The idea that Phoenix is responsible for the creation of Galactus and the abstracts and that they are just the evolved form of humanity from the previous universe (anyone can take a look at Galactus' most recent bio to see that that is still very much the case)Then I guess the Big G's bio is in need of an update. As you can see...no mention of the Phoenix. Oh sure, I'll accept that she created Eternity...but it was Eternity who saved Galan, and transformed him into Galactus.
To give Phoenix the full credit is like giving my mom full credit for my university degree.
Originally posted by Lord SThis was discussed before. . the bio mentioning the phoenix retconed the pictures you showed.
Then I guess the Big G's bio is in need of an update. As you can see...no mention of the Phoenix. Oh sure, I'll accept that she created Eternity...but it was Eternity who saved Galan, and transformed him into Galactus.To give Phoenix the full credit is like giving my mom full credit for my university degree.
Originally posted by CreshoskIncorrect...because 'X-Men Forever' was presented in 2001...what I posted was straight out of the 2003 'Thanos' series...and GS' logic states that whatever is released more recently represents current continuity.
This was discussed before. . the bio mentioning the phoenix retconed the pictures you showed.
Originally posted by Lord SThe Bio that mentions Phoenix was the Fantastic Four handbook. . .
Incorrect...because 'X-Men Forever' was presented in 2001...what I posted was straight out of the 2003 'Thanos' series...and GS' logic states that whatever is released more recently represents current continuity.
circa 2004 or 2005. . . more recent than 2003. . .
Originally posted by CreshoskThe info in that bio seems to be based off of 'X-Men Forever', aka GS' Holy Grail, and therefore is incorrect.
The Bio that mentions Phoenix was the Fantastic Four handbook. . .circa 2004 or 2005. . . more recent than 2003. . .
BTW, last I checked, bios don't mean shit around here. We're supposed to base our arguments on what's presented in the comic books, not bios.
If you want to play that bio game, I could easily link you to one straight from the source (Marvel.com) where no mention is even made of Phoenix.
Originally posted by Lord SDoesn't matter, 200(4)|(5)>2003
The info in that bio seems to be based off of 'X-Men Forever', aka GS' Holy Grail, and therefore is incorrect.
Originally posted by Lord SSome people think that stats are more important than feats, some think that feats are more important that stats, some people think that both should be used.
BTW, last I checked, bios don't mean shit around here. We're supposed to base our arguments on what's presented in the comic books, not bios.
It's obvious that you're using an ad populem attack to discredit a source that invalidates your argument.
Originally posted by Lord SAnd? MArvel.com only seems to have the more well known characters anyway. You'll note that alot of the marvel universe is missing. . . Do you see any abstracts in there?
If you want to play that bio game, I could easily link you to one straight from the source (Marvel.com) where no mention is even made of Phoenix.
Originally posted by CreshoskBrilliant deduction...but it means nothing if the info it's based on in the comics has been invalidated.
Doesn't matter, 200(4)|(5)>2003
Some people think that stats are more important than feats, some think that feats are more important that stats, some people think that both should be used.
Stats and feats are supposed to be based on factual events that occur in the comics...and the 2003 Thanos series shows Eternity saving and transforming Galan into Galactus. The rest is conversation.
It's obvious that you're using an ad populem attack to discredit a source that invalidates your argument.
Again, (for the slow-minded), the 2003 info IN THE COMICS invalidates what was presented in 2001. Your source is based on invalid information, it doesn't need any help from me in losing its credibility.
And? MArvel.com only seems to have the more well known characters anyway. You'll note that alot of the marvel universe is missing. . . Do you see any abstracts in there?
We're not talking about other abstracts, we're talking about Galactus, whose history is presented...and if the Phoenix was truly directly involved with his history, don't you think they'd bother to mention it?
Instead, they refer to the 'sentience of the dying universe', and any Marvel fan with a modicum of knowledge knows they're referring to Eternity...not the promoted 'Johnny Come Lately' entity known as the Phoenix.
Ok ok, so they don't refer to him by name either, but they have a faded pic of him in the background, indicative of the fact that he is the Marvel Universe.
Connect the dots.
Here's a snapshot if you don't believe me.
|
|
|
V
Originally posted by Lord SStill doesn't matter.
Brilliant deduction...but it means nothing if the info it's based on in the comics has been invalidated.
You just want to discard the latest retcon because it doesn't suit you.
Originally posted by Lord SActually some would say that feats are supposed to be based on the stats of Bios and the like.
Stats and feats are supposed to be based on factual events that occur in the comics...and the 2003 Thanos series shows Eternity saving and transforming Galan into Galactus. The rest is conversation.
Originally posted by Lord SAnd the 2004 or 2005 bio invalidates what was presented in 2003.
Again, (for the slow-minded), the 2003 info IN THE COMICS invalidates what was presented in 2001. Your source is based on invalid information, it doesn't need any help from me in losing its credibility.
Originally posted by Lord S
We're not talking about other abstracts, we're talking about Galactus, whose history is presented...and if the Phoenix was truly directly involved with his history, don't you think they'd bother to mention it?Instead, they refer to the 'sentience of the dying universe', and any Marvel fan with a modicum of knowledge knows they're referring to Eternity...not the promoted 'Johnny Come Lately' entity known as the Phoenix.
Ok ok, so they don't refer to him by name either, but they have a faded pic of him in the background, indicative of the fact that he is the Marvel Universe.
Connect the dots.
Here's a snapshot if you don't believe me.
|
|
|
V
Funny how neither Eternity nor Living Tribunal are mentioned on Marvel.com
If they were truly important to the MU you'd think they'd at least mention them.
Heres two snapshots if you don't beleive me:
Originally posted by CreshoskWhy?
Still doesn't matter.
You just want to discard the latest retcon because it doesn't suit you.
Bullshit. Just like you want to discard ACTUAL FACTS that have been presented IN THE COMICS because they don't suit you.
And the 2004 or 2005 bio invalidates what was presented in 2003.
How? Are you on crack? It's a frickin bio! Written by someone who is clearly unaware of what happened in 2003. Bios don't invalidate factual events that occur in the comics...it's the other way around.
Funny how neither Eternity nor Living Tribunal are mentioned on Marvel.com
They've acknowledged Eternity by showing him.
of all the pics gs has posted{and btw they looked like they were scanned to me} i have seen none, humbling LT, nor anyone dominatin eternity{though it might be that eternity is slightly lower than PF now} and all i see again n again is pheonix holdin an infant universe in her hands, u know shes not the only one whose done that.
Originally posted by CreshoskOk, now I understand what you meant by this...it's an attempt to retort my statement about the Phoenix not being mentioned. I didn't mean she didn't have her own bio on Marvel.com...but that she was not mentioned in Galactus' bio, where you'd think she would be, if she were as significant to the Big G's life as you're trying to make us believe.
Funny how neither Eternity nor Living Tribunal are mentioned on Marvel.comIf they were truly important to the MU you'd think they'd at least mention them.
Originally posted by Lord S
Ok, now I understand what you meant by this...it's an attempt to retort my statement about the Phoenix not being mentioned. I didn't mean she didn't have her own bio on Marvel.com...but that she was not mentioned in Galactus' bio, where you'd think she would be, if she were as significant to the Big G's life as you're trying to make us believe.
Lord S you've misunderstood. Phoenixes role in Galactus' creation was depicted in Xmen Adventures issue 12 about a year ago. The events from this series made it into the official handbook making it canon. Galactus' old origin has been retconned its as simple as that.