The Superman Dunk was not a dunk.

MagicFan3 · Post #161 » by **MagicFan3** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:49 pm

General Ford wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

It looked like he was looking for props.

It looked like he got props.

maginno · Post #162 » by **maginno** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:50 pm

Hairy Midget wrote:RealGM has some of the stupidest people I've ever heard in my life.

Totally agree. the argument that something is not thrust down because the person or thing thrusting it does not physically touch it all the way down is the stupidest argument I have ever heard in my life. Sheer idiocy that doesn't even address this

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dunk
3 : to throw (a basketball) into the basket from above the rim.

any takers for that? I shudder to think how much of a fool someone can make of themselves trying to wiggle out of that dictionary definition.

MagicalMan · Post #163 » by **MagicalMan** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:01 pm

themadmagician wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Its funny how nonmagic fans agree with me, see general board.

If you mean Raptors fans, then yes a lot agree with you. But is that really a surprise? Even if Dwight did a flip dunk over the backboard they would still complain.

edit: and by your tone in this thread I imagine you would find a way to complain too?

jonskilly · Post #164 » by **jonskilly** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:04 pm

Ok, I just read through the entire thread on this. Two people seem very confident that this was not a dunk. Everyone else said it was a dunk. Definitions were there to back it up and a wanna-be physicist is giving false information. If it weren't a dunk, they would of made him do it again. And seriously, look at a lot of his dunks -- no touching of the rim is made. Change the topic of this thread and all you Boston/Toronto fans stop trolling.

Hairy Midget · Post #165 » by **Hairy Midget** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:04 pm

The only people who have an issue with this are Raptors fans and a couple of Celtics fans who still have an attachment to Gerald Green for some reason.

General Ford · Post #166 » by **General Ford** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:06 pm

MagicalMan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

If you mean Raptors fans, then yes a lot agree with you. But is that really a surprise? Even if Dwight did a flip dunk over the backboard they would still complain.

edit: and by your tone in this thread I imagine you would find a way to complain too?

I really like D12! If we could get him here in Toronto for Bargnani BC would be crazy not to do it! But honestly, the hype got the dunk the score, throw -in dunks are gay...

Hairy Midget · Post #167 » by **Hairy Midget** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:11 pm

General Ford wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I really like D12! If we could get him here in Toronto for Bargnani BC would be crazy not to do it! But honestly, the hype got the dunk the score, throw -in dunks are gay...

Banned?

Simplicity0 · Post #168 » by **Simplicity0** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:13 pm

General Ford wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I really like D12! If we could get him here in Toronto for Bargnani BC would be crazy not to do it! But honestly, the hype got the dunk the score, throw -in dunks are gay...

If we could get LeBron here in Orlando for Pat Garrity.

Cammo101 · Post #169 » by **Cammo101** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:21 pm

Superman called it a dunk.

/thread

Simplicity0 · Post #170 » by **Simplicity0** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:22 pm

Seriously, just wow at RealGMers. ****, it wasn't a dunk, happy? He shoud've ruined the moment just because he missed the rim by half an inch. Dwight should've done what Moon did and take an extra attempt 3 feet in front of where he put the tape. That would've made everything better.

Nothingface · Post #171 » by **Nothingface** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:24 pm

maginno wrote:Please do leave because we do have kids on this board that might actually believe you have a clue at what you are talking about. Planes begin to descend when DRAG affects thrust not when Thrust disappears. Thrust is Force in that context. Force does not disappear instantly when you turn off an engine. You have no clue on basic physics.

You will notice that speed decreases not when there is no longer any thrust - contradicting your (silly, silly silly) point that thrust does not exist unless force is increasing - but when drag overcomes an existing thrust.

Did you even read what I had written? Either you didn't or you have comprehension problems. Following is text from one of my posts that says the same thing as you are now saying (edit: except how you keep trying to say thrust is stored energy, when it is not in actuality). :nonono:

"You thrust upon something giving it momentum. Once you take away the thrust inertia says an object in motion stays in motion. Of course it works against gravity, wind resistance what have you. Simple fact is that since there is no more thrust, eventually the object will come to a stop."

