# EMS Sasuke vs BM Naruto



## Enki (Oct 16, 2013)

This is going to be gud 

Distance: 50 meters
Restrictions: BSM
Intel: Manga
Mindset: Bloodlusted.

Bonus Scenario:
PS CS Sasuke vs BSM Naruto.
Mindset: Bloodlusted


----------



## The Saiyan Prince Vegeta (Oct 16, 2013)

If it's a friendly spar then neither are going to use their full strength. Meaning Sasuke won't pull out PS and Naruto won't pull out BM. I would think they'd only use those if they're trying to kill each other. 

Either way, if they did use their mechs then I'm not sure who'd win. It's going to be high difficulty for either side regardless. IMO you can just flip a coin.


----------



## Enki (Oct 16, 2013)

The Saiyan Prince Vegeta said:


> If it's a friendly spar then neither are going to use their full strength. Meaning Sasuke won't pull out PS and Naruto won't pull out BM. I would think they'd only use those if they're trying to kill each other.
> 
> Either way, if they did use their mechs then I'm not sure who'd win. It's going to be high difficulty for either side regardless. IMO you can just flip a coin.



Changed mindset.


----------



## Joakim3 (Oct 16, 2013)

FRS chucking RM clones to stall PS, Naruto fires up a _Super Bijudama_ and you have a very dead Sasuke


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 16, 2013)

BM Naruto has the feats to beat EMS Madara w/o Kurama.  His tails block PS slashes and madara's susanoo isn't going to tank a super bijuudama.

Now, Naruto's up against a much weaker version of PS since it's much smaller and only has one sword that hasn't sliced a mountain range yet. 

The there's the fact that since naruto's the same size as the PS, he can prevent the construct from ever slicing if he grabs the hands with his chakra arms, and he can even use ninjutsu via the chakra arms.

I don't see how sasuke stands much of a chance at least featwise.

Straight up ignoring feats and going full portrayal is the only way one could argue this IMO.


----------



## Blu-ray (Oct 16, 2013)

Joakim3 said:


> FRS chucking RM clones to stall PS, Naruto fires up a _Super Bijudama_ and you have a very dead Sasuke



FRS will stall how? One burning sword turns them all into flames that Sasuke can then control. Sasuke could always try and preempt the Bijuudama, or dodge, or I dunno, tank it. His Susano'o is featless so we don't know what it can or can't do. I'm personally of the opinion that they'd stalemate or kill each other.


----------



## Jak N Blak (Oct 16, 2013)

KCM Naruto would still curb stomp.


----------



## Enki (Oct 16, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> Now, Naruto's up against a much weaker version of PS since it's much smaller and only has one sword that hasn't sliced a mountain range yet.



Seems like the same size to me. But knowing Kishimoto's inconsistencies in drawing i wouldn't put so much fait in sizes 

But yeah, i think that Sasuke's PS isn't complete right now. He lacks another sword (tough he might change it with a bow) and another pair of arms like Madara's.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 16, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> BM Naruto has the feats to beat EMS Madara w/o Kurama.  His tails block PS slashes and madara's susanoo isn't going to tank a super bijuudama.


KSBM was WAXED LAST CHAPTER, so...........

And once again, your assessment is baseless. Naruto SUPER TBB has little to no feats, and THE ONE UTILIZED WAS COMPARED TO SASUKE'S

You talk about using feats, yet your only feats for Naruto's Bijuudama is destroying MOUNTAIN RANGES.



> Now, Naruto's up against a much weaker version of PS since it's much smaller and only has one sword that hasn't sliced a mountain range yet.



Much smaller? You sure about that?


*Spoiler*: __ 











Please do your research before speaking, how many times does Iphr0z3nI have to teach you this lesson?

They're size is comparable. 

Key features such as:

placement of the user(In forehead jewel)
Tengue nose being of comparable sizes.
Kurama's eyes, teeth, etc. etc. are of comparable scales.

Besides we've not seen Sasuke's PS outside of it's FUSED FORM WITH NARUTO'S OWN VARIATION. And given that 

And even if his PS wasn't a big as Madara's, which is baseless. It's still arguably bigger than Naruto's BM, seeing as PS has to cover the former.



> The there's the fact that since naruto's the same size as the PS, he can prevent the construct from ever slicing if he grabs the hands with his chakra arms, and he can even use ninjutsu via the chakra arms.


Naruto isn't the same size, read the manga.

How could he be, when these are comparable in size.

And judging by the scale of Madara's full body Susano'o to PS.

I think it's safe to assume a similar gap exist between Sasuke's full body Susano'o and PS.

I think it's safe to assume judging from this panel, that Sasuke's PS is noticeably larger than Naruto's BM.



> I don't see how sasuke stands much of a chance at least featwise.


But that's the thing. You have nothing feat wise. None of your arguments check out. 

You make the baseless argument regarding SUPER TBB > Susano'o with NO MERITS....(It's only feat is destroying mountains, as you so gleefully point out)

You make the baseless assumption that Sasuke's PS is smaller than Madara's, despite nothing indicating such. 

You make the baseless assumption that Sasuke's PS is weaker than Madara's despite having the better "TAGGED" feat.




> Straight up ignoring feats and going full portrayal is the only way one could argue this IMO.


No good sir. Ueharakk straight up ignoring feats and making baseless assumptions is the only way he can argue Naruto's win.

Note, that I'm nearly conveying Sasuke could win or lose, as he doesn't have enough feats on his own right, to make a case for him IN ANY BATTLE YET.

But I am going to say, that Naruto now has the same troubles as Sasuke did prior to showcasing his FULL POTENTIAL, as the size of his BM doesn't appear to match that of Sasuke's PS. 

At this point I see them as equals on the totem pole. 

Sasuke lacks access to his own source of Senjutsu, which he may receive soon.

And Naruto's construct doesn't have Sasuke's PS size, which he may receive once he gets the other half of Kurama's chakara.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 16, 2013)

hey it's this guy again 



IpHr0z3nI said:


> KSBM was WAXED LAST CHAPTER, so...........
> 
> And once again, your assessment is baseless. Naruto SUPER TBB has little to no feats, and THE ONE UTILIZED WAS COMPARED TO SASUKE'S
> 
> You talk about using feats, yet your only feats for Naruto's Bijuudama is destroying MOUNTAIN RANGES.


Are you asserting that Sasuke's PS CAN tank a super bijuudama?  And if so, by what arguments, evidence or reasoning?  It doesn't matter if a super bijuudama has little or no feats, if you want to assert it can or can't do something then you have to give an argument for that that shows how its offensive power compares to PS's defensive power.  And I do that based on the size of the bijuudama noting that susanoo has been busted by attacks that are far weaker than a bijuudama of the same size as susanoo.  Thus if susanoo gets hit by a bijuudama of the same size it won't survive it.  Danzou's fuuton being one of them, oonoki's jinton being another, kirin being another, and Sinsuusenjuu's barrage being another.  All of these attacks destroy susanoo yet pale in comparison to the power of a bijuudama of the same size of that susanoo.

Are you asserting that Sasuke's arrow that can't even penetrate a bridge is as powerful as a mountain vaporizer?




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Much smaller? You sure about that?
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...


In order for you to assert that Sasuke's PS is as large as Madara's you'd have to assert that Naruto's BSM is as big as 100% Kurama.  Would you like to support that assertion with an argument?

And no, *BSM Naruto's avatar is no bigger than BM Minato's * and both are completely dwarfed by *100% Kurama's size * while remaining comparable to current Kyuusanoo:




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Naruto isn't the same size, read the manga.
> 
> How could he be, when these are comparable in size.
> 
> ...


none of that has anything to do with how big Sasuke's PS is.  Sasuke's full body one isn't larger than Naruto's BM since it doesn't have tails which make up for at least half of naruto's size.  And Sasuke making a full body one of a certain size doesn't imply that his PS is far larger as Madara's capable of making *skeletal susanoo that compares in size to his PS.  *

PS is simply the stabalized final form of susanoo, it's size doesn't necessarily have to be significantly larger than the lower forms.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> But that's the thing. You have nothing feat wise. None of your arguments check out.
> 
> You make the baseless argument regarding SUPER TBB > Susano'o with NO MERITS....(It's only feat is destroying mountains, as you so gleefully point out)
> 
> ...


Once again, let me hold your hand and take you through the definition of what baseless means.  Baseless means it has NO bases, AKA NO arguments or reasoning to support itself.  I HAVE supported my assertion that a super TBB > PS with arguments and evidence, thus your assertion that my assertions are baseless is in fact a straight up lie.  If you don't agree with my reasoning attack that reasoning, or if you want to assert that a super bijuudama doesn't destroy PS, then support it with an assertion, else your arguments hold no water and you concede the point as an ignored argument is a conceded one and you haven't even supported any kind of counterargument.

And unless you want to assert that Madara's Susanoo under the same conditions as Sasuke's would have performed less than his against Juubito, then you saying he has a better feat is irrelevant.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> No good sir. Ueharakk straight up ignoring feats and making baseless assumptions is the only way he can argue Naruto's win.
> 
> Note, that I'm nearly conveying Sasuke could win or lose, as he doesn't have enough feats on his own right, to make a case for him IN ANY BATTLE YET.
> 
> ...



Wait what?  Are you saying that Sasuke's PS is as large as Madara's PS?  And are you saying that BSM/BM Naruto's avatar are way smaller than Sasuke's PS?


----------



## Rocky (Oct 16, 2013)

Naruto wins because he's the Goku to Sasuke's Vegeta.

The problem is that it's very unclear where Sasuke stands by himself. The first time his legged Susano'o made an appearance, he was wearing Naruto's cloak. Then, he got a pseudo-Sage power up from Juugo to keep pace with Naruto's Sage Mode in the battle against Jubito. Lastly, Naruto isn't at full strength in the Manga, considering he currently has his Chakra distributed between thousands of Shinobi, and he's given enough to the Rookie 9 to grant them Biuu Mode jackets. Seriously, Lee can't even use Ninjutsu and Naruto gave him enough of a boost that now he can form giant Rasengans.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 16, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> hey it's this guy again
> 
> 
> Are you asserting that Sasuke's PS CAN tank a super bijuudama?  And if so, by what arguments, evidence or reasoning?  It doesn't matter if a super bijuudama has little or no feats, if you want to assert it can or can't do something then you have to give an argument for that that shows how its offensive power compares to PS's defensive power.  And I do that based on the size of the bijuudama noting that susanoo has been busted by attacks that are far weaker than a bijuudama of the same size as susanoo.  Thus if susanoo gets hit by a bijuudama of the same size it won't survive it.  Danzou's fuuton being one of them, oonoki's jinton being another, kirin being another, and Sinsuusenjuu's barrage being another.  All of these attacks destroy susanoo yet pale in comparison to the power of a bijuudama of the same size of that susanoo.


Your accusation, your proof, period.

Super TBB hasn't done anything to showcase it's the answer to PS.

Danzo's attack doesn't represent Naruto's, and Naruto's TBB hasn't busted anything but mountains.

Besides Danzo's feat occurred against a FAR, FAR WEAKER SUSANO'O.(You got to do better)




> Are you asserting that Sasuke's arrow that can't even penetrate a bridge is as powerful as a mountain vaporizer?


It didn't penetrate the bridge.(Do you know the definition of penetrate)

I don't think Sasuke's arrows arrows is designed to vaporize anything, it's an arrow for god sake's. But it's effectiveness against Juubito mirrored that of TBB, thus is where my argument begins and ends.



> In order for you to assert that Sasuke's PS is as large as Madara's you'd have to assert that Naruto's BSM is as big as 100% Kurama.  Would you like to support that assertion with an argument?


But 100% Kurama was never depicted to be larger than that of other TB, and Naruto's BM is just as large as a TB.

The Size of Sasuke's PS is larger than Naruto's BM, and the final fusions of both Madara and Sasuke's feats with Kurama are comparable.

It's not an assertion, as I clearly posted panel to support my argument. An assertion is making baseless claims in which you cannot support. Madara's PS being larger is one of them.




