Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Fight takes place in Central City

Who wins

I think Apoc/Kurse takes it...

Apoc is the deciding factor; he's just too powerful...

Apoc has a counter for everything that they do and is fully capable of BFR'ing Doomsday...

I honestly think Apoc solo's...

Originally posted by TheLordofMurder

I honestly think Apoc solo's...

I do too. It would be fun to watch Kurse beat the hell out of Superman though.

Originally posted by tkitna
I do too. It would be fun to watch Kurse beat the hell out of Superman though.
http://i422.photobucket.com/albums/pp305/K9Thefirst1/TheShiningNotSureIfSerious_zps4767e5fb.jpg

http://images.memes.com/meme/729629

https://media.makeameme.org/created/THEN-YOU-ARE-04beal.jpg

Kurse actually has probably the best feat in the MCU when it comes to pure strength: b*tch slapping away Thor's hammer.

Yeah, Thor couldnt do anything to him. Kal would fare the same.

Originally posted by Surtur
Kurse actually has probably the best feat in the MCU when it comes to pure strength: b*tch slapping away Thor's hammer.
Agreed.


Superman > Kurse > Thor

Superman can shift tectonic plates. He is stronger than Kurse by a massive margin.

Originally posted by playa1258
Superman can shift tectonic plates. He is stronger than Kurse by a massive margin.

Just curious, but how do we know Superman is stronger than Kurse by massive margins? Was it established that Kurse would be unable to shift tectonic plates? I'm just saying that Kurse treated Thor like a dog pecker gnat. I have doubts that Superman is massively stronger than Kurse.

Because Kurse has no feats close to that.

Post the clip that shows Superman moving tectonic plates.

It was a news report shown in BVS.

Then give the exact details of the feat.

I think he used Kryptonian tech to move the tectonic plates. Someone prove me wrong.

Originally posted by carver9
I think he used Kryptonian tech to move the tectonic plates. Someone prove me wrong.



Thats exactly why off screen/panel feats arent the strongest debating material; you never know precisely how the feat was accomplished...

Occam's razor says he used pure strength, since that is simplest explanation.

Superman absolutely never used Kryptonian tech in such a fashion, or ever really in any active fashion.

So yeah, since Kurse is millions and millions of times weaker than that by feats, he loses.

Especially since Superman is far faster than him. Able to catch an RPG from near point blank.

What are the exact details of the feat?

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_500.png

It's a news headline.

That's it.

He shifts a tectonic plate, and prevents a devastating earthquake.

Everyone else in the opposite side is millions of times weaker than that.

I asked the the exact details, not the headline.

That is the exact details of the feat.

It's a headline.

Question, how did the reporter even know that Supes shifted the plates? Did he see Superman perform the "feat"? Is that even possible? Did Superman brag about it? Is that even in his character to do so?

Newspapers can be wrong/lie/embelish the truth you know. To grab headlines and sell papers.

Stop.

Flat out.

These are laughable conspiracy theories and you'd have to do a helluva lot of proving to show that they are anything but such; to prove that the writer's intention was to create some ambiguous false headline off to the side of the screen to cause random debate on a Vs. forum.

Again, we defer to good ol' Occam's Razor here. Superman moved the tectonic plate because that is the simplest explanation.

And its probably an easter egg reference to the Christoper Reeve Supes doing the same exact thing in the 1978 movie.

As to the plausibility of the feat. We don't know the hard limits of Cavill Supes yet. Jor-El even told him to continually test them. He may have gotten exponentially stronger in 18 months.

But seeing as a highly weakened Superman busted through the World Engine, which was durable enough to fall at hypersonic speeds from space, down to the Earth and plow through a mountain completely unscathed, it's readily believable to me.

Said World Engine was also terraforming the entire planet and it would have gotten the job done in seemingly a few hours at most. Superman flew up through that same terraforming beam, again while heavily weakened.

Keeping in mind the scale of destruction he was dealing with, it becomes entirely plausible that he shifted a tectonic plate by himself.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
Stop.

Flat out.

These are laughable conspiracy theories and you'd have to do a helluva lot of proving to show that they are anything but such; to prove that the writer's intention was to create some ambiguous false headline off to the side of the screen to cause random debate on a Vs. forum.

Again, we defer to good ol' Occam's Razor here. Superman moved the tectonic plate because that is the simplest explanation.

And its probably an easter egg reference to the Christoper Reeve Supes doing the same exact thing in the 1978 movie.

As to the plausibility of the feat. We don't know the hard limits of Cavill Supes yet. Jor-El even told him to continually test them. He may have gotten exponentially stronger in 18 months.

But seeing as a highly weakened Superman busted through the World Engine, which was durable enough to fall at hypersonic speeds from space, down to the Earth and plow through a mountain completely unscathed, it's readily believable to me.

Said World Engine was also terraforming the entire planet and it would have gotten the job done in seemingly a few hours at most. Superman flew up through that same terraforming beam, again while heavily weakened.

Keeping in mind the scale of destruction he was dealing with, it becomes entirely plausible that he shifted a tectonic plate by himself.

Excellent post...

Supes doesn't even need tectonic plate feat in this.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Question, how did the reporter even know that Supes shifted the plates? Did he see Superman perform the "feat"? Is that even possible? Did Superman brag about it? Is that even in his character to do so?

Newspapers can be wrong/lie/embelish the truth you know. To grab headlines and sell papers.

Exactly, it does say a lot that people are relying on a headline rather than feats that we actually see Superman perform.

