- 14,956
- 1,830
Heck it tells you what his eye does in your last link. "immense damage"and inflicts weaken. That is not EE at all.
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.
Constant Immense damage to a soul. Erasing souls. Yamamoto's could do it with his reiatsu just like that was the difference here?Rocker1189 said:Heck it tells you what his eye does in your last link. "Constant immense damage"and inflicts weaken. That is not EE at all.
I am saying there is no evidence of EE. That is what I am saying. Or would everyone in Bleach get EE?DragonEmperor23 said:Are you arguing that it's not EE because he destroys it? All EE is destruction of some sort. Again, explain how a fate worse than death isn't EE when getting killed normally in bleach verse just sends you into the cycle.
The difference is that you are sayign that by galancing at someone he erases their existenc and Yamamoto's has actual evidence of his EE where we see thing literally disappear upon him touching them.AppleLord said:Constant Immense damage to a soul. Erasing souls. Yamamoto's could do it with his reiatsu just like that was the difference here?
It has never been described as erasure once it has just been said to bring things to nothing (and literaly stated about its destructive power).Wokistan said:@Rocker
Being described as erasure, being described as inflicting a worse state than death (soul destruction is thrown out the window because everyone in bleach does that), and turning stuff to nothingness. None of those are indicative of AP. Examples of verses that were denied EE while meeting these criteria?
Yeah and we still have no actual evidence of him bringing things to nothingness with his eyes that is my issue. It literally just looks like a high power attack. That is not EE. That is just AP. And I did not say destroying a soul is not EE actually read what I am typing.DragonEmperor23 said:>Destroying a soul isn't EE
The definition of EE
Ulq turn's things into nothingness with the power of his eyes. This qualifies as EE.
- Most characters have not the full range of the ability, for example only being able to erase a target's matter and energy, but not its mind, soul, concept, etc.
It's not in some verses. But there's mention on the manga that Quincy erase Hollows from Existence by erasing their souls. Same thing Ulquiorra does by destroying their souls they cannot reincarnate.DragonEmperor23 said:
And I am saying there is no actual evidence of bringing things to nothingness that is the usual hyperbole used for a whole bunch of things. And the bringin to nothing ness seems to refer to his destructive power and nothing else. You can literally say that for example a tailbeast bomb would bring a town to nothingness. That is not EE though that is just vaporisation. The I can do worse than just kill you only makes me think of torture/ just beating the person up by being much more powerful than them.Wokistan said:Bringing things to nothing is not something that happens with AP unless it is far, far higher than everything around it. Not the case when I assume other tier 5s exist in game. A nuke won't even bring a town to nothingness, most of the time. Also doesn't address the whole "I can do worse than just kill you" part of it.
That's why I wrote this part in the OP: "The problem with his part is that "all" characters in the game die with a similar animation which is "faiding away" therefore it's effect are inconclusive in combat."Wokistan said:Bringing things to nothing is not something that happens with AP unless it is far, far higher than everything around it. Not the case when I assume other tier 5s exist in game. A nuke won't even bring a town to nothingness, most of the time. Also doesn't address the whole "I can do worse than just kill you" part of it.
No contradiction so far.Wokistan said:You can't insist that EE can't translate to heavy damage in game. There still needs to be gameplay, cant just have him instantly kill everything. Using gameplay mechanics to argue won't really get far, unless they don't contradict anything else.
No contradictions still needs evidence.AppleLord said:No contradiction so far.
Just because you say it is not an actual argument does not make it one. Nothing actually says that he erases people. It literally just looks like a show of his destructive power.DragonEmperor23 said:Honestly, I don't understand if you're argueing because you didn't read the scans but I'll just try and sum it up again.
1. "He has the destructive power to turn everything he sees into nothingness."
2. His eyes have special properties
3."...even death itself pales in comparison."
He has EE because his eyes have special properties. I posted more scans of his eyes being special in the first post under the OP. Now if you have an actual argument please say that instead of "it says power so he's hitting things physically into nothingness" when the scans contradict that or "How do you know he's not talking about torture when he says worse than death" when no one has brought an argument for why Ulqu would even be talking about torture and I've explained why he wouldn't be.
Six or seven scans of literally nothing only 3 of then refer to nothingness and one scans talk about that nothingness as if it is referring to destructibility.DragonEmperor23 said:>Literally like six or seven scans
"I need evidence"
^Dr.Fix said:Its a game profile. I've seen EE added to other profiles with far less evidence than this to back it up. I vote add unless we want to overhaul existing EE profiles.
That is a stupid quote. You cant make a claim without evidence.AppleLord said:Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
They "fade away" is just that the video was cut before they did. Other videos where over 11 minutes long. ;-;Wokistan said:Gameplay mechanics in this case would contradict the apparent story, as the corpses are still around. As such, that is considered of lesser priority.
I said it is a stupid quote dont know what you mean by language. There is evidence that also directly contradicts EE. It is no new argument because no new argument has to be said.AppleLord said:Language. There is evidence. Not enough evidence is another thing. Saying the same thing all over again is no new argument.
What does that have to do with character "faiding away" and what you said is base on a cut video instead of the full lenght. In one of the cut frames you can see them faiding away.Wokistan said:Not considering gameplay mechanics in this case actually helps your case, apple.