Kubik vs. Exitar

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Black bolt z
Based on feats I believe kubik has shown to be above celestials but kubik siad he is several magnitudes below them.Who would win in this cosmic brawl?

Colossus-Big C
the celestial created the cn right? it can erase universes with ease.

Nihilist
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
the celestial created the cn right? it can erase universes with ease. Merlin created the CN.

Blanket
lol

TheLordofMurder
Depends on what you choose to believe...

If you look specifically at feats, Kubik is (bare minimum) the equal of the Infinity Gauntlet and crushes Exitar without effort...

If you go by statements made by Kubik himself, he has absolutely no chance of beating Exitar or any Celestial for that matter...

TheTyrant
Kubik wins.

Blanket
Originally posted by Blanket
lol

the Darkone
Exitar higher on the food chain, Exitar is more powerful than fourth host combined. Kubik even stated that he and other cube beings are insects compare to the Celestails, and that being said Exitar in monster stomp.

Bentley
Kubik can lose only because of self-imposed limitations.

He just needs to replicate that blast Sue Storm used...

Galan007
Kubik has feats. Celestials have unproven statements.

Feats, ftw.

Slaanesh
Exitar stomp..Kubik himself says that he is nothing to a celestial..

guy222
Exitar

Black bolt z
undecided it seems...

theICONiac
Originally posted by Galan007
Kubik has feats. Celestials have unproven statements.

Feats, ftw.

This should not be the case, with Kubik recognizing his inferiority.

But I agree; if Kubik had not proclaimed this I would pick him in a heartbeat.

Galan007
Originally posted by theICONiac
This should not be the case, with Kubik recognizing his inferiority.

But I agree; if Kubik had not proclaimed this I would pick him in a heartbeat. -Hyperbole-
"A figure of speech that is exaggerated in order to create emphasis or effect. Hyperbole is a literary device often used to increase the impact of the story."

And since Celestials have absolutely NO feats to place them anywhere near Kubik's level, the comment that he made pertaining to their power certainly qualifies as hyperbole.... Until proven otherwise.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Galan007
-Hyperbole-
"A figure of speech that is exaggerated in order to create emphasis or effect. Hyperbole is a literary device often used to increase the impact of the story."

And since Celestials have absolutely NO feats to place them anywhere near Kubik's level, the comment that he made pertaining to their power certainly qualifies as hyperbole.... Until proven otherwise.
Hey. Shut up. uhuh

And don't forget Sentry stalemated Galactus.

But on a more serious note its interesting that in Kubik's statement we have a rare self-lowballing statement. stick out tongue

Galan007
haw-som

theICONiac
Originally posted by Galan007
-Hyperbole-
"A figure of speech that is exaggerated in order to create emphasis or effect. Hyperbole is a literary device often used to increase the impact of the story."

And since Celestials have absolutely NO feats to place them anywhere near Kubik's level, the comment that he made pertaining to their power certainly qualifies as hyperbole.... Until proven otherwise.

Sooooooo Kubik is like my drunkin' Uncle Bill who brags about his sexual conquests in college...even though you know based on the ditch-pig he is with now negates most of his comments...

I expected more out of Kubik roll eyes (sarcastic)

King Kandy
Originally posted by Galan007
-Hyperbole-
"A figure of speech that is exaggerated in order to create emphasis or effect. Hyperbole is a literary device often used to increase the impact of the story."

And since Celestials have absolutely NO feats to place them anywhere near Kubik's level, the comment that he made pertaining to their power certainly qualifies as hyperbole.... Until proven otherwise.
I don't think hyperbole is the right word here, that's an exaggeration of something. Not something that's just totally wrong. If Kubik would lose to Exitar after a hard fought battle, but said Exitar was thousands of times greater, that's hyperbole. If he could beat him, but said Exitar was thousands of times stronger, that's just incorrect.

kgkg
Exitar wins I don't know why people are all about feats when there is clear evidence at that time that Exitar > Celestial > Kubik

People want to go wow he destroyed universes.... by feats Odin has more destructive feat that Celestial look were that got him against Celestials.

Anyway Exitar wins.

Colossus-Big C
^ exactly

quanchi112
Originally posted by kgkg
Exitar wins I don't know why people are all about feats when there is clear evidence at that time that Exitar > Celestial > Kubik

People want to go wow he destroyed universes.... by feats Odin has more destructive feat that Celestial look were that got him against Celestials.

Anyway Exitar wins. Those posters who disregard comparisons in place of feats have no grasp of the writer's intentions at all. Exitar wins this all day.

Naija boy
Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't think hyperbole is the right word here, that's an exaggeration of something. Not something that's just totally wrong. If Kubik would lose to Exitar after a hard fought battle, but said Exitar was thousands of times greater, that's hyperbole. If he could beat him, but said Exitar was thousands of times stronger, that's just incorrect.

