Superman vs. Wonder Woman

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
Hard drive crashed. You might think that I will keep a back up since is in my line of work, but I just got over confident thinking that I could fix the hard drive.

But fixing hard drives? uh uh time consuming if the heads are damaged. I still have them on the hard drive but I can't read the files, maybe one day I will decide to fix it

I'm glad that's all that happened.

I know that many of your files were from physical comics you actually scanned on your own ... the only thing I could think of was that some disaster had affected your HOUSE (and thus your actual physical collection) ... glad to hear that's not the case.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's impossible to know without asking the artist. Remember, artists are not always using correct math when they draw things and they purposely exaggerate things for different reasons. So it's possible he could have thought Venus is much closer than it really is. Or he doesn't know the correct math in order to draw the right perspective. Or the writer could purposely go against the script to emphasize to the audience that Superman was trying to take her to the sun. Making the sun huge without a doubt shows that he is taking her there.

With that said,
We take the art as fact UNTIL it is contradicted by the script. Meaning, if the script doesn't contradict the art then the art counts 100%.

I don't think anybody was saying he wasn't trying to take her to the Sun. But on the art contradicting the script, there's more than just the writer apparently saying they never went past Venus accord to his script. There's how the Sun was suddenly out of the way when he punched her back to Earth, the lead box being completely in tact when it should have melted as close to the Sun as people argue, and that nobody mentioned he was amped. Blue tries to dismiss this as Diana wasn't exactly in he mind set of saying it, but if the writer truly intended him to be amped, I would think it would've been mentioned by somebody. Like in JUSTICE LEAGUE ELITE #12, when Superman is tricked into killing a whole bunch of people and goes to the Sun, Batman is the one stating Superman is going to be amped when Supes leaves the scene.

Originally posted by Delta1938
I don't think anybody was saying he wasn't trying to take her to the Sun. But on the art contradicting the script, there's more than just the writer apparently saying they never went past Venus accord to his script. There's how the Sun was suddenly out of the way when he punched her back to Earth, the lead box being completely in tact when it should have melted as close to the Sun as people argue, and that nobody mentioned he was amped. Blue tries to dismiss this as Diana wasn't exactly in he mind set of saying it, but if the writer truly intended him to be amped, I would think it would've been mentioned by somebody. Like in JUSTICE LEAGUE ELITE #12, when Superman is tricked into killing a whole bunch of people and goes to the Sun, Batman is the one stating Superman is going to be amped when Supes leaves the scene.

I was saying the artist could have been emphasizing that Superman was taking her to the Sun. The only way to emphasize that is to draw the Sun bigger than what it would actually appear.

Bottomline, the real question is does the script have more say that the art?

Originally posted by h1a8
I agree with what you are saying except for the lead box melting. Remember, according to my calculations they were closer than Venus but not as close as Mercury. Lead has a high melting point and probes have went to Mercury without melting.

I was saying the artist could have been emphasizing that Superman was taking her to the Sun. The only way to emphasize that is to draw the Sun bigger than what it would actually appear.

Bottomline, the real question is does the script have more say that the art?

You misunderstood me. People argue they were RIGHT BY the Sun, and I was pointing-out the fact that the lead box was still in tact as evidence. People try and dismiss it as "real world science applied to comics," but like I said, the way the Sun was suddenly out of the way and no mention of an amp(by WW, Max or Supes) argue this as well, without even getting into Rucka apparently said they never went past Venus according to his script.

Originally posted by Delta1938

People argue they were RIGHT BY the Sun ...

And rightly so.

Besides the communicated intent of Superman to burn his opponent in the sun and the prevelance of all those huge solar images, we find the following in Wonder Woman #221. Notice that Wonder Woman is still bearing the scars from Superman's heat vision scoring, and still wearing her left bracer as a splint for her injured wrist.

Notice her dialogue:

"The heat wraps me like a lover.
It burns, but I've felt FAR worse and FAR more recently."

