Originally posted by leonheartmm
re read and reply. i asked you to DEFINE the characteristics of YOUR versipon of an omniverse. you can not simply becaus it is incompatible with logic. the reason marvel has not been sued is becaus they were mishandling words and nothing more. im talking about universally accepted definitions here. i explained what uni/multi/mega/omniverse meant. if you continue to say that LT held two megaverses then your implying that he held two realities of two different comic book creatrs. and you shud accept it and give evidence to back it up. on the other hand, you CANT say that they are both megaverses and yet somehow paradoxically they are BOTH marvel. it is either one or the other. if you keep defining them as such then its clear that's its a wrong definiton and what LT is really holding in his hand are two UNIVERSES. unless he has surpassed the laws of definiton and wordly copyright. againuniverse=sef explanatory
multiverse= an infinite continuum of CONNECTED universes which exists in its own confined boundaries
megaverse= complete reality of ONE comic book publisher containing any dfineable place/existance ever mentioned in the history of that comic, given that it is not amalgam
omniverse= the compendium of ALL realities, defineable, that exist in any and ALL comic book publishers and potentially everything in media which can be added to it. part of the omniverse is the realy depicted in any amalgams etc.im not having a hard time accepting fact, your just not understanding the paradox behind your argument and that PIS is the reason for it. it has nuthing to do with what I choose to define as PIS but what LOGIC dictates as PIS.
Questions: To my knowledge you didn't show any evidence to back prof anything of what I have shown other then illustrating points by Mark Gruenwald (A Treatise in Reality in Comics Literature, have read it) which isn't proof off anything.
You need to get that marvel (as shown) has a Omniverse, and furthermore if they are a Megaverse by definition care to explain to my why star trek and Star Wars has yet to show more then a Galaxy.
If you disagree with marvel on there definition write them a letter. Why do you think that Marvel hadn't been sued yet probably because that all companies are following a simple rule that you are forgetting. MY COMIC, MY RULES. that's the way it is.
You post:
My definition of a omniverse is the same as yours but in case you forgot then my personal meaning has no influence what so ever. I'm debating this strictly from Marvels point of view.
I'm not implying anything the Brothers where created by the LT in Marvels omniverse and I can assure you that I find it highly unlikely that marvel go around using words they doesn't understand the meaning of. Surpassed the law of definition isn't that basically what marvel characters and DC characters are doing constantly. Definitions is meaningless in a comic sense I can write a comic where a Nuclear Bomb explodes into bubbles that's against definitions and yet: MY COMIC MY RULES. Marvel works the same way there comic there rules if Marvel want a Omniverse then they have it no matter what Mark Gruenwald wrote.
You obviously doesn't see that both definitions can apply if needed, its like a reality warp, maybe pr definition they have a Megaverse but within that Megaverse exist a Omniverse that entirely possibly seeing as how its comic after all.
You are using PIS a lot lets have a look at the Killermovies definition:
PIS = Plot Induced Stupidity
At times, for the sake of the plot, characters that are immensely more powerful than their opponent will "job" to carry on the plot of the story, even though the characters powers and history would clearly show that they are more than capable of destroying their opponent. For this reason we have a No PIS Rule. This rule prohibits the use of such instances of PIS from being used as evidence in debates.
Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.
Sorry but I fail to see how PIS have anything to do with Marvel saying they have a Omniverse. But perhaps that's the wrong definition.
Originally posted by quanchi112
fail.u have admitted u are biased.
im not. big diff.
😉
yes i did. i said I liked wonder woman more than any other character and I'm biased towards her. everyone is biased. the difference is, you are illogical and biased. and refuse to admit that you are either. which then makes you irritating to the majority of the forum.
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirli dont care. i dont break the rules all the time and constantly start trouble.
yes i did. i said I liked wonder woman more than any other character and I'm biased towards her. everyone is biased. the difference is, you are illogical and biased. and refuse to admit that you are either. which then makes you irritating to the majority of the forum.
i am not illogical and i use comics to prove my points while u dont. if i post something u say the writer doesnt know what he was doing. sorry but u really haven proved more than three points in three months to me.
ps i was being generous by saying three points.