Exactly.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by kgkg
Exitar wins I don't know why people are all about feats when there is clear evidence at that time that Exitar > Celestial > Kubik

People want to go wow he destroyed universes.... by feats Odin has more destructive feat that Celestial look were that got him against Celestials.

Anyway Exitar wins.
I really don't see what's stopping Kubik from weakness exploiting ala Sue Storm.

On paper Batman is several orders of power below Superman but with weakness exploitation he can take Big Blue down. The difference here is that Kubik probably wouldn't need prep to pull such a thing off.

Blanket
Originally posted by Omega Vision
On paper Batman is several orders of power below Superman Stopped reading

Black bolt z
Originally posted by Blanket
Stopped reading laughing out loud

Galan007
Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't think hyperbole is the right word here, that's an exaggeration of something. Not something that's just totally wrong. If Kubik would lose to Exitar after a hard fought battle, but said Exitar was thousands of times greater, that's hyperbole. If he could beat him, but said Exitar was thousands of times stronger, that's just incorrect. Fair point, but here's how I look at it...

Kubik made a random statement about a Celestial's power being FAR greater than his own 'infinite' power. So if a no name Celestial has so much power that a universal reality warper like Kubik is absolutely nothing in comparison, then how much power would a 'higher-end' Celestial like Exitar have by proxy? Am I supposed to believe that Sue Storm was channeling unknown levels of infinite power when she pwned Exitar?

For instance, Hyperman was referred to as 'possibly the most powerful being in existence', even though he has NO feats to warrant such a claim. Am I to automatically place him in the upper echelons of the DC hierarchy just by that one, off-the-wall, statement? No way. Why? Because unproven statements are just that: unproven statements. If Celestials had done something.... Anything, to warrant Kubik's claim, then I'd have no problem with placing them on such a high pedestal... But to date, they haven't (in general.)

I guess my main point is: where do we draw the line between unproven statements and established on panel feats?

quanchi112
Originally posted by Galan007
Fair point, but here's how I look at it...

Kubik made a random statement about a Celestial's power being FAR greater than his own 'infinite' power. So if a no name Celestial has so much power that a universal reality warper like Kubik is absolutely nothing in comparison, then how much power would a 'higher-end' Celestial like Exitar have by proxy? Am I supposed to believe that Sue Storm was channeling unknown levels of infinite power when she pwned Exitar?

For instance, Hyperman was referred to as 'possibly the most powerful being in existence', even though he has NO feats to warrant such a claim. Am I to automatically place him in the upper echelons of the DC hierarchy just by that one, off-the-wall, statement? No way. Why? Because unproven statements are just that: unproven statements. If Celestials had done something.... Anything, to warrant Kubik's claim, then I'd have no problem with placing them on such a high pedestal... But to date, they haven't (in general.)

I guess my main point is: where do we draw the line between unproven statements and established on panel feats? So because she was a rare example does this make her more powerful than Thor? No, just like if anyone used red solar radiation on Superman that doesn't make them any more powerful than Superman just the right set of powers to defeat him.


Exitar wins as it's been explained already that they are nothing to Celestials.

Colossus-Big C
celestial are presumbly, low multiversal powers
kubik is universal at best

Johnny Sorrow
Originally posted by Galan007
Fair point, but here's how I look at it...

Kubik made a random statement about a Celestial's power being FAR greater than his own 'infinite' power. So if a no name Celestial has so much power that a universal reality warper like Kubik is absolutely nothing in comparison, then how much power would a 'higher-end' Celestial like Exitar have by proxy? Am I supposed to believe that Sue Storm was channeling unknown levels of infinite power when she pwned Exitar?

For instance, Hyperman was referred to as 'possibly the most powerful being in existence', even though he has NO feats to warrant such a claim. Am I to automatically place him in the upper echelons of the DC hierarchy just by that one, off-the-wall, statement? No way. Why? Because unproven statements are just that: unproven statements. If Celestials had done something.... Anything, to warrant Kubik's claim, then I'd have no problem with placing them on such a high pedestal... But to date, they haven't (in general.)

I guess my main point is: where do we draw the line between unproven statements and established on panel feats?

Was the Kubik statement meant to serve as a ret-con statement of sorts, keeping in mind the changes for both the Beyonder and Molecule Man?

guy222
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
celestial are presumbly, low multiversal powers
kubik is universal at best

low powers?

Black bolt z
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
celestial are presumbly, low multiversal powers
kubik is universal at best When he was able to affect another universe while being in his own?Sure...

Colossus-Big C
Originally posted by Black bolt z
When he was able to affect another universe while being in his own?Sure... still universal, multiversal means you can affect all the multiverse at the same time

Black bolt z
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
still universal, multiversal means you can affect all the multiverse at the same time Well then he's more then universal but not quite universal.Universal means one universe.

Galan007
Originally posted by Johnny Sorrow
Was the Kubik statement meant to serve as a ret-con statement of sorts, keeping in mind the changes for both the Beyonder and Molecule Man? Nothing was really 'retconned'. Kubik just made a comment pertaining to a Celestial's *supposed* power.