To be fair, there's the remote possibility that she is talking of the heat from the nuclear rods she contained in the previous issue. Far more likely, Diana is talking of the heat she endured from multiple sources in Sacrifice, with the Sun itself topping the list:

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
And rightly so.

Besides the communicated intent of Superman to burn his opponent in the sun and the prevelance of all those huge solar images, we find the following in Wonder Woman #221. Notice that Wonder Woman is still bearing the scars from Superman's heat vision scoring, and still wearing her left bracer as a splint for her injured wrist.

Notice her dialogue:

"The heat wraps me like a lover.
It burns, but I've felt FAR worse and FAR more recently."

To be fair, there's the remote possibility that she is talking of the heat from the nuclear rods she contained in the previous issue. Far more likely, Diana is talking of the heat she endured from multiple sources in Sacrifice, with the Sun itself topping the list:

So, still, assumptions that don't hold-up as well considering everything. If Rucka intended Superman to be amped, I'm pretty sure he would've written somebody saying something other than he intended to take her to the Sun.

Originally posted by Delta1938

You misunderstood me. People argue they were RIGHT BY the Sun, and I was pointing-out the fact that the lead box was still in tact as evidence. People try and dismiss it as "real world science applied to comics" ...

I don't mind "Real World" science speculation, but judging solely from environmental effects is usually not the best idea with most comics and comicbook staff. Artists draw different things according to their own style, the direction they are given, and practical social considerations.

Compare what happens to DCnU Superman immersed in molten metal versus Wonder Woman immersed in molten metal. Superman's outfit is special armor in the new series, and, on top of that, if some of the physics pre Flashpoint still hold, has a kind of protective "aura" that extends a few centimeters above his skin.
So his uniform should endure quite a bit more than the average hero's.

By contrast, Diana ... wears a bathing suit.

Should there be a stitch of clothing on her once she emerges from her dip?
Yet whose uniform betrays more damage from the molten treatment?

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
I don't mind "Real World" science speculation, but judging solely from environmental effects is usually not the best idea with most comics and comicbook staff. Artists draw different things according to their own style, the direction they are given, and practical social considerations.

Compare what happens to DCnU Superman immersed in molten metal versus Wonder Woman immersed in molten metal. Superman's outfit is special armor in the new series, and, on top of that, if some of the physics pre Flashpoint still hold, has a kind of protective "aura" that extends a few centimeters above his skin.
So his uniform should endure quite a bit more than the average hero's.

By contrast, Diana ... wears a bathing suit.

Should there be a stitch of clothing on her once she emerges from her dip?
Yet whose uniform betrays more damage from the molten treatment?

That's true that different artists can draw different things, so it's a good thing I have more than just the lead box not melting. If that was all I had, you could say you countered my argument, but its not, and you didn't.

Anyways, taquito time. 😄

Originally posted by Delta1938
So, still, assumptions that don't hold-up as well considering everything. If Rucka intended Superman to be amped, I'm pretty sure he would've written somebody saying something other than he intended to take her to the Sun.

1. Why the double standard? Were you not the same person arguing that Superman amped himself against Darkseid through similar means in Superman/Batman #13? Was there any explicit mention of amping there? If not, why do you assume it for one and not the other?

2. Regarding the previous showing, I realize I need an enlarged image to display the costume damage DCnU suffered properly:

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
And rightly so.

Besides the communicated intent of Superman to burn his opponent in the sun and the prevelance of all those huge solar images, we find the following in Wonder Woman #221. Notice that Wonder Woman is still bearing the scars from Superman's heat vision scoring, and still wearing her left beaver as a splint for her injured wrist.

Notice her dialogue:

"The heat wraps me like a lover.
It burns, but I've felt FAR worse and FAR more recently."

