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

Clark and Carol face each other, lock forearms together, then take turns headbutting each other with full strength. First one to get knocked to the ground loses. Carol is at full power. Neither is allowed to fly.

Who wins?

Marvel, no doubts.

I doubt either can harm the other, unless Carol isn't allowed to use a force field. If she is then this is a stalemate.

Superman

Superman.

Carol smashing the Sanctuary II >>>> Any feat DCEU Superman has.

Feats>>> Fanboyisms.

Carol stomps.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Carol smashing the Sanctuary II >>>> Any feat DCEU Superman has.

Feats>>> Fanboyisms.

Carol stomps.
Superman went through a ship too.

So going through a ship is greater than going through a ship while weakened and against tremendous resistance forces?

And why would going through a metal ship be greater than all of Superman's feats, especially when metal is tissue paper to him?

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Carol smashing the Sanctuary II >>>> Any feat DCEU Superman has.

Feats>>> Fanboyisms.

Carol stomps.

LOL she put a hole in a ship, big deal. Superman put a hole in a ship too, also put a hole in another ship sized object while fighting through its gravity beam head on

Originally posted by h1a8
Superman went through a ship too.

So going through a ship is greater than going through a ship while weakened and against tremendous resistance forces?

And why would going through a metal ship be greater than all of Superman's feats, especially when metal is tissue paper to him?

Thanos' ship was clearly bigger and more powerful than the terraforming ship Superman destroyed.

A beam of energy? Prove that a force was being exerted on Superman.


Originally posted by relentless1
LOL she put a hole in a ship, big deal. Superman put a hole in a ship too, also put a hole in another ship sized object while fighting through its gravity beam head on

Gravity beam? Where did you got that term from? That was some sort of energy beam which was modifying the Earth's core.

You do know that Superman was heavily depowered when he did that right? And it was a gravity beam, it was crushing skyscrapers on the other side fo the globe.

The fact Superman survived at all exposure that up close to the beam is a huge feat.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Thanos' ship was clearly bigger and more powerful than the terraforming ship Superman destroyed.


Hmmm, I agree it was bigger and probably had better guns. What's that got to do with flying through it? I'm not aware that either ship has much in the way of durability feats. What reason do you have to say the hull of the ship Thanos had would be more difficult to fly through?

Surprised that people are concentrating on their ship-bash feats instead of their headbutt feats against Wonder Woman and Thanos respectively.

Yeah he took her out with a headbutt right?

Originally posted by Psychotron
You do know that Superman was heavily depowered when he did that right? And it was a gravity beam, it was crushing skyscrapers on the other side fo the globe.

Is there even a thing called a gravity beam? Gravity isn't a particle, or atleast not prove to be one. Therefore a gravity beam isn't a thing. Furthermore, the movie never stated such a thing

The buildings colapsing was due to the gravity of the Earth being altered due to the ship terraforming the Earth's core, not because of the beam smashing them directly.

Originally posted by Surtur
The fact Superman survived at all exposure that up close to the beam is a huge feat.



Hmmm, I agree it was bigger and probably had better guns. What's that got to do with flying through it? I'm not aware that either ship has much in the way of durability feats. What reason do you have to say the hull of the ship Thanos had would be more difficult to fly through?

There are no durability feats for either ship. However, based on impresiveness, the Santuary clearly shadows the terraforming ship.

Also, bear in mind that Zod's ship was a terraforming/scientific ship, whereas Thanos' ship was a battle station.

So, base on that concept alone, we can assume that Thanos' ship is more apt for combat.

It's a terraforming ship that would have to withstand some pretty intense gravitational forces, right? I'd agree the ship probably wouldn't be as good in combat, but it doesn't mean the ships hull is less durable.

EDIT: Also Pscyhotron was not saying the beam was directly hitting buildings on the other side of the globe. He was saying that the side effects of the beam were so powerful it was crushing buildings on the other side of the globe.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Is there even a thing called a gravity beam? Gravity isn't a particle, or atleast not prove to be one. Therefore a gravity beam isn't a thing. Furthermore, the movie never stated such a thing

No, and there's no such thing as a World Engine or an infinity gauntlet but here were are. It was a gravity beam in the movie.


Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
The buildings colapsing was due to the gravity of the Earth being altered due to the ship terraforming the Earth's core, not because of the beam smashing them directly.

The core was being altered by the beam... Notice that as soon as Superman destroyed the World Engine the gravity effect ceased. That means the beam was the cause of the massive gravity increase. So he overpowered a beam capable of flattening skyscrapers on the other side of the planet while being heavily depowered, and then destroyed the World Engine itself.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's a terraforming ship that would have to withstand some pretty intense gravitational forces, right? I'd agree the ship probably wouldn't be as good in combat, but it doesn't mean the ships hull is less durable.

EDIT: Also Pscyhotron was not saying the beam was directly hitting buildings on the other side of the globe. He was saying that the side effects of the beam were so powerful it was crushing buildings on the other side of the globe.

The beam itself carries no weight and therefore no opposing force. The Earth's grabity smashing the buildings due to the alteration performed by the ship doesn't mean the beam carries weight.

I don't really know how strong a terraforming ship must be, but the movie makes no reference to such, and therefore any conclusion is invalid.

However, we do know that battleships must be strong enough to withstand enemy attacks, so, Thanos' dreadnought has that adv.

Originally posted by Psychotron
No, and there's no such thing as a World Engine or an infinity gauntlet but here were are. It was a gravity beam in the movie.




The core was being altered by the beam... Notice that as soon as Superman destroyed the World Engine the gravity effect ceased. That means the beam was the cause of the massive gravity increase. So he overpowered a beam capable of flattening skyscrapers on the other side of the planet while being heavily depowered, and then destroyed the World Engine itself.

Yet the movie never mentioned "gravity beam", if otherwise, then bring the proof.

Altering the core doesn't translate in the beam taking force.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
The beam itself carries no weight and therefore no opposing force. The Earth's grabity smashing the buildings due to the alteration performed by the ship doesn't mean the beam carries weight.