> And no, *BSM Naruto's avatar is no bigger than BM Minato's * and both are completely dwarfed by *100% Kurama's size * while remaining comparable to current Kyuusanoo:


Rookie mistake.

Please utilize MULTIPLE PANELS.

Size is one of the most inconsistent aspects in this manga.




> none of that has anything to do with how big Sasuke's PS is.  Sasuke's full body one isn't larger than Naruto's BM since it doesn't have tails which make up for at least half of naruto's size.  And Sasuke making a full body one of a certain size doesn't imply that his PS is far larger as Madara's capable of making *skeletal susanoo that compares in size to his PS.  *


And we don't know the size of Sasuke's PS, that's the point.

Sasuke's full body Susano'o is comparable to Naruto's BM. His PS is larger.
I'm not going to sit here and debate something with you that's blatantly proven by panel.

And the panel you post is baseless, as you have nothing to compare it too.



> PS is simply the stabalized final form of susanoo, it's size doesn't necessarily have to be significantly larger than the lower forms.


But it is mate, or at least that's how it's been presented.




> Once again, let me hold your hand and take you through the definition of what baseless means.  Baseless means it has NO bases, AKA NO arguments or reasoning to support itself.  I HAVE supported my assertion that a super TBB > PS with arguments and evidence, thus your assertion that my assertions are baseless is in fact a straight up lie.  If you don't agree with my reasoning attack that reasoning, or if you want to assert that a super bijuudama doesn't destroy PS, then support it with an assertion, else your arguments hold no water and you concede the point as an ignored argument is a conceded one and you haven't even supported any kind of counterargument.


Hold my hand, boy please. 

Baseless is what you're doing in the above paragraph.

"Madara's capable of making skeletal Susano'o the size of PS" 
"Super TBB destroys PS"

When your shit doesn't have any bases, it's baseless...

You claim to have supported your assessment, but you haven't with actual panel that relates to the situation.

Danzo's feat isn't Naruto's.

Completed Susano'o isn't a Perfect Susano'o.

etc.



> And unless you want to assert that Madara's Susanoo under the same conditions as Sasuke's would have performed less than his against Juubito,


LMAO, what?

Sasuke's Susano'o has better feats in the lesser stages.
Sasuke's Susano'o has better feats in the FULL BODY STAGES.

I don't know how Madara's Susanoo have performed, but it's irrelevant to this discussion, isn't it?



> then you saying he has a better feat is irrelevant.


How so? Ueharakk, you're never going to be Iphr0z3nI, so stop trying to debate like him.

Your argument don't add up.

Your support isn't as featured.



> Wait what?  Are you saying that Sasuke's PS is as large as Madara's PS?  And are you saying that BSM/BM Naruto's avatar are way smaller than Sasuke's PS?


I'm saying Sasuke's PS hasn't been showcased.

I'm saying regardless Sasuke's PS is larger than Naruto's BM.

I was very clear in my initial argument.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 16, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Your accusation, your proof, period.
> 
> Super TBB hasn't done anything to showcase it's the answer to PS.
> 
> ...


That's simply catering to the logical fallacy that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  So no, you can't go claiming logical fallacies.  

Danzou's attack shows that susanoo gets its back blown open by an attack tiers beyond tiers weaker than a bijuudama and thus (unless you have some kind of positive argument to assert otherwise), susanoo getting hit with an attack tiers beyond tiers more powerful than danzou's fuuton means it gets busted.  Danzou's feat occuring against a far far weaker susnaoo has been taken into account since a a bijuudama of the same size as that susanoo is magnitudes more powerful than danzou's fuuton it would blow up that susanoo 100 times over, and thus a bijuudama the size of PS would be magnitudes would scale by that basis.

It doesn't matter if a super TBB hasn't been directly used on PS, that in no way means that we can't formulate arguments for or against the notion of what happens if it does hit PS.

All you have done is show that "you aren't necessarily correct" yet NO argument can show necessary truth, thus that's a burden of proof no one can bear.  Unless you have some kind of positive argument that PS can withstand a super bijuudama, then it's a concession on your part as I have an argument and you don't.





IpHr0z3nI said:


> It didn't penetrate the bridge.(Do you know the definition of penetrate)
> 
> I don't think Sasuke's arrows arrows is designed to vaporize anything, it's an arrow for god sake's. But it's effectiveness against Juubito mirrored that of TBB, thus is where my argument begins and ends.


The arrow being desined to vaporize things is irrelevant.  It couldn't even go through a 40 thick wall of cement, while a bijuudama vaporizes kilometers worth of pure rock.  So no, the notion that the attacks are somehow comparable simply because they were fired at the same time against the black jinton is refuted by the actual abilities of both attacks.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> But 100% Kurama was never depicted to be larger than that of other TB, and Naruto's BM is just as large as a TB.
> 
> The Size of Sasuke's PS is larger than Naruto's BM, and the final fusions of both Madara and Sasuke's feats with Kurama are comparable.
> 
> It's not an assertion, as I clearly posted panel to support my argument. An assertion is making baseless claims in which you cannot support. Madara's PS being larger is one of them.


100% Kurama WAS depicted to be larger than the other TB by the fact that 50% Kurama and BM/BSM Naruto are comparable in size. 

And supporting an assertion with a panel or argument does not mean it's no longer an assertion.  It just means it's not a BASELESS assertion.  




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Rookie mistake.
> 
> Please utilize MULTIPLE PANELS.
> 
> Size is one of the most inconsistent aspects in this manga.


Concession accepted, I am just appalled by your blatant dishonesty and lack of integrity right now.  You just told me to use multiple panels, yet you bring up the one and only panel of 100% Kurama being depicted as normal bijuu sized in their entire fight.  

Kurama is consistently shown to be much much much much larger than that one and only panel of his depiction that you brought up:
1
2

3
4
5
6
7
*8*
9
10


Finally, *this scan* just destroys your entire PS argument as it clearly shows 50% Kurama is at least as big as BM/BSM Naruto.

Do NOT make me refute the blatantly obvious and especially do not waste my time making arguments that you know are flat out disingenuous.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> And we don't know the size of Sasuke's PS, that's the point.
> 
> Sasuke's full body Susano'o is comparable to Naruto's BM. His PS is larger.
> I'm not going to sit here and debate something with you that's blatantly proven by panel.
> ...


"we don't know" arguments aren't positive arguments thus hold no water.
No one is denying that Sasuke's PS is larger than his full body susanoo, so I don't know what you are saying there.
The panel i've posted is in no way baseless, it shows Madara's Skeletal susanoo towering over he rubel just as much as his PS did.  The skeletal susanoo both has the jewel that madara sits inside and is so big that despite madara being inside that susanoo he doesn't even register as a dot on that panel.  So no.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> But it is mate, or at least that's how it's been presented.


No it hasn't, not based on the scans of skeletal susanoo, nor based on sasuke's V3 being comparable to the same BSM Naruto that his PS is now covering



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Hold my hand, boy please.
> 
> Baseless is what you're doing in the above paragraph.
> 
> ...


Concession accepted.  I've just straight up explained by the book why none of those claims are baseless as they are supported by arguments.  You've not only falsely called arguments that are supported "baseless" but also haven't backed up or tried to generate a counterargument which is another concession on your part since you have no counter you're simply asserting that what I'm saying is baseless without any basis.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> LMAO, what?
> 
> Sasuke's Susano'o has better feats in the lesser stages.
> Sasuke's Susano'o has better feats in the FULL BODY STAGES.
> ...


Unless you want to argue that Madara's susanoo would be incapable of performing those feats at those lower stages, then them having those feats is irrelevant to madara's ability to perform them. 




IpHr0z3nI said:


> How so? Ueharakk, you're never going to be Iphr0z3nI, so stop trying to debate like him.
> 
> Your argument don't add up.
> 
> Your support isn't as featured.


Since none of this answers the question that you've quoted, then I'm guessing you concede that point since you either don't have an answer or are straight up ignoring the question.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> I'm saying Sasuke's PS hasn't been showcased.
> 
> I'm saying regardless Sasuke's PS is larger than Naruto's BM.
> 
> I was very clear in my initial argument.


then that's completely and utterly irrelevant in regards to Sasuke's susanoo being as large as Madara's susanoo.

If you aren't asserting anything, then your argument doesn't hold any water and you'd have to logically concede to the arguments that are asserting something regardless of whether you agree with their support or not since a supported argument no matter how compelling or convincing it is is more probable than an argument that isn't supported by anything.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 16, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> Concession accepted, I am just appalled by your blatant dishonesty and lack of integrity right now.  You just told me to use multiple panels, yet you bring up the one and only panel of 100% Kurama being depicted as normal bijuu sized in their entire fight.


Concession what? LMAO, classic Ueharakk.(Couldn't do you awful properly because I pressed for time, let's see if your argument holds up against Iphr0z3nI)

Earlier I told you to use multiple panels, and you didn't do a good job of such. How do we measure the scale of something, without a common medium.

Iphr0z3nI is going show you how YOU LINK ASSESSMENTS PROPERLY.



> Kurama is consistently shown to be much much much much larger than that one and only panel of his depiction that you brought up:
> 1
> 2
> 
> ...


Among all the panel you listed, the only one that actually shows to validate your case is the last two. 

The first eight are panels exclusively showcasing Kurama, but one doesn't have a comparable medium.

This is how you do it Mr. Ueharrakk.

This panel will serve as are bases.

Along with this one.

And the comparison is solely going to be between the construct and people, as thus is the only aspect in which they coincide in.

Exhibit A.

Exhibit B.

Exhibit C

Exhibit D

Exhibit E

Exhibit F

You compare Kurama's size to that of people, as there isn't a KONOHA AROUND the "BASES". There isn't a forest around the "BASES"

The only thing around Naruto and Sasuke's current monstrosity is people.

But we're not done yet, not by a long shot.

Pay attention to how it's done Ueharakk.

Isn't Madara occupying the same area here in which Naruto and Sasuke are currently occupying?

Did you seriously use this panel? Note such panel doesn't support your point. 

Look at the size of Obito here, too Naruto and Sasuke's Kyuusano.

No wounder why Obito loss... Look at the size of Naruto and Sasuke's sword compared to Obito's.

Another panel that disproves your point. A huge size difference between this right?

As you can see very clearly, SIZE ISN'T SOMETHING THAT'S EXACTLY CONSISTENT, is it.

And the panels above wasn't what I was using to argue my point. It's THIS, I WAS USING.
Kurama, whether it's smaller or not, is still the same size as the rest of the tailed beast. Thus, unless one is alluding to Kurama being larger than the other Biju's the size argument is questionable.

And just  to show you that you are dead.

Let's also compare the ranging scales of other Biju's.

That's how you do it ueharakk.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 16, 2013)

Why do you paragraph so hideously.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 16, 2013)

Another day, another thread where IpHr0z3nl engages in an endless, eight-paragraph tirade filled to the brim with ad hominem with some poor chap.

Same NBD as ever.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 16, 2013)

And he

refers to

himself in

the third

person.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 16, 2013)

Doesn't get any more obnoxious or pretentious than that.



*Spoiler*: __ 



I keed, I keed.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 16, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Concession what? LMAO, classic Ueharakk.(Couldn't do you awful properly because I pressed for time, let's see if your argument holds up against Iphr0z3nI)
> 
> Earlier I told you to use multiple panels, and you didn't do a good job of such. How do we measure the scale of something, without a common medium.
> 
> ...


Wait hold on, are you saying that simply because we don't have a human figure in any of the scans except for the last 2, we have ABSOLUTELY NO WAY of comparing 100% Kurama to the scan with a human figure?

that's completely illogical.  In the scans without humans in it you have other objects that give kurama scale such as BUILDINGS and size of kurama vs forest.  By your logic, we can't say that the watertower that sasuke hit with chidori is smaller than one of the mountains around the chibaku tensei crater if we can't see any humans in that picture.

In addition to that, even by your embarrassingly fallacious logic, it wouldn't just be the last two that have humans as the *first one* has kushina as a dot at the very bottom of the page.  