I mean I'm iffy. I'd agree yes he most likely didn't use Kryptonian technology to shift those plates. So unless he somehow used heat vision to accomplish this(which wouldn't make any sense obviously) yeah it was most likely due to strength.

Even if the reporter exaggerated it..well, the feat is pretty far above anything we've seen(I'd forgotten the headline until someone mentioned it).

With all that being said...for me when it has come to statements and using them as evidence I just ask myself if there are other feats we have seen that would support this level of strength. Or any feats that even come close to it. If there were, yes I'd accept the statement.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
Stop.

Flat out.

These are laughable conspiracy theories and you'd have to do a helluva lot of proving to show that they are anything but such; to prove that the writer's intention was to create some ambiguous false headline off to the side of the screen to cause random debate on a Vs. forum.

Again, we defer to good ol' Occam's Razor here. Superman moved the tectonic plate because that is the simplest explanation.

And its probably an easter egg reference to the Christoper Reeve Supes doing the same exact thing in the 1978 movie.

As to the plausibility of the feat. We don't know the hard limits of Cavill Supes yet. Jor-El even told him to continually test them. He may have gotten exponentially stronger in 18 months.

But seeing as a highly weakened Superman busted through the World Engine, which was durable enough to fall at hypersonic speeds from space, down to the Earth and plow through a mountain completely unscathed, it's readily believable to me.

Said World Engine was also terraforming the entire planet and it would have gotten the job done in seemingly a few hours at most. Superman flew up through that same terraforming beam, again while heavily weakened.

Keeping in mind the scale of destruction he was dealing with, it becomes entirely plausible that he shifted a tectonic plate by himself.

That wasn't a "conspiracy theory". That was a legit question. How exactly did the reporter witness said tectonic moving?

/shrug

And Occum's Razor is a logical guide (to help point the person to discover a possible right answer), it is not a logical constant as even its phrasing states that it can be wrong.

It was obviously an easter egg. I think we can all agree on this. A witty homage to previous movie incarnations of Superman. In your own wirds, the writer obviously did not put it there to spark some random debate in some obscure battleboard. So who is in the wrong here? The one using it as some sort of indisputable evidence or those that believe the little easter egg might well not be all that good as evidence?

You HAVE to agree, that at its best, it is as flimsy and weak an evidence as evidence can get. And if you ever tried to use a headline in a court of law and fail to have corroborating evidence to prove its authenticity, then opposing council would likely tear you a new one.

Best to use actual "feats" we can see on screen and let those do the talking.

I think Wonder Woman was probably helping him but the reporter did not see her due to her being on the other side of the plate.

Not strong enough to hold as an actual feat in this battle

Doomsday as much as i loathe him in that movie could simply just evolve and wins this fight by himself.

Originally posted by carver9
I think Wonder Woman was probably helping him but the reporter did not see her due to her being on the other side of the plate.


Wonder Woman only arrived after that scene.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That wasn't a "conspiracy theory". That was a legit question. How exactly did the reporter witness said tectonic moving?

/shrug

And Occum's Razor is a logical guide (to help point the person to discover a possible right answer), it is not a logical constant as even its phrasing states that it can be wrong.

It was obviously an easter egg. I think we can all agree on this. A witty homage to previous movie incarnations of Superman. In your own wirds, the writer obviously did not put it there to spark some random debate in some obscure battleboard. So who is in the wrong here? The one using it as some sort of indisputable evidence or those that believe the little easter egg might well not be all that good as evidence?

You HAVE to agree, that at its best, it is as flimsy and weak an evidence as evidence can get. And if you ever tried to use a headline in a court of law and fail to have corroborating evidence to prove its authenticity, then opposing council would likely tear you a new one.

Best to use actual "feats" we can see on screen and let those do the talking.
It's not flimsy at all. It's a reference to a feat Superman does off panel.

There is nothing to suggest that the report was wrong.

You need to prove that its wrong. Not the other way around.

If you want to use a statement as a feat you would need to provide other feats to show why it should be taken as valid.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It's not flimsy at all. It's a reference to a feat Superman does off panel.

There is nothing to suggest that the report was wrong.

You need to prove that its wrong. Not the other way around.

Off panel "feats" are flimsy enough. But an off panel "feat" using a medium w/c even in the real world has been proven to be less than dependable where even the "how" on the method used to observe said "feat" is pretty sketchy sure sounds pretty damned flimsy to me.

I'm not trying to prove it wrong, I'm demonstrating how weak the nature of the evidence is.

Let us put it another way: if we removed that headline from the movie and then someone asked you if, based on everything else, you think Superman could shift around tectonic plates, what would be the answer?

Off panel feats and/or implied power level can be an indication of how a character should be perceived, but nothing more imho. E.g. Odin from the MCU.

Also, Superman does not need that specific feat in here.

Originally posted by Surtur
Let us put it another way: if we removed that headline from the movie and then someone asked you if, based on everything else, you think Superman could shift around tectonic plates, what would be the answer?

The answer would obviously be "no".

Exactly, though on the other hand I'm struggling to see how either Apoc or Kurse could inflict any lasting damage to Doomsday. A nuke didn't take him out, so I'm not sure how they would be able to. Not unless you're giving Kurse one of those black hole grenades.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Exactly, it does say a lot that people are relying on a headline rather than feats that we actually see Superman perform. Doesn't matter as Superman performed the feat by writers intentions. It was a Christopher Reeve tribute.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That wasn't a "conspiracy theory". That was a legit question. How exactly did the reporter witness said tectonic moving?

/shrug

And Occum's Razor is a logical guide (to help point the person to discover a possible right answer), it is not a logical constant as even its phrasing states that it can be wrong.