I don't really know how strong a terraforming ship must be, but the movie makes no reference to such, and therefore any conclusion is invalid.

However, we do know that battleships must be strong enough to withstand enemy attacks, so, Thanos' dreadnought has that adv.

The beam was the cause of what was happening to the buildings. Superman was in close proximity to the thing.

And yes ships meant for battle need to be able to withstand enemy attacks. Yet I still must point out we have no feats for the ship. And I agree we have no idea exactly how tough the terraforming ship would have to be. All we can say is that it would need to be tough, but that is not a feat. Both ships would have to be tough(albeit for different reasons) and both lack feats.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Yet the movie never mentioned "gravity beam", if otherwise, then bring the proof.

Altering the core doesn't translate in the beam taking force.

It alters gravity and it's a beam. What else would you call it?

Superman had trouble standing under it, never mind flying. It was clearly exerting tremendous force on him. On top of that the impact of the beam had created a crater with shit flying all over the place.

here is kal and diana headbutt...

kndL0n6qTEU


diana falls backwards several feet


here is thanos headbutt against carol...

ryeo86HwyMk


carol doesn't even flinch


kal might win but then again it could be a stalemate

Originally posted by Surtur
Yeah he took her out with a headbutt right?

Yup. Superman smashed WW with a headbutt and CM no-sold Thanos' headbutt.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Thanos' ship was clearly bigger and more powerful than the terraforming ship Superman destroyed.

A beam of energy? Prove that a force was being exerted on Superman.




Gravity beam? Where did you got that term from? That was some sort of energy beam which was modifying the Earth's core.

Prove that is was more durable than the world engine.

Why are you trolling? We clearly see the beam crushing cars (flattening them upon contact). We clearly see Superman struggle trying to stand up in the beam. And Superman was weaker. Why did you ignore that?

Why do you think someone going through tissue paper automatically means they are stronger and more durable than Superman?

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
here is kal and diana headbutt...

kndL0n6qTEU


diana falls backwards several feet


here is thanos headbutt against carol...

ryeo86HwyMk


carol doesn't even flinch


kal might win but then again it could be a stalemate

To be fair, Superman was no-selling Wonder Woman, Cyborg, and Aquaman's attempt to overpower him earlier in the scene. He wasn't hurt when WW hit him, he just looked annoyed.

Originally posted by Surtur
The beam was the cause of what was happening to the buildings. Superman was in close proximity to the thing.

And yes ships meant for battle need to be able to withstand enemy attacks. Yet I still must point out we have no feats for the ship. And I agree we have no idea exactly how tough the terraforming ship would have to be. All we can say is that it would need to be tough, but that is not a feat. Both ships would have to be tough(albeit for different reasons) and both lack feats.

The easiest conclusing is that it's an energy beam which modifies the core by energizing it in some quantum mechanics way.

Energy beams carry little to no force, at least not enough to matter anyway.

Well, basing it on which ship seemed more impressive, Thanos' dreadnought seems tougher.

Originally posted by Psychotron
It alters gravity and it's a beam. What else would you call it?

Superman had trouble standing under it, never mind flying. It was clearly exerting tremendous force on him. On top of that the impact of the beam had created a crater with shit flying all over the place.

You certainly don't call it a "gravity beam", as the movie never called it that nor does a "gravity beam" a thing under human terms.

Furthermore, if you are right and there is a massive amount of force being applied on Superman, the floor beneath Superman should have collapsed, which it didn't .

So, either there is no force or not as much as you are pretending there to be.

Even if you are right and Superman was withstanding massive forces, it would still pale in comparison to CM flying through a Black Hole

Originally posted by h1a8
Prove that is was more durable than the world engine.

Why are you trolling? We clearly see the beam crushing cars (flattening them upon contact). We clearly see Superman struggle trying to stand up in the beam. And Superman was weaker. Why did you ignore that?

Why do you think someone going through tissue paper automatically means they are stronger and more durable than Superman?

Battleship>>>>Scientific vessle.

In other words, it's your burden to prove against logic.

Was the beam directly over the cars? No, which means it was an outcome of the Earth's gravity being modified by whatever sort of energy beam that was.

Does energy carry mass?

Either way, Thanos>>>>>>>>>>Diana.

CM>>>>>Superman.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Either way, Thanos>>>>>>>>>>Diana.

CM>>>>>Superman.

1) Why does Thanos headbutt harder than Diana?

2) Also CM resisted a headbutt using a force field. She never delivered one. It's possible she wouldn't be even able to effect Superman at all.

3) And Superman >>>>>Thanos. Her resisting Thanos doesn't mean she will resist Superman.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You certainly don't call it a "gravity beam", as the movie never called it that nor does a "gravity beam" a thing under human terms.

Furthermore, if you are right and there is a massive amount of force being applied on Superman, the floor beneath Superman should have collapsed, which it didn't .

So, either there is no force or not as much as you are pretending there to be.

Even if you are right and Superman was withstanding massive forces, it would still pale in comparison to CM flying through a Black Hole

Prove that CM flew through an event horizon.

And flying through the event horizon is a shitty feat if you are traveling faster than light speed (which is the escape velocity). It's not as if you flew through the singularity.

Originally posted by h1a8
1) Why does Thanos headbutt harder than Diana?

2) Also CM resisted a headbutt using a force field. She never delivered one. It's possible she wouldn't be even able to effect Superman at all.

3) And Superman >>>>>Thanos. Her resisting Thanos doesn't mean she will resist Superman.



Prove that CM flew through an event horizon.

And flying through the event horizon is a shitty feat if you are traveling faster than light speed (which is the escape velocity). It's not as if you flew through the singularity.

1) Thanos strength feats>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diana.

2) Who said she didn't had her force field here? Besides, that's part of her power, if you are looking to nerf her, then that's another thing.

3) LOL! Thanos' strength feats>>>>Superman

Watch the movies h1, I know you are an MCU hater just as much as Quanchi is an MCU lover, but at least watch the movies before entering debates.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
1) Thanos strength feats>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diana.