Do not waste my time with kindergarden level illogical fallacies.  



IpHr0z3nI said:


> This is how you do it Mr. Ueharrakk.
> 
> This panel will serve as are bases.
> 
> ...


wow just wow.  In EVERY SINGLE scan you just posted we are given ZERO reference to how big a person is compared to Kurama since in EVERY single panel you've posted it has the human subject standing WAY closer to the camera than Kurama.

Thus absolutely NONE of those scans you've posted support your case in the slightest bit.  Actually on further review, exhibit D might actually be legit seeing as minato and kushina are tiny dots under Kurama's looming head on the bottom panel which of course is just another panel that supports my case that 100% Kurama is far larger than BM Naruto and Sasuke's kyuusanoo.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Pay attention to how it's done Ueharakk.
> 
> Isn't Madara occupying the same area here in which Naruto and Sasuke are currently occupying?
> 
> Did you seriously use this panel? Note such panel doesn't support your point.


The size of the diamond is roughly the same, however the size of the diamond compared to Kurama's head is completely different.  The diamond takes up a much larger area of the head of Sasuke's Susanoo compared to the area Madara's takes up on the head of his.  Thus the pages you've just posted actually disprove your argument that Madara's susanoo is just as large as sasuke's.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Look at the size of Obito here, too Naruto and Sasuke's Kyuusano.
> 
> No wounder why Obito loss... Look at the size of Naruto and Sasuke's sword compared to Obito's.
> 
> ...


None of the scans of obito vs kurama come close to what 100% Kurama is to Madara.  I've never argued that size is 100% consistent, however I do argue that the size that is CONSISTENTLY depicted should be the genuine size of the construct which is why the bolded scan is completely fallacious in depicting 100% Kurama's size.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> And the panels above wasn't what I was using to argue my point. It's THIS, I WAS USING.
> Kurama, whether it's smaller or not, is still the same size as the rest of the tailed beast. Thus, unless one is alluding to Kurama being larger than the other Biju's the size argument is questionable.


Yes obviously one would be alluding to 100% Kurama being significantly larger than all the other bijuu when 50% Kurama and BM Naruto are as large as the other bijuu as well.  I have no idea why you brought up BM Naruto being as large as Bee as that doesn't have anything to do with the argument that 100% Kurama isn't much larger than bee.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> And show to show you that you are dead.
> 
> Let's also compare the ranging scales of other Biju's.
> 
> That's how you do it ueharakk.


yeah, I have no idea what you are trying to argue here.  I've never asserted that the other bijuus aren't equal in size.  It's only 100% Kurama that's much larger then all of them, and this is show by 50% Kurama being comparable in size to the other bijuu, BM Naruto being comparable in size to the other bijuu, and 100% Kurama just flat out being much larger than those other bijuu when compared to humans or constructs.


----------



## Trojan (Oct 16, 2013)

Madara's PS = Full Kurama in size. 
Sasuke's PS = Naruto's Kurama in size

that can't be more obvious, and since Naruto's Kurama is not even half the size of full Kurama
according to this. 
Biju's

then Sasuke's PS is not even half as big as Madara's. Simple.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 16, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> In addition to that, even by your embarrassingly fallacious logic, it wouldn't just be the last two that have humans as the *first one* has kushina as a dot at the very bottom of the page.



There was a calculation for Kurama in that specific scan; he was around 350-ish meters on his hind legs.

Yeah, Nine-Tails was absolutely enormous back in the day.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 17, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> Wait hold on, are you saying that simply because we don't have a human figure in any of the scans except for the last 2, we have ABSOLUTELY NO WAY of comparing 100% Kurama to the scan with a human figure?


Without a human figure or something that can be utilized to measure SCALE, posing a panel intended for comparison is silly.



> that's completely illogical.  In the scans without humans in it you have other objects that give kurama scale such as BUILDINGS and size of kurama vs forest.  By your logic, we can't say that the watertower that sasuke hit with chidori is smaller than one of the mountains around the chibaku tensei crater if we can't see any humans in that picture.


How so? How do fuck do you think we're going to compare Madara's PS Susano'o, to that of Naruto and Sasuke's.

Are their buildings to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too?
Are there trees or mountains to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too? Please utilize a bit more common sense before speaking.

If we're posting panel for the sake of comparison it actually helps to have a medium in which he can compare such too...



> In addition to that, even by your embarrassingly fallacious logic, it wouldn't just be the last two that have humans as the *first one* has kushina as a dot at the very bottom of the page.


Again with the poor attempts to imitate Iphr0z3nI.

isn't Kurama doing something similar here? Doesn't look nearly as big does it? Mate.




> Do not waste my time with kindergarden level illogical fallacies.


Keep it classy Mr. Ueharakk.



> wow just wow.  In EVERY SINGLE scan you just posted we are given ZERO reference to how big a person is compared to Kurama since in EVERY single panel you've posted it has the human subject standing WAY closer to the camera than Kurama.


Wow, that reading comprehension.

The reference I was using is PEOPLE, I noted that earlier did I not?

And camera angle is a major factor in all panels, hence why the argument of size is an extremely controversial issue.



> Thus absolutely NONE of those scans you've posted support your case in the slightest bit.  Actually on further review, exhibit D might actually be legit seeing as minato and kushina are tiny dots under Kurama's looming head on the bottom panel which of course is just another panel that supports my case that 100% Kurama is far larger than BM Naruto and Sasuke's kyuusanoo.


How so? You don't even know my case Mr. Ueharakk.

I'm dismantling your argument two ways.

By showcasing the various sizes of 100% Kurama, and showcasing the various sizes of the BIJU AS A WHOLE.

And before you talk about things supporting your point. Exhibit D doesn't even have Kushina in it.

You're like referring to exhibit E, and PLEASE DON'T GET TO HAPPY.

Here's panel of 100% prior to the size reduction. Note that the bottom left panel shows the scale of Minato's jutsu to that of 100% Kurama. Note that it was more than just a dot, right.

Now let's analyze the Karuusano showcased this chapter. Obito at best wasn't the size of it's thumb. Neither were Naruto and Sasuke.




> The size of the diamond is roughly the same, however the size of the diamond compared to Kurama's head is completely different.  The diamond takes up a much larger area of the head of Sasuke's Susanoo compared to the area Madara's takes up on the head of his.  Thus the pages you've just posted actually disprove your argument that Madara's susanoo is just as large as sasuke's.


No it isn't. 

The diamond of both.

What panel are you utilizing, please? You're not using the correct ones.

The diamond takes up a much larger area on Sasuke's Susano'o because his head is much sleeker in comparison to Madara's own variation.

In fact Sasuke's entire Susano'o is sleeker than that of Madara's.

That's likely because Sasuke and Naruto's variation is designed to MOVE.




> None of the scans of obito vs kurama come close to what 100% Kurama is to Madara.  I've never argued that size is 100% consistent, however I do argue that the size that is CONSISTENTLY depicted should be the genuine size of the construct which is why the bolded scan is completely fallacious in depicting 100% Kurama's size.


Yea, they do, it simply comes down to what panel you're using.

Again, there aren't any buildings or trees to compare them too. But the people is consistent among all of them.

Your argument has no merit because you're clearly picking and choosing what panels to take with 100% Kurama.

You've opted for a medium: buildings, trees and mountains that aren't available to the current comparison. But people is, and there's clear panel to support them being equivalent in the dwarfing people argument.

Notice, how you stuck to a single panel. Yet, that panel as nothing on it.



> Yes obviously one would be alluding to 100% Kurama being significantly larger than all the other bijuu when 50% Kurama and BM Naruto are as large as the other bijuu as well.  I have no idea why you brought up BM Naruto being as large as Bee as that doesn't have anything to do with the argument that 100% Kurama isn't much larger than bee.


But we both know that isn't true.

As the Biju's are clearly, clearly designed to be of the same scale. You mean to tell me that 1-8 are meant to be comparable in size, but the nine tails isn't?

(They were comparable in their youth, and LOOK MR. Ueharakk, Naruto is only the size of the eight tails finger nail)

There's nothing to suggest Kurama was meant to be larger than the other tail beast. The only tail beast meant to be larger than the rest is the Juubi.



> yeah, I have no idea what you are trying to argue here.  I've never asserted that the other bijuus aren't equal in size.  It's only 100% Kurama that's much larger then all of them, and this is show by 50% Kurama being comparable in size to the other bijuu, BM Naruto being comparable in size to the other bijuu, and 100% Kurama just flat out being much larger than those other bijuu when compared to humans or constructs.


Do you truly not.....

Deal how. Those other BIJU'S HAVE THE SAME FUCKING COLOSSAL SIZE AS ANY 100% Kurma.

Please look at those panels carefully. Please look at all the panels that showcases THE TAILS BEAST TOGETHER. Kurama wasn't larger than shit, and your assessment here is baseless.

You were all high and mighty recently about posting MORE PANELS THAN ME, yet you resort to NOTHING, HERE but baseless statements.

100% Kurama has size inconsistencies like everybody else. Depending on the ANGLE, one can deviate size. The problem is that the OTHER BIJU'S HAVE PANELS THAT SHOWCASES THEM DWARFING HUMANS, TREES, ETC.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 17, 2013)

ATastyMuffin said:


> There was a calculation for Kurama in that specific scan; he was around 350-ish meters on his hind legs.
> 
> Yeah, Nine-Tails was absolutely enormous back in the day.



Your calculations means nothing, as size various from panel to panel.

Kurama was clearly meant to be the same size as the other tailed beast.

Put it this way.

Madara was able to solidly rest upon 100% Kurama's forehead, right? What a coincidence so was the other Jinchuurki's.

Another nail in the coffin for Mr. Ueharakk.


----------



## Jagger (Oct 17, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI, I'd start debating with you right now if it wasn't over the fact your take way too many spaces in your posts.


----------



## Jeαnne (Oct 17, 2013)

Elia said:


> Madara's PS = Full Kurama in size.
> Sasuke's PS = Naruto's Kurama in size
> 
> that can't be more obvious, and since Naruto's Kurama is not even half the size of full Kurama
> ...


Stop, just stop. You realize that this is a logical fallacy right?

Sasuke is making a fucking armor for Naruto's kurama, how the fuck is it supposed to be bigger so? When you are supposed to create an armor for something, you will make it match this something. 

If Naruto's kurama is half of the kyuubi size, Sasuke will make his PS become proportional to half of the kyuubi.

There is nothing to backup the idea that this same PS couldnt armor a full kyuubi , we cant measure the true size yet. So stop it, stop trying to make it something that its not, its useless... you will just look stupid when Kishi prove otherwise.


----------



## Psp123789 (Oct 17, 2013)

Naruto still stomps. All sasuke's PS or "legged susano'o" has shown to have so far is a sword and a bow. Both can't stop a mountain range busting super TBB from destroying sasuke. Naruto restrains sasuke's susano'o with chakra arms and then destroys it with a super TBB. Sasuke still hasn't reached naruto's lvl.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 17, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Your calculations means nothing, as size various from panel to panel.
> 
> Kurama was clearly meant to be the same size as the other tailed beast.
> 
> ...



I'm not disputing anything you're saying; keep in mind, I'm not on anybody's side here or supporting them as you imply.


----------



## Trojan (Oct 17, 2013)

Jeαnne said:


> Stop, just stop. You realize that this is a logical fallacy right?
> 
> Sasuke is making a fucking armor for Naruto's kurama, how the fuck is it supposed to be bigger so? When you are supposed to create an armor for something, you will make it match this something.
> 
> ...



:S

I still believe they are at the same size. 
nail

there Kurama is as big as that mountain, and it even bigger with its tails included. 
of course Kurama is a fox, so he needs all 4 of his legs (2 hands?) but when he actually
stand he's giant
nail

look at the size others compare to Kurama. 

back to PS
he also was compared to the meteor
nail

which seems as big as the mountain (or what ever it called) to me. Either way, Naruto still
win this. 
Sasuke hardly have feats with his susanoo, or even hype.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 17, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Without a human figure or something that can be utilized to measure SCALE, posing a panel intended for comparison is silly.