It was obviously an easter egg. I think we can all agree on this. A witty homage to previous movie incarnations of Superman. In your own wirds, the writer obviously did not put it there to spark some random debate in some obscure battleboard. So who is in the wrong here? The one using it as some sort of indisputable evidence or those that believe the little easter egg might well not be all that good as evidence?

You HAVE to agree, that at its best, it is as flimsy and weak an evidence as evidence can get. And if you ever tried to use a headline in a court of law and fail to have corroborating evidence to prove its authenticity, then opposing council would likely tear you a new one.

Best to use actual "feats" we can see on screen and let those do the talking.

He moved it by pure strength as thst was the writers intentions.

Superman punched Zod to the top of a skyscraper. That dwarfs any feat by Kurse. Apoc gets one shotted by Superman.

Superman solos.

Originally posted by h1a8
He moved it by pure strength as thst was the writers intentions.

Prove it.

Doomsday solos and unlike Apoc he doesn't need a new body and temple to evolve.

lol... Kryptonians stomp easy

Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove it. It was a headline for a newspaper. Thus it happened.

Originally posted by h1a8
It was a headline for a newspaper. Thus it happened.

You claimed that it was done through pure strength and that was the writers intention.

Prove it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You claimed that it was done through pure strength and that was the writers intention.

Prove it.
1. Christopher Reeve Superman done it that way and it was a reference to that scene.
2. If writer intended for Superman to not use pure strength and some equipment then the writer would have stated so.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. Christopher Reeve Superman done it that way and it was a reference to that scene.
2. If writer intended for Superman to not use pure strength and some equipment then the writer would have stated so.


That is speculation, I asked for proof.

So, prove it.

This tectonic plate feat holds about as much clout as the Sentry beating Galactus.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That is speculation, I asked for proof.

So, prove it. It is proof. The simplest explanation is what happened. Also, extra details doesn't exist if the writer didn't provide evidence towards it. We can't make stuff up. Actually there's nothing to discuss since you believe that Superman did it with pure strength. The discussion should be for those who don't actually believe.

Originally posted by tkitna
This tectonic plate feat holds about as much clout as the Sentry beating Galactus. Sentry stalemated Galactus. This was reinforced in several feats.

1. Collectors feat
2. Terrax feat.
3. MM feat
4. Thor busting Galactus twice (Sentry>>>>>Thor).

Originally posted by h1a8
It is proof. The simplest explanation is what happened. Also, extra details doesn't exist if the writer didn't provide evidence towards it. We can't make stuff up. Actually there's nothing to discuss since you believe that Superman did it with pure strength. The discussion should be for those who don't actually believe.

In other words you can't provide any proof, so you're just going to continue to insist that your speculation is actually proof.

>Newspapers are fallable/inaccurate in RL but somehow comic movie newspapers are 100% accurate.

>Acknowledges that writer put it there as an easter egg tribute shoutout to classic Reeves Superman, yet insists writer intentions clearly gave the "feat" to current Superman.

Nothing Superman has done in all the movies has convinced me he's strong enough to move tectonic plates.

That said, I still think Superman and Doomsday win this. I mean, what's Apoc gonna do to them? Wrap them in sand?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
>Newspapers are fallable/inaccurate in RL but somehow comic movie newspapers are 100% accurate.

>Acknowledges that writer put it there as an easter egg tribute shoutout to classic Reeves Superman, yet insists writer intentions clearly gave the "feat" to current Superman.

What kind of idiotic conflation is this?

-Prove the director's intent was to somehow create this invisible newspaper writer that could somehow falsify information on the scale of a phucking earthquake being averted.

-Jesus Christ you are dumb. The two points are TIED you idiot, not mutually exclusive. The director had an article about Superman performing the feat as a call out to Christopher Reeves doing the same thing. In addition, that entire wall is newspaper clippings of the collection of heroic things that Superman had done for the last 18 months.

Are the rest of the newspaper clippings false too? Why is it that you would focus on that particular one?

If it is a false heading that the invisible column writer somehow disastrously got the details wrong for, then prove it.

Prove that this was Zack Snyder's intent. You can't, and won't.

Seeing as his intent was to show Superman as an unflinchingly heroic figure even while being distrusted by a large amount of people across the world. For that reason alone its just as valid to go the complete opposite direction of your assertion that the article was wrong or a lie and say that the writer may have been a Superman hater who even toned down the magnitude of the feat even more simply because he didn't want to give him full credit--afterall who knows, Superman may have had to deal with more than one tectonic plate that day. Just as likely as your inane conspiracy theory, and even uses IN-PLOT elements to justify its possibility, whereas yours has nothing to do with plot, you just assume it could be wrong because news articles can be wrong sometimes.

Anyway, the extreme assumptions more or less cancel each other out anyway, and thus it leaves us back to the center: Which is that the article title says exactly what happened. Not negotiable.

The fact that it exists at all is evidence alone that it happened. Occam's Razor lends it even more strength, since you don't automatically assume a newspaper clipping is factually incorrect. You do the opposite (but perhaps keep an open mind to new information coming in).

This is even stronger in fiction seeing as there was no actual column writer at all in existence. Only the director, Zack Snyder, who was trying to show Superman's heroic efforts for the past nearly 2 years, both in on-screen montage and further detailed by a collection of newspaper clippings.

You don't get to assume one phucking headline about something as cut and dried and as impossible to fake as a phucking earthquake was wrong.

The fact that you would even bring up this sh-itty conspiracy theory about "The column writer might have wrote a false story! People get the news wrong sometimes!" is another way of saying you don't want the feat to exist.