2) Who said she didn't had her force field here? Besides, that's part of her power, if you are looking to nerf her, then that's another thing.

3) LOL! Thanos' strength feats>>>>Superman

Watch the movies h1, I know you are an MCU hater just as much as Quanchi is an MCU lover, but at least watch the movies before entering debates.

1) That doesn't mean that Thanos can headbutt harder than her. Diana rocking back Superman is a strength feat, given Superman's durability feats. Therefore it can be argued that she is stronger than Thanos from that mere feat. Diana headbutt had speed and strength behind it. It created a Shockwave.

2) Durability with a force field =/= strength to headbutt someone.
You have to prove that she can significantly effect Superman with a headbutt.

3) Superman's strength feats >>>>>>>>>Thanos. Therefore he is stronger.

Originally posted by h1a8
1) That doesn't mean that Thanos can headbutt harder than her. Diana rocking back Superman is a strength feat, given Superman's durability feats. Therefore it can be argued that she is stronger than Thanos from that mere feat. Diana headbutt had speed and strength behind it. It created a Shockwave.

2) Durability with a force field =/= strength to headbutt someone.
You have to prove that she can significantly effect Superman with a headbutt.

3) Superman's strength feats >>>>>>>>>Thanos. Therefore he is stronger.

1. Lol, and you call me the troll! If Thanos' strength feats>>>>Diana, simple logic indicates that he will headbutt harder.

2. Captain Marvel was standing toe to toe with Thanos who would shit stomp Diana all day long, you clearly haven't watched the movies.

3. Thanos stomping Hulk>>>> Any strength feat DCEU Superman has portrayed.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You certainly don't call it a "gravity beam", as the movie never called it that nor does a "gravity beam" a thing under human terms.

Furthermore, if you are right and there is a massive amount of force being applied on Superman, the floor beneath Superman should have collapsed, which it didn't .

So, either there is no force or not as much as you are pretending there to be.

Even if you are right and Superman was withstanding massive forces, it would still pale in comparison to CM flying through a Black Hole

What do you call it then, smartass?

Floor? He's not in a building. He's on the ground and there was a crater there created by the WE.

Superman overpowered a singularity. So yeah.

The same "singularity" that Lois tanked?

Good ole Silent. Only comes to threads to criticize and nitpick arguments against characters facing Marvel characters. Hardly ever does he actually debate a side of the thread. Troll at the highest level.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
1. Lol, and you call me the troll! If Thanos' strength feats>>>>Diana, simple logic indicates that he will headbutt harder.

2. Captain Marvel was standing toe to toe with Thanos who would shit stomp Diana all day long, you clearly haven't watched the movies.

3. Thanos stomping Hulk>>>> Any strength feat DCEU Superman has portrayed.

1. Why isn't Diana's headbutt a strength feat? Thanos headbutt to Thor appeared weaker than Diana's. You are basing Thanos strength feats off characters he fought (since he has no lifting feats). If so then Why can't Diana's headbutt be based off Superman's durability feats?

2. Again you haven't shown that CM would effect Superman with a headbutt. Giving opinions that reasonable others don't agree with is not evidence.

3. Wrong! Superman is stronger than Hulk period. Superman is more durable too. Plus Thanos hit Hulk in many pressure sensitive areas.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. Why isn't Diana's headbutt a strength feat? Thanos headbutt to Thor appeared weaker than Diana's. You are basing Thanos strength feats off characters he fought (since he has no lifting feats). If so then Why can't Diana's headbutt be based off Superman's durability feats?

2. Again you haven't shown that CM would effect Superman with a headbutt. Giving opinions that reasonable others don't agree with is not evidence.

3. Wrong! Superman is stronger than Hulk period. Superman is more durable too. Plus Thanos hit Hulk in many pressure sensitive areas.

1. Is easily answerable. Because Thanos defeated and overpowered characters like Hulk and Thor, so we can easily say he's stronger than them and can replicate their strength feats and more. WW never overpowered or defeated Superman, so it's very difficult to quantify just how strong she is based on that headbutt. We can use her tank lifting feat to quantify her strength, but that still makes her weaker than Hulk.

Originally posted by FrothByte
1. Is easily answerable. Because Thanos defeated and overpowered characters like Hulk and Thor, so we can easily say he's stronger than them and can replicate their strength feats and more. WW never overpowered or defeated Superman, so it's very difficult to quantify just how strong she is based on that headbutt. We can use her tank lifting feat to quantify her strength, but that still makes her weaker than Hulk.

But you do know about fiction inconsistency right?
1. Weaker characters can and have struck harder than stronger characters.
2. Characters have highs and lows. For example, a character can have a million ton feat (supergirl) and perform under 200 tons on average. So someone overpowering supergirl in one scene doesn't mean they too can lift a million tons. It's just means that they are stronger than her average and everything else is fiction inconsistency.

Therefore Stronger characters don't get weaker character's top feats. Thanos is stronger than average Hulk. Thanos can't leap like the Hulk because his legs aren't as strong. Striking and lifting, although positively correlated, are different. As others pointed out, an expert and experienced fighter can strike harder than someone who is both a lot stronger and has little to no fighting experience (a bodybuilder for example).

In other words, Thanos being stronger than the Hulk does not mean he can headbutt harder than WW. Visually WW headbutts harder.

Lastly you are giving Thanos strength due to the people he fought. Well WW headbutt Superman and rocked his head back. Given Superman's feats then that is a strength feat well beyond lifting a tank. So you should judge WW's strength off that and not other feats.

In regards to the million tons, I do hope you're not talking about the key feat.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In regards to the million tons, I do hope you're not talking about the key feat. Common sense Silent.

Originally posted by h1a8
Common sense Silent.

Glad you're not stupid enough to keep trying to use that non-feat.

Originally posted by h1a8
But you do know about fiction inconsistency right?
1. Weaker characters can and have struck harder than stronger characters.
2. Characters have highs and lows. For example, a character can have a million ton feat (supergirl) and perform under 200 tons on average. So someone overpowering supergirl in one scene doesn't mean they too can lift a million tons. It's just means that they are stronger than her average and everything else is fiction inconsistency.

