarily.
 
Again, where is the scene for Shredder changing the Earth? It's not linked on the profile nor can i find it online.
 
"It is because it is."

You haven't given a convincing argument as to why it is. You only used tropes and failed to address the actual scene.

"I thought we were treating this as it's own real separate universe and we were discarding all author intent and involvement"

If we are officially now, then you'll have to think of something else to debunk Shredder's feat, because your arguments are built entirely on TV Tropes.

As for I, I said above that if the show wanted to make it clear it was not literal it would. It hasn't, so you can't assign your headcanon to say it isn't. Just like above you said that it was caused by an unknown other magical artifact that was never mentioned in-universe.
 
Thing is, like AMM said....there is no actual confirmation that the whole "plunged japan into darkness" is a power feat, like, if anything it sounds a hell of a lot like some sort of symbolism/metaphor.

And assuming he was capable of such feat....and we take Shredder as Planet level, how did it take him so long to take over the world? Either that is severe PIS or an outlier (assuming it was an actual power feat)
 
"Thing is, like AMM said....there is no actual confirmation that the whole "plunged japan into darkness" is a power feat"

There kinda is, as pointed out above. The moon moved at massively hypersonic speeds creating an eclipse when he took over Japan, then the eclipse stayed on Japan for years without stop, and then it returned to normal as he was defeated.

It's pretty explicit that this is his power. You can't use the "trope" example because this is way more elaborate then a character being sad, and thus it rains in the next scenes where he is sad.
 
Another thing proving that this is a trope is the simple fact that the eclipse went away when he lost. Signifying that the threat is over.

Shredder has no reason to move the moon back whatsoever. You can't even do so using your headcanon.

Yeah its quite obvious this isnt legit, and the majority seems to agree.
 
"Shredder has no reason to move the moon back whatsoever."

Or perhaps it just moved back to its spot because he was incapable of keeping it in the same place due to being defeated?
 
"Another thing proving that this is a trope is the simple fact that the eclipse went away when he lost. Signifying that the threat is over."

Or rather, Shredder was actively keeping the eclipse through his power and so when he was defeated he stopped keeping the eclipse, thus things returned to normal.

"Yeah its quite obvious this isnt legit, and the majority seems to agree."

Looked through the thread and that's false.
 
The Everlasting said:
"Shredder has no reason to move the moon back whatsoever."

Or perhaps it just moved back to its spot because he was incapable of keeping it in the same place due to being defeated?
Click to expand...
Do you have any physical evidence at all within the show where shredder is stating he is holding the moon in that position the entire time. Or even him stating that he holds the moon in place.
 
There is no reason for it to fling off the screen the way it did.

You may of had a point if it went away normally but it did not.
 
"Do you have any evidence at all within the show where shredder is stating he is holding the moon in that position the entire time. Or even him stating that he holds the moon in place."

The whole scene? You have to show evidence that this was a coincidence that kept on happening for years.
 
Since the majority disagrees with this "feat" I think you should concede as clearly neither side is going to influence the other.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
"Do you have any evidence at all within the show where shredder is stating he is holding the moon in that position the entire time. Or even him stating that he holds the moon in place."

The whole scene? You have to show evidence that this was a coincidence that kept on happening for years.
Click to expand...
The burden of proof is on you Matt or anyone really I just want evidence.
 
LordAizenSama said:
Since the majority disagrees with this "feat" I think you should concede as clearly neither side is going to influence the other.
Click to expand...
The majority that is you, Xcano and AMM? I think you should concede to the actual majority (Darkanine, DarkDragonMedeus, The 2nd Existential Seed, The Everlasting, me, The real cal howard, Ultima Reality) if that's the case.
 
The majority seems to disagree with the downgrade, actually. Everything points to Shredder performing the feat and Aizen I'm really getting tired of your condescending attitude in every thread.

Unless it's a series of unfathomable consequences, Shredder caused the eclipse. It's not an outlier as its consistent with the other feats ad statements regarding this incarnation of Shredder as well. Saying it's a trope or symbolism is dumb as we clearly see the eclipse, clear as daylight. The moon was moved.
 
Grudgeman1706 said:
The burden of proof is on you Matt or anyone really I just want evidence.
Click to expand...
The evidence has already been given if you go to the top of the thread.

Either you accept it was Shredder's doing, or accept that the moon moved at MHS speeds out of nowhere, then aligned itself in an eclipse which lasted for years, and then coincidentally ended when Shredder was defeated.

Occan's Razork, which is more likely and logical? The former.
 
Sorry Matt, but can you repeat the evidence?

Also just wondering, how is the burden of evidence on someone who asked a question?
 
Every thread dark? Lol.

It is just irritating that people dont listen to evidence but instead use a form of headcanon. Apologies if you think this is condescending.
 
I think statements like "How anyone is defending this is mind boggling" is condescending, pretty sure that's what Dark means.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

4Kids Base EOS Turtles 5-A?
Replies
5
Views
1K
MKN66
4kids TMNT base tier and speed upgrade?
Replies
16
Views
2K
MKN66
AerrowStorm1
TMNT Rage empowerment (More proof)
Replies
1
Views
1K
Kaio1277999
SpiralPowerTheUndying
Adora (She-Ra [2018]) 7-C Upgrade
Replies
2
Views
325
DimeUhDozen
DimeUhDozen
ObberGobb
Verse-Wide Katekyo Hitman Reborn Downgrades
2 3
Replies
111
Views
5K
ObberGobb
ObberGobb
Back
Top