Originally posted by Utrigita
Questions: To my knowledge you didn't show any evidence to back prof anything of what I have shown other then illustrating points by Mark Gruenwald (A Treatise in Reality in Comics Literature, have read it) which isn't proof off anything.You need to get that marvel (as shown) has a Omniverse, and furthermore if they are a Megaverse by definition care to explain to my why star trek and Star Wars has yet to show more then a Galaxy.
If you disagree with marvel on there definition write them a letter. Why do you think that Marvel hadn't been sued yet probably because that all companies are following a simple rule that you are forgetting. MY COMIC, MY RULES. that's the way it is.
You post:
My definition of a omniverse is the same as yours but in case you forgot then my personal meaning has no influence what so ever. I'm debating this strictly from Marvels point of view.
I'm not implying anything the Brothers where created by the LT in Marvels omniverse and I can assure you that I find it highly unlikely that marvel go around using words they doesn't understand the meaning of. Surpassed the law of definition isn't that basically what marvel characters and DC characters are doing constantly. Definitions is meaningless in a comic sense I can write a comic where a Nuclear Bomb explodes into bubbles that's against definitions and yet: MY COMIC MY RULES. Marvel works the same way there comic there rules if Marvel want a Omniverse then they have it no matter what Mark Gruenwald wrote.
You obviously doesn't see that both definitions can apply if needed, its like a reality warp, maybe pr definition they have a Megaverse but within that Megaverse exist a Omniverse that entirely possibly seeing as how its comic after all.
You are using PIS a lot lets have a look at the Killermovies definition:
PIS = Plot Induced Stupidity
At times, for the sake of the plot, characters that are immensely more powerful than their opponent will "job" to carry on the plot of the story, even though the characters powers and history would clearly show that they are more than capable of destroying their opponent. For this reason we have a No PIS Rule. This rule prohibits the use of such instances of PIS from being used as evidence in debates.Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.
Sorry but I fail to see how PIS have anything to do with Marvel saying they have a Omniverse. But perhaps that's the wrong definition.
re read and reply. i asked you to DEFINE the characteristics of YOUR versipon of an omniverse. you can not simply becaus it is incompatible with logic. the reason marvel has not been sued is becaus they were mishandling words and nothing more. im talking about universally accepted definitions here. i explained what uni/multi/mega/omniverse meant. if you continue to say that LT held two megaverses then your implying that he held two realities of two different comic book creatrs. and you shud accept it and give evidence to back it up. on the other hand, you CANT say that they are both megaverses and yet somehow paradoxically they are BOTH marvel. it is either one or the other. if you keep defining them as such then its clear that's its a wrong definiton and what LT is really holding in his hand are two UNIVERSES. unless he has surpassed the laws of definiton and wordly copyright. againuniverse=sef explanatory
multiverse= an infinite continuum of CONNECTED universes which exists in its own confined boundaries
megaverse= complete reality of ONE comic book publisher containing any dfineable place/existance ever mentioned in the history of that comic, given that it is not amalgam
omniverse= the compendium of ALL realities, defineable, that exist in any and ALL comic book publishers and potentially everything in media which can be added to it. part of the omniverse is the realy depicted in any amalgams etc.im not having a hard time accepting fact, your just not understanding the paradox behind your argument and that PIS is the reason for it. it has nuthing to do with what I choose to define as PIS but what LOGIC dictates as PIS.
im sorry, in that long winding reply you didnt ONCE mention the characteristics that define your MULTIVER/MGAVERSE/OMNIVERSE. multiverse<megaverse<omniverse. you can not have an OMNIVERSE inside a MEGAVERSE. thats the opposite. megaverses is a subset of omniverse, and multiverse is a subset of megaverse.
as long as you dont take the question head on, the fact remains that marvel is using terms like megaverse/omniverse to describe nuthing more than the textbook definition of a universe/singukar realm. it isnt the same as MY COMIC MY RULES, if marvel defines a grain of sand as an omniverse, i cant use that to say that the person who held the grain of sand is >lucifer who has only created multiverses and survived multiverse shattering explosion. even if you want to CALL the things LT was holding megaverses, the fact remains that they had nuthing but the characteristic of simple UNIVERSES and hence that feat is in no way compareable to lucifer's who created the TEXTBOOK DEFINITION of a multiverse.
marvel can define things as they see fit but seeing as we know that ,marvel is calling what are generally understood to be UNIVERSES and renaming them MEGAVERSES, then we shudnt treat them any different then wed trat universes in other media.
again if LT was TRULY holding multiverses, marvel wud have a big ass lawsuit on their hands.{and again i ask you, can wanda really destroy the OMINVERSE with the chaos wave and can genis REALLY percieve all in the OMNIVERSE?!?!?! they can by your argument and that wud make them both greater than LT. how cume u dont accept that?}
PIS is a term used for any event/phenomenon/explanation used irrationally and illogically in comics{this INCLUDED but is not CONFINED to impossibly weak characters beatign impossibly strong characters} to make the stroy line continue without destroying it.
