__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Not all Surtur is capable of destroying a galaxy. Just because he did it once doesn't make it his natural power level. Otherwise everytime Gladiator hits someone it's planet destroying punches. Otherwise everytime Surfer blasts someone it's with planet destroying force. I can go on and on.
And being caught off guard has nothing to do with it. Loki can easily catch Thor off guard and fail like hell to turn him into snow, same goes for any high herald or trans level being not weak to magic. Hell Odin can be sleep and Loki can't change him to snow.
Superman is a lot stronger and more durable than Thor yet HP DD breaks him up with ease. So it's fair to say Superman can take a punch or two from Bor.
ABC logic is faulty since character's flucuate in power from comic to comic and you are not considering rock paper scissors (it's how you beat B that proves you can beat C).
Lastly, you are not considering Superman's speed and freeze breath. Those alone renders this fight won on a majority scale.
The fact that you use certain people at their strongest and anything else that goes against your argument, you call it PIS or a low showing. You have no rights to determine whats legit or not. Accept the fts and move on.
__________________
On ignore list: Darksaint and Stilt
Last edited by carver9 on Mar 28th, 2013 at 06:08 AM
I don't use anyone at their strongest. I stopped doing that a long time ago. Otherwise I would still argue that Superman is over a million times stronger than Thor. Otherwise I would consistently argue Superman lifting infinity.
Surtur destroyed a galaxy once in his existence and yet it's a phucking standard? Please. If Superman did have only 1 feat then I would not use it as a standard. If Surtur destroyed galaxies on a regular basis (or it wasn't a one time thing) then I would agree.
Also you are not understanding that the shift of power was made a long time ago. Skyfathers are no longer galaxy busters. Galactus level beings are.
I don't use it in the sense that everytime he hits someone it's with the same force. Or that everytime we see him in a comic then he is at that level.
You have to understand people's slick arguments Carv.
igniz implied that since Surtur once destroyed a galaxy then everytime someone matches him in a comic then they must be also galaxy strong (by ABC logic). Or better yet, everytime we see Surtur in a comic then he is automatically operating at galaxy busting power. Thus any character that matches him is also a galaxy buster, no matter what. Do you see the problem?
Since when? When did this shift take place? I was under the impression it was like any other tier and simply the power simply varied from skyfather to skyfather.
Also Surtur not consistently busting galaxies is a point to make but your saying it as if it's concrete evidence that that feat was some sort of peak and not within his ability to do again. As far as iv seen even when portrayed as threats characters on that level hardly perform such feats more than once or twice. Make verbal threats or have statements of their ability to do so mentioned sure but outside of Galactus (the planet eating plot device) and the anti monitor (you know what he did) hardly really do what were told is well within their ability to do so.
Skyfathers have fought many times since then and no more galaxy busting was done. But anyway that argument of mine was weak. My strong argument is that it is faulty to compare a character to another character's highest feat just because they matched them.
"Strength feats" is plural,
Surtur destroying a galaxy is singular.
Remember in my last post I said if Surtur did stuff like that more often (not a one time thing) then there would be no problem with it.
Also you failed to understand my point.
It's faulty to say that since character A has destroyed a galaxy and character B has matched them in another appearance then character B has the power of destroying a galaxy too.
For example, I can say that since Gladiator once destroyed a planet and yet Colossus matched him then Colossus can also destroy a planet as well. See the faultiness?
In the "Everything Burns" arc, after Thor destroyed Surtur's body, the fire that poured out of him was enough to burn "all of reality".
In the issue it was stated by Thor that "all of the fire of creation had been released when i killed Surtur".Everything that burned was burning with the very [essence] of him and his infernal forge (the same forge he used to create the twilight sword and destroy Beta Ray Bill's galaxy). The fire that clears the slate and allows for new growth". Thor needed someone to harness that all that power and the only person that could him with it was Odin".
Surtur's depiction as a high sky father capable of destroying galaxies has been pretty consistent over his limited appearances over the years.
Besides, if Surtur has done it before and that incident is integral to Beta Ray Bill's origin, there's no way to waive it away.
Last edited by deathlife on Mar 28th, 2013 at 07:21 AM
I'm not claiming that Surtur isn't a skyfather level being.
That's not the point. Surtur has fought plenty of times in comics and has had plenty of appearances. He wasn't always using galaxy busting force. He busted a galaxy once, that's it.
My point is that if a character shown a feat in comics then that doesn't mean everytime we see them in a comic they are operating at that level. Otherwise that would open Pandora's box and lead to many absurdities.
It is faulty to use the logic,
"Since Surtur is capable of destroying Galaxies and X character matched him then X character is also capable of destroying Galaxies." I can use that same argument for anyone I want and create absurdities everywhere.
Well I understand what your trying to say but what I think has gotten obscured here is your point of bringing this up in this thread. It's quickly turned into ppl simply seeing you rambling insanity at a sky father...soo.. Could you please tell me how this point of 'A beating B doesn't make A = B' holds meaning here in this thread? (perhaps we can get things back on track since you have explained the mechanic to your point)
It started by Igniz using the logic to compare OF Thor with that of a power that can destroy a galaxy (Surtur). I rebutted that not all Surtur is capable of destroying a galaxy. This is because character's power levels fluctuate from comic to comic. For example, Firelord is capable of destroying a city or possibly a planet yet Spider-man beat him. It's PIS but nonetheless the point still stands. Firelord is not always operating at planet or city destroying levels.
Carver then said, that I'm contradicting myself because I use the highest showings but not allowing another to do the same. Carver clearly misunderstood my point as I wasn't suggesting that you can't use a characters highest showings in a forum but rather I was suggesting that everytime you see a character IN A COMIC doesn't mean they are operating at a their highest levels.
Then different posters started misconstruing the argument into something slightly different. I was just rolling with the punches from all angles and it started to appear as rambling.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 27th, 2013 11:08 PM