...Plus, the events of F4 #319 (the one in which Kubik pwns a universe) were mentioned in the Celestial-wank-fest issue, as well.

Black bolt z
Man...beyonder got one hell of a retcon.He went form making LT shit his pants to being wtfpwned by someone several magnitudes of power lower then a no name celestial.

Colossus-Big C
toaa saw him as a threat so he retconned him

King Kandy
Originally posted by Galan007
Fair point, but here's how I look at it...

Kubik made a random statement about a Celestial's power being FAR greater than his own 'infinite' power. So if a no name Celestial has so much power that a universal reality warper like Kubik is absolutely nothing in comparison, then how much power would a 'higher-end' Celestial like Exitar have by proxy? Am I supposed to believe that Sue Storm was channeling unknown levels of infinite power when she pwned Exitar?

For instance, Hyperman was referred to as 'possibly the most powerful being in existence', even though he has NO feats to warrant such a claim. Am I to automatically place him in the upper echelons of the DC hierarchy just by that one, off-the-wall, statement? No way. Why? Because unproven statements are just that: unproven statements. If Celestials had done something.... Anything, to warrant Kubik's claim, then I'd have no problem with placing them on such a high pedestal... But to date, they haven't (in general.)

I guess my main point is: where do we draw the line between unproven statements and established on panel feats?
Generally I trust statements given by a character that they directly pertain to, if they aren't boasts. There's no reason that Kubik should have been wrong, after all he would have been undervaluing himself to do so.

Galan007
Originally posted by King Kandy
Generally I trust statements given by a character that they directly pertain to, if they aren't boasts. There's no reason that Kubik should have been wrong, after all he would have been undervaluing himself to do so. So if a no-name Celestial is FAR more powerful then a guy who can warp entire universes with the utmost of ease, then exactly what level of power are you placing them at? Multiversal?

If so, do you truly think that one statement with absolutely no feats to back it up, warrants such a placement? Do you think that Celestials are equal to someone like Mxy, even though Mxy has feats, and all Celestials have are statements? Do you think Sentry did in fact stalemate Galactus?

Where do we draw the line?

Rage.Of.Olympus
Yea Kandy, where do you draw the line? Nate Grey said that he and Sentry took on a rogue Thor on together. Are we really supposed to believe that bullshit? I mean seriously, what kind of a chance could they possibly stand?

quanchi112
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yea Kandy, where do you draw the line? Nate Grey said that he and Sentry took on a rogue Thor on together. Are we really supposed to believe that bullshit? I mean seriously, what kind of a chance could they possibly stand? If you're this paranoid about the writer's intention don't read them.

TheLordofMurder
I, too, am in the camp of those that believe Kubiks statement was done as a retcon; otherwise Kubik making that statement and being scared of the non-named Celestials' pending judgement makes absolutely no sense at all...

Kubik doesnt make many appearances, but I am willing to bet money that we never see him warping entire universes ever again...

And asumming he hasnt been retconned (and I am convinced that he was) that makes the Celestials stupidly powerful (supremely overpowered that is); hell, why send Galactus and the abstracts against Thanos in the Infinity Gauntlet series!? Just send the 4th Celestial host + Exitar and you'd have enough firepower to beat Thanos (with the Gauntlet), Eternity, and Bloody atleast 2 of the Tribunals faces...


Galan, you claim that Kubik wasnt retconned...I disagree...I believe there is enough circumstancial evidence present to support Kubik being retconned vs evidence stating that he's still capable of warping an entire resisting universe with ease...

And the circumstancial evidence is:
1) A lone Celestial doesnt possess the power to warp entire universes.
2) Kubik flatly saying he was several orders of magnitude beneath a lone Celestial.
3) Kubik being afraid of the judgement of a lone Celestial.

This is, IMHO, one of the clearest cases of a retcon that I have ever seen...

And if Kubik isnt retconned, then 1-3 are false (and I am 100% certain that #1 is true); as for 2 and 3, given the situation, I can find no logical explanantion for Kubik lying and pretending he was scared if he really wasnt...

King Kandy
Originally posted by Galan007
So if a no-name Celestial is FAR more powerful then a guy who can warp entire universes with the utmost of ease, then exactly what level of power are you placing them at? Multiversal?

If so, do you truly think that one statement with absolutely no feats to back it up, warrants such a placement? Do you think that Celestials are equal to someone like Mxy, even though Mxy has feats, and all Celestials have are statements? Do you think Sentry did in fact stalemate Galactus?

Where do we draw the line?
If we're to believe Kubik is far above the Celestials, that implies that they are on about equal footing with most abstracts... that would completely contradict all statements given that the abstracts only pretended to be weaker than Beyonder. Essentially a de-retcon.

Mr Master
The Kubik statement was canon when it was presented on panel,
but we must acknowledge that said statement was then retconned.

Why?

Well because Kubik made that statement in FF Annual #26,
but in FF Annual #27, full potential Owen Reece states that ONLY he surpasses Beyonder's power.

