Come on bro. Make an independent thought and defend it. Your nose won't be happy for long in that other guy's sugar barrel.
Claim: The two films have no tangible connection that a casual observer would make had their titles been obfuscated.
Your challenge to the claim: __________________
Go!

This is the worst mugojoe fan club meeting ever.

Yes, I agree, arguing with Mugo is pointless, he is a special kind of stupid. Any other civil discussion I can just agree to disagree, but he decided to be nasty about itso I will continue to peck at his tiny mind.
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

It is very clear there is no point arguing this. Not because the OP is right, but because he cannot concede that anything that didn't originate from his own smug little consciousness has any validity. Being so in love with your self-perceived cleverness and ignoring any reasoning that doesn't conform to your own view doesn't mean you have superior logic, it just makes you look an ass with his fingers in his ears going, "nah, nah, nah. I can't hear you!"
That IS a tasty burger!

A question was asked, and I 'technically completed' the task of answering it correctly.
What should I do beyond that? What expectations do you have for answers on an internet forum above answering questions correctly?
You may have your gold star, sweetpea.
You don't hand out the gold stars numbnuts, and I already got one for my first response on this thread, which was correct. All you have achieved through your posts is make everyone who read your words dislike you. Kudos.
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

Yes, I concede that while your effort was dismal and ultimately impotent, the task was technically completed.
You may have your gold star, sweetpea.
Now run along.

Oh so you now concede I HAVE provided links from within the films. Take this with your concession that outside info about the films clearly links them, and you have 2 films that are linked.
Well it took a while, but you finally stayed down and admitted defeat, shame you couldn't do it graciously, but I guess what matters is that you finally see sense.
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

You provided two tenuous connections:

1. Things fall from the sky in both alien invasion films.
2. There's a blink-it-and-miss cameo of the company that is mentioned in both films.
   These elements are distinct in your mind?
   I mean, it totally makes sense if they are given your disdain for critical thought.

Not sure I can dumb this down any further for you
I gave you some stuff IN THE FILM that links them, you have not done a thing to dispute any of my points yet.
This is true until you bring in material that isn't in the films.
Oh so now you concede they
are
linkedcould have just done that from the start and saved yourself the embarrassment of how you have looked on this threadyou haven't come across well
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

Ok, I see the problem. I'm going to try to use fewer syllables now.
The two
films
have nothing to do with each other.
This is true until you bring in
material that isn't in the films.
At that point, it's not about the
films
, is it?
Do you understand those words, slappy?

It becoming painfully obvious you don't understand what a fallacy is. It isn't wrong to point out that the 2 films are made as films with links when answering a question about one film having 'nada' to do with the other. Its cute that you have a word you (just you) think is clever, but not so good that you don't understand what it means.
as that is the claim being challenged: By watching the two films, an observer would not logically conclude that they are related.
um no, you can't just make stuff up. The question is
'Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/origin'
. The fact that viral marketing and online teaser stuff clearly links the films is very valid in answering the actual question asked. You cant change the question just because you have lost the argument moron.
I just battered you again, showing clear links between the films, your reply has nothing to refute them.
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

At the end of Cloverfield, we see a satellite coming to earth into the sea. Right? You remember that?
Yes, we see something. Most alien invasion films have an invasion.
This is a (or the) satellite coming to Earth just as in Cloverfield.
Yes, this could be something. Most alien invasion films have an invasion.
he knows
He wildly suspects many things and repeatedly states that he doesn't
know
anything.
scroll to the bottom
If possible, try to limit to observations within the films, as that is the claim being challenged:
By watching the two films, an observer would not logically conclude that they are related.
Lets not forget THAT THE FILM MAKERS SAY THEY ARE LINKED!!!
This appeal to authority (while comforting since it comes from a grownup) doesn't substantiate the argument, but presumes an infallible author. Please stop it with the fallacies.
Try again, sugardimples?

OK, seeing as how the top level obvious stuff that links the films doesn't do it for you, Hows this for observation of minutiae in the film: (the satellite one I knew, the Howard job one I found in a google searchthere is some really cool stuff online about the links of the films that I wouldn't have found if not for your moronic denial of the facts, including blogs from Howard about the impending invasionso thanks!)
At the end of Cloverfield, we see a satellite coming to earth into the sea. Right? You remember that?
At the beginning of 10 Cloverfield Lane we are looking out over the sea from Michelles window, the camera pans to her packing, there is a flash and a muffled explosion offscreen. This is a (or the) satellite coming to Earth just as in Cloverfield.
John Goodmans character Howard is a satellite tracking tech, he knows about the satellites and the impending invasion, and he is employee of the month for Bold Futura, a subsidiary of Tagruato corpthe same company that Rob Hawkins from Cloverfield was off to start working for.
http://tagruato.jp/employee_of_the_month_2016_february.php
click on the link, scroll to the bottom and there is Howard.
So is having Howard working for a subsidiary of the same Japanese oil company Tagruato whose deep sea drilling awakened the cloverfield monster a link? Is having him be a satellite tech, when we see a satellite crashing at the end of cloverfield a link? Is his doomsday prepping for the invasion before it happens because of his work on the satellites for it a link?
We may well get more answers in the third film set around these events, we may find out what the link is between the ancient alien sea monster and the subsequent invasion after it awakens, but what we do know for sure is that the films are linked. Lets not forget THAT THE FILM MAKERS SAY THEY ARE LINKED!!!
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

Come on sport, you're better than this.
same world event
How so? Other than alien monsters from the sky, which is a centuries-old trope, what elements unify the two? The method of approach is different (one from the water, the other from the sky). The types of monsters are different (in terms of design and intelligence). They don't occur in the same region. The events don't reference each other (heck, even live news reports during Cloverfield don't mention similar devastation in other areas of the country). Other than a commonality shared by every alien invasion film ever made, what irrefutably sets them in the same universe?
In other words, if this film was called "Something's Goofy in Texas" not a single person would ask, "Why was the word 'Cloverfield' not in the title?"
Nobody's arguing this is a sequel, just that the films are loosely related.
Well, they're arguing
poorly
that they're loosely related. The arguments are based on stinky, smelly, icky piles of raw, unprocessed fallacies, not observations.

So two stories about the same world event told in different settings and with different povs are unrelated? Have you ever heard of an anthology? BTW, referring to people you disagree with using cutesy pet names makes you sound smug, not smart. Nobody's arguing this is a sequel, just that the films are loosely related.
That IS a tasty burger!

Finally! A reasonable person!
Can
you
logically link the films other than through begging the question or a "because I said so" fallacy, of course?

Cheers!
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

I agree with EVERYTHING you wrote here MarwoodWalks, 100%!

I'm not recalling anything by that description. Hm. It must have been featured in both films.

The one you had no comeback on, and then got beat down again
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

See my answer below.
The impotent one? Or did you post something useful yet?

See my answer below.
So run along, poochie. I'm looking for a conversation with an adult now.
Yeah you sound so mature.
Another knockdownBOOM!
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

I'm actually the one asking for substance. My claim is that there is no way to substantiate your argument. You have proven this over and over again through opting out.
If I missed something, I'm sure your ilk can help finish this thought (because you can't):
"Cloverfield and 10 Cloverfield Lane are clearly linked through these observations in both films:
a. ______________
b. ______________
c. ______________"
So run along, poochie. I'm looking for a conversation with an adult now.

Yet again you reply with no substance. You are out of arguments and haven't successfully refuted a word I have said.
Do you have an adult or guardian who can help?
LOLthat's pathetic.
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."