Too bad. The newspaper article exists and its truth is self-evident until proven otherwise, the same way that narration's words/narrator's boxes work.

So since in Guardians of the Galaxy, Korath said "Thanos is the most powerful being in the universe" (without the infinity gems) then he automatically wins every VS. fight right?

Didn't watch Guardians yet so I will assume what you said is accurate.

But no, we assume the statement is true that Thanos is the most powerful of any one being in the universe.

We assume exactly what was said.

What we don't do is make 100% assertions about any tangentially related possibilities or events.

Though we can theorize that Thanos probably has a good shot of beating any one person out there in his universe for a majority since he is billed as the most powerful. What he is not however, is ALL-Powerful, which is why he is going after the gems. If you are not all-powerful, then you can lose.

I'm surprised I had to actually explain this.

That was a rather amateurish red herring by the way.

Ok, well to simplify it for you, here in the movie versus Forum. We go by feats. Not by what is said, not by what is written, not by what is narrated, not what we imagine in our heads that characters are should capable of.
On screen feats tump everything. If we don't see the character performing a certain feat in the movie, it has to be disregarded.
This doesn't work like comics where the writer can say something on a panel and it could be used as a feat or description on what the character is capable of
Didn't think this needed explaining tbh.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In other words you can't provide any proof, so you're just going to continue to insist that your speculation is actually proof.
It is proof. I just said that something doesn't exist if the writer didn't write evidence of it or its not based off common knowledge. That's 100% proof.

And you are trolling by trying to discredit something that you actually believe, so that Superman isn't able to win against Kurse. Because you don't like Superman or favor Marvel characters more.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
>Newspapers are fallable/inaccurate in RL but somehow comic movie newspapers are 100% accurate.

>Acknowledges that writer put it there as an easter egg tribute shoutout to classic Reeves Superman, yet insists writer intentions clearly gave the "feat" to current Superman. newspapers are fallible in real life but in fiction they are only if the writer shows it to be. You are arguing as if any of this stuff happened. Superman never moved tectonic plates because Superman never existed. But did he moved tectonic plates in the writer's mind? Yes!

Superman's uppercut to Zod >>>>>>>Anything Kurse has done strength wise. If anyone disagree then let's debate it. I'll prove it.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Ok, well to simplify it for you, here in the movie versus Forum. We go by feats. Not by what is said, not by what is written, not by what is narrated, not what we imagine in our heads that characters are should capable of.
On screen feats tump everything. If we don't see the character performing a certain feat in the movie, it has to be disregarded.
This doesn't work like comics where the writer can say something on a panel and it could be used as a feat or description on what the character is capable of
Didn't think this needed explaining tbh.

No.

Evidence is evidence.

You have to prove the evidence is not valid.

There is no differing specialty rules unless specified directly, fictional debates have the same basic tenants.

Originally posted by h1a8
newspapers are fallible in real life but in fiction they are only if the writer shows it to be. You are arguing as if any of this stuff happened. Superman never moved tectonic plates because Superman never existed. But did he moved tectonic plates in the writer's mind? Yes!

Nope. You have it backwards.

Items/objects shown in movies have the same characteristics/behaviour as their real world counterparts, as such, newspapers represent the same level of credibility as their real world counterparts.

The only exception is that IF the writer specifically/clearly indicates that X fictional object behaves differently from their real world counterpart.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
No.

Evidence is evidence.

You have to prove the evidence is not valid.

There is no differing specialty rules unless specified directly, fictional debates have the same basic tenants.

And there are types of evidence. And levels of credibility that these evidence provide.

Proor/weak evidence is something many can simply reasonably disregard.

Unless of course you believe that bigfoot kept a farmer as his love slave.

http://squirrelsviews.blogspot.com/2009/10/crazy-tabloid-headlines.html

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Nope. You have it backwards.

Items/objects shown in movies have the same characteristics/behaviour as their real world counterparts, as such, newspapers represent the same level of credibility as their real world counterparts.

The only exception is that IF the writer specifically/clearly indicates that X fictional object behaves differently from their real world counterpart. Yes newspapers cam be fallible in fiction, but only After they were shown to be (like a retconn). In fiction, writers intentions are law. That's all that matters. We can't argue against what the writer is TRYING TO SHOW.

Originally posted by h1a8
Yes newspapers cam be fallible in fiction, but only After they were shown to be (like a retconn). In fiction, writers intentions are law. That's all that matters. We can't argue against what the writer is TRYING TO SHOW.

No. Fictional newspapers are, by default, as credible as the real world newspapers they represent. The same way as any fictional objects, by default, behave/work the same way as their real world counterpart. The writer needs to specifically point out that they behave differently before any argument can be made that they do. Otherwise no forum battle would work as we need to have a real world basis foundation to quantify "feats". Newspapers are not excempt from this basic rule.

And stop using that the "writer's intent", when writer's intent was clearly an easter egg tribute to a different Superman. This is highly disingenuous of you.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
No. Fictional newspapers are, by default, as credible as the real world newspapers they represent. The same way as any fictional objects, by default, behave/work the same way as their real world counterpart. The writer needs to specifically point out that they behave differently before any argument can be made that they do. Otherwise no forum battle would work as we need to have a real world basis foundation to quantify "feats". Newspapers are not excempt from this basic rule.

And stop using that the "writer's intent", when writer's intent was clearly an easter egg tribute to a different Superman. This is highly disingenuous of you. No they aren't. They are credible if it's the writers intention for it to be. They have full artistic license of what they want to show.