This is strange but,
Eternity's 2006 bio confirms that Beyonder was indeed a threat to him,
plus
Mistress Death's 2006 bio credits Post-Retcon Beyonder with erasing her.

Therefore, Pre-Retcon's 1985 feat was never retconned completely,
and so Post-Retcon Beyonder did in fact erase the concept of Death across the Universe.

So where does this lead us?

You make the call, I have my own opinion.

guy222
Opinions are good

Morning Mr. M smile

IMO, Exitar wins

We all know who the Celestial fan is on KMC

stick out tongue

Blanket
Originally posted by Mr Master
The Kubik statement was canon when it was presented on panel,
but we must acknowledge that said statement was then retconned.

Why?

Well because Kubik made that statement in FF Annual #26,
but in FF Annual #27, full potential Owen Reece states that ONLY he surpasses Beyonder's power.
no expression

That's not a retcon.

Galan007
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
I, too, am in the camp of those that believe Kubiks statement was done as a retcon; otherwise Kubik making that statement and being scared of the non-named Celestials' pending judgement makes absolutely no sense at all...

Kubik doesnt make many appearances, but I am willing to bet money that we never see him warping entire universes ever again...

And asumming he hasnt been retconned (and I am convinced that he was) that makes the Celestials stupidly powerful (supremely overpowered that is); hell, why send Galactus and the abstracts against Thanos in the Infinity Gauntlet series!? Just send the 4th Celestial host + Exitar and you'd have enough firepower to beat Thanos (with the Gauntlet), Eternity, and Bloody atleast 2 of the Tribunals faces...


Galan, you claim that Kubik wasnt retconned...I disagree...I believe there is enough circumstancial evidence present to support Kubik being retconned vs evidence stating that he's still capable of warping an entire resisting universe with ease...

And the circumstancial evidence is:
1) A lone Celestial doesnt possess the power to warp entire universes.
2) Kubik flatly saying he was several orders of magnitude beneath a lone Celestial.
3) Kubik being afraid of the judgement of a lone Celestial.

This is, IMHO, one of the clearest cases of a retcon that I have ever seen...

And if Kubik isnt retconned, then 1-3 are false (and I am 100% certain that #1 is true); as for 2 and 3, given the situation, I can find no logical explanantion for Kubik lying and pretending he was scared if he really wasnt... Once again: nothing pertaining to Kubik was 'retconned'. The events of F4 #319 (the issue in which Kubik warps a universe) were specifically mentioned in the F4 Annual #26 (the issue in which Kubik wanks a Celestial.)

-Kubik, to the Beyonder-
" could have easily crushed you... I once did*"

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/4820/ffann02659.th.jpg

And as you can see, the source for that statement is F4 #319. So obviously Kubik is referring to his universe-warping feat/battle, thus retaining that feat's canonicity by proxy.

Originally posted by King Kandy
If we're to believe Kubik is far above the Celestials, that implies that they are on about equal footing with most abstracts... that would completely contradict all statements given that the abstracts only pretended to be weaker than Beyonder. Essentially a de-retcon. What does this have to do with any of the question(s) I asked? confused

TheLordofMurder
Well can we atleast agree that we have some incredibly inconsistent writing going on then?

Kubik making that statement about his vast inferiority to the Celestials, then simutaneously having his universe warping feat stand; despite the fact that a lone member of the Celestial race doesnt have anywhere near "several orders of magnitude" more power than what is needed to warp a universe...contradicts itself many times over.

Of course this shouldnt be surprising as Marvel is famous for its glaring inconsistencies in writing...


Bottomline for me is that either Kubik is retconned; which makes the cosmic hierarchy atleast somewhat logical...

Or a lone member of the Celestial race (and isnt it crazy stupid that there is an entire RACE of beings this powerful!?) has the power to effortlessly warp atleast 100 resisting universes simutaneously (several orders of magnitude more than what Kubik can do, so ATLEAST 100...bare minimum)...

If the Celestials are that badass, then the whole cosmic hierarchy falls apart as a lone member of the Celestials should be able to (IMHO) be able to beat the wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet; and if not...assumming that the Celestials are that powerful...surely an entire Celestial Host would trump the Infinity Gauntlet many times over.


So either we accept that:
1) Kubiks universe warping feat was meant to be retconned...
2) A lone Celestial is vastly more powerful than any abstract save perhaps the Tribunal...
3) A cube being, which ranks beneath an abstract in the cosmic hierarchy, is simutaneously capable of warping a universe and yet is several orders of magnitude beneath a Celestial; in this case ALL the abstracts possess the power to warp atleast 100 resisting universes with ease (you see how ridiculous this is!?); of course this cant be true as Thanos owned Eternity's "cosmic brigade" when he had the IG.


No matter how its spun, you have bad...inconsistent...writing no matter what.

D_Dude1210
Just because a Celestial was never shown to warp a universe, doesn't mean they can't.