Therefore Stronger characters don't get weaker character's top feats. Thanos is stronger than average Hulk. Thanos can't leap like the Hulk because his legs aren't as strong. Striking and lifting, although positively correlated, are different. As others pointed out, an expert and experienced fighter can strike harder than someone who is both a lot stronger and has little to no fighting experience (a bodybuilder for example).

In other words, Thanos being stronger than the Hulk does not mean he can headbutt harder than WW. Visually WW headbutts harder.

Lastly you are giving Thanos strength due to the people he fought. Well WW headbutt Superman and rocked his head back. Given Superman's feats then that is a strength feat well beyond lifting a tank. So you should judge WW's strength off that and not other feats.

Prove that rocking Superman's head back is a strength feat well beyond that of lifting a tank

Originally posted by FrothByte
Prove that rocking Superman's head back is a strength feat well beyond that of lifting a tank Well I misspoke. I meant jarring Superman (him being affected to a significant degree).

Namek can lift well over a tank. Namek punched Superman in the face with a less jarring effect than with what WW did.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Glad you're not stupid enough to keep trying to use that non-feat.

I'm using it to show fiction inconsistency, not to argue that Supergirl can lift a million tons in a forum fight. Keep up.

Originally posted by h1a8
Well I misspoke. I meant jarring Superman (him being affected to a significant degree).

Namek can lift well over a tank. Namek punched Superman in the face with a less jarring effect than with what WW did.



I'm using it to show fiction inconsistency, not to argue that Supergirl can lift a million tons in a forum fight. Keep up.

When did Namek punch Superman in the face with less effect than WW's headbutt?

Originally posted by Silent Master
The same "singularity" that Lois tanked?

"Tanked" implies she did anything at all. Superman overpowered it. She was just in his arms when it happened.

For which she recieved no damage. IE, she tanked it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
For which she recieved no damage. IE, she tanked it.

Any why would she receive damage? They were being sucked it, Superman was pushing back.

Did you seriously just ask why would someone receive damage from being near a singularity?

That's what happened in the movie. Are you saying that it wasn't a singularity?

I'm saying that it didn't injure Lois.

So it wasn't a real singularity, Lois is somehow invulnerable in that scene, or it was simply an oversight?

Originally posted by Psychotron
What do you call it then, smartass?

Floor? He's not in a building. He's on the ground and there was a crater there created by the WE.

Superman overpowered a singularity. So yeah.

You can call it as you wish, doesn't mean that's what it is.

Black hole>>>>>> Singularity

Originally posted by h1a8
1. Why isn't Diana's headbutt a strength feat? Thanos headbutt to Thor appeared weaker than Diana's. You are basing Thanos strength feats off characters he fought (since he has no lifting feats). If so then Why can't Diana's headbutt be based off Superman's durability feats?

2. Again you haven't shown that CM would effect Superman with a headbutt. Giving opinions that reasonable others don't agree with is not evidence.

3. Wrong! Superman is stronger than Hulk period. Superman is more durable too. Plus Thanos hit Hulk in many pressure sensitive areas.

Thor's durability and strength feats>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Diana.

I honestly find it hilarious that you fail to realize that the MCU is in a another level of strength!

Hulk moving Surtur>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Anything Superman has ever portrayed.

I suggest you hit the cinema sometime

I love how superfans keep giving the terraforming machine feats. It failed to destroy a single building with one blow. It took hours for this thing to destroy anything

Originally posted by FrothByte
When did Namek punch Superman in the face with less effect than WW's headbutt? When Superman was on the ground Namek punched him square in the face and Superman was unbothered.

Originally posted by h1a8
When Superman was on the ground Namek punched him square in the face and Superman was unbothered.

I rewatched their fight, can't find the scene you're describing. Please post a link.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You can call it as you wish, doesn't mean that's what it is.

Black hole>>>>>> Singularity

It's a gravity beam in function. Deal with it.

They're literally the same thing.

Originally posted by Psychotron
It's a gravity beam in function. Deal with it.

They're literally the same thing.

You want to base your arguments on fallacies, that's up to you.

Carol stomps DCEU Superman, deal with it.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You want to base your arguments on fallacies, that's up to you.

Carol stomps DCEU Superman, deal with it.

What's the fallacy, exactly? I don't care what you want to call it, the beam increased gravity on screen.

Not according to feats.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Giving attributes without movie backup nor scientific backup.

Going through a Black hole in deep space》》》》》》anything Superman has ever dream about.

Except we saw the gravity effect on screen.

Too bad for you that Superman dealt with a black hole in MoS.

We certainly saw how it affected Lois.

Originally posted by Psychotron
Except we saw the gravity effect on screen.

Too bad for you that Superman dealt with a black hole in MoS.

By affecting the Earth's core, not by being gravity itself.

A small Black Hole insignificant to the likes of the one Marvel went through. Keep up with the fallacies, meanwhile Marvel is beating Superman all over the place

Originally posted by FrothByte
I rewatched their fight, can't find the scene you're describing. Please post a link.

check 2:59

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You can call it as you wish, doesn't mean that's what it is.

Black hole>>>>>> Singularity



Thor's durability and strength feats>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Diana.

I honestly find it hilarious that you fail to realize that the MCU is in a another level of strength!

Hulk moving Surtur>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Anything Superman has ever portrayed.

I suggest you hit the cinema sometime

Thor's durability feats being greater than WWs is irrelevant. It's about whether Thor's relevant durability feats are greater than Superman's, since that is who was headbutt by WW headbutt.

Also WW headbutt to Superman can be seen as a greater strength feat than any of Thor's feats. Therefore she can be stronger than him by that very feat.

Hulk moving Surtur? You how big Hulk was in comparison to Surtur? Hulks downward momentum did that. Otherwise explain why all other hits on Surtur didn't do anything? Not even make him flinch. Hulk was hitting Surtur with all his might and did not move him a millimeter.