The easter egg reference is the exact proof of his intentions that Mos actually performed the feat. There is only one Superman in that work of fiction.

In the writer's mind Superman moved tectonic plates as Christopher Reeve did. End of story.

Originally posted by h1a8
No they aren't. They are credible if it's the writers intention for it to be. They have full artistic license of what they want to show.

The easter egg reference is the exact proof of his intentions that Mos actually performed the feat. There is only one Superman in that work of fiction.

In the writer's mind Superman moved tectonic plates as Christopher Reeve did. End of story.

And the writer made no specific mention of newspapers being infallible in his universe, so you're making up his intent in your head.

And no, it is not proof. It is simply an easter egg.

You didn't write BvS and you are not a telepath. So you clearly have no inkling on what was inside the writer's mind.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
And the writer made no specific mention of newspapers being infallible in his universe, so you're making up his intent in your head.

And no, it is not proof. It is simply an easter egg.

You didn't write BvS and you are not a telepath. So you clearly have no inkling on what was inside the writer's mind. The writer didn't write a headline IN THE MOVIE while in his head it didn't actually happen in the movie.

Originally posted by h1a8
The writer didn't write a headline IN THE MOVIE while in his head it didn't actually happen in the movie.

Of course it can. That is what an easter eggs is...

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Of course it can. That is what an easter eggs is... No, an Easter egg has no bearing on whether something in the story occurred or not. It's not like it appeared in deleted scenes or something. It appeared in the actual released movie as part of the story. So whether it is Easter egg or not is irrelevant. The writer wrote the headline for viewers to see AND Know that Mos did the same thing as Christopher Reeve did.

Only a fool would take a newspaper headline to describe an entire event without even reading the details of the article.

Headlines are meant to capture the attention of people, not to tell the proper story.

I concede as its moot anyway. We can use things that were shown.
Superman, by shown feats, is a lot stronger and more durable than Kurse. From knocking Zod a mile away to being knocked up a skyscraper without any damage.

Originally posted by h1a8
No, an Easter egg has no bearing on whether something in the story occurred or not. It's not like it appeared in deleted scenes or something. It appeared in the actual released movie as part of the story. So whether it is Easter egg or not is irrelevant. The writer wrote the headline for viewers to see AND Know that Mos did the same thing as Christopher Reeve did.

Pls google easter egg and come back to me...

Edit. Sorry. Didn't see your concession on this being an irrelevant item for discussion. If that is the case, carry on.

Originally posted by h1a8
It is proof. I just said that something doesn't exist if the writer didn't write evidence of it or its not based off common knowledge. That's 100% proof.

And you are trolling by trying to discredit something that you actually believe, so that Superman isn't able to win against Kurse. Because you don't like Superman or favor Marvel characters more.

I asked for proof, so are you going to post any or you just going to keep crying?

Originally posted by Silent Master
I asked for proof, so are you going to post any or you just going to keep crying? I conceded to that argument since it was getting nowhere and wasn't needed. You missed that post.

Superman has several more SHOWINGS to prove that he's stronger, more durable, and faster than Kurse. Thus he beats Kurse.

Originally posted by h1a8
I conceded to that argument since it was getting nowhere and wasn't needed. You missed that post.

Superman has several more SHOWINGS to prove that he's stronger, more durable, and faster than Kurse. Thus he beats Kurse.

You conceded well after you made the post that I responded to so it's not that I missed your concession, it's that I had not gotten to it yet.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You conceded well after you made the post that I responded to so it's not that I missed your concession, it's that I had not gotten to it yet. I don't understand. I conceded 4 hours before you repost.
Anyway Team 2 wins. That's all that matters.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't understand. I conceded 4 hours before you repost.
Anyway Team 2 wins. That's all that matters.

You can't be this stupid, I responded to that post as soon as I read it and only then did i finish reading all the new posts, so like I said, I didn't miss your concession, I just hadn't reached it yet, do you understand now or I do I need to continue explaining this like you're two years old?

He thinks team 2 wins. That should tell you everything.

Team 2 in a stomp.

Originally posted by Kotor3
Team 2 in a stomp.

Why?

Wrong question, why wouldn't it be a stomp?

I see, you can't back up your statement.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I see, you can't back up your statement. How is that?

Prove me wrong, back up your statement.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
Stop.

Flat out.

These are laughable conspiracy theories and you'd have to do a helluva lot of proving to show that they are anything but such; to prove that the writer's intention was to create some ambiguous false headline off to the side of the screen to cause random debate on a Vs. forum.

Again, we defer to good ol' Occam's Razor here. Superman moved the tectonic plate because that is the simplest explanation.

And its probably an easter egg reference to the Christoper Reeve Supes doing the same exact thing in the 1978 movie.

As to the plausibility of the feat. We don't know the hard limits of Cavill Supes yet. Jor-El even told him to continually test them. He may have gotten exponentially stronger in 18 months.

But seeing as a highly weakened Superman busted through the World Engine, which was durable enough to fall at hypersonic speeds from space, down to the Earth and plow through a mountain completely unscathed, it's readily believable to me.

Said World Engine was also terraforming the entire planet and it would have gotten the job done in seemingly a few hours at most. Superman flew up through that same terraforming beam, again while heavily weakened.

Keeping in mind the scale of destruction he was dealing with, it becomes entirely plausible that he shifted a tectonic plate by himself.

There is so much wrong with this I don't even know where to begin.