You do realize wind resistance is DRAG don't you???????????

maginno wrote:Planes begin to descend when DRAG affects thrust not when Thrust disappears. Thrust is Force in that context. Force does not disappear instantly when you turn off an engine. You have no clue on basic physics.

Please read the following text.

"The engine furnishes the power needed to rotate the propeller blades. The engine rotates the airfoils of the blades through the air at high speeds, and the propeller transforms the rotary power of the engine into forward thrust. An airplane moving through the air creates a drag force opposing its forward motion. Consequently, if an airplane is to fly, there must be a force applied to it that is equal to the drag, but acting forward. This force is called "thrust." "

http://ma3naido.blogspot.com/2007/08/ae ... eller.html

Do you want the simple version? Engine creates thrust. Plane flies. No thrust, plane cannot counteract resistance, plane does not fly.

Without thrust the plane will descend because there is no force being applied to counteract resistance.

THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG

General Ford · Post #172 » by **General Ford** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:27 pm

PimpORL wrote:Seriously, just wow at RealGMers. ****, it wasn't a dunk, happy? He shoud've ruined the moment just because he missed the rim by half an inch. Dwight should've done what Moon did and take an extra attempt 3 feet in front of where he put the tape. That would've made everything better.

Simplicity0 · Post #173 » by **Simplicity0** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:28 pm

General Ford wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

General Ford · Post #174 » by **General Ford** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:30 pm

PimpORL wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

(picture)

you realize that his hand is closest when its already way below the rim right? :lol:

Post #175 » by **UCFJayBird** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:36 pm

can anyone find a picture, or a good enough video where you can pause it right when his hand is fully extended? I want to see just how close he came, cause seriously he may have come within an inch.

bstein14 · Post #176 » by **bstein14** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:37 pm

It was not a dunk. Is a sky hook a dunk?

Just because a player jumps above the rim and throws in downwards, doesn 't make it a dunk.

If this were the case players could dunk from the 3 pt line without even jumping past the free throw line.

If you think it was a dunk, based on whatever definitions you find, you don't know jack **** about basketball.

bucsmagicfan · Post #177 » by **bucsmagicfan** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:40 pm

bstein14 wrote:It was not a dunk. Is a sky hook a dunk?

Just because a player jumps above the rim and throws in downwards, doesn 't make it a dunk.

If this were the case players could dunk from the 3 pt line without even jumping past the free throw line.

If you think it was a dunk, based on whatever definitions you find, you don't know jack **** about basketball.

You are a complete idiot...

Simplicity0 · Post #178 » by **Simplicity0** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:42 pm

bstein14 wrote:It was not a dunk. Is a sky hook a dunk?

Just because a player jumps above the rim and throws in downwards, doesn 't make it a dunk.

If this were the case players could dunk from the 3 pt line without even jumping past the free throw line.

If you think it was a dunk, based on whatever definitions you find, you don't know jack **** about basketball.

You can say it wasn't a dunk, but you're a (Please Use More Appropriate Word) if you think that was anything like a skyhook. A skyhook has an arc and you don't throw it downwards. Maybe you don't know jack **** about basketball. I would really like to see someone throw it downwards from the 3 point line. You would need a jetpack. Dwight was definitely high enough, but he didn't have enough forward motion.

AdamTheGreek · Post #179 » by **AdamTheGreek** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:42 pm

I swear, it looks like Dwight misses the rim by finger tips, not far off.

Nothingface · Post #180 » by **Nothingface** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:45 pm

bstein14 wrote:It was not a dunk. Is a sky hook a dunk?

Just because a player jumps above the rim and throws in downwards, doesn 't make it a dunk.

If this were the case players could dunk from the 3 pt line without even jumping past the free throw line.

If you think it was a dunk, based on whatever definitions you find, you don't know jack **** about basketball.

That analogy does not disprove it was a dunk because with a sky hook, there is no downward force applied to the ball by the shooter. Dwight did force the ball in a downward motion.