Originally posted by h1a8
Also WW headbutt to Superman can be seen as a greater strength feat than any of Thor's feats. Therefore she can be stronger than him by that very feat.

LOL!!!!!!

Originally posted by h1a8
check 2:59

Still don't see it. You claimed Clark was less affected by Namek's punch than Diana's headbutt. Well, pretty sure getting hit strong enough to have your torso smack on the ground and break concrete is not being "less bothered" than simply getting your head snapped back.

WW headbutt feat is better than all of Thors feats? You never ceases to surprise me

It's what the movie showed.

I'll happily BZ you on whether or not Lois was injured by the singularity.

Originally posted by Surtur
The fact Superman survived at all exposure that up close to the beam is a huge feat.



Hmmm, I agree it was bigger and probably had better guns. What's that got to do with flying through it? I'm not aware that either ship has much in the way of durability feats. What reason do you have to say the hull of the ship Thanos had would be more difficult to fly through?

Naw, the terraformer was planet busting level, Superman swam through the Death Star laser.

Originally posted by h1a8
Thor's durability feats being greater than WWs is irrelevant. It's about whether Thor's relevant durability feats are greater than Superman's, since that is who was headbutt by WW headbutt.

Also WW headbutt to Superman can be seen as a greater strength feat than any of Thor's feats. Therefore she can be stronger than him by that very feat.

Hulk moving Surtur? You how big Hulk was in comparison to Surtur? Hulks downward momentum did that. Otherwise explain why all other hits on Surtur didn't do anything? Not even make him flinch. Hulk was hitting Surtur with all his might and did not move him a millimeter.

What a massive fallacy.

Hulk swaying Surtur is a greater strength feat than any strength feat portrayed by JL Superman, regardless of how it happened.

Hulk's strength 》Superman. We debate based on movie feats, and Hulk's got the greater here.

Surtur barely damaged the surrounding area, his power isn't even comparable to the planet busting world devastators.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
What a massive fallacy.

Hulk swaying Surtur is a greater strength feat than any strength feat portrayed by JL Superman, regardless of how it happened.

Hulk's strength 》Superman. We debate based on movie feats, and Hulk's got the greater here.

But Hulk failed to move him using strength. Therefore Surtur was moved by Hulk's downward momentum (not strength).

Lol!!!!!!

Originally posted by FrothByte
One day you'll learn a little bit about fighting, then you'll realize how utterly ridiculous you sound.
That's not a rebuttal.
I win the debate

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
By affecting the Earth's core, not by being gravity itself.

A small Black Hole insignificant to the likes of the one Marvel went through. Keep up with the fallacies, meanwhile Marvel is beating Superman all over the place

The core affects the magnetic field of the Earth, not gravity. The beam increased gravity by linking with the kryptonian ship over Metropolis.

A black hole is a black hole.

Uninjured Lois is an uninjured Lois

Originally posted by h1a8
But Hulk failed to move him using strength. Therefore Surtur was moved by Hulk's downward momentum (not strength).

Hulk hardly went down at all.

He leaped up then fell down (a tiny bit) and 2 handed punched Surtur.

So he moved him either via the momentum of his own leap, or via his punch, or a combination of both.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Uninjured Lois is an uninjured Lois

You'd have a point if we didn't see Superman, debris, the ship and everything else around them being sucked in. For whatever reason Lois wasn't affected, but Superman was and he overpowered it.

Edit: upon re-watching the scene it's clear that the singularity only pulled in things that were "touched" by the phantom zone. So Superman, the Kryptonians, the ship, and the debris hit by the gravity beam. Lois was in free fall, while everything else was being pulled in, because she hadn't interacted with the zone or its energies. Case closed.

^ When Was Superman touched by the Phantom Zone? Also do we see the singularity pull on him?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ When Was Superman touched by the Phantom Zone? Also do we see the singularity pull on him?

He was standing under the gravity beam, remember? Also, he traveled through the Phantom Zone as a baby to get to the Earth. His ship had a phantom zone drive.

Yes, you can see its energies ripple across his face when he's trying to break free from it.

Originally posted by Psychotron
You'd have a point if we didn't see Superman, debris, the ship and everything else around them being sucked in. For whatever reason Lois wasn't affected, but Superman was and he overpowered it.

Edit: upon re-watching the scene it's clear that the singularity only pulled in things that were "touched" by the phantom zone. So Superman, the Kryptonians, the ship, and the debris hit by the gravity beam. Lois was in free fall, while everything else was being pulled in, because she hadn't interacted with the zone or its energies. Case closed.

Since when do singularities pick and choose?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Hulk hardly went down at all.

He leaped up then fell down (a tiny bit) and 2 handed punched Surtur.

So he moved him either via the momentum of his own leap, or via his punch, or a combination of both.
The following punches did absolutely nothing. Therefore it wasn't too much the strength involved but the momentum of Hulk.

Originally posted by h1a8
The following punches did absolutely nothing. Therefore it wasn't too much the strength involved but the momentum of Hulk.


No because Surtur was obviously braced for the following punches.

In any case ive already explained the momentum was from Hulks own leap.

Unless you beleive we could drop anything on Surtur and hed fall over like that.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
No because Surtur was obviously braced for the following punches.

In any case ive already explained the momentum was from Hulks own leap.

Unless you beleive we could drop anything on Surtur and hed fall over like that. He wasn't shown to brace. Hulk punches were just that of an insect. And bracing doesn't make someone not move ANY distance (not even a millimeter).

Since the MCU stated they were able too, do you have a quote from the DCEU movie that states singularities can pick and choose what to affect?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Since the MCU stated they were able too, do you have a quote from the DCEU movie that states singularities can pick and choose what to affect? Silent are you serious with this argument? In other words, are you seriously downplaying the singularity because Lois wasn't injured? Or you just messing around?

Originally posted by h1a8
Silent are you serious with this argument? In other words, are you seriously downplaying the singularity because Lois wasn't injured? Or you just messing around?

Two people were involved in the feat, either it counts for both or it doesn't count for either.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Two people were involved in the feat, either it counts for both or it doesn't count for either. So you are serious. Good to know.

