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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
I asked for proof, so are you going to post any or you just going to keep crying?
__________________ 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.
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.
__________________ 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.
KMC Community Forums
Aug 22nd, 2016 03:37 AM
