Quasar With the UN vs. Reed Richards with the UN

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
You saying the same thing I"m saying. I'm saying they cannot be the same becuz of all the variables. I'm arguing against Galan and Mr. Master who conclude that they are indeed at the same lvl even with all those varying circumstances.

What would have happened if Quasar's Galactus had been the same as Reed's? Also factor in them tring to acheive the same thing. Naturally we can't touch confidence or knowledge of the device.

But it still seems to me that they'd simply wipe each other out and it'd be a stalemate. Reed is not Magus neither is Quasar. Quasar is not a multiverse and neither is Reed.

With too many variables you cannot conclude your research so have to answer either no contest or stalemate to show a lack of bias.

Originally posted by Priest
Actually Galactus during the time of the Infinity Wars was pretty powerful, id say more powerful than the version that was used during th abarax arc.

I say this because Galactus was able to Survive and reform himself his ship Surfer, Nova and Dr. Strange from a blast from Mangus with 5 cosmic cubes. Also Galactus himself comments how mangus underestimate his power.

Another thing to note is Galactus was pretty much on top of his game in the Infinity Gauntlet Saga when he went to fight Thanos w/IG. This is Shorty before the UN insident with Quasar.

You saying that Big G was at his prime during the time of Abarax is kinda speculative, especially since nova was able to damage him heavily.

👆

Originally posted by Creshosk
So you normilize the variables that were different inorder to acheive the results which are true and not the ones you lead them to be.

What would have happened if Quasar's Galactus had been the same as Reed's? Also factor in them tring to acheive the same thing. Naturally we can't touch confidence or knowledge of the device.

But it still seems to me that they'd simply wipe each other out and it'd be a stalemate. Reed is not Magus neither is Quasar. Quasar is not a multiverse and neither is Reed.

With too many variables you cannot conclude your research so have to answer either no contest or stalemate to show a lack of bias.

👆

Dang! again. 😆

Like they say, "you gotta strike when the iron's hot"

Originally posted by Creshosk
So you normilize the variables that were different inorder to acheive the results which are true and not the ones you lead them to be.

What would have happened if Quasar's Galactus had been the same as Reed's? Also factor in them tring to acheive the same thing. Naturally we can't touch confidence or knowledge of the device.

But it still seems to me that they'd simply wipe each other out and it'd be a stalemate. Reed is not Magus neither is Quasar. Quasar is not a multiverse and neither is Reed.

With too many variables you cannot conclude your research so have to answer either no contest or stalemate to show a lack of bias.

There is no way to normalize variables when the variables are not in a controlled envire. To suggest that Reed using the UN to reset the multiverse, which was not even fighting against the Un's powers, as it is actually a creation of the Multi, is in no way a comparison to what quasar only "TRIED" to achieve. Thus saying the incomplete IG is superior to the Multiversal restructing UN is unfounded. Case closed.

Originally posted by Priest
Actually Galactus during the time of the Infinity Wars was pretty powerful, id say more powerful than the version that was used during th abarax arc.

I say this because Galactus was able to Survive and reform himself his ship Surfer, Nova and Dr. Strange from a blast from Mangus with 5 cosmic cubes. Also Galactus himself comments how mangus underestimate his power.

Another thing to note is Galactus was pretty much on top of his game in the Infinity Gauntlet Saga when he went to fight Thanos w/IG. This is Shorty before the UN insident with Quasar.

You saying that Big G was at his prime during the time of Abarax is kinda speculative, especially since nova was able to damage him heavily.

Except During the time of the abraxas arc, big G is now the prime big G and the crux to the salvation of the multiverse. Something not shown or even hinted to in previous appearances.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
Except During the time of the abraxas arc, big G is now the prime big G and the crux to the salvation of the multiverse. Something not shown or even hinted to in previous appearances.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
There is no way to normalize variables when the variables are not in a controlled envire.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
To suggest that Reed using the UN to reset the multiverse, which was not even fighting against the Un's powers, as it is actually a creation of the Multi, is in no way a comparison to what quasar only "TRIED" to achieve. Thus saying the incomplete IG is superior to the Multiversal restructing UN is unfounded. Case closed.

You use a computer to write a fictional novel. I use it to compose music. Mr Master uses it to make a piece of art.

Who is better at using the computer?

Originally posted by Priest
their both the same Galactus 😐

Originally posted by Priest
their both the same Galactus 😐

Um NO. It's a retroactive retcon. Thus everything that happens in the past has to be viewed that way.

I'll explain it to you simply.

Let's say Odin is retconned into a being that was always Superior to the LT. Tho it was never shown. It is just revealed. Now when Odin dies, he actually comes back with his trusty weapon gungigear and slays the LT.

Now someone decides that becuz Thanos with Stood that sword gun thing, back then, it's a feat that is still worthy today. And One can say well, it's still the same odin. Even tho it was only just revealed that Odin was this Superior omniversal being. It's the same Odin. So now, One coudl theorize that Thanos is Now Even Superior to this portrayal of Odin, based upon a PAST showing. This does not compute. And it's the same thing people are doing when they try and use the current showings of the UN to justify the IG's power.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Apparently at some point in time Galactus became Galactus Prime. I wonder how he'd fare against Jubilee Prime, JP or KMC's royal family.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
It's a retroactive retcon.

Yes yes go on . . .

Originally posted by Creshosk
Then its impossible to compare Quasar's use of a machine to Reed's use of a machine.

You use a computer to write a fictional novel.

I use it to compose music. Mr Master uses it to make a piece of art.

Who is better at using the computer?

Is anyone reading this?

Cresh, you're good. 😎

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes yes go on . . .

😆

Originally posted by Mr Master
Is anyone reading this?

Cresh, you're good. 😎

Not that Good. The output of the computer can be read by what the user at the time is doing. And thier skill at handling the computer. THe computer also could have an upgrade or get smarter as time goes on. Try again.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes yes go on . . .

Retroactive retcons cannot be used to justify something in the past. The past action must stand on it's own. Or else We could play those silly games in every comic debate.

Originally posted by Creshosk
This *gestures to the forums* is a controlled environment. We pit gods against one another. Fictional super beings fight in hypothetical situations for our entertainment.

Stalemate then. Because you are saying that a comparison of targets in the previous scenerios is impossible. Then its impossible to compare Quasar's use of a machine to Reed's use of a machine.

You use a computer to write a fictional novel. I use it to compose music. Mr Master uses it to make a piece of art.

Who is better at using the computer?

It's not who is better at using the computer that matters all in itself. It matters at who is measuring the output of said computer. try again. Different uses require differnt computations and a different amount of RAM, Thinking, and energy used by the machine.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
Not that Good. The output of the computer can be read by what the user at the time is doing. And thier skill at handling the computer. THe computer also could have an upgrade or get smarter as time goes on. Try again.

Lets say that the time between is as soon as one of us finishes the next person starts on the same computer. The others wait their turn and don't study computers.

Who's better at using a computer? The person made a story, made music, or made a picture?

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
Retroactive retcons cannot be used to justify something in the past.

The past action must stand on it's own. Or else We could play those silly games in every comic debate.

I just noticed ... you were serious. 🤨

Quasar has FTL speed, he can just grab Reed's UN before he even has a chance to think of firing it.

Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
It's not who is better at using the computer that matters all in itself. It matters at who is measuring the output of said computer. try again. Different uses require differnt computations and a different amount of RAM, Thinking, and energy used by the machine.

Or are you going to be giving Reed a better UN in this hypothetical thus forcing the answer you want rather than the objective truth in which case you have an agenda and thus a very closed mind.