That's completely false.  We don't need to see a human standing next to a mountain in order to conclude it's larger than a watertower, just like we don't need to have a human standing next to kurama in order to conclude it's larger than BM Naruto if we see its head is larger than multi-story buildings.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Are their buildings to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too?
> Are there trees or mountains to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too? Please utilize a bit more common sense before speaking.


Why do we have to have trees and buildings in order to compare Naruto's and Sasuke's versions?  Having buildings and trees tell us how large a human would be in 100% Kurama's scan or and having humans in Naruto's scan tells us how large buildings would be in Sasuke and Naruto's scan.

For the last time, DO NOT make me refute blatantly false kindergarden level logic.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> If we're posting panel for the sake of comparison it actually helps to have a medium in which he can compare such too...


No one's denying that it would help if we had a human in one scan and a human in another scan, however that's not what you are saying, what you are saying is that it's litterally IMPOSSIBLE to compare two scans if we don't have the exact same object for size reference in each scans which is one of the most ridiculously stupid statements I've ever heard in the manga which would lead you to the conclusion that: "you don't know if mountains are bigger than a watertower" since you don't have the exact same medium.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> isn't Kurama doing something similar here? Doesn't look nearly as big does it? Mate.


Considering you don't dispute the scan explicitly shows 100% Kurama is far far larger than BM Naruto due to Kushina being a tiny dot, then I'm guessing you concede that point.

Next, by what logic do you draw the conclusion that Kurama in that scan isn't nearly as big?




IpHr0z3nI said:


> The reference I was using is PEOPLE, I noted that earlier did I not?
> 
> And camera angle is a major factor in all panels, hence why the argument of size is an extremely controversial issue.


Since you haven't refuted the post you've quoted then I guess you concede then that none of the scans you've given support your case since none of them have humans that are next to kurama.

The camera angle is in no way a major factor in the panels that I use since the things that are being compared are roughly the same distance away from the camera.  So the camera angle would only be a major factor in YOUR scans that YOU'VE brought up which is why they are worthless in regards to the assertions you are trying to support.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> By showcasing the various sizes of 100% Kurama, and showcasing the various sizes of the BIJU AS A WHOLE.
> 
> And before you talk about things supporting your point. Exhibit D doesn't even have Kushina in it.
> 
> You're like referring to exhibit E, and PLEASE DON'T GET TO HAPPY.


Since the scan you've posted of Naruto vs 50% Kurama explicitly shows that 50% Kurama is much much smaller than 100% Kurama especially in the scan of Kushina, then no I will definitely get happy as you've just dismantled your own case more.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Here's panel of 100% prior to the size reduction. Note that the bottom left panel shows the scale of Minato's jutsu to that of 100% Kurama. Note that it was more than just a dot, right.
> 
> Now let's analyze the Karuusano showcased this chapter. Obito at best wasn't the size of it's thumb. Neither were Naruto and Sasuke.


Scan of death reaper seal compared to 100% Kurama is refuted by the next page as the seal is the same size in regards to 50% Kurama which we know to be much smaller.

I have no idea what you are trying to assert with the rest of your post as you give no evidence or reasoning for Obito being the size of Kyuusanoo's thumb meaning that kyuusanoo's the same size as 100% Kurama.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> No it isn't.
> 
> The diamond of both.


Even in that lower limit scan, madara's diamond compared to kurama's head is still smaller than naruto and sasuke's.  And for that one panel you've posted, I'll give you 1
2 3
4 5 6
7
panels of the diamond being MUCH smaller compared to Kurama's head.

So no, the diamond is obviously much smaller than compared to 100% Kurama's head than Sasuke's kyusanoo's head.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> What panel are you utilizing, please? You're not using the correct ones.
> 
> The diamond takes up a much larger area on Sasuke's Susano'o because his head is much sleeker in comparison to Madara's own variation.
> 
> ...


Susanoo's shape around kurama's body is defined by the size of kurama's body.  Sasuke's susanoo would only be "sleeker" in the sense that it doesn't have the additional susanoo in between the ears which would be irrelevant to the size of the diamond compared to the shape of Kurama's head.

So nope, the scans clearly and conclusively show madara's diamond is much smaller compared to his susanoo's head.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> *Yea, they do, it simply comes down to what panel you're using.*
> 
> Again, there are any buildings or trees to compare them too. But the people is consistent among all of them.
> 
> ...


Concession accepted.  

You've ignored my argument that completely and flat out falsifies the bolded in which I CLEARLY state that "I do argue that the size that is CONSISTENTLY depicted should be the genuine size of the construct".  So it's not about what one scan shows, it's about what the majority of the scans show.

You've basically just reasserted the defeated point that it's impossible to compare sizes of two objects unless we have the exact same object in both scans as a size reference.

So you've flat out ignored my post and flat out ignored my counterargument thus you tacitly concede those points as an ignored argument is a conceded one.






IpHr0z3nI said:


> But we both know that isn't true.
> 
> As the Biju's are clearly, clearly designed to be of the same scale. You mean to tell me that 1-8 are meant to be comparable in size, but the nine tails isn't?
> 
> ...


First scan doesn't mean anything as its just a bunch of images of the bijuus in separate environement where we are given nothing to compare their sizes.

The second scan is a knockdown of your argument as it clearly shows that 50% Yang Kurama is the same size as the other bijuus and thus you'd have to logically conclude that 100% Kurama is far larger than them.

Third scan simply shows 5 bijuus, none of which are 100% Kurama are of the same size.

the rest would be a good argument except for the fact that the manga has 50% Kurama being as large as the other bijuu and has 100% Kurama being far larger than 50% Kurama.  So any implications you've tried to draw have been refuted by the blatant size difference that has been shown in the manga.

Oh and considering Kurama had so much chakra that the chakra from all the other 8 tailed beasts were needed to balance out his own, then the statement that "all the beasts were meant to be comparable in size" doesn't hold water.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Do you truly not.....
> 
> Deal how. Those other BIJU'S HAVE THE SAME FUCKING COLOSSAL SIZE AS ANY 100% Kurma.
> 
> ...


None of the panels you have given show 100% Kurama next to the other bijuus, the panel you've given shows 50% yang kurama next to the other bijuus and it utterly destroys your own argument since it conclusively proves that if 50% Kurama is comparable in size to the other bijuus then 100% Kurama MUST be much larger than all of them.

I have no idea what you are trying to assert with the bolded as both Kurama and the other bijuus having size inconsistencies and being able to dwarf humans and trees etc in no way shape or form means that they are the same or comparable size.  In order to argue that, you'd have to show that the other bijuus CONSISTENTLY dwarf humans, trees,etc JUST AS MUCH AS 100% Kurama does.

Else, your argument is illogical as the conclusion does not follow from the premise. 

Please don't waste my time with arguments you know are blatantly false.


----------



## Joakim3 (Oct 17, 2013)

*chews popcorn


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 17, 2013)

Miyamoto Musashi said:


> but i don't find it such, so? [rant]
> 
> i actually like the general flow, it gives some breathing space to uherak-something to learn and swallow down the bitter truth
> 
> ...



how about instead of ranting about how other posters whom you don't agree with are bad, you show that they are bad, or how my arguments are wrong or less supported than yours?

Anyone can call others names, get all riled up because they don't like the arguments that they see and throw a hissy fit, but if that's all you are doing then it's most likely you and your opinion who are guilty of "wanking" or "having trouble swallowing the truth." 

The people who actively seek truth will not stoop to simply ranting about how much they disagree with another poster's opinion, they will instead try to argue and engage others whom they don't agree with in debate.

So I invite you to respond to my post if you disagree so strongly.  I mean if you think my posts are so wrong or so untruthful, then it should be an easy thing for you to correct me where I am wrong and disprove my arguments.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 17, 2013)

Miyamoto Musashi said:


> but i don't find it such, so? [rant]
> 
> i actually like the general flow, it gives some breathing space to uherak-something to learn and swallow down the bitter truth
> 
> ...




I understand. I know the posters you're speaking of, as I didn't join _too _long after you did, _Iceman _. However, I don't think that placing each sentence on a separate paragraph is necessarily pleasant to read, regardless of post content and or quality. Not that I like walls of text either; I'm actually a fan of the way Winchester Gospel posts for example.


----------



## Jak N Blak (Oct 17, 2013)

My heart always goes out to any mortal man who debates with Iphr0.

Iceman, waddup holmes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I didn't know it was you all this time.
Now all that hatred towards me...now seems even more amusing now that I know this. Hahaha.


----------



## Octavian (Oct 17, 2013)

I totally lost it when phr0zen pulled out "Exhibit # this and Exhibit # that" 

As for the actual match-up, I'd probably go with a tie at this point in time.


----------



## Jagger (Oct 17, 2013)

Damn, I feel young...


----------



## Lurko (Oct 17, 2013)

You aren't post whore.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 18, 2013)

Miyamoto Musashi said:


> i don't have the time nor the patience to go back forth in circular debates with people of your kind
> 
> i don't have that stamina anymore, i'm progressively growing older sorry



you never know until you try.  

I don't think I've ever gotten into a long debate with you, and if you look at all the long debates that I do get into, most of my posts are dedicated not to bringing up arguments or evidence for a character and against the opposite character, but they are spent trying showing how the other person's arguments are either flat out illogical, are attacking a strawman, have ignored my own arguments or would make it necessary for them to also logically conclude some outlandish things.

Take IpHr0z's conversation with me in this thread.  He actually tried to support the assertion that "unless there is the exact same object in two scans for size reference, it's impossible to argue that something in one scan is larger or smaller than something in another scan."  

That's as dumb as arguments come as by that logic, you wouldn't be able to assert that the watertower sasuke hit with chidori is smaller than a mountain, or a paper bomb explosion is smaller than the juubidama's explosion.

So debating with me can be very simple and straightforward, it's hardly ever about the evidence, it's about the logic of interpreting that evidence.


----------



## izanagi x izanami (Oct 18, 2013)

sasuke takes this with mid difficulty


----------



## vagnard (Oct 19, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> None of the panels you have given show 100% Kurama next to the other bijuus, the panel you've given shows 50% yang kurama next to the other bijuus and it utterly destroys your own argument since it conclusively proves that if 50% Kurama is comparable in size to the other bijuus then 100% Kurama MUST be much larger than all of them.
> 
> I have no idea what you are trying to assert with the bolded as both Kurama and the other bijuus having size inconsistencies and being able to dwarf humans and trees etc in no way shape or form means that they are the same or comparable size.  In order to argue that, you'd have to show that the other bijuus CONSISTENTLY dwarf humans, trees,etc JUST AS MUCH AS 100% Kurama does.
> 
> ...



The panels show consistently that the size of both diamonds of Madara's PS and Sasuke's PS are around the same size. They use a similar portion of the head. Just see the panel when BM/PS fusion is displayed with his full body for first time and then compare it with the size of Madara in comparisson to 100% Kyuubi it's basically the same. 

I think your mistake is the assumption that BM Naruto must have the size of 50% Kurama just because he has half of the chakra. According to this logic BM Naruto shouldn't be able to extend his tails or chakra arms at will and Four Tails Naruto should be smaller than 6 tailed Naruto because he is using less % of chakra. 

There is no statement about BM Naruto being smaller than original Kyuubi and most the panels shows them to be of comparable scale. Just because Naruto has half of the chakra it doesn't mean he can't create a CHAKRA CONSTRUCT as big as the original Kyuubi. It just mean his total reserves are lower. So for example instead being capable to mantain BM for 10 minutes Naruto would be able to mantain for 20 minutes with 100% of the chakra. 

There is no reason to believe Kurama is twice the size of the rest of the bijuus when they are been displaying with similar scales (jinchuurikis resting comfortable in each of their bijuus head with proportions similar to Madara and 100% Kyuubi). We haven't a panel of 50% Kurama next to other bijuus so you are the one who is assuming they are of comparable size. That makes no sense. Even as kids the bijuus were portrayed to be of similar scale. The scale between bijuus and humans is usually the same (they are like a spot in their foreheads). I don't see why Kyuubi should be an exception. Hachibi has been stated the second most powerful bijuu after Kyuubi and his size is comparable to other bijuus too. 