You know that nearly every feat can be discredited due to incorrect science principles by writers?

It was understood that Superman protected Lois from the effects with his body. Same thing happened in comics, Superman Shields everyone from a singularity with his hands. In movies, doing such things don't violate the suspension of disbelief.

You saw Superman straining and yelling to break free of the pull. You saw his face losing its physical integrity and on the verge of separating into pieces. That alone proves that there were insane pulling forces acting on Superman due to Superman's level of strength and durability.

Originally posted by h1a8
So you are serious. Good to know.

You know that nearly every feat can be discredited due to incorrect science principles by writers?

It was understood that Superman protected Lois from the effects with his body. Same thing happened in comics, Superman Shields everyone from a singularity with his hands. In movies, doing such things don't violate the suspension of disbelief.

You saw Superman straining and yelling to break free of the pull. You saw his face losing its physical integrity. That alone proves that there were insane pulling forces acting on Superman due to Superman's level of strength and durability.

We can easily get a mod ruling, I'd love to see your argument for why feats that involve multiple people should only count for one of them.

Originally posted by Silent Master
We can easily get a mod ruling, I'd love to see your argument for why feats that involve multiple people should only count for one of them.

So basically there was no great force acting on Superman although we see him straining and yelling against the pull (given Superman's level of strength) ? Although we see his face on the verge of losing its integrity (given Superman's level of durability)?

All because the suspension of disbelief doesn't cover a superhuman with fictional makeup to shield someone from the effects of this force?


You are the biggest troll on the site.

Originally posted by h1a8
So basically there was no great force acting on Superman although we see him straining and yelling against the pull (given Superman's level of strength) ? Although we see his face on the verge of losing its integrity (given Superman's level of durability)?

All because the suspension of disbelief doesn't cover a superhuman with fictional makeup to shield someone from the effects of this force?


You are the biggest troll on the site.

Both were subjected to the same force, so either it counts for both or it doesn't.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Both were subjected to the same force, so either it counts for both or it doesn't.

Both weren't subject to the same force. Superman shielded her with his body under the suspension of disbelief.
Otherwise that would make Lois astronomically more durable than Superman since she wasnt losing any physical integrity.

Both were subjected to the same force, so either it counts for both or it doesn't.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Both were subjected to the same force, so either it counts for both or it doesn't.

I stated that there were not subjected to the same force for the reasons I pointed out. You just basically ignored it without addressing what I said at all and restated that they were.

I'm done with it. You can troll someone else.

You don't get to decide what counts and what doesn't.

Originally posted by h1a8
But Hulk failed to move him using strength. Therefore Surtur was moved by Hulk's downward momentum (not strength).

Momentum produced by his body. Superman has no similar feat, ergo he loses.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Momentum produced by his body. Superman has no similar feat, ergo he loses. Momentum falling =/= strength. It was his legs that made the jump. Thanos can't jump like that. Therefore Hulk's legs are stronger than Thanos. Therefore, Hulk jumping has no bearing on how hard Thanos headbutts.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Since when do singularities pick and choose?

Since when does a Phantom Zone exist?

Originally posted by Psychotron
Since when does a Phantom Zone exist?

Oh, then by all means provide the quote from the movie that states singularities pick and choose.

Originally posted by h1a8
Momentum falling =/= strength. It's was his legs than made the jump. Thanos can't jump like that. Therefore Hulk's legs are stronger than Thanos.

Lol, the distance travelled by Hulk is insignifcant to cause such momentum! Which means Hulk caused such momentum!

Thanos outpowered Hulk, which means he is just as strong or stronger, and CM was standing toe to toe with Thanos!

CM has the adv. against Clark.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Lol, the distance travelled by Hulk is insignifcant to cause such momentum! Which means Hulk caused such momentum!

Thanos outpowered Hulk, which means he is just as strong or stronger, and CM was standing toe to toe with Thanos!

CM has the adv. against Clark.

Hulk used his legs to create the momentum (along with gravity when he was falling). Hulk's legs are stronger than Thanos. Hulk's arms are weak as hell as they didn't budge Surtur. Thanos overpowered Hulk's arms, not his legs.


Lastly, characters operate at high and low. Gladiator busted a planet before. Doesn't mean that he's using planet busting power everytime he punches someone. You can't equate Hulk's best feats with all of his other showings. He operates at much lower levels most of the time. Therefore, overpowering Hulk when he is operating at a lower level does not mean that you are exerting the force of Hulk's greatest feat.

Superman lifted tectonic plates off scene and pulled against a singularity that was in the verge of breaking him into pieces.

H1 has a point, that as far as we know Thanos doesnt have the leg strength/power to propel himself at their same sort of speeds and heights that Hulk does.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
H1 has a point, that as far as we know Thanos doesnt have the leg strength/power to propel himself at their same sort of speeds and heights that Hulk does.

Or he just hasn't needed to yet. This was a common complaint about Thor before, about how if he was close to Hulk in strength, why does he never leapt about? This was fixed in Ragnarok when we do finally see him jumping around. Not quite to Hulk's extent but enough to know that he has some good leg strength.

Another explanation could be that Thanos is simply denser and heavier than Hulk.

Originally posted by FrothByte
One day you'll learn a little bit about fighting, then you'll realize how utterly ridiculous you sound.

Not to pile on here but he has a point. The concrete is like tissue paper to these guys so it breaking around them means very little. Imagine this, someone pushes you in the chest causing you to stumble and maybe fall backwards vs them headbutting you in the face. The headbutt might not knock you over but it is likely to cause more damage. That's what the two blows look like when compared side to side. WW's attack seemed to bother Clark much more than that shot from Nam which seemed to push him down but not really affect him

Originally posted by juggerman
Not to pile on here but he has a point. The concrete is like tissue paper to these guys so it breaking around them means very little. Imagine this, someone pushes you in the chest causing you to stumble and maybe fall backwards vs them headbutting you in the face. The headbutt might not knock you over but it is likely to cause more damage. That's what the two blows look like when compared side to side. WW's attack seemed to bother Clark much more than that shot from Nam which seemed to push him down but not really affect him

Yeah... I'm pretty sure Namek didn't just "push" Superman. Let's not pretend that Namek simply caused Superman to trip or something. Bottom line is, a punch that knocks you down is a more devastating punch than one that rocks your head back. But... adrenaline and the amount of threat also has something to do with it.