The highest expression of power I've seen a Celestial do was when a (until that point) "nameless" Celestial named Scathan took down Protege.

Galan007
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
Well can we atleast agree that we have some incredibly inconsistent writing going on then? This much I can certainly agree on.

Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Just because a Celestial was never shown to warp a universe, doesn't mean they can't.

The highest expression of power I've seen a Celestial do was when a (until that point) "nameless" Celestial named Scathan took down Protege. The same could be said about Alfred. wink

That was Scathan. He certainly shouldn't be your bearing for 'general' Celestial power.

D_Dude1210
Originally posted by Galan007
This much I can certainly agree on.

The same could be said about Alfred. wink

That was Scathan. He certainly shouldn't be your bearing for 'general' Celestial power.

True that. "Proving a negative" thingie. Haha. My point was that they've always been considered a "universal" power in the cosmic hierarchy of marvel. They don't manipulate reality on a universal scale the same way that Eternity was never shown (at least to my memory) to manipulate reality on a universal scale. Does that put Kubik above Eternity? Don't think so. big grin

Also, Scathan was only thought of as being at the power levels he was at due to the Protege feat. Exitar was always shown as a Celestial well beyond the average Celestial. If Scathan is what a high-tier Celestial is capable of, then I have to think

Of course, this is ABC logic, so I'll have to concede that there is too little viable Celestial feats to consider them beyond a Cosmic Cube (even tho, Kubik himself has admitted his inferiority to Celestials).

And I also have to say that only a single feat has shown Kubik to be at a level beyond Celestials and anything to do with the Beyonder has been ubergayretconned since then.

Colossus-Big C
who says celestials cant warp univese??

and the ig would still stomp someone who is multiple levels above kubik

theres levels such as
universal
multiversal
omniverse

kubic is 1.
celestials should be two
the ig is three.

and the hotu somps all of them.
compare to multiversal beings kubiks feat is nothing
compared to omniversal beings, multiversal beings are nothing

Galan007
laughing out loud/facepalm/sad/srsly/none @ Celestials now being bumped to multiversal entities, the IG being omniversal, and THOTI being > omniversal.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Blanket
no expression

That's not a retcon.
Congrats, Blanket, you just retconned MM's post. dur

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Galan007
laughing out loud/facepalm/sad/srsly/none @ Celestials now being bumped to multiversal entities, the IG being omniversal, and THOTI being > omniversal.
Marvel Cosmic wank is getting purrty ridonculous. laughing out loud

Astner
I'm going with Exitar based on the fact that Kubik acknowledged the Celestials as his superior.

Galan007
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Marvel Cosmic wank is getting purrty ridonculous. laughing out loud laughing out loud

Oh and remember to keep in mind that unproven statements pertaining to a character's supposed power = on panel feats.

That's something I've learned from this thread. thumb up

quanchi112
Originally posted by Galan007
laughing out loud

Oh and remember to keep in mind that unproven statements pertaining to a character's supposed power = on panel feats.

That's something I've learned from this thread. thumb up What I learned is a writer's intentions pertaining to actual comparisons between two characters gets trumped because one has better feats.

Galan007
Originally posted by quanchi112
What I learned is a writer's intentions pertaining to actual comparisons between two characters gets trumped because one has better feats. For some reason I had the urge to look at your post, despite you being on ignore... And I'm very glad I did. Why? Because for once we actually agree!

smile thumb up

Now back to perma-ignore, you go. wink

quanchi112
Originally posted by Galan007
For some reason I had the urge to look at your post, despite you being on ignore... And I'm very glad I did. Why? Because for once we actually agree!

smile thumb up

Now back to perma-ignore, you go. wink Sure ya did galan. The funny thing is you pmed me before about my opinion regarding blood and thunder now you want to act like a baby and put me on ignore. Fine and dandy but you read my posts and this proves it.

I was also being sarcastic galan but you won't read this as I am back on ignore.

Astner
I honestly don't think anyone perceives the value of statements and exposition to be equal to the value of actual feats. However, that doesn't mean that statements and exposition should be left ignored unless contradicted (to some degree) by feats.

Galan007
^ So I'll ask you then: where is the line drawn between unproven statements and on panel feats? I mean, if you are agreeing with Kubik's statement that Celestials are FAR more powerful than he, then you must also agree with Spidey's comment that Sentry stalemated Galactus. Both are completely baseless and unproven, after all.

...Or are we to pick and choose which statements we believe, and which ones we don't..?

Rage.Of.Olympus
Originally posted by quanchi112
If you're this paranoid about the writer's intention don't read them.

So you agree that it would take both Shaman X-men and the Sentry to take on Thor? Cool.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
So you agree that it would take both Shaman X-men and the Sentry to take on Thor? Cool. No, we saw Void actually restrain a scared Thor as he helplessly watched on as he destroyed asgard. We saw how ineffective Thor was on his own against the Void.