Power = / = size. 

Kyuubi became smaller not just because it lost half of his chakra but also his soul was divided in 2. (We saw this thanks to BM Minato). There is no reason why Naruto shouldn't be able to create a chakra construct as big as the original. It just means he can do it for less time.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 19, 2013)

vagnard said:


> The panels show consistently that the size of both diamonds of Madara's PS and Sasuke's PS are around the same size.


that is something I agreed with



vagnard said:


> They use a similar portion of the head. Just see the panel when BM/PS fusion is displayed with his full body for first time and then compare it with the size of Madara in comparisson to 100% Kyuubi it's basically the same.


that is something I don't agree with.

*Diamond vs N/S Kyuusanoo*
*Diamond vs Madara Kyuusanoo*




vagnard said:


> I think your mistake is the assumption that BM Naruto must have the size of 50% Kurama just because he has half of the chakra. According to this logic BM Naruto shouldn't be able to extend his tails or chakra arms at will and Four Tails Naruto should be smaller than 6 tailed Naruto because he is using less % of chakra.


I don't 'argue' that BM Naruto is the same size as 50% Kurama because he has half the chakra.  I argue that he does because he's consistently shown to be the same size as the other bijuu and consistently shown to be much smaller than 100% Kurama.  The logic that he's only the same size as 50% Kurama because he's powered by him is just additional evidence which is consistent with the size showings of BM Naruto.



vagnard said:


> There is no statement about BM Naruto being smaller than original Kyuubi and most the panels shows them to be of comparable scale. Just because Naruto has half of the chakra it doesn't mean he can't create a CHAKRA CONSTRUCT as big as the original Kyuubi. It just mean his total reserves are lower. So for example instead being capable to mantain BM for 10 minutes Naruto would be able to mantain for 20 minutes with 100% of the chakra.


you've just shown that the argument that naruto's BM isn't necessarily smaller than 100% Kurama because it's powered by 50% Kurama.  I'd agree with that, but that's not some kind of positive argument for the alternative: that BM Naruto IS as large as 100% Kurama.



vagnard said:


> There is no reason to believe Kurama is twice the size of the rest of the bijuus when they are been displaying with similar scales (jinchuurikis resting comfortable in each of their bijuus head with proportions similar to Madara and 100% Kyuubi). We haven't a panel of 50% Kurama next to other bijuus so you are the one who is assuming they are of comparable size. That makes no sense. Even as kids the bijuus were portrayed to be of similar scale. The scale between bijuus and humans is usually the same (they are like a spot in their foreheads). I don't see why Kyuubi should be an exception. Hachibi has been stated the second most powerful bijuu after Kyuubi and his size is comparable to other bijuus too.


Reasons why kyuubi should be an exception:
1) The fact that 100% Kurama is consistently shown to be MUCH larger than BM Naruto who is the same size as the other bijuu
2) The fact that Kurama is exempt from the standard bijuu rule since it has so much chakra that it takes the combined chakra from all the other bijuu in order to balance his own out.

And simply saying "they rest comfortably on their bijuu's head" doesn't mean that they are as large as 100% Kurama.  *compare how big madara is to 100% Kurama's head* vs how big the other jins (some of which are midgets) *compare to their bijuu's heads.*  Better yet, compare madara vs 100% Kurama's head to *Naruto vs BM Naruto's head*, and there's clearly a significant difference.



vagnard said:


> Power = / = size.


i agree



vagnard said:


> Kyuubi became smaller not just because it lost half of his chakra but also his soul was divided in 2. (We saw this thanks to BM Minato). There is no reason why Naruto shouldn't be able to create a chakra construct as big as the original. It just means he can do it for less time.


As a naruto fan, I'd love for that to be true, and I'd welcome the possibility, but as of now he hasn't shown the ability to do that since his chakra shroud has never approached this this or this kind of size.  

so while you've shown that it's not necessarily true that naruto can't make his shroud that large, it doesn't on the other hand mean his cloak actually IS that large or that in any of his showings he has made a cloak that large.


----------



## GKY (Oct 19, 2013)

Honestly, going of only feats Naruto wins. Sasuke's perfect susano'o only has 1 feat so far (although it's a good feat). With that said, Sasuke should win this because he's going to lose to BSM Naruto with high-extreme difficulty. Also, his PS is currently being portrayed as being just as strong/important as Naruto's BSM. So logic dictates that Sasuke should win, probably with high difficulty.


----------



## Jagger (Oct 19, 2013)

The Entire Forum said:


> sasuke takes this with mid difficulty


How and why?


----------



## Crow (Oct 20, 2013)

Sasuke doesn't have the feats to beat naruto his ps can't tank a super bijudamma and if he can naruto shots a frs at him and ends this


----------



## Jak N Blak (Oct 20, 2013)

Are we still up in here pretending that KCM Naruto isn't STILL too much for this cat?


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 20, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> That's completely false.  We don't need to see a human standing next to a mountain in order to conclude it's larger than a watertower, just like we don't need to have a human standing next to kurama in order to conclude it's larger than BM Naruto if we see its head is larger than multi-story buildings.


But the panels you've posted, much of them are none comparable to this.

How do you compare the size of chakara constructs without a similar "THIRD PARTY" to compare them too.

[QUOTEWhy do we have to have trees and buildings in order to compare Naruto's and Sasuke's versions?  Having buildings and trees tell us how large a human would be in 100% Kurama's scan or and having humans in Naruto's scan tells us how large buildings would be in Sasuke and Naruto's scan.[/QUOTE]
See above.

Without an identical "Third party" how do you assess one LARGE CONSTRUCT IS BIGGER THAN ANOTHER. It's not rocket science, Ueharakk.



> For the last time, DO NOT make me refute blatantly false kindergarden level logic.


As if you could refute anything of mine. When is the last time you've actually done that Mr. Ueharakk?



> No one's denying that it would help if we had a human in one scan and a human in another scan, however that's not what you are saying, what you are saying is that it's litterally IMPOSSIBLE,............


What? My god Ueharakk, that questionable reading comprehension level.



> How so? How do fuck do you think we're going to compare Madara's PS Susano'o, to that of Naruto and Sasuke's.
> 
> Are their buildings to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too?
> Are there trees or mountains to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too? Please utilize a bit more common sense before speaking.
> ...


Here's the portion of the post you were quoting.

How the fuck are you going to tell me what I'm saying? You see what I say about you? You cannot debate with me without trying to contort my argument into something YOU BELIEVE YOU CAN COUNTER. 

The above clearly alludes to solely the comparison between Madara's construct and Sasuke's.



> Considering you don't dispute the scan explicitly shows 100% Kurama is far far larger than BM Naruto due to Kushina being a tiny dot, then I'm guessing you concede that point.


What's that? Isn't Obito, Naruot, Guy, and Kakashi just as tiny of a dot, in the above scan?



> Next, by what logic do you draw the conclusion that Kurama in that scan isn't nearly as big?


It's not  rather what I think, it's the fact that Kishi didn't do much to emphasized it's size there, opposed to the other panel



> Since you haven't refuted the post you've quoted then I guess you concede then that none of the scans you've given support your case since none of them have humans that are next to kurama.


How about you be a bit more patient buddy.



> The camera angle is in no way a major factor in the panels that I use since the things that are being compared are roughly the same distance away from the camera.  So the camera angle would only be a major factor in YOUR scans that YOU'VE brought up which is why they are worthless in regards to the assertions you are trying to support.


How did you conclude that?

Anyways, THE PEOPLE IN THIS PANEL ARE SMALLER THAN THE ONE YOU'VE POSTED.



> Since the scan you've posted of Naruto vs 50% Kurama explicitly shows that 50% Kurama is much much smaller than 100% Kurama especially in the scan of Kushina, then no I will definitely get happy as you've just dismantled your own case more.


How can you be so sure that Kurama didn't recover his size?

After all when Naruto's extracted Kurama's chakara for KCM, there was some visual alterations to Kurama, right?

Before having his chakara extracted.

During and After.(More shots for reference)

Yet overtime Kurama's body had recover.

Your scan of Kushina has been crushed, and if that's all you have to fall back on, you've lost this argument.

(Going to speed rush the rest of the post, as this GAME SET)



> Scan of death reaper seal compared to 100% Kurama is refuted by the next page as the seal is the same size in regards to 50% Kurama which we know to be much smaller.


Is it? What are you talking about?

Please stop being so lazy, debating.



> Even in that lower limit scan, *madara's diamond compared to kurama's head is still smaller than naruto and sasuke's.*  And for that one panel you've posted, I'll give you 1
> 2 3
> 4 5 6
> 7
> panels of the diamond being MUCH smaller compared to Kurama's head.


Uh, the bold is because their respective helmets are vastly different.

Sasuke's armor is clearly more streamlined than that of Madara's.

Here's a better angle for Naruto and Sasuke's. They are VERY comparable in size.



> So no, the diamond is obviously much smaller than compared to 100% Kurama's head than Sasuke's kyusanoo's head.


See above.



> Susanoo's shape around kurama's body is defined by the size of kurama's body.  Sasuke's susanoo would only be "sleeker" in the sense that it doesn't have the additional susanoo in between the ears which would be irrelevant to the size of the diamond compared to the shape of Kurama's head.


See above.

Taken from a similar angle the size of the diamond in comparison to that of Kurama's head in similar for both.

The diamond upon Sasuke's and Naruto's taken from this angle also seems a bit wider than that of Madara's, probably to compensate for TWO PEOPLE VS. ONE.



> So nope, the scans clearly and conclusively show madara's diamond is much smaller compared to his susanoo's head.


It doesn't.



> You've ignored my argument that completely and flat out falsifies the bolded in which I CLEARLY state that "I do argue that the size that is CONSISTENTLY depicted should be the genuine size of the construct".  So it's not about what one scan shows, it's about what the majority of the scans show.


And the majority of your scans aren't usable.

Please stick to your Kushina panel that's been demolished.



> You've basically just reasserted the defeated point that it's impossible to compare sizes of two objects unless we have the exact same object in both scans as a size reference.


It's not defeated, as you've didn't even respond to what was given.



> So you've flat out ignored my post and flat out ignored my counterargument thus you tacitly concede those points as an ignored argument is a conceded one.


No, an ignored argument is an irrelevant one.



> First scan doesn't mean anything as its just a bunch of images of the bijuus in separate environement where we are given nothing to compare their sizes.


It's to show you that the BIJU'S ARE DESIGNED TO BE ALL BE THE SAME SIZE.
All 1-9.



> The second scan is a knockdown of your argument as it clearly shows that 50% Yang Kurama is the same size as the other bijuus and thus you'd have to logically conclude that 100% Kurama is far larger than them.


Unless 50% Kurama managed to recover his size, just like the VERY SAME 50% Kurama in quesiton, manged to recover his body mass after Naruto extracted hsi chakara for KCM.



> Third scan simply shows 5 bijuus, none of which are 100% Kurama are of the same size.


Yea they do.

100% Kurama vs. the Golden brothers.

King ape sage Goku vs. Naruto.



> Look
> the rest would be a good argument except for the fact that the manga has 50% Kurama being as large as the other bijuu and has 100% Kurama being far larger than 50% Kurama.  So any implications you've tried to draw have been refuted by the blatant size difference that has been shown in the manga.


No.

50% Kurama showcased that extracting his chakara forcefully alters his body, right? Yet he his body was able to return to normal a short time later.

50% Kurama here is compared to a 100% Kurama's here.

This panel is the greatest SCALE OF ANY tailed beast. 

The Biju's in the above were depicted to be on god of war Titan scale.



> Oh and considering Kurama had so much chakra that the chakra from all the other 8 tailed beasts were needed to balance out his own, then the statement that "all the beasts were meant to be comparable in size" doesn't hold water.


Uh....

