KMC Forums - DC versus Marvel: A Multiversal War

Home » Comic Book Forums » Comic Book 'Versus' Forum » DC versus Marvel: A Multiversal War

DC versus Marvel: A Multiversal War
Started by: masterbruce

Forum Jump:

Pages (8): « First ... « 6 7 [8]

Last Thread Next Thread

Author

Thread

Estacado
Legendary

Gender: Male
Location: Soul Society

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mr Master
This is glorious,

Thanks for shutting down the Parallax hype,

it's a Universe he destroys and recreates, NOT a Multi-verse.

Have you missed the one Universe won't be enough part?

__________________

Bankai.

Dec 8th, 2006 12:02 AM

Click here to Send Estacado a Private Message

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
If you take away those artifacts, then you also have to take away the artifacts that nvr listed, which means that there are still Marvel cosmics unaccounted for on Mr. M's list. So Marvel still takes it.

I left out the Artifacts, weapons and power sources in my list,

then nvr threw in a load of said such, so I added our said such.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:02 AM

Click here to Send Mr Master a Private Message

darthgoober
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Purgatory

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Galan007
Whatever ALL if DC is, then thats what he destroyed..

He then began making his own universe in its place

Wait, I thought that before Infinite Crisis, DC was still a single universe?

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:04 AM

Click here to Send darthgoober a Private Message

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by juggernaut66666
Have you missed the one Universe won't be enough part?

No I didn't,

did you miss when he say's "MAYBE ONE Universe won't be enough"

AND?

He doesn't act on that, I read all those scans.

Parallax destroyed ONE Universe, and re-created ONE Universe.

End of Story.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:04 AM

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Galan007
Whatever ALL if DC is, then thats what he destroyed..

He then began making his own universe in its place

ONE Universe is right.

He destroyed ONE Universe, and created ONE Universe.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:05 AM

King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mr Master
I think not.

It's true.

THOTU is the biggest rump card on marvels sidde, and the source equals it.

Also, stop your semantic arguments about Entropy and "Inert Uniformity", and learn some Thermodynamics.

And don't say it's not relevant. Thermodynamics is VERY relavent to the meaning of Entropy.

Look Up heat death, the ultimate form of Entropy in all systems as well. It's nothing if not orderly.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:06 AM

Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message

King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mr Master
No I didn't,

did you miss when he say's "MAYBE ONE Universe won't be enough"

AND?

He doesn't act on that, I read all those scans.

Parallax destroyed ONE Universe, and re-created ONE Universe.

End of Story.

But he could have destroyed more.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:07 AM

darthgoober
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Purgatory

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
It's true.

THOTU is the biggest rump card on marvels sidde, and the source equals it.

Also, stop your semantic arguments about Entropy and "Inert Uniformity", and learn some Thermodynamics.

And don't say it's not relevant. Thermodynamics is VERY relavent to the meaning of Entropy.

Look Up heat death, the ultimate form of Entropy in all systems as well. It's nothing if not orderly.

Yes, but if we are going by EVERY being that's ever existed, then Marvel has the HOTU AND TOAA.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:08 AM

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
It's true.

THOTU is the biggest rump card on marvels sidde, and the source equals it.

Also, stop your semantic arguments about Entropy and "Inert Uniformity", and learn some Thermodynamics.

And don't say it's not relevant. Thermodynamics is VERY relavent to the meaning of Entropy.

Look Up heat death, the ultimate form of Entropy in all systems as well. It's nothing if not orderly.

Dude, stop getting yourself dizzy with circles.

And learn the simple meaning of uncommon terms.

Entropy is the embodiment of RANDOMNESS.

INERT Uniformity, means

LACKING UNIFORMITY!

If this disagrees with you and you don't like it,

too bad.

__________________

Last edited by Mr Master on Dec 8th, 2006 at 12:17 AM

Dec 8th, 2006 12:09 AM

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
But he could have destroyed more.

Could have, should have, would have.

Where does it say he could have destroyed more?

That's your unsupported opinion.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:11 AM

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
Yes, but if we are going by EVERY being that's ever existed, then Marvel has the HOTU AND TOAA.

Even if we delete TOAA and the Presence.

Which we should, otherwise this goes nowhere,

Marvel takes this in the Cosmic department.

Especially now with the revelation of Parallax's Feat.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:13 AM

King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mr Master
Dude, stop getting yourself dizzy with circles.

And learn the simple meaning of uncommon terms.

Entropy is the embodiment of RANDOMNESS.

INERT Uniformity, means

LACKING UNIFORMITY!

If this disagrees with you and you don't like it,

too bad.

To bad that's not what inert means.

I looked it up.

I looked through 3 dictionary's, and every single one said that Inert means powerless or motionless.

And Now I see what you did. You looked at the sentence "Lacking Motion" and took out the "Lacking" part.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:23 AM

Mr Master
Junior Member

Gender: Male
Location: somewhere within time & space

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
To bad that's not what inert means.

I looked it up.

I looked through 3 dictionary's, and every single one said that Inert means powerless or motionless.

And Now I see what you did. You looked at the sentence "Lacking Motion" and took out the "Lacking" part.

So what does that mean in your head KK?

Please me, enlighten me with your discovery.

Inert:

"Lacking the ability or strength to move"

"Lacking vigor"

"chemically inactive"

Now take the phrase INERT UNIFORMITY, and tell me, how do you summize this to mean a promotion of UNIFORMITY instead of the OPPOSITE?

Jeez, you guys...

let me not say anything, just let me see your response.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:34 AM

King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

Unmoving Uniformity.

Well, THAT certainly isn't chaotic in the slightest.

If it's uniform and doesn't change, then that's the most orderly system possible.

__________________

Dec 8th, 2006 12:36 AM