Colossus-Big C
sentry is cool

Rage.Of.Olympus
Originally posted by quanchi112
No, we saw Void actually restrain a scared Thor as he helplessly watched on as he destroyed asgard. We saw how ineffective Thor was on his own against the Void.

Uhuh. Concession accepted.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Uhuh. Concession accepted. Should I post the scans of scared Thor being restrained while the Void is wrecking his entire home?

Black bolt z
Originally posted by quanchi112
Should I post the scans of scared Thor being restrained while the Void is wrecking his entire home? I'll doubt you will.You never post scans even if was to help your cause.

Endless Mike
Exitar

quanchi112
Originally posted by Black bolt z
I'll doubt you will.You never post scans even if was to help your cause. With you I don't post scans only you. Others I have no problems doing so but I pity posters such as yourself who beg for scans while arguing regardless of having any knowledge on the subject matter.

Black bolt z
Originally posted by quanchi112
With you I don't post scans only you. Others I have no problems doing so but I pity posters such as yourself who beg for scans while arguing regardless of having any knowledge on the subject matter. I didn't beg for scans.You don't post scans.Were you to post those scans I might admitt you were right.Until then concession accpeted.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Black bolt z
I didn't beg for scans.You don't post scans.Were you to post those scans I might admitt you were right.Until then concession accpeted. I don't post scans for posters who admit they didn't read anything but argue against them anyways.

Colossus-Big C
quanchi112 is right, i dont why all the quanchi hate
hes an effective debater, better than the majority of people here i would listen to him more than anyone here

JakeTheBank
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
quanchi112 is right, i dont why all the quanchi hate
hes an effective debater, better than the majority of people here i would listen to him more than anyone here

duryes

You did say he was one of your alt. accounts though...

mmm

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
quanchi112 is right, i dont why all the quanchi hate
hes an effective debater, better than the majority of people here i would listen to him more than anyone here
Birds of a feather...

Blanket
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
quanchi112 is right, i dont why all the quanchi hate
hes an effective debater, better than the majority of people here i would listen to him more than anyone here I was going to point out the grammar up top, but then I read your whole post...

Nevermind that amirite?

Black bolt z
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
quanchi112 is right, i dont why all the quanchi hate
hes an effective debater, better than the majority of people here i would listen to him more than anyone here Originally posted by JakeTheBank
duryes

You did say he was one of your alt. accounts though...

mmm laughing out loud

Utrigita
Originally posted by Galan007
^ So I'll ask you then: where is the line drawn between unproven statements and on panel feats? I mean, if you are agreeing with Kubik's statement that Celestials are FAR more powerful than he, then you must also agree with Spidey's comment that Sentry stalemated Galactus. Both are completely baseless and unproven, after all.

...Or are we to pick and choose which statements we believe, and which ones we don't..?

There is from my perspective alot of sides to this and ultimately it, again from my perspective, comes down to how much we can "trust" the individual character and if based on showings is something that we can indeed see happening, for instance alot of people takes everything Reed Richards say as being facts because he has for long been established as being a "reliable" character capable of giving a accurate assesment on the current threats level or a persons power.
As for your example, I personally doubt anyone here can see Sentry stalemating Galactus also because Sentry imo doesn't have the required feats to validate it and it's a statement that was only made once with nothing to support it from Spiderman who have a tendency to leave things out or joke about things, or more in general his credibility is low.
A general thing that I think have been left out concerning the Kubik Celestial incident is that the unnamed Celestial judged Kubik and deemed him worthy to continue his existance, Kubik, a universel warper, was in that scan afraid and was aware that he was at the mercy of the Celestial, so while the Celestials haven't shown that they can accomplishe anything on the same scale as Kubik can, the Celestial showed in the incident that he apparently was powerful enough to kill Kubik without Kubik being capable of doing anything about it.
And after this incident Kubik yet again referes to the Celestials (and many others) as being above both Kosmos and him, so his statement isn't just thrown out once but twice and the second time more characters are added to show the extent of the abstracts power.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Utrigita
There is from my perspective alot of sides to this and ultimately it, again from my perspective, comes down to how much we can "trust" the individual character and if based on showings is something that we can indeed see happening, for instance alot of people takes everything Reed Richards say as being facts because he has for long been established as being a "reliable" character capable of giving a accurate assesment on the current threats level or a persons power.
As for your example, I personally doubt anyone here can see Sentry stalemating Galactus also because Sentry imo doesn't have the required feats to validate it and it's a statement that was only made once with nothing to support it from Spiderman who have a tendency to leave things out or joke about things, or more in general his credibility is low.
A general thing that I think have been left out concerning the Kubik Celestial incident is that the unnamed Celestial judged Kubik and deemed him worthy to continue his existance, Kubik, a universel warper, was in that scan afraid and was aware that he was at the mercy of the Celestial, so while the Celestials haven't shown that they can accomplishe anything on the same scale as Kubik can, the Celestial showed in the incident that he apparently was powerful enough to kill Kubik without Kubik being capable of doing anything about it.
And after this incident Kubik yet again referes to the Celestials (and many others) as being above both Kosmos and him, so his statement isn't just thrown out once but twice and the second time more characters are added to show the extent of the abstracts power.