And that's an indication that Kurama is supposed to be bigger how?
And my claim does hold water, as Biju's 1-9 have always been depicted as teh as the same size.




> None of the panels you have given show 100% Kurama next to the other bijuus, the panel you've given shows 50% yang kurama next to the other bijuus and it utterly destroys your own argument since it conclusively proves that if 50% Kurama is comparable in size to the other bijuus then 100% Kurama MUST be much larger than all of them.


And none of your panels support that a 100% Kurama is larger than other Biju's.



> Please don't waste my time with arguments you know are blatantly false.


Waist your time, boy please.


----------



## Panther (Oct 20, 2013)

BM Naruto wins low diff. Based on feats i would even argue that full powered RM would win with mid-high diff.

Even when Sasuke had KN1 cloack and Juugo's CS, he didn't show anything new that Naruto can't handle, his best feats with KN1 cloack and CS is cutting down a branch from the Shinju and throwing an arrow, which even SM Naruto can dodge based on his reaction/sensing feats. 

Sasuke's PS is not only much smaller than Madara's but also doesn't have any mountain cutting swords. Sasuke's latest PS sword feat can't be attributed to him alone since it was being powered by Naruto's SM and probably Naruto's BM aura since his PS is surrounding BM + it got swinged by BSM Naruto's hand.

BM Naruto can easily immobilize Sasuke's PS with his tails which he can't get out, because with only 6 of tails was he able to tank Juubi's multy mountain range laserdama, and a sword that has as best feat cutting down a branch even when powered up by KN1 cloack and CS, isn't gonna be enough to even scratch BM Naruto's tails. While Sasuke is immobilized Naruto can easily charge a standart bijuudama and destroy Sasuke.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 20, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> See above.
> 
> Without an identical "Third party" how do you assess one LARGE CONSTRUCT IS BIGGER THAN ANOTHER. It's not rocket science, Ueharakk.


Obviously seeing how the constructs we are given as reference in one scan compare to other constructs we are given as reference in another scan

And since you have ignored my point about size of water tower vs mountain, then it's a concession on your part and you rescind your argument that we need to see a human next to both kuramas in order to see how big one is compared to the other.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> As if you could refute anything of mine. When is the last time you've actually done that Mr. Ueharakk?
> 
> 
> What? My god Ueharakk, that questionable reading comprehension level.
> ...


You've just conclusively proven the point that you've set out to disprove: that you are asserting that it's literally impossible to compare the sizes of two objects unless you have an exact same third object in both scans to give you a size reference.  

Your statement that "How so? How do fuck do you think we're going to compare Madara's PS Susano'o, to that of Naruto and Sasuke's.

Are their buildings to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too?
Are there trees or mountains to compare Naruto and Sasuke's variation too? Please utilize a bit more common sense before speaking." makes that assertion that because there are no trees or buildings in both panels, then it's impossible to compare the sizes of objects in both panels.

If you are NOT asserting that its impossible to tell without a third reference, then you'd have to rescind all of your arguments where you claim that.... it's impossible to tell without a same third object as reference.  Thus you'd have just as much of a burden of proof as i would to show how scans without same third objects depict what your argument entails: that kurama is the same size.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> The above clearly alludes to solely the comparison between Madara's construct and Sasuke's.


if that's the case, it's a double standard on your part unless your logic would only apply to Madara's and Sasuke's in which you'd have to explain why Madar and Sasuke get special treatment.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> What's that? Isn't Obito, Naruot, Guy, and Kakashi just as tiny of a dot, in the above scan?


irrelevant as that inconsistency was ruled out by the many many later consistent showings of BM Naruto vs  Bee, Kakashi and Gai vs jinchuriki, Bee vs humans etc.  On the other hand kushina vs kurama is not inconsistent with all the rest of his showings bar that one scan you've given at VoTe.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> It's not  rather what I think, it's the fact that* Kishi didn't do much to emphasized it's size there, opposed to the other panel*


But you stating the bolded IS what you think.  That's an assertion, back it up with some kind of argument.  Do the other panels DISPROVE or are CONTRADICTORY to kishi's depiction of size there?  If not, then your point holds no water.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> How did you conclude that?
> 
> Anyways, THE PEOPLE IN THIS PANEL ARE SMALLER THAN THE ONE YOU'VE POSTED.


since none of this in anyway addresses the post you've quoted, then I'm guessing you've conceded that the camera angle does not affect the relation of size between one object and another if both are in the same panel. 

The second quote is easily a vast outlier as none of the humans are anywhere near that small in comparison to the other bijuu in the vast majority of the other panels.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> How can you be so sure that Kurama didn't recover his size?
> 
> After all when Naruto's extracted Kurama's chakara for KCM, there was some visual alterations to Kurama, right?
> 
> ...


Since none of this addresses the argument that in those scans you've posted of 50% Kurama's size vs Naruto and 100% Kurama vs Kushina shows that 100% Kurama is far larger, then i'm guessing you concede that point.

Now if you want to assert that 50% Kurama didn't regain his lost size over time, then you'd have to back up that assertion with an argument.  The argument you've used to support that assertion just now actually dismantles your own case.  This is because we've seen that after Naruto rips 50% Kurama's chakra from him, he doesn't get smaller, he only become emaciated, or skinnier, thus the chakra he naturally regains has absolutely nothing to do with his size, only his physical health state.  Thus you've just disproved your own argument.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Is it? What are you talking about?
> 
> Please stop being so lazy, debating.


The size or thickness of the death reaper seal compared to the two halves of kurama shown in the scan you've just posted is exactly the same as it was compared to 100% Kurama, thus it falsifies your assertion of death reaper seal vs 100% Kurama to somehow downplay the size.  

In addition to that by your own logic, you couldn't even make that kind of argument to begin with right?  Because unless the death reaper seal is used on BM Naruto, then by your logic its literally impossible to compare the two.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Uh, the bold is because their respective helmets are vastly different.
> 
> Sasuke's armor is clearly more streamlined than that of Madara's.
> 
> Here's a better angle for Naruto and Sasuke's. They are VERY comparable in size.


Their helmet being streamlined is irrelevant, the outer edges of both helmets are still limited by the size of the kurama head that they are being worn by, thus the size of diamond to head ratio still stands.  In addition to that , the "better angle" scan isn't in anyway a better angle, the size to head ratio of the diamond in that scan is refute the size to helmet ratio of the other scans in that chapter.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> See above.
> 
> 
> See above.
> ...


see above.

The diamond on sasuke and naruto's if anything is SMALLER than madara's as both sasuke and naruto are much shorter than madara and madara* has ample room within his diamond for two of himself.*



IpHr0z3nI said:


> It doesn't.
> 
> 
> *And the majority of your scans aren't usable.*
> ...


The bolded is only true if you assert that if there isn't a same third object in two panels, then it's literally IMPOSSIBLE to compare the objects to each other in those panels.   Do you agree with that statement?

If so, which is larger, a water tower in konoha or a mountain around chibaku tensei's crater?



IpHr0z3nI said:


> It's not defeated, as you've didn't even respond to what was given.


since you don't dispute that 



IpHr0z3nI said:


> No, an ignored argument is an irrelevant one.


nope, an ignored argument is a conceded one.  If you want to assert an argument is irrelevant, then you have a burden of proof to do so.  

Stop using just flat out kindergarden level logic.  If an ignored argument is an irrelevant one, then anyone can just ignore any argument they want to no matter how convincing or compelling and by your logic, those arguments would be irrelevant.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> It's to show you that the BIJU'S ARE DESIGNED TO BE ALL BE THE SAME SIZE.
> All 1-9.


Which the scan doesn't in any way shape or form show or give evidence for that notion.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Unless 50% Kurama managed to recover his size, just like the VERY SAME 50% Kurama in quesiton, manged to recover his body mass after Naruto extracted hsi chakara for KCM.
> 
> 
> Yea they do.
> ...



First two points have been refuted already.

Gin and Kin are both much larger than a KCM Naruto let alone a hunched-over KCM Naruto. And of course, the kin scan is just an vast outlier.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> Uh....
> 
> And that's an indication that Kurama is supposed to be bigger how?
> *And my claim does hold water, as Biju's 1-9 have always been depicted as teh as the same size*.


the bolded is just an assertion, back it up with an argument.

and if bijuu's are giant masses of chakra, and kurama has comparable chakra to all the other tailed beasts combined, then obviously it's an indication that Kurama would be exempt from your assertion that all bijuus were meant to be the same size.


Do me a favor and answer this question.

Which is larger, *one of these watertowers* or *a mountain surrounding the chibaku tensei crater?*

Which explosion is larger?  *This explosion* or *this one?*


----------



## Jak N Blak (Oct 20, 2013)

The things I honestly want to tell Iphr0 would get me banned for 6 months easy.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 20, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> since none of this in anyway addresses the post you've quoted, then I'm guessing you've conceded that the camera angle does not affect the relation of size between one object and another if both are in the same panel.
> 
> The second quote is easily a vast outlier as none of the humans are anywhere near that small in comparison to the other bijuu in the vast majority of the other panels.


Why are you still posting?

You've lost with just this panel.

Ueharakk learned to debate, a debate has two sides offense and defense.
I've addressed all of your points, believe me.

You just simply create new ones, or emphasize ones that don't even matter. You scantly address others argument, but will holler "Concession accepted" in a heartbeat, when someone doesn't answer your post in the way you deem fit.

More importantly you wouldn't know double standards if it came and slapped you in the face. You can't cry outlier in one instance, but not in another. Also the other biju's have much, much more panel time than that of 100% Kurama.

Unless you got something to dispute the above panel, this discussion is a wash.

And Jak n Blak, it's not like anyone would care or notice for that matter. What exactly do you do around here, anyways? You want to say something to Iphr0z3nI do so in a discussion that contributes to the actual thread.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 20, 2013)

IpHr0z3ni, have we actually ever seen another panel with the Tailed Beasts remotely at that level of size (the panel you linked)? IIRC, every other instance we've seen them situated next to human characters, they were nowhere near that massive.

A bit of an outlier, no?


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 20, 2013)

ATastyMuffin said:


> IpHr0z3ni, have we actually ever seen another panel with the Tailed Beasts remotely at that level of size (the panel you linked)? IIRC, every other instance we've seen them situated next to human characters, they were nowhere near that massive.
> 
> A bit of an outlier, no?


How many of these does 100% Kurama have?(Is this an outlier, as well?)

How about this?

100% Kurama hasn't been portrayed at a consistent size either.(The outlier argument is a two way street)

But to answer your question directly.

Yes, we do.

And we also have this of the other Biju to rival the one of 100% Kurama above.

And we also have this from Hachibi  to rival that of 100% Kurama. Here's another one.

Don't know where this fits, but here's an "OUTLIER" from Biju Mode.

Clearly, clearly the issue of size is a sensitive one.

The bottom line is that Kurama was never sighted or shown to be larger than the tailbeast. Outliers for Outilers, 100% Kurama loses to that of the other tailed beast.

Clearly the comparisons above depict all of BIJU'S 1-9 to be of the same size.
Clearly this panel implicates that Biju's 1-9 were meant to be the same size.


.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Why are you still posting?
> 
> You've lost with just this panel.
> 
> ...


Since I have directly addressed the above panel in my previous post yet you do not attack the point I've made, then you have tacitly conceded that argument, and thus that panel which you've shown is in fact a vast outliar of the size of the other 1-8 bijuu.

In addition to that, since you have ignored all of my other points in my previous post, then you've tacitly conceded all of them as well. 