First, it wasn't going to be completed in a few hours. Shit it probably wouldn't have been in months. Think about it. It starts terraforming. Military officials and see and are trying to figure out what is happening. Supes later shows up with Lois and is briefly the military on their plan. Then they start the plan of action. Shit, all that was likely 2 hours. Further, and more proof it would've taken vastly longer than your claiming. Just look at the destruction is was doing. Just in the scenes we see... after it had been working for at least a hour or already. barely any of the city was destroyed. Just a small fraction of it. You can see each pulse is taking out just a limited area. A few hours, yeah, not.

World engine durable enough to coming barreling through our atmosphere and stop LOL. That's a durability feat now? That pathetic. That's what spaceships do. They travel through space and land places. To even call that a durability feat is truly hilarious

Newspapers get stories wrong all the time. What do you mean conspiracy theory? It's common place in the real world. Especially when Superman generally performs feats and then leaves for the next emergency. he doesn't conduct interviews about what he just did. For all we know, they just saw him doing stuff and guessed what happened. That isn't the best feat to even try and use.

When did superman shift tectonic plates in the original series. I remember in Superman 1, when Lois died in the earthquake. Didn't he just fly around the earth and reverse time so that it never happened and then just saved her before. Am I remembering this wrong? It's been awhile.

Team 1, and fairly easily

Team 1 due to Apocalypse.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
When did superman shift tectonic plates in the original series. I remember in Superman 1, when Lois died in the earthquake. Didn't he just fly around the earth and reverse time so that it never happened and then just saved her before. Am I remembering this wrong? It's been awhile.


There's a scene where he goes underground, starts pushing up against the Earth and repairing some of the Earthquake damage. It effected quite a large area. I'm guessing that's it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Why?

He thinks all they do is punch each other.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You can't be this stupid, I responded to that post as soon as I read it and only then did i finish reading all the new posts, so like I said, I didn't miss your concession, I just hadn't reached it yet, do you understand now or I do I need to continue explaining this like you're two years old? I still don't understand.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Team 1, and fairly easily why?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove me wrong, back up your statement. I did when I told you how ridiculous your statement is.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Team 1, and fairly easily Why do you say Team 1 and with ease? What exactly do you see Apoc doing to the other two?

Originally posted by Kotor3
I did when I told you how ridiculous your statement is.

Stating an opinion isn't the same thing as backing up a statement. backing up a statement requires the posting of evidence.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Stating an opinion isn't the same thing as backing up a statement. backing up a statement requires the posting of evidence. You want to know why and I want to know why you feel it wouldn't be a stomp. That is why it is a called a debate not a an investigation where one person asks questions and the other responds.

I'll answer your question if you are able to provide one reason why it wouldn't be a stomp.

This is a debate thread, therefore since you are unable to back up your statement. it can be ignored as the ramblings of a fanboy.

Originally posted by Silent Master
This is a debate thread, therefore since you are unable to back up your statement. it can be ignored as the ramblings of a fanboy. Then debate and stop whining. I asked a question back to you.

Asking you to back up your claim is debating, not whining. so if you really want to debate. start backing up your claims.

Originally posted by Kotor3
Why do you say Team 1 and with ease? What exactly do you see Apoc doing to the other two?

First off, the ease in which Kurse dealt with Thor, leads me to believe he's right there with Superman when it comes to strength. Based on feats Superman is stronger, but feats are the only thing we can go by. There is also something called implied power or power scaling that can be used. For example, Odin doesn't have strength feats that can compare to Cap, does that mean I believe Cap is stronger? Absolutely not. The way Kurse treated Thor, was as if he was a mere child. So when you powerscale that up, we get near Superman imo. Plus Kurse is unquestionably for durable based on feats.

Then we have the issue of Apoc, and I honestly don't know what they are even going to do to him. He's so versatile in his powers and abilities that it puts team 2 to shame. Literally. To say nothing of DD getting BFR'd right away. Then that leaves superman against Apco and Kurse... yeah, goodnight.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Asking you to back up your claim is debating, not whining. so if you really want to debate. start backing up your claims. You first.

Originally posted by Kotor3
You first.

That isn't how debates work, you made the original claim, that means the burden is on you.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
First off, the ease in which Kurse dealt with Thor, leads me to believe he's right there with Superman when it comes to strength. Based on feats Superman is stronger, but feats are the only thing we can go by. There is also something called implied power or power scaling that can be used. For example, Odin doesn't have strength feats that can compare to Cap, does that mean I believe Cap is stronger? Absolutely not. The way Kurse treated Thor, was as if he was a mere child. So when you powerscale that up, we get near Superman imo. Plus Kurse is unquestionably for durable based on feats.

Then we have the issue of Apoc, and I honestly don't know what they are even going to do to him. He's so versatile in his powers and abilities that it puts team 2 to shame. Literally. To say nothing of DD getting BFR'd right away. Then that leaves superman against Apco and Kurse... yeah, goodnight. Apoc is where you an I differ. While his powers are versatile, I don't see them being able to take out DD or Superman. DD or Superman could fling him into outer space with one toss. They could easily blitz him. This being a fight where they aren't holding back I don't see Apoc being an issue.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That isn't how debates work, you made the original claim, that means the burden is on you. You really are going to keep going back and forth aren't you. Okay. Its a stomp because that is what DD and Superman do. Your counter.

Originally posted by Kotor3
You really are going to keep going back and forth aren't you. Okay. Its a stomp because that is what DD and Superman do. Your counter.

Restating your opinion isn't the same thing as backing up your statement. so, since you are unable to do so. we can all ignore your statement as the fanboy ramblings it was.

