Originally posted by -Pr-
smh @ last two pages.
I will have to agree to this. The debate with ares834 has become silly.
Ares834:
Look, you made the declaration that:
Originally posted by ares834
The heat of the star had absolutely no noticeable impact on Superman;
Then the burden of proof is on you.
All I know is:
1) Superman is face down on the ground after exposure.
2) The panel where they WERE inside the star had their faces in a silent scream (or it seems that way via the artwork anyway).
3) This wasn't "nonchalant" or "casual" at all. We requested Superman soaking the heat of a non-yellow star nonchalantly/casually as the Surfer does.
The only "proof" that you seem to insist on is that there are no "burn marks" on Superman.
How the hell do you even draw burn marks in comics?? :-/
How the hell does this prove anything at all?
And finally, how the hell is this even relevant to the debate in question especially to the ACTUAL argument I made (Surfer run-and-gunning Superman down in a ranged battle)??? Or are you just wasting my time in an irrelevant debate?
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
And finally, how the hell is this even relevant to the debate in question especially to the ACTUAL argument I made (Surfer run-and-gunning Superman down in a ranged battle)??? Or are you just wasting my time in an irrelevant debate?
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Superman is face down on the ground after exposure.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
2) The panel where they WERE inside the star had their faces in a silent scream (or it seems that way via the artwork anyway).
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
The only "proof" that you seem to insist on is that there are no "burn marks" on Superman.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
How the hell do you even draw burn marks in comics?? :-/
Originally posted by ares834
Probably wasting both of our time…. Lol. I simply disagreed with your claim that SS is more heat resistant because he sits in stars. Anyway here will be my final post on the matter.
I guess we can just conclude this with an"agree to disagree" verdict to not waste anymore time here. I'll post this as a final reply, as well.
Originally posted by ares834
As I have already said they shad hurtled down into the ground. At this point in time they were almost completely depowered. After all, Prime soon losses the power of heat vision and, even more telling, Superman knocks out Prime in four punches.Or it could simply be due to the massive amount of Kryptonite all around….
My main problem here really is the chronology of the depowerment and the extent of it. There is no question that a depowerment occured, just if it occured to a significant extent upon exposure to the sun's heat during the limited period of exposure.
The main problem here is that it is inconclusive on both ends.
Originally posted by ares834
Yeah, I’ll be honest I have almost no clue what is happening in that panel. The art is quite bad in that panel. I think it was meant to show Prime’s armor was melting away, but it really doesn’t look like it. And it’s hard to tell if Superman is screaming in pain or anger.
On closer inspection, it really does look like two heads/faces flailing around in a silent scream. Tho, I WILL def agree that the art here is pretty badly done. 😛
Originally posted by ares834
Well yeah… The star’s heat doesn’t cause Superman any symptoms that are common with heat such as burns or even sweating. Sure he is laying on the ground stunned a few panels later, but there are other reasons for this IMO.
Thing is, the fact that Supes is on the ground kinda makes the entire evidence presented wholly circumstantial. We can never determine what caused him to be down on the ground, we can only assume. Thing is, I can show many instances of him falling from that height/speed and being completely unharmed right after. Again, this puts the entire viability of the scan as any conclusive proof that Supes was indeed "unaffected by the Sun's heat" in question.
Originally posted by ares834
? Make them look raw and red or something. The newest issue of Knight Errant has a really good example of burn wounds.
Doesn't always happen that way, tho. There are as much instances of simply smoke being and indicator of slight burning damage, but you're right about it being inconclusive this way, tho.
Not saying you're wrong. You might well be right. Thing is, your evidence to prove this has been wholly circumstantial and, thus, doesn't conclusively prove your point.
Originally posted by paisapower
What superior range attacks ?
http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums...wg/sste-068.jpg
So with that kind of reach and the destructive force that in effect produce a singularity blackhole, I say that's by far superior to Supes only range attack, the HV.. There is just no way Supes is going to win against Surfer if he goes with exchange range tactic..
Some impressions I seem to be getting from the last few pages need to be addressed:
1. Superman was depowered by his trip through Krypton's sun. The red sun incident is not indicative of Superman's tolerance (or lack thereof) when it comes to heat, as he had no powers. In general, his resistance to temperature variations is as high if not higher than most heralds.
The fact that he survived the trip at all shows that Superman has impressive heat resistance, if anything.
2. Heat vision is NOT JUST HEAT. It's also concussive force. Anyone who thinks that heat vision couldn't hurt Surfer or even give him pause is either (imo) on crack or is just sadly misinformed.
3. He has more than one ranged attack.
Some people are trying to be reasonable, and that's fine, but this thread is the exact reason why I don't tend to post in Surfer threads, regardless of the fact of how much i've read of the character.
Stupidity or ignorance isn't an excuse. Warnings will be handed out for trolling (some of which are LONG overdue).