thumb up

Galan007
Originally posted by Utrigita
As for your example, I personally doubt anyone here can see Sentry stalemating Galactus also because Sentry imo doesn't have the required feats to validate it and it's a statement that was only made once with nothing to support it Double-standards, ftw!

psycho gundam
Originally posted by Galan007
^ So I'll ask you then: where is the line drawn between unproven statements and on panel feats? I mean, if you are agreeing with Kubik's statement that Celestials are FAR more powerful than he, then you must also agree with Spidey's comment that Sentry stalemated Galactus. Both are completely baseless and unproven, after all.

...Or are we to pick and choose which statements we believe, and which ones we don't..? pretty sure you can go with kubik on that one, cosmics don't tend to spout lies infront of chicks

Black bolt z
laughing out loud

Utrigita
Originally posted by Galan007
Double-standards, ftw!

You have to draw the line somewhere, I draw the line at the person who makes the claim and whether he can be seen as being a valid source given his history within the given comic universe. Personally I think many would have wondered but only a few would have doubted that Sentry stalemated Galactus if it was Reed Richards that had made the claim because he has a tendency to be correct in the statements he gives. But thing is that is wasn't Reed Richards, it was Spiderman given a statement under unknown circumstances about a incident we can't even be sure he saw with his own eyes.

The Example (again) that have been used throughout this entire debat (Kubik and The Unnamed Celestial) is from the above criteria not perfect given that we actually see the Celestial "overpower" Kubik. The Sentry Galactus example is better in my opinion.

Black bolt z
@Utrigita

Why does it look like galactus has swords in your sig?

Utrigita
Originally posted by Black bolt z
@Utrigita

Why does it look like galactus has swords in your sig?

No idea.

Galan007
Originally posted by Utrigita
You have to draw the line somewhere, I draw the line at the person who makes the claim and whether he can be seen as being a valid source given his history within the given comic universe. Personally I think many would have wondered but only a few would have doubted that Sentry stalemated Galactus if it was Reed Richards that had made the claim because he has a tendency to be correct in the statements he gives. But thing is that is wasn't Reed Richards, it was Spiderman given a statement under unknown circumstances about a incident we can't even be sure he saw with his own eyes. I disagree here. I think that if you are going to accept one unsupported statement made by a character as fact, then you need to accept all unsupported statements as fact. Picking and choosing which characters are more 'reliable' then others as your basis behind 'truth' is completely open to personal opinion, and therefore tends to be a faulty path to travel where debates are concerned. Imo.

But yeah, I'm not going to argue my point anymore. I've said all I can think to say. smile

Blanket
There's a difference between you admitting to being below someone, and someone saying they saw something...

Galan007
^ They're still both unproven statements. For instance, Mace stated he was inferior to Yoda as a swordsman. Their battles with Sidious, however, paint a much different picture.

Blanket
Originally posted by Galan007
^ They're still both unproven statements. For instance, Mace stated he was inferior to Yoda as a swordsman. Their battles with Sidious, however, paint a much different picture. Because Mace used Vaapad against Sidious.

At least with admitting you're below someone, there's a rough measure of power that goes into it.

Galan007
Originally posted by Blanket
Because Mace used Vaapad against Sidious. Since Vaapad = Mace's sole combat style, he wasn't really an inferior swordsman at all.

He was probably just giving Yoda respect -- kind of like when Anakin said that Obi-Wan was "as powerful as master Windu, and as wise as master Yoda" during AOTC. I mean we know Obi-Wan wasn't really that powerful/wise. *shrug*

Blanket
Originally posted by Galan007
Yep, so he wasn't really an inferior swordsman at all.

He was probably just giving Yoda respect -- kind of like when Anakin said that Obi-Wan was "as powerful as master Windu, and as wise as master Yoda" during AOTC. I mean we know Obi-Wan wasn't really that powerful/wise. *shrug* Vaapad uses the power of the dark side against their opponent. It'd be like saying Metallo with a kryptonite heart is as powerful as Doomsday because both can fight with Superman.
Vaapad wouldn't work well against Yoda to say the least.

Maybe, maybe not. But that's him saying it. Not an outside force like Hayden Christensen... Anakin Skywalker.

Galan007
Originally posted by Blanket
Vaapad uses the power of the dark side against their opponent. It'd be like saying Metallo with a kryptonite heart is as powerful as Doomsday because both can fight with Superman.
Vaapad wouldn't work well against Yoda to say the least.

Maybe, maybe not. But that's him saying it. Not an outside force like Hayden Christensen... Anakin Skywalker. Vaapad also channels Mace's own inner darkness and allows him to use it freely in battle (that's why he originally created it, in fact.) So yes, Vaapad would still retain an advantage against practitioners of the 'light side' of the force.

Huh?