Aren't you being a bit of a hypocrite? In a previous thread KuRuPT Thanosi asked you to provide evidence of fighting a large animal or dog and it being easy (something you said you did). A feat you used in the context of the thread. You never provided any evidence just said he was whining.

I answered your question. You evidently do not have an counter. You have done nothing but asked questions throughout the whole thread. So I accept you concession. As usual you have nothing reasonable to provide to any debate.

I get that you're not very smart, but people don't go around filming themselves 24/7, so asking for proof of a random event in their life is rather intellectually dishonest.

However, what I'm asking you for is to back up a statement you made in regards to characters from movies. movies being things that have been recorded.

Double standards I see. If you are having memory issues and don't want to provide info on life events then don't use them in a debate to try to lower a feat for another character. Especially ones you can't remember.

Originally posted by Kotor3
Double standards I see. If you are having memory issues and don't want to provide info on life events then don't use them in a debate to try to lower a feat for another character. Especially ones you can't remember.

I can remember the feat just fine, however seeing as I have no video of it, kt would just claim I was lying, IOW. kt was just trolling me. kind of like what you're doing now, just so you can avoid backing up your claim about things that we do have video of.

Come on Kotor, it's silent, the resident troll. He always asks for proof and never provides any of his own.

In the very thread you mention, he specifically used his "personal" showing against Dogs to imply that fighting off large animals isn't as hard as you were implying. Thus Tarzan's feat wasn't impressive. Knowing that story sounded like bullshit, and coming from the source made it even more suspect, I inquired about the specifics of these encounters silent said he had. I got nothing. I never asked for a video, I just asked for specifics and context behind his statement. Nothing. Now we all know it was bs, but that doesnt' change the fact that he was unwilling or unable to provide facts/context to back up his claim.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Come on Kotor, it's silent, the resident troll. He always asks for proof and never provides any of his own.

In the very thread you mention, he specifically used his "personal" showing against Dogs to imply that fighting off large animals isn't as hard as you were implying. Thus Tarzan's feat wasn't impressive. Knowing that story sounded like bullshit, and coming from the source made it even more suspect, I inquired about the specifics of these encounters silent said he had. I got nothing. I never asked for a video, I just asked for specifics and context behind his statement. Nothing. Now we all know it was bs, but that doesnt' change the fact that he was unwilling or unable to provide facts/context to back up his claim.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I can remember the feat just fine, however seeing as I have no video of it, kt would just claim I was lying, IOW. kt was just trolling me. kind of like what you're doing now, just so you can avoid backing up your claim about things that we do have video of. So, people in this forum post videos to prove their points? More whining. I said they stomp because that is what they do. I will add something else, because they can because they are more powerful.

Any counters?

No, I used Tarzan's feats themselves to show that they weren't that impressive. kotor then tried to use the IRL argument, so I mention my personal exp.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, I used Tarzan's feats themselves to show that they weren't that impressive. kotor then tried to use the IRL argument, so I mention my personal exp. No you didn't. You question me as to why I made a statement. Then when I explain, you made some stupid comment about it sounds the same as the basic of fighting, punching and dodging. When I showed your ignorance in that area you made an comment even more stupid stating that you have been attacked by animals before an it is no big deal.

Then you got called out on that one and have yet to provide a single piece of evidence.

The only ignorance you've shown is your own.

Look I accept you concession. You obviously do not want to have a serious debate (because we both know how that would go). Instead you want to go back and forth. How do they not stomp, really. DD solos.

The only "concession" I've made is conceding that you're a fanboy that can't back up their claims.

Back up your claims Silent. Or admit you are picking team 1 due to Marvel bias.

Originally posted by Kotor3
Apoc is where you an I differ. While his powers are versatile, I don't see them being able to take out DD or Superman. DD or Superman could fling him into outer space with one toss. They could easily blitz him. This being a fight where they aren't holding back I don't see Apoc being an issue.

That's the thing though, if anybody is BFRing somebody it's Apoc BFRing Doomsday. That is how I see it anyways. I don't get the blitzing thing though. He has total control over his molecular structure, I could easily see him during into something to alleviate anything physical damage they could do. Further, I'd say he could likely TP Superman with his abilities. I don't remember any superman showings that show he's strong against mental attacks. Do you?

Originally posted by playa1258
Back up your claims Silent. Or admit you are picking team 1 due to Marvel bias.

What claims do you want me to back up?

All you can say is " Team 1 wins" and then give a reason.

Again, what claims did I make that you want me to back up?

Go play with someone else lol.

Originally posted by playa1258
Go play with someone else lol.

You still haven't told me what claims you want me to back up.

Apoc probably BFR's team 2

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
That's the thing though, if anybody is BFRing somebody it's Apoc BFRing Doomsday. That is how I see it anyways. I don't get the blitzing thing though. He has total control over his molecular structure, I could easily see him during into something to alleviate anything physical damage they could do. Further, I'd say he could likely TP Superman with his abilities. I don't remember any superman showings that show he's strong against mental attacks. Do you? What exactly could he turn to that they could not effect within the physical realm? Superman definitely has not shown himself to be mentally strong. Still, not sure how long that would be effective. I see no mental attack having any effect on DD rendering that ability moot for this fight if DD attacks him.

I still see Apoc as the weak link. I personally think he is out of his league in this battle.

Originally posted by juggerman
Apoc probably BFR's team 2

How?

Originally posted by Kotor3
What exactly could he turn to that they could not effect within the physical realm? Superman definitely has not shown himself to be mentally strong. Still, not sure how long that would be effective. I see no mental attack having any effect on DD rendering that ability moot for this fight if DD attacks him.

