which mutants are omega level??

Originally posted by Soljer
Well, a contact isn't necessarily a mutant (as proven).

And a mystic isn't necessarily a mutant(as obvious).

But, by Richards' logic, Earthmover is an omega mutant. 😐.

So, might as well add him to the list.

agreed 😎

😈

Originally posted by Soljer
Well, a contact isn't necessarily a mutant (as proven).

And a mystic isn't necessarily a mutant(as obvious).

But, by Richards' logic, Earthmover is an omega mutant. 😐.

So, might as well add him to the list.

Since the term contact was used to identify a mutant, by a mutant hunting machine, The term refers to mutants.

I have told you guys what you need to get me to agree, instead of wasting your time in a futile effort to make me agree with you, go out and search for that info.

Since the term contact was used to identify non-mutants, by a machine, the term is not exclusive to mutant.

If this thread were "Which contacts are omega level?" you'd be absolutely correct.

However, since it is, in fact, not about contacts, but about mutants....you're shit out of luck.

So your saying Nimrod identified a non-mutant as an Omega Contact? If so show me a scan.

I'm saying that Nimrod identified a non-mutant as a contact. Hence, contact doesn't necessarily mean mutant.

Since, to marvel, the word 'omega' is meaningless without being in the context of 'mutant,' being an 'omega contact' means absolutely dick.

You can't speak for Marvel comics, show me something from them that says it's meaningless, other then that your just wasting both our time.

starhawk, you're arguing points that don't exist. "omega" is not a classification used by marvel. never has been. the only classifications involving the word omega were "omega level mutant" and "class omega contact." those two are clearly not the same series of words, and can very possibly mean different things. your entire argument rests on you interpreting them to mean the same thing, which you cannot prove.

that's just how it is. there is no burden of proof on us, because our argument is basically "two different things are two different things." and from our limited understanding [that "class omega contact" is currently without definition,] ours is the only definite conclusion that can be drawn. you have been unable to prove in any fashion that "omega level mutant" MEANS "class omega contact," but repeated argue that the word being used twice must mean they're the same. that's a supposition. an opinion. a guess. it is not rooted in any fact. it was not written in the comics. it does not exist in canon.

our argument, at its simplest, is that "omega level mutant" is not the same series of words as "class omega contact," and thus cannot be proven to mean the same thing when the latter is without definition. that IS proof positive, because it is based on all established facts at this time.

it's entirely possible that rachel is an omega level mutant. it's entirely possible that nicieza meant to reference claremont's terminology those many years later. but it is not KNOWN that that is the case, and thus, you cannot present it as proof. grow up.

Yes I can, until you show me proof that it isn't the same as the present day classification. We're still circling the drain here.

Originally posted by Starhawk
So your saying Nimrod identified a non-mutant as an Omega Contact? If so show me a scan.

Unless you're trying to claim that the use of the phrase "class ______ contact" had a different meaning in the space of 3 panels, while the use of the word "omega" 15 years apart has the same meaning. Which is actually utterly stupid. Or that the current classification of "omega mutants" can also be applied to non-mutants. Which is equally utterly stupid.

This coupled with the fact that the word Omega has never been used to refer to her again to my knowledge, and never post-2001.

And unless you can provide proof positive that Fabian Nicieza was referring to this one off occurrence 15 years ago, when he coined the term Omega mutant, then your supposition that he might have is baseless and just your opinion and the logical fallacy of negative proof. The onus is on you to provide proof positive of your unsubstantiated claim.

Holy Jesus mother****ing christ!!!!!

IT'S DAVID_RICHARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!dude,i am such a fan.

all im seeing is verbal semantics, rachel is omega deal with it.....even tho the classifiaction was more refined circa early 2000's, I think it's kind of obvious that omega class contact pretty much infers that dude registered her as an omega lvl mutant. seeing as how nimrod was a next gen sentintel and sentinels had the ability to scan mutant DNA.......or it could mean that rachel was the most serious threat in his current location, therefore making that threat "omega", but either way i choose the former...so f **** it she'll always be omega to me😆

"class omega contact" and "omega level mutant" have NEVER been proven to have the same meaning. that is fact. assuming that they do is just that; an assumption. it is based on opinion, it is based on pre-conceived notions. it is not based in canon.

if you don't see how assuming such is logical fallacy, get out of law school.

LOL Manjaro, your making sense man, it's goona cause their earth to go off access, I also think another point is that they refer to her abilities on the marvel website as unlimited.

Originally posted by manjaro
all im seeing is verbal semantics, rachel is omega deal with it.....even tho the classifiaction was more refined circa early 2000's, I think it's kind of obvious that omega class contact pretty much infers that dude registered her as an omega lvl mutant. seeing as how nimrod was a next gen sentintel and sentinels had the ability to scan mutant DNA.......or it could mean that rachel was the most serious threat in his current location, therefore making that threat "omega", but either way i choose the former...so f **** it she'll always be omega to me😆

Saying that the definition of 'Omega mutant' coined by Nicieza in 2001 is a "more refined" but identical classification is unsubstantiated supposition. The rest of your post about what 'Class Omega Contact' "means to Nimrod' is also unsubstantiated supposition.

What's on panel is a classification by Claremont without definition in 1986 that was applicable to both mutants and non-mutants.
What's on panel is a defined classification by Nicieza in 2001 applicable exclusively to mutants.
Thus they are not the same thing, as shown on panel.

Marvel Girl is a mutant with the virtually unlimited telepathic powers, allowing her to read minds, project her thoughts into other minds, stun the minds of others with telepathic mental bolts, and cast psionic illusions such as those she uses to mask her facial tattoos.

that's a direct quote. don't resort to outright lying, please. virtually unlimited does not mean unlimited. virtually unlimited does not mean omega. in fact, it categorically means she's NOT an omega. thanks for proving yourself wrong.

Originally posted by Disappear
that's a direct quote. don't resort to outright lying, please.

In any event it wouldn't make her an Omega anyway.

So you guys are just going to repeat the same opinions over and over again knowing that they have already been addressed? I have told you what you need to show to get me to believe you and you have yet to do it, instead you just think if you say something enough times someone will agree with you. I am telling right now, until you provide me with the proof I have asked for, you can say it a million times and it will have no greater effect now then it did the first time you said it.

you realize, of course, that we've given you several pages of actual, canon FACT that says rachel isn't an omega, but you've given us only several pages of "yes she is" without backing it up or disproving our facts, yes?

you've run out of steam, kid. like i said, just bow out gracefully.

Back on topic:

The officially confirmed 7 Omegas are therefore:
Jean Grey
Iceman (Bobby Drake)
Kid Omega (Quentin Quire)
Mister M (Absolom Mercator)
Franklin Richards
Vulcan (Gabriel Summers)
Elixir (Josh Foley)

[/thread]

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The entire basis of an Omega mutant classification hinges upon the unambiguous and unequivocal labeling by a writer with a context attributed in X-Men Forever. That is the only thing that one can use to call a mutant an Omega mutant. Anything else is supposition. Thus it's rightfully based on linguistic semantics.

Saying that the definition of 'Omega mutant' coined by Nicieza in 2001 is a "more refined" but identical classification is unsubstantiated supposition. The rest of your post about what 'Class Omega Contact' "means to Nimrod' is also unsubstantiated supposition.

What's on panel is a classification by Claremont without definition in 1986 that was applicable to both mutants and non-mutants.
What's on panel is a defined classification by Nicieza in 2001 applicable exclusively to mutants.
Thus they are not the same thing, as shown on panel.

Oooo that was good. I have to agree. 🙂