This. For those saying that the foot delivers more power than the shin, check the results.[/QUOT
The perspective that landing with the foot is more powerful is solely(ha!) because it moves faster than the shin.
The shin is harder and solid, therefore can take more damage. I'd rather get hit with a foot, as one can't torque a kick landing with the foot compared to the shin.
Think elbow vs. punch, all the same principles apply.
But it's not the same prinicple. The elbow vs. punch changes the surface area ratio compared to the shin vs. foot. Also, the elbow would be moe similar to the knee and the forearm is the equivalent of the shin. So, the forearm vs. fist is the same principle as shin vs. foot.
Moreover, you and the other gentleman are comparing which surface can absorb more damage as opposed to which surface is applying more damage. Obviously, the shin is a better defensive weapon, it's larger surface area is better for dispersing the incoming force. But that's not analogous to which surface is the more powerful offensive weapon.
The foot is bringing more speed and body weight at the time of contact but with a smaller surface area. This makes it an inefficient defensive weapon and requires more precision as an offensive weapon. It doesn't make it weaker.
This doesn't have to be a zero sum argument. Each tool can have pros and cons. The shin is the more versatile tool (offensive and defensive capabilities) and the discrepancy in power is unlikely to be significant.