I still see Apoc as the weak link. I personally think he is out of his league in this battle.

That's the thing... If Apoc TP's superman, he could just have him attack DD. All three could attack him or BFR him. Apoc is just too versatile for team 2 imo

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
That's the thing... If Apoc TP's superman, he could just have him attack DD. All three could attack him or BFR him. Apoc is just too versatile for team 2 imo That is a strong assumption though. This superman is not the brightest I do agree but that doesn't mean he can without severe effort be controlled.

However, lets go with your scenario. Without the K, I don't see DD losing. I mean its the only thing that took him out and he was distracted when he got caught. Seriously, how don't you see Apoc as the weak link? If the match is prolong with DD constant evolving in power soon it wouldn't matter what they did to him.

Originally posted by carver9
I think Wonder Woman was probably helping him but the reporter did not see her due to her being on the other side of the plate. LoL WTF bro?

Doomsday and Supes stomp. Kurse is a nonfactor against these two, and both of them beating on Apoc will take him out.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
First off, the ease in which Kurse dealt with Thor, leads me to believe he's right there with Superman when it comes to strength. Based on feats Superman is stronger, but feats are the only thing we can go by. There is also something called implied power or power scaling that can be used. For example, Odin doesn't have strength feats that can compare to Cap, does that mean I believe Cap is stronger? Absolutely not. The way Kurse treated Thor, was as if he was a mere child. So when you powerscale that up, we get near Superman imo. Plus Kurse is unquestionably for durable based on feats.

Then we have the issue of Apoc, and I honestly don't know what they are even going to do to him. He's so versatile in his powers and abilities that it puts team 2 to shame. Literally. To say nothing of DD getting BFR'd right away. Then that leaves superman against Apco and Kurse... yeah, goodnight.

You say based on feats Superman is stronger, but I really don't see Superman as swatting away Thor's hammer like Kurse did.

Perhaps if the tectonic plate feat was valid, but since it's only a headline..it's not enough.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Doomsday and Supes stomp. Kurse is a nonfactor against these two, and both of them beating on Apoc will take him out.

How do assume that Kurse isnt a factor? Thor was literally nothing to him.

Originally posted by tkitna
How do assume that Kurse isnt a factor? Thor was literally nothing to him.

You have to forgive h1, he automatically reduces Marvel feats by 99.9%, while increasing DC feats by 999.99%.

Uh, Superman's punches damaged Doomsday after he had adapted to surviving a nuclear bomb exploding on him.

That's the only strength feat either needs, if we're being honest here.

Either Doomsday OR Superman would ragdoll Apocalypse and Kurse. Thor when he fought Kurse =/= Current Thor. He's clearly gotten much more powerful since then, especially considering how well he did against Hulk while unarmed.

Regardless, Apocalypse's only feasible chance here would be to win via TP, and that's something I don't see working particularly well on Superman, and definitely not on Doomsday. Disregarding Doomsday's adaptability, they should both be capable of thinking at a substantially faster rate than Apocalypse, considering their raw speeds are capable of blitzing the Flash(who is >>>>> Quicksilver).

Anyways, there's really nothing Apocalypse or Kurse could do to put DD or SM down, and there are plenty of ways the latter two could kill the former. Superman alone could just behead them both with heat vision at the start of the fight, tbh.

This thread...Alive again?

Are you really claiming that Superman's punches > a nuke?

Apoc and Kurse ftw.

Originally posted by SSJGGogeta
Uh, Superman's punches damaged Doomsday after he had adapted to surviving a nuclear bomb exploding on him.

That's the only strength feat either needs, if we're being honest here.

Either Doomsday OR Superman would ragdoll Apocalypse and Kurse. Thor when he fought Kurse =/= Current Thor. He's clearly gotten much more powerful since then, especially considering how well he did against Hulk while unarmed.

Regardless, Apocalypse's only feasible chance here would be to win via TP, and that's something I don't see working particularly well on Superman, and definitely not on Doomsday. Disregarding Doomsday's adaptability, they should both be capable of thinking at a substantially faster rate than Apocalypse, considering their raw speeds are capable of blitzing the Flash(who is >>>>> Quicksilver).

Anyways, there's really nothing Apocalypse or Kurse could do to put DD or SM down, and there are plenty of ways the latter two could kill the former. Superman alone could just behead them both with heat vision at the start of the fight, tbh.

You are soooo Wrong its annoying , there is not plenty of ways for superman and doomsday , doomsday only has strength , superman has speed and strength, his laser is pathetic , but Apocalypse has many many powers , he also defeated someone much faster than superman (Quicksilver).

Doomsday will turn both superman and doomsday to dust.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Are you really claiming that Superman's punches > a nuke?

At full might even be more devastating than a nuke.

Hold On ...... The lasso of truth which WW tied round supes didnt work on him, how are we sure apocalypse TP will affect supes at all?

Originally posted by The Spectre+
At full might even be more devastating than a nuke.

Provide examples where DCEU Superman's punches were even 1/10th the power of a nuke.

Originally posted by The Spectre+
At full might even be more devastating than a nuke. Based on?

my example is not not gonna be striking power but more of pushing strength.
When supes pushed the motherboxes apart.. i think that in itself was a great feat, if you know that individualy, those motherboxes have planetary power. THEY ARE POWER.

Originally posted by The Spectre+
my example is not not gonna be striking power but more of pushing strength.
When supes pushed the motherboxes apart.. i think that in itself was a great feat, if you know that individualy, those motherboxes have planetary power. THEY ARE POWER.

Duuuuuuddeee.....