Thus since you have both conceded those points, then you would have to logically concede that 100% Kurama is in fact much larger than BM Naruto and the other bijuu which then logically leads to the conclusion that current Sasuke's PS is much smaller than Madara's PS.

here are a list of points you've conceded in this thread:
- 100% Kurama is much larger than BM Naruto
- It is possible to compare the sizes of two objects in two different panels without having to have the exact same object in each panel for size reference
-  Madara's PS vs Sasuke's PS is not exempt from the above size comparison logic
- the camera angle does not affect the size of one entity compared to another entity if both are right next to each other in that same panel
- 100% Kurama is much larger than 50% Kurama by direct comparison of sizes
- 50% Kurama not getting smaller, but only getting physically emaciated proves that 50% Kurama didn't recover his size over time
- Death reaper seal vs 100% Kurama as a size reference is refuted by death reaper seal vs 50% kurama
- The helmet of BSM Kyuusanoo being more streamlined is irrelevant as streamlined or not, the helmet conforms to the outline of both kurama's heads.
- The diamond Madara uses is at least as large as the one Sasuke used
- that an ignored argument isn't an irrelevant one, but one that is tacitly conceded
- that Kin and Gin's scan was a vast outlier of size
- that the scan you used to argue that the nine bijuu are of same size actually doesn't in anyway support that
- and that the logic of bijuus being a giant mass of chakra in addition to 100% Kurama having chakra comparable to all the other 8 beasts is good evidence that 100% Kurama's size should not be confined to the sizes of the other 8 bijuu.

Finally, I request you answer a couple of questions again:

Which is larger, *one of these watertowers* or *a mountain surrounding the chibaku tensei crater?*

Which explosion is larger?  *This explosion* or *this one?*

If your logic is so ridiculously terrible that it forces you to just straight up dodge questions like "does an explosive tag make a bigger explosion that the juubi's bijuudama?" then obviously there is something wrong with your logic.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 21, 2013)

Question: Why are people referring to the Kin-Gin scan as an outlier? Has the community accepted it as such, or can we now just claim random things to be outliers?


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

Rocky said:


> Question: Why are people referring to the Kin-Gin scan as an outlier? Has the community accepted it as such, or can we now just claim random things to be outliers?



i'm asserting that scan as an outlier.  I'm not saying that the community has accepted it as such, and sure anyone can claim something is an outlier, but their claims are only valid if they support them with arguments.

And I'm more than happy to show how the vast majority of 100% Kurama's size showings in addition to 50% Kurama's size showings make that scan an outlier.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 21, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> And I'm more than happy to show how the vast majority of 100% Kurama's size showings in addition to 50% Kurama's size showings make that scan an outlier.




That's very hard to do, considering _none_ of the Bijuu, including Kurama, remain consistent in size. Kishimoto just isn't that good at scaling. I've tried to argue size before in detail, but my points didn't work because some scans show Obito as a dot in Bee's hand, while others show Kakashi nearly covering the Hachibi's entire palm.

What's clear is that 50% Kurama is smaller than 100% Kurama. So, is Bijuu Mode Naruto as big as 100% Kurama, or the 50% he is using?


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

Rocky said:


> That's very hard to do, considering _none_ of the Bijuu, including Kurama, remain consistent in size. Kishimoto just isn't that good at scaling. I've tried to argue size before in detail, but my points didn't work because some scans show Obito as a dot in Bee's hand, while others show Kakashi nearly covering the Hachibi's entire palm.


While it's clear that their sizes aren't perfectly consistent, that doesn't mean that we can't draw a conclusion based on the sizes that they usually are portrayed as or the average of all the sizes.

People like IpH0 want to abuse this inconsistency by saying "not perfectly consistent, so NO conclusion can be drawn" or draw conclusions based on the upper limit of BM Naruto/the bijuu's showings versus the lower limits of 100% Kurama's showings.  That's pretty disingenuous if you ask me, I think that clearly if you are going to make any sense of the sizes of the bijuus, you should take in all the showings and either average them out, or find the sizes that they or other beings we know to be the same size are usually displayed as.



Rocky said:


> What's clear is that 50% Kurama is smaller than 100% Kurama. So, is Bijuu Mode Naruto as big as 100% Kurama, or the 50% he is using?


i've been trying to argue that he's as big as 50% Kurama based on how Naruto's size vs his bijuu mode throughout the vast majority of his showings is considerably larger than a human or madara is compared to 100% Kurama throughout the majority of his showings.

Or that 50% Kurama throughout the majority of his showings when compared to naruto is of the same size as BM Naruto.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 21, 2013)

Well, Son Goku's hand is much larger than 50% Kurama's if that means anything. I don't really know.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

Rocky said:


> Well, Son Goku's hand is much larger than 50% Kurama's if that means anything. I don't really know.


it's also much larger than BM Naruto's hand as well...

like I said, most consistent, the majority, or the mean of all the showings is IMO the best way to analyze it, not merely pick one instance to compare to another as by that logic one could argue Bee is the same size as the juubi.  Unless of course we have a direct comparison bijuu-sized thing to 100% Kyuubi like we had a direct comparison of bee vs juubi.


How about this, would you agree that gamabunta is the same size as a bijuu?  

If yes, wouldn't you agree *that this scan shows that gamabunta* is at most twice the height of Kurama's shoulder to elbow?  Isn't that kind of conclusive proof that 100% Kurama is far larger than the rest of the bijuu given that you accept that Bunta is bijuu sized?  *Or the fact that bunta isn't taller than the hokage's building* while *Kurama always just towers over all the buildings even while sitting down.*


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 21, 2013)

ueharakk said:


> Since I have directly addressed the above panel in my previous post yet you do not attack the point I've made, then you have tacitly conceded that argument, and thus that panel which you've shown is in fact a vast outliar of the size of the other 1-8 bijuu.


Addressing and refuting are two different things.



> In addition to that, since you have ignored all of my other points in my previous post, then you've tacitly conceded all of them as well.


I didn't ignore it, it's that I already addressed ALMOST ALL OF YOUR POINTS BEFORE.

If the issue at the end of the day is size, why not trim all the fat and just discuss size. 



> Thus since you have both conceded those points, then you would have to logically concede that 100% Kurama is in fact much larger than BM Naruto and the other bijuu which then logically leads to the conclusion that current Sasuke's PS is much smaller than Madara's PS.


You do know there's a such thing as a conclusion to a debate, right?

You've ventured so far from the original topic, and I'm simply trying to get you back the ISSUE.

As far as 100% kurama is concerended, note that the panel supports me on that. Look at the difference in our post respectively. The HOT SHIT YOU WERE TALKING earlier, here 



> Concession accepted, I am just appalled by your blatant dishonesty and lack of integrity right now. You just told me to use multiple panels, yet you bring up the one and only panel of 100% Kurama being depicted as normal bijuu sized in their entire fight.



If you're going to originally make it an issue of NUMBER OF PANELS, then you've clearly lost right?

How many comparisons do I have? Do I not have the best comparison here? Outlier you say, then yours are outliers as well, and you still lose.



> here are a list of points you've conceded in this thread:
> - 100% Kurama is much larger than BM Naruto
> - It is possible to compare the sizes of two objects in two different panels without having to have the exact same object in each panel for size reference
> -  Madara's PS vs Sasuke's PS is not exempt from the above size comparison logic
> ...


I've not conceded anything, I've already addressed much of these.

I've already  that 100% Kurama is the same size as the other tailed beast.

(Your compare the size of two objects, is an argument in which you've invented, as usual) I clearly was referring exclusively to the comparison in question....

50% Kurama getting emancipated was merely an example to allude to the possibility of him already regaining his size.(Minato stole essentially half of his chakara, Naruto stole what may have been a fraction by comparison)There's nothing to refute there, as it was merely an example, mate.

Don't know what you're rambling about about Madara and Sasuke's Susano'o, but I don't believe there's a size difference. So....

LMAO the death reaper seal refuted by the what..............Dear god where do you come up with your ideas? You don't link panel, and you often make things up. You should really reassess your strategy in debates. 

Conforms to the outline of what....I'm too through. As I said before, you often make things up.

Please don't tell me out to debate, I've been doing this far longer than you have, clearly. 

As far as my scans not supporting my argument, and your what.......Words, support yours? Yea, sure.


Finally, you want to discuss concede, concede to this MR. You cannot pick and choose which are outliers and which are not.




> Finally, I request you answer a couple of questions again:
> 
> Which is larger, *one of these watertowers* or *a mountain surrounding the chibaku tensei crater?*
> 
> ...


I have a question to ask you. How is the above relevant?

Can you produce more panel to support your point, than I can? 

Who has the best quote on quote OUTLIER?


----------



## Rocky (Oct 21, 2013)

There have been no panels where Bee was the same size as the Juubi. It's also impossible to judge the "mean" size of something because the only method of measurement we have is eyeballing it. That just leads to all kinds of different opinions.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

Rocky said:


> There have been no panels where Bee was the same size as the Juubi.


Sure there are.  You take the *upper limit of bee* and the *lower limit of the juubi* and bee's head is much larger than the juubi's head.



Rocky said:


> It's also impossible to judge the "mean" size of something because the only method of measurement we have is eyeballing it. That just leads to all kinds of different opinions.


if it's impossible to judge the mean size, then you take the median.  And no it's only impossible to judge the EXACT mean size by eyeballing it, getting a general picture of the sizes are in no way impossible.


----------



## Dr. White (Oct 21, 2013)

Size of Kurama 1, 2

Size of Hachibi 1, 2

Kurama is much bigger


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

IpHr0z3nI said:


> Addressing and refuting are two different things.


It is a refutation unless you show that it is not a refutation.  You have not only haven't attempted to do so, but you've ignored that point entirely which means you've tacitly conceded that point as an ignored argument is a conceded one.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> I didn't ignore it, it's that I already addressed ALMOST ALL OF YOUR POINTS BEFORE.
> 
> If the issue at the end of the day is size, why not trim all the fat and just discuss size.


No you haven't addressed any of them before.  If you "think" you did then my post that you've ignored either shows that you in actuality didn't or that your response is fallacious in which i give my reasoning why.

Thus since you have ignored those points you have tacitly conceded all of them.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> You do know there's a such thing as a conclusion to a debate, right?
> 
> You've ventured so far from the original topic, and I'm simply trying to get you back the ISSUE.
> 
> As far as 100% kurama is concerended, note that the panel supports me on that. Look at the difference in our post respectively. The HOT SHIT YOU WERE TALKING earlier, here


since none of this has anything to do with refuting my post or the reasoning of it, then you have tacitly conceded that post and thus have conceded the thread.  By the way, we haven't in anyway gone off topic as the conclusion OF THE TOPIC is based on what we are arguing right now: that 100% Kurama is far larger than BM Naruto.




IpHr0z3nI said:


> If you're going to originally make it an issue of NUMBER OF PANELS, then you've clearly lost right?
> 
> How many comparisons do I have? Do I not have the best comparison here? Outlier you say, then yours are outliers as well, and you still lose.


I have already addressed this argument in the post that you've completely ignored. If you do not agree with my response, go back, quote it and refute the response.  If not, then you would be guilty of ignoring my argument and you would tacitly concede this point as an ignored argument is a conceded one.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> I've not conceded anything, I've already addressed much of these.
> 
> I've already  that 100% Kurama is the same size as the other tailed beast.


All of those points have already been addressed in our argument, thus that in no way shape or form proves your point as I have disputed it in the post you've ignored.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> (Your compare the size of two objects, is an argument in which you've invented, as usual) I clearly was referring exclusively to the comparison in question....
> 
> 50% Kurama getting emancipated was merely an example to allude to the possibility of him already regaining his size.(Minato stole essentially half of his chakara, Naruto stole what may have been a fraction by comparison)There's nothing to refute there, as it was merely an example, mate.


which means you've tacitly conceded that 50% Kurama being emaciated refutes your argument.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Don't know what you're rambling about about Madara and Sasuke's Susano'o, but I don't believe there's a size difference. So....
> 
> LMAO the death reaper seal refuted by the what..............Dear god where do you come up with your ideas? You don't link panel, and you often make things up. You should really reassess your strategy in debates.


Again, you ignore my argument about the death reaper seal and simply say "dear god where do you come up with your ideas?"  Which of course is a concession of that argument since what you've just posted is in no way some kind of counterargument.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Conforms to the outline of what....I'm too through. As I said before, you often make things up.


another concession on your part as I've not only thoroughly explained my point in the post you've ignored but claiming im 'making things up' is in no way a counterargument.