Originally posted by Shin_Nikkolas
No. it screams that leonheartmm is an idiot who ignores canon because he thinks he knows more than Marvel.Anyone with reasoning skills above that of a toddler and who has seen at least 2 of your posts.
LOl Lucifer > Beyonder.
Poor deluded soul.
im sorry, when did you get the impression that the oppinion of insignificant land crawling insects like yourslelf actually mattered?
Poor deluded soul
Originally posted by quanchi112
i dont care. i dont break the rules all the time and constantly start trouble.i am not illogical and i use comics to prove my points while u dont. if i post something u say the writer doesnt know what he was doing. sorry but u really haven proved more than three points in three months to me.
ps i was being generous by saying three points.
Keep your generosity. You need it for yourself.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
im sorry, in that long winding reply you didnt ONCE mention the characteristics that define your MULTIVER/MGAVERSE/OMNIVERSE. multiverse<megaverse<omniverse. you can not have an OMNIVERSE inside a MEGAVERSE. thats the opposite. megaverses is a subset of omniverse, and multiverse is a subset of megaverse.as long as you dont take the question head on, the fact remains that marvel is using terms like megaverse/omniverse to describe nuthing more than the textbook definition of a universe/singukar realm. it isnt the same as MY COMIC MY RULES, if marvel defines a grain of sand as an omniverse, i cant use that to say that the person who held the grain of sand is >lucifer who has only created multiverses and survived multiverse shattering explosion. even if you want to CALL the things LT was holding megaverses, the fact remains that they had nuthing but the characteristic of simple UNIVERSES and hence that feat is in no way compareable to lucifer's who created the TEXTBOOK DEFINITION of a multiverse.
marvel can define things as they see fit but seeing as we know that ,marvel is calling what are generally understood to be UNIVERSES and renaming them MEGAVERSES, then we shudnt treat them any different then wed trat universes in other media.
again if LT was TRULY holding multiverses, marvel wud have a big ass lawsuit on their hands.{and again i ask you, can wanda really destroy the OMINVERSE with the chaos wave and can genis REALLY percieve all in the OMNIVERSE?!?!?! they can by your argument and that wud make them both greater than LT. how cume u dont accept that?}
PIS is a term used for any event/phenomenon/explanation used irrationally and illogically in comics{this INCLUDED but is not CONFINED to impossibly weak characters beatign impossibly strong characters} to make the stroy line continue without destroying it.
I answer you questions perfectly:
i asked you to DEFINE the characteristics of YOUR versipon of an omniverse?? My definition of a omniverse is the same as yours but in case you forgot then my personal meaning has no influence what so ever. I'm debating this strictly from Marvels point of view.:
This would implicate that I agree with you definition in the real world, but I'm again debating this from Marvel point of view. And I have already answer you questions I see no reason to do so again.
Again I find it hard to Believe that Marvel are going around using words that they doesn't understand the full meaning off.
Again Reality warp, Jamie Braddock warped a Universe that from the outside looked no larger then a Village but inside was infinitely larger, same applies here, per definition they have a megaverse and that lying side by side with other companies but inside that Megaverse they can make there Megaverse as big ore small as they want to I have already given two examples of this what you haven't mentioned.
Whats the problem here is that you are applying real world definitions to a comic universe where the Company can make the story whatever way they want. I will just find the proof of the Brothers actually being Megaverses and Marvel still hasn't been sued. Because MY COMIC MY RULES.
http://img102.imageshack.us/my.php?image=omniis2yp2.jpg
What you are constantly forgetting is that I have numerous references to what marvel thinks of the issue while you are constantly applying you own analyse with no support from neither written litterateur nor scans nor a Message from DC ore something that says that's marvel way to shape there Comic Universe is wrong, except in yours opinion because if LT was Capable of doing this he would rank far above Luficer.