Blanket
Originally posted by Galan007
Vaapad also channels Mace's own inner darkness and allows him to use it freely in battle (that's why he originally created it, in fact.) So yes, Vaapad would still retain an advantage against practitioners of the 'light side' of the force.

Huh? Yes, and works against Dark Side users.
Wouldn't retain an advantage against Yoda just because it worked against Sidious though.

Anakin is an outside source talking about others power levels. Mace is talking about someone being above his own level.
There's a difference.

Galan007
Originally posted by Blanket
Yes, and works against Dark Side users.
Wouldn't retain an advantage against Yoda just because it worked against Sidious though.

Anakin is an outside source talking about others power levels. Mace is talking about someone being above his own level.
There's a difference. No, Vaapad would retain an advantage against Yoda, because with it Mace is free to utilize his own inner darkness (which is apparently considerable) as an offensive 'weapon of the light', as he put it. In the right hands, a practitioner of Vaapad is all but unbeatable -- too bad it died with it's only master. sad

Chalk it up to a statement based purely on respect, imo.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Blanket
Yes, and works against Dark Side users.
Wouldn't retain an advantage against Yoda just because it worked against Sidious though.

Anakin is an outside source talking about others power levels. Mace is talking about someone being above his own level.
There's a difference.
Considering how much respect Mace and other Jedi have for Yoda it could just be Mace being modest. Yoda might be his peer in swordsmanship but I don't think it would be fair to call him his superior especially considering at his advanced age Yoda required heavy use of the force to move around and jump like he did against Dooku.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Considering how much respect Mace and other Jedi have for Yoda it could just be Mace being modest. Yoda might be his peer in swordsmanship but I don't think it would be fair to call him his superior especially considering at his advanced age Yoda required heavy use of the force to move around and jump like he did against Dooku.

Either you and Galan are one and the same or something reeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaalllly weird is going on between you two...

Mr Master
Kubik spoke in FF Annual #26.

Owen Reece as the unrestricted Molecule Man stated,
that only he was above Beyonder in power.

Owen Reece stomps Cube beings like we stomp ants,
Owen also stated that his power/awareness was many infinites beyond a Cube being.

Kubik, who's word is being stamped as cosmic law here,
confirmed that Owen was far more powerful than himself and Kosmos,
so Owen wasn't hyperboling (proven by how he stomped Beyonder so easily)
The LT also called Owen one of the most powerful beings in the Omniverse.

So ... no expression

Mr Master
Also ...

Way AFTER FF Annual #26, both Kubik & Kosmos
control the 3rd Dimensional Timestream (including 616) from the 4th Dimension.

Post/Beyonder is credited
with erasing 616 Death from existence in her bio. (2006)
Post/Beyonder is credited
with granting Rachel the full power of the Phoneix Force in Rachel's bio. (2004)
Post/Beyonder is credited
with threatening Eternity's existence. (2006)
Post/Beyonder was affecting reality on a Multiversal scale during the Protege arc.

So again ... no expression

Utrigita
Originally posted by Galan007
I disagree here. I think that if you are going to accept one unsupported statement made by a character as fact, then you need to accept all unsupported statements as fact. Picking and choosing which characters are more 'reliable' then others as your basis behind 'truth' is completely open to personal opinion, and therefore tends to be a faulty path to travel where debates are concerned. Imo.

But yeah, I'm not going to argue my point anymore. I've said all I can think to say. smile

I disagree, I don't think that a unproven statement made by Spiderman concerning for instance a cosmic threat (for instance Hunger or The Collective) should carry as much weight as Thanos or Reed Richards statement on the matter, simply because the later simply have more experience within the given field to estimate the level of power the threat is operation under, to suggest that Spiderman and Reed are equally without knowledge in the given example is from my perspective wrong.

But again that is my opinion. I to see no reason to continue the debate, we have different standpoints on the subject and no reason to drive a debate around in circles.

Utrigita
Originally posted by Galan007
^ They're still both unproven statements. For instance, Mace stated he was inferior to Yoda as a swordsman. Their battles with Sidious, however, paint a much different picture.

In the manuscript concerning the battle in Episode Three, iirc Yoda succeeded in disarming Sidious.

Colossus-Big C
exitar is my favorite celestial.
infact hes the only cool one

Galan007
Originally posted by Utrigita
In the manuscript concerning the battle in Episode Three, iirc Yoda succeeded in disarming Sidious. The novel never said anything about one of them disarming the other. It did say that Yoda really never had a chance, though...

"Finally, saw the truth. This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order - - just didn't have it. He'd never had it. He had lost before he started. He had lost before he was born."


...The the Mace/Palpatine battle, on the other hand, described Mace as the definitive superior.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by theICONiac
Either you and Galan are one and the same or something reeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaalllly weird is going on between you two...
Pfft. Someone's jealous. roll eyes (sarcastic)

kgkg
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
exitar is my favorite celestial.
infact hes the only cool one laughing out loud This was funny.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.