IpHr0z3nI said:


> Please don't tell me out to debate, I've been doing this far longer than you have, clearly.
> 
> As far as my scans not supporting my argument, and your what.......Words, support yours? Yea, sure.
> 
> ...


I don't pick and choose which are outliers and which are not, outliers are outliers due to them differing significantly from the majority of the other showings by definition.  *BM Naruto* *who's* *the same size as those bijuu* *is* *consistently* *shown* *to* *be* *not* *nearly* *as* *close* *to* *the* *size* *of* *that* *single** panel* *you've* *posted.*

So for that one panel you've posted, i've given you about 50 panels that showcases Bijuu vs humans as far far smaller than that.  Thus that is why your one panel is an outlier.  



IpHr0z3nI said:


> I have a question to ask you. How is the above relevant?
> 
> Can you produce more panel to support your point, than I can?
> 
> Who has the best quote on quote OUTLIER?


Yeah like I guessed, you once again didn't answer those two extremely simple questions.  For now on whenever you post in any thread, I will encourage everyone in the thread to ask you those two questions until you answer them.

And of course since you've ignored my questions, then you've tacitly conceded that by your logic, it is impossible to say that a paper bomb makes a bigger explosion than a juubidama.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 21, 2013)

Dr. White said:


> Size of Kurama 1, 2
> 
> Size of Hachibi 1, 2
> 
> Kurama is much bigger



Much bigger, A?

Size of Kurama 1 and 2

Size of Hachibi 1 and 2.

Size of Kurama 1 and 2

Szie of Hachibi 1 and 2

Hachibi is much bigger.(DEPENDING ON WHAT PANEL YOU PICK AND CHOOSE)


----------



## Dr. White (Oct 21, 2013)

You make a good point that Kishi is inconsistent, but Kyuubi is still the bigger of the two. The two panels I provided show us direct size comparison to forest, and Rock formations. In both panels he isn't even at the apex of his stand. Hachibi is the size of 50% kyuubi. We know Kyuubi was lessened in zize after his yin chakra was taken out of him. There is no reason for him to return to normal size without getting his chakra back. 

Also comparing anything in this manga to Shinsensenju is just ridiculous as it is the single biggest thing shown so far, the only thing contending being the blast radius of the Juubidama, and V2 Juubi's mega TBB.


----------



## ATastyMuffin (Oct 21, 2013)

Dr. White said:


> Also comparing anything in this manga to Shinsensenju is just ridiculous as it is the single biggest thing shown so far, the only thing contending being the blast radius of the Juubidama, and V2 Juubi's mega TBB.



The Tailed Beast Bombs of the Ten-Tails were hundreds of kilometres in sheer blast radius; they hardly 'contend' so much as laughably dominate in size. A better choice would be the ball of Chibaku Tensei, which was calculated to be around 6 kilometres in diameter.


----------



## IpHr0z3nI (Oct 21, 2013)

Dr. White said:


> *You make a good point that Kishi is inconsistent, but Kyuubi is still the bigger of the two.* The two panels I provided show us direct size comparison to forest, and Rock formations. In both panels he isn't even at the apex of his stand. Hachibi is the size of 50% kyuubi. We know Kyuubi was lessened in zize after his yin chakra was taken out of him. There is no reason for him to return to normal size without getting his chakra back.


The bold is a contradiction, you cannot hold on to both opinions.

100% Kurama has size inconsistencies.
He's not depicted to be the size in ever panel. And depending on what panel you pick, as I've done, Hachibi is larger.

As far as a direct comparison to the rock formation and the forest.
Are they the same forest and rock formation? The only thing consistent is the size of people, and 100% doesn't trump Hachibi in that department.

100% Kurama vs. people is what I've shown.
Hachibi vs. people is what I've shown. 

People don't vary in size as much as a forest or rock formation do.

See my above argument. There's nothing to suggest that 50% didn't regain his size during the sixteen year time span. Considering this isn't 50%. Kurama your argument isn't very solid.

100% Kurama was in another forest, and wasn't depicted to be nearly as big.


----------



## Jak N Blak (Oct 21, 2013)

Shame! Shame on anyone who actually takes time out of their LIFE to tolerate such nonsense posts.

I would even take it even lower now and argue that Sage Naruto can go toe-to-toe with EMS Sasuke. He's built to fight giants.


----------



## Kai (Oct 21, 2013)

BM Naruto vs. EMS Sasuke- Naruto wins with extreme difficulty, probably by a hair.

BSM Naruto vs. EMS/CS Sasuke- Naruto wins with high difficulty. Sasuke's ability to apply the Cursed Seal on his Susano'o isn't as powerful a combination as Naruto perfectly syncing his BM with Sage Mode.


----------



## αce (Oct 21, 2013)

I'm surprised people are using these arguments knowing how inconsistent the author is at accurately portraying sizes.


----------



## ueharakk (Oct 21, 2013)

αce said:


> I'm surprised people are using these arguments knowing how inconsistent the author is at accurately portraying sizes.



i'm surprised that just because the author is sometimes inconsistent with portraying size, people believe it's literally impossible to make any kind of size comparisons.


----------



## αce (Oct 21, 2013)

It's not impossible, it's just easily dismissible by the opposing view, which would mean you're just going in circles. But hey, I guess that's just the normal battledome logic.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Oct 21, 2013)

Kai said:


> BM Naruto vs. EMS Sasuke- Naruto wins with extreme difficulty, probably by a hair.


...why? BM Naruto trumps EMS Sasuke in speed, firepower, strength, durability, ninjutsu, and taijutsu in every way imaginable. Genjutsu's useless due to the perfect Jinchuriki breaking method. So how would it be that close from the feats we have?


----------



## blackguyinpinksuit (Oct 21, 2013)

Bm naruto can survive a attack from the v1 juubi that was pretty much made to penetrate(zooming through mountain ranges and blasting through TBB's in spades) so his shroud defense cannot be doubted in the slightest.

Now lets look at sasuke best offense...amaterasu and enton. I do not see how the element whether in arrow or sword form is gonna wreck the shroud that can take a v1 juubi beam while only some some tails that can regen. I just do not see it....armors, cloaks etc are amaterasu's bane in way because they can be removed with the fire or block them halting the slow burning flames.

Naruto giant bijuudama's are packing firepower that sasuke has not been shown to deal with. Even if sasuke was able to take one somehow with PS he does not wanna get into a slugfest stamina battle of naruto when it comes to who can last the longest. He has no chance for victory be honest.

Sasuke will need more hax...PS is just not enough for giant bijuudama's imo though some will just say it can deal with any bijuudama, no matter the size, for the hell of it. PS has not shown the ability to tank one so powerscaling nor feats are on sasuke's side.


----------



## MysteriousD (Oct 31, 2013)

Naruto by FAAAAAAAAAR

This time he doesnt have to power up the Alliance and literally has 100% Stamia, chakra, and since not specified, rest.

We saw KCMs magic

We saw DAT CLONE make more clones and USE SAGE MODE

We saw Naruto not have any problems whatsoever with energy once he got BM

And if he did, he had 20k people to juice so whoopty do

We saw BM Naruto durability

We saw him drop the cloak and shushin to diss Wood dragon = LolAMATERAnothing

We know he can make clones and use chakra arms with them

We know he can create MANY chakra arms out of virtually anywhere on his body

We know he can DETECT NEGATIVE EMOTIONS= any form of Sasuke so far GG

We know he can make Mini Bijuu Bombs and Sasuke is not Madara nor does he have his OP fan


Why do this to Sasuke man?


NARUTO STOMPS 10/10 DIFFICULTY DEPENDS ON HIS HOW LONG HE WANTS TO SAVOR THE MOMENT


----------



## Raiken (Oct 31, 2013)

Everyone knows size is slightly inconsistent.
But in regards to direct comparisons, it is consistent, for example, this *SHOULD* shut IpHr0z3nI the hell up; a direct comparison of size between 100% Kurama and 50% Kurama:

I have no idea why he persists so furiously, despite being overwhelmed by countering evidence, I guess that's just the way he is.
He can never acknowledge when he is wrong.

*THE BATTLE:*

Size: *Draw:*
Sasuke's PS and Naruto's BM are roughly the same size.
Agility and Movement Speed: *Naruto:*
Movement Speed is similar, Naruto likely having the edge due to his 4 Limbs. However BM has displayed many fast, far dashing feats. And is shown to be very nimble for it's size.
Defence: *Draw:*
Based on feats Naruto wins, but I'm willing to wager Sasuke's PS is a lot more durable than his Smaller Susano'o with L1 Armour. Their defence is likely comparable.
Offensive Attack Power: *Naruto:*
Sasuke lacks an Ultimate Power comparable to the likes of Naruto's Super Bijuu Dama.
Offensive Attack Speed: *Draw:*
Is comparable, Sasuke can likely shoot Arrows out pretty fast, while Naruto can spam normal Bijuu Dama's.
Melee: *Draw:*
While Naruto has, 4 Limbs, a Mouth and 9 Tails to Physically attack with, it's likely Sasuke's PS Sword is more potent, and in a clash Sasuke's Sword would win, based on a scaled down version of what Madara's Sword was capable of. But the sheer advantage of the number of ways Naruto can attack Physical, including using his 9 Tails as Chakra Limbs to attack from a distance as well, would make up for that disadvantage.
Utility: *Naruto:*
While Sasuke has great utility with his usage of Smaller Susano'os, Raiton and Katon usage, as well as timed Amaterasu's, all to support his stronger Susano'o Powers; along with Sharingan Perception supporting it all, overall Naruto comes out on top.
Naruto can make use of Clones in a massive number of ways, using a SM sensor. KCM Clones through the BM tails or using them for offensive bursts, distractions, feints; all of them possessing incredible speed and Chakra Limb / Rasengan-FRS Combinations.
Naruto can accomplish all that while the main body remains in BM.
Overall Stamina: *Naruto:*
I don't think I really need to explain this one. Naruto clearly has a massive advantage in this regard, if the fight does drag on for a long time.
Regeneration: Health and Stamina(Chakra): *Naruto:*
Again, it's obvious why Naruto is superior in this regard, to dispute this and the previous one, would be rather idiotic. Sasuke has displayed no recovery traits involving Stamina and Health, he only has his Overall Stamina, and once that's low or gone, that's it.
Intelligence and Stategy: *Draw*
While Sasuke might appear to have the edge, based on past examples. Naruto more recently has became a far more strategic and intelligent fighter, rivalling Sasuke.
Hype: *Draw:*
Hype is currently _'portraying'_ BM Naruto and EMS Sasuke as equal.

Conclusion:
While Sasuke can definitely hold his own in this fight, and equals Naruto in a few regards of combat.
In a few different categories, Naruto comes out on top, while Sasuke doesn't really have any distinct advantage; other than really his Amaterasu / PS combo's, which he hasn't displayed yet, which could catch Naruto off-guard.
It's a tough fight that will likely last a while before Naruto's able to get the upper hand. But in the end, Naruto will win the fight, before it becomes a case of: _cut and nail, High Difficulty - Even fight, that lasts until the last drops of Stamina and Chakra are gone._

Difficulty Tier:
0: Equal
1: Very High
2: High
3: Medium
4: Low
5: Very Low

Naruto Wins: High Difficulty


----------



## Mayweather (Oct 31, 2013)

Naruto wins with Extreme difficulty.


----------



## Trojan (Oct 31, 2013)

what was Sasuke's feat with PS again?


----------



## Trojan (Oct 31, 2013)

Kai said:


> BM Naruto vs. EMS Sasuke- Naruto wins with extreme difficulty, probably by a hair.
> 
> BSM Naruto vs. EMS/CS Sasuke- Naruto wins with high difficulty. Sasuke's ability to apply the Cursed Seal on his Susano'o isn't as powerful a combination as Naruto perfectly syncing his BM with Sage Mode.



so, you don't think that since Zetsu made the statement that SM Naruto is stronger than sasuke
that's mean Naruto is superior in every area? Just saying 

Or when Sasuke was bothering by seeing Naruto's power himself!


----------

