Non-canon sources are invalid for evidence. With rare exceptions, comics not in continuity such as Elseworlds, What Ifs, or alternate universes are not used for evidence in debates of a particular mainstream character.
A canon source is one that is regarded as being 'in continuity'. In the example of Star Trek; instances from the series and movies can be used, but books are definitely out. Comic book crossovers are usually unusable as they ignore common sense most of the time (DC vs. Marvel is certainly unusable in some cases in our debates!).
This includes JLA/Avengers. Canon or not, people just aren't going to agree on it in most cases. Besides, there should be plenty of other comics with which to make your point.
Comics released strictly online or on web sites will not be considered proof in the Comic Book Versus Forum.
An obscure interview given by someone involved in a story arc is not proof to refute feats. Neither is a random post by a supposed writer on a message board, blogs, tweets, etc. There have been too many of these so called interviews which go against what's shown on panel. Especially when there is no dialogue to refute what's happening on panel. Most writers are clear with the intentions of the plot and story arc.
This principle extends to characters with multiple versions, alternate timelines, etc. Unless specified by the thread starter, only current-version canon feats are allowed.
waste of time and yet you are searching my attention in every thread i post in. hypocritical of you? to tell you the truth, i dont recall you making any significant contribute to the forums, aside of pathetic trolling here and there. like some basement troll
I dont have the scan handy but some Apocalyptian type creatures said Black Adam is stronger than Superman during some type of power reading. During the time this was said, Superman was not at full power due to kryptonite poison (I think) but their statement seemed (imo) to be based primarily on the overall powerset than their current powerset during that time and they had no knowledge of Superman being weakened (and I'm sure that wasnt the writer intention).
The fact that people point to a single showing and reason that if it is definitive or explicit enough it 'proves' anything shows their inexperience.
Yes, it was said that Black Adam was stronger than Superman by one writer in a comic--through a character, but we have little reason to doubt the character was expressing the writer's opinion. But that is not definitive--it's one opinion. Nor would it be definitive if there were direct statements showing Superman was stronger than Adam. There's still a ton of other evidence on both sides of the argument, and there's no one decisive piece. You have to take it all in and do your honest best to see which side of the debate the preponderance of the best evidence lies on.
How does any of that prove Adam is stronger when Superman was shown as holding back?
Not to mention that was an abnormally high showing for Adam and the writer even admitted that she wrote Adam as stronger than Captain Marvel while Adam is explicitly equal to Cap otherwise.
If anything that shows Superman being stronger than regular Black Adam.
Superman wasn't even grabbing him. You can see Adam grab Superman's wrists and then throw him up.
Check that first panel again. Maybe make a red circle around their hands, too.
If you really wanted to use something, you should have used here, where they're grabbing eachother's hands, and Superman is the one who overpowers and punches him:
KMC Community Forums
Jun 15th, 2018 10:09 AM