Its the first time you ask me this Question, to you knowledge then I doesn't agree with the Idea of the 616 destroyed then the Omniverse crumble, I doesn't agree with Genis-vell destroying the Omniverse the only think he could have destroyed was the multiverse, The scarlet Witch however sure was a threat to Marvels omniverse, seeing as how Roma THE OMNIVERSAL GAURDIAN, saw her as a threat. And do you seriously believe that they are both greater then LT and that they destroyed a you and Marks version of a Omniverse?
This normally also applies to a single incident Spiderman beating Firelord, The omniverse however is canon materiel used in Handbooks and Comics and marvels own site (that doesn't include PIS) uses the term Omniverse.
Originally posted by Utrigita
I answer you questions perfectly:i asked you to DEFINE the characteristics of YOUR versipon of an omniverse?? My definition of a omniverse is the same as yours but in case you forgot then my personal meaning has no influence what so ever. I'm debating this strictly from Marvels point of view.:
This would implicate that I agree with you definition in the real world, but I'm again debating this from Marvel point of view. And I have already answer you questions I see no reason to do so again.
Again I find it hard to Believe that Marvel are going around using words that they doesn't understand the full meaning off.
Again Reality warp, Jamie Braddock warped a Universe that from the outside looked no larger then a Village but inside was infinitely larger, same applies here, per definition they have a megaverse and that lying side by side with other companies but inside that Megaverse they can make there Megaverse as big ore small as they want to I have already given two examples of this what you haven't mentioned.
Whats the problem here is that you are applying real world definitions to a comic universe where the Company can make the story whatever way they want. I will just find the proof of the Brothers actually being Megaverses and Marvel still hasn't been sued. Because MY COMIC MY RULES.
http://img102.imageshack.us/my.php?image=omniis2yp2.jpg
What you are constantly forgetting is that I have numerous references to what marvel thinks of the issue while you are constantly applying you own analyse with no support from neither written litterateur nor scans nor a Message from DC ore something that says that's marvel way to shape there Comic Universe is wrong, except in yours opinion because if LT was Capable of doing this he would rank far above Luficer.Its the first time you ask me this Question, to you knowledge then I doesn't agree with the Idea of the 616 destroyed then the Omniverse crumble, I doesn't agree with Genis-vell destroying the Omniverse the only think he could have destroyed was the multiverse, The scarlet Witch however sure was a threat to Marvels omniverse, seeing as how Roma THE OMNIVERSAL GAURDIAN, saw her as a threat. And do you seriously believe that they are both greater then LT and that they destroyed a you and Marks version of a Omniverse?
This normally also applies to a single incident Spiderman beating Firelord, The omniverse however is canon materiel used in Handbooks and Comics and marvels own site (that doesn't include PIS) uses the term Omniverse.
so basically, you are repeating yourself ans saying that marvel is free to use its own paradoxical and completely illogical definitions and then you can use the same definitions to compare feats in marvel to feats outside marvel{where consistant definitions are under play}??????
FAIL. and AGAIN, i ask you, what IS IT, that you {or marvel} is defining as an omniverse/megaverse????? because i have defined mine and yours{marvel's} is MOST DEFINATELY not the same defintion as mine or the greater world. by the general definition of megaverse, a comic publisher can only have ONE megaverse, reguardless of size or vastness. you say that LT, a MARVEL CHARACTERS who is NOT in amalgam is holding TWO megaverses, while from the general definition, one comic book publisher's ENTIRE reality is ONE megaverse. tell me how that is possible or what is amiss. most DEFINATELY marvel is using wrong definitions here and is referring to universes as megaverses.
as long as you dont answer the question, no amount of dodging will help. lucifer was standing at ground zero of a MULTIVERSAL{universally accepted non marvel definition of a multiverse} explosion without caring. even if LT destroyes infinite OMNIVERSES{the marvel definition} he wont hold a candle to lucifer. marvel's definition is about as cannon as the PIS force. cannon doesnt mean VALID. the handbook is flawed. if it isnt then PLEASE stop arguing and give the defining criteria for your version of omniverse/megaverse as i have given mine{which coincidentally are the univeral criteria}
no such thing as a real marvel OMNIVERSE exists. no such things as real multiple marvel MEGAVERSES exists. no such thing as an LT beyond the singular marvel multiverse EXISTS.
micheal turns LT into spaghetti and feads it to his pet dinosaur.