I've been punched in the face before and I was still able to continue moving without a hitch. In comparison, I had an ex-gf who slapped me and it took me a second or two to recover. Why? It wasn't because her slap was more painful than the punch. It was because

1. It took me completely by surprise and
2. Because she wasn't getting ready for another blow, and so my subconscious knew I could take my time because there was no continuous threat looming.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Yeah... I'm pretty sure Namek didn't just "push" Superman. Let's not pretend that Namek simply caused Superman to trip or something. Bottom line is, a punch that knocks you down is a more devastating punch than one that rocks your head back. But... adrenaline and the amount of threat also has something to do with it.

I've been punched in the face before and I was still able to continue moving without a hitch. In comparison, I had an ex-gf who slapped me and it took me a second or two to recover. Why? It wasn't because her slap was more painful than the punch. It was because

1. It took me completely by surprise and
2. Because she wasn't getting ready for another blow, and so my subconscious knew I could take my time because there was no continuous threat looming.

I wasn't trying to say Nam-Ek didn't punch him, just that it didn't seem to bother him as much as WW did. And the punch didn't really knock him down as he was already down.

Most every shot from a Kryptonian to another sends them flying without much damage. But WW's shot did rock him. Maybe Nam's hit wasn't at full power but it's pretty clear to see the effects were different

Superman was mid fight both times so I don't think it's likely he wasn't expecting to get hit

Lois Kryptonian level durability confirmed

Originally posted by juggerman
I wasn't trying to say Nam-Ek didn't punch him, just that it didn't seem to bother him as much as WW did. And the punch didn't really knock him down as he was already down.

Most every shot from a Kryptonian to another sends them flying without much damage. But WW's shot did rock him. Maybe Nam's hit wasn't at full power but it's pretty clear to see the effects were different

Superman was mid fight both times so I don't think it's likely he wasn't expecting to get hit

Superman was fighting two opponents against Nam and Faora whereas he was only fighting WW and he had her locked in his grip. Pretty sure the first scenario would be a far more threatening position.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Superman was fighting two opponents against Nam and Faora whereas he was only fighting WW and he had her locked in his grip. Pretty sure the first scenario would be a far more threatening position.

He was fighting 4 opponents in Justice League. Flash, Aquaman, Cyborg and Wonder Woman. I won't add Batman as he showed up later. I think Faora and Nam were the bigger threats but I think he would be more expectant of a blow from an opponent standing right in front of his than in a melee with two people and he may not know when the next strike is coming from. Nam would more likely catch him by surprise than Diana in their respective scenarios

Originally posted by carthage
Lois Kryptonian level durability confirmed

That is their argument, yes.

Originally posted by juggerman
He was fighting 4 opponents in Justice League. Flash, Aquaman, Cyborg and Wonder Woman. I won't add Batman as he showed up later. I think Faora and Nam were the bigger threats but I think he would be more expectant of a blow from an opponent standing right in front of his than in a melee with two people and he may not know when the next strike is coming from. Nam would more likely catch him by surprise than Diana in their respective scenarios

Nah, Faora and Namek had already proven that they could hurt him at that point. They could also move fast enough to keep up with him. The JL just don't pose the same level of threat period.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Nah, Faora and Namek had already proven that they could hurt him at that point. They could also move fast enough to keep up with him. The JL just don't pose the same level of threat period.

I agree on that but there still is evidence that WW's headbutt did more to Superman than that specific punch from Nam-Ek

Originally posted by juggerman
I agree on that but there still is evidence that WW's headbutt did more to Superman than that specific punch from Nam-Ek

Actually I just re-watched the scene on a proper TV. Looks like Namek actually punched Superman in the chest. H1's claim was that Namek's punch to Clark's face hurt him less than Diana's headbutt to the face. Seeing as that's apparently incorrect, there's no need for me to continue debating this angle. A hit to the face is generally a more painful hit that a hit to the chest.

Like what?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Oh, then by all means provide the quote from the movie that states singularities pick and choose.

I don't have to. The movie shows it. Otherwise feel free to explain why Lois was in free fall while everything else, including debris from the ground hundreds of feet beneath her, was being sucked in. Also, explain why she isn't visually affected by the singularity like Superman.

No, that's your headcanon to explain the scene. not something the movie actually said.

It's not my fault you need to be spoon fed.

Originally posted by Psychotron
I don't have to. The movie shows it. Otherwise feel free to explain why Lois was in free fall while everything else, including debris from the ground hundreds of feet beneath her, was being sucked in. Also, explain why she isn't visually affected by the singularity like Superman.

Lol. Why or how would a singularity choose not to hurt her? That is such reaching. Literally makes zero sense but ok.

Anything to make sure Supes wins

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Lol. Why or how would a singularity choose not to hurt her? That is such reaching. Literally makes zero sense but ok.

Anything to make sure Supes wins

Exactly.

Originally posted by h1a8
Momentum falling =/= strength. It was his legs that made the jump. Thanos can't jump like that. Therefore Hulk's legs are stronger than Thanos. Therefore, Hulk jumping has no bearing on how hard Thanos headbutts.

Damn, your understanding over physics is basic!

The amount of momentum required to move someone like Surtur would take more than just a couple hundreds of falling distance!

Which means the energy was produced by Hulk!

If Hulk's legs were stronger than Thanos, Thanos would have never been able to stand toe to toe with him!

Originally posted by Silent Master
Exactly.



Not even trying to be a dick but that sounds like some H1 special right there

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Lol. Why or how would a singularity choose not to hurt her? That is such reaching. Literally makes zero sense but ok.

Anything to make sure Supes wins

Okay, explain why Lois was unaffected by it. Go ahead, I'll wait.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Lol. Why or how would a singularity choose not to hurt her? That is such reaching. Literally makes zero sense but ok.

Anything to make sure Supes wins Watch the movie, she was unnaturally unaffected by that singularity.

The same reason Madison from Godzilla: KOTM didn't die when a 3 headed golden, 150,000 ton space dragon that shoots gravity beams didn't die despite being in positions and mere feet away from energy attacks that levelled skyscrapers.

Plot

But please back up your claims that not only was the singularity intelligent enough to decide who to hurt, please explain why it had a soft spot in it's dark heart for Lois Lane. I will wait. I bet it takes you a lot longer to answer that than it did me

Exactly.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander

If Hulk's legs were stronger than Thanos, Thanos would have never been able to stand toe to toe with him!


How do you figure? Its not like Hulk is a kick boxer.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
How do you figure? Its not like Hulk is a kick boxer.

Thanos would have had an extremely hard time pushing him around.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Exactly.

Wasn't Hulk pushing against Thanos? We did saw Hulk pushing against Thanos, but it really didn't have much of an effect on him, therefore we can say that the power difference (at least leg wise) between both isn't significant.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Thanos would have had an extremely hard time pushing him around.


Surely that would be dependent on upper body strength as well.

Also Thor has smacked Hulk around without a problem. But clearly cant leap the way Hulk can.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Surely that would be dependent on upper body strength as well.

Also Thor has smacked Hulk around without a problem. But clearly cant leap the way Hulk can.

Not really no. I mean, sure upper body strength plays a big part in a shoving match, but any accomplished wrestler will tell you a good deal of it comes from leg strength. Had Thanos not had leg strength to at least be in Hulk's strength range then he would have completely folded under Hulk's push.

As for Thor, we've seen him leap great distances during the escape from Sakaar. Maybe not as far as Hulk leaps but then I think it was clear that Thor was never quite as strong as Hulk.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Not really no. I mean, sure upper body strength plays a big part in a shoving match, but any accomplished wrestler will tell you a good deal of it comes from leg strength. Had Thanos not had leg strength to at least be in Hulk's strength range then he would have completely folded under Hulk's push.

As for Thor, we've seen him leap great distances during the escape from Sakaar. Maybe not as far as Hulk leaps but then I think it was clear that Thor was never quite as strong as Hulk.

Thor and Valkyries leaps were every bit as impressive as Hilks except for the Surtur leap.

Thor flies,wtf would he jump around for?

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Thor and Valkyries leaps were every bit as impressive as Hilks except for the Surtur leap.

Thor flies,wtf would he jump around for?

No one else in the MCU can leap even 1/10 of what Hulk can.

Thanos would be unable to overpower Hulk if his legs were weaker. All the power in the body comes from the legs, even punching power. Any real athlete would tell you that.

Originally posted by Psychotron
Thanos would be unable to overpower Hulk if his legs were weaker. All the power in the body comes from the legs, even punching power. Any real athlete would tell you that.

But yet Thanos can't leap the distance Hulk can.


The maximum frictional force on Hulks feet is equal to his weight times the coefficient of static friction (between 0.1 and 1.5). Therefore if Thanos weighs more than Hulk (especially with his armor on) and can exert more than 1.5 times the weight of Hulk then he can push Hulk back against Hulk's will no matter how strong Hulk is.

Originally posted by h1a8
But yet Thanos can't leap the distance Hulk can.


The maximum frictional force on Hulks feet is equal to his weight times the coefficient of static friction (between 0.1 and 1.5). Therefore if Thanos weighs more than Hulk (especially with his armor on) and can exert more than 1.5 times the weight of Hulk then he can push Hulk back against Hulk's will no matter how strong Hulk is.

So? Jumping strength isn't the only measure of leg strength. Powerlifters can't jump like basketball players, doesn't mean their legs are weaker. Stop throwing red herrings around. Fact remains that if Thanos' legs were somehow massively weaker than Hulk's then he wouldn't have been able to stand his ground against Hulk.

Originally posted by FrothByte
So? Jumping strength isn't the only measure of leg strength. Powerlifters can't jump like basketball players, doesn't mean their legs are weaker. Stop throwing red herrings around. Fact remains that if Thanos' legs were somehow massively weaker than Hulk's then he wouldn't have been able to stand his ground against Hulk.


All of this is moot since Thanos can push Hulk back by simply weighing more than Hulk and being able to exert at least 1.5 times the weight of Hulk, no matter how strong Hulk is.

But to correct you, Powerlifters are heavier.
I studied the physics of jumping years ago. Distance covered is strongly and positively related to pressing strength. Correlation tests where done using a scale. Jumpers jumped off a scale. The final scale reading along with the the jumpers height (measured from a belt around their weight) was recorded.

I can predict anyone's jumping height (to within 10% error) simply by knowing
1) Their mass
2) maximum leg press strength
3) initial crouching distance (measure from a belt)
4) height (measured from a belt while on standing their tippy toes).

Originally posted by h1a8
All of this is moot since Thanos can push Hulk back by simply weighing more than Hulk and being able to exert at least 1.5 times the weight of Hulk, no matter how strong Hulk is.

But to correct you, Powerlifters are heavier.
I studied the physics of jumping years ago. Distance covered is strongly and positively related to pressing strength. Correlation tests where done using a scale. Jumpers jumped off a scale. The final scale reading along with the the jumpers height (measured from a belt around their weight) was recorded.

I can predict anyone's jumping height (to within 10% error) simply by knowing
1) Their mass
2) maximum leg press strength
3) initial crouching distance (measure from a belt)
4) height (measured from a belt while on standing their tippy toes).

No dumb dumb. Your weight and being able to exert 1.5x the weight of your opponent are not the only factors to consider in a shoving match. This statement is so darn stupid that I'm not even going to bother to explain why it's stupid. Treating a person's strength as a non-factor in a pushing contest is just plain dumb.

And if your theory about jumping is correct, what you're saying is that basketball players for sure have stronger legs than Muay Thai fighters or sprinters correct?