To be fair, there's the remote possibility that she is talking of the heat from the nuclear rods she contained in the previous issue. Far more likely, Diana is talking of the heat she endured from multiple sources in Sacrifice, with the Sun itself topping the list:

:/ why not assume is from Supernan's scorching hv? Since actually that seems to be the source of heat she might be talking about

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
1. Why the double standard? Were you not the same person arguing that Superman amped himself against Darkseid through similar means in Superman/Batman #13? Was there any explicit mention of amping there? If not, why do you assume it for one and not the other?

2. Regarding the previous showing, I realize I need an enlarged image to display the costume damage DCnU suffered properly:

Picking and choosing.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
1. Why the double standard? Were you not the same person arguing that Superman amped himself against Darkseid through similar means in Superman/Batman #13? Was there any explicit mention of amping there? If not, why do you assume it for one and not the other?

2. Regarding the previous showing, I realize I need an enlarged image to display the costume damage DCnU suffered properly:

What double standard? Superman actually took Darkseid to the Sun. It's assumed Superman took Wonder Woman there.

Originally posted by quanchi112
👆

Picking and choosing.

1: Irony. 2: Fail. 4: Cheerleading. 5: I skipped 3.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
And rightly so.

Besides the communicated intent of Superman to burn his opponent in the sun and the prevelance of all those huge solar images, we find the following in Wonder Woman #221. Notice that Wonder Woman is still bearing the scars from Superman's heat vision scoring, and still wearing her left bracer as a splint for her injured wrist.

Notice her dialogue:

"The heat wraps me like a lover.
It burns, but I've felt FAR worse and FAR more recently."

To be fair, there's the remote possibility that she is talking of the heat from the nuclear rods she contained in the previous issue. Far more likely, Diana is talking of the heat she endured from multiple sources in Sacrifice, with the Sun itself topping the list:

Blue you are ignoring an vital cog in Delta's argument.
The lead box, if they were as close to the sun as you assume, it would have melted. So that right there tells you that they were still quite a distance from the sun.

The size of the sun is just the artist's representation.
The sun would appear bigger on Venus than it would from Earth, that's why it was drawn bigger. In one of the scans, you can actually see the curvature of the sun. You wouldn't have seen that if they were in or on the sun. But this is a minor point and holds little relevance when compared to the lead box. The lead box not melting cannot be misinterpreted, how do you explain it not melting? IF you can answer this, then you win the distance from the sun argument, if not, then you have to concede this part of your debate to Delta.

Originally posted by Diesldude
Blue you are ignoring an vital cog in Delta's argument.
The lead box, if they were as close to the sun as you assume, it would have melted. So that right there tells you that they were still quite a distance from the sun.

The size of the sun is just the artist's representation.
The sun would appear bigger on Venus than it would from Earth, that's why it was drawn bigger. In one of the scans, you can actually see the curvature of the sun. You wouldn't have seen that if they were in or on the sun. But this is a minor point and holds little relevance when compared to the lead box. The lead box not melting cannot be misinterpreted, how do you explain it not melting? IF you can answer this, then you win the distance from the sun argument, if not, then you have to concede this part of your debate to Delta.

This doesn't follow even if we're assuming "real world" science rules. For starters, just for starters, you're making the assumption the box is pure lead. I typed in "batman lead box kryptonite" as a Google search item and found nothing of the sort, only, in fact, that there was a lead-LINED box. But lots of materials are lead-lined that Batman possesses, including part of his outfit. Not long before this fight takes place, Superman himself kept a kryptonite ring in a compartment that was lead-lined, and, in fact, used it to defeat Supergirl when they were fighting in one of the firepits of Apokolips.

If a box need only be lead-lined to block kryptonite radiation, then there's no reason whatsoever to assume the entire box is lead, and, indeed, most other things that Batman uses to block radiation are not entirely, or even mostly, lead either.

And certainly we've been shown as comic readers numerous instances of boxes of other material resisting great heat, even the heat near or in the sun.

http://www.quora.com/Superman-comics-movie-and-creative-franchise/How-do-Supermans-enemies-acquire-their-supplies-of-kryptonite

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
This doesn't follow even if we're assuming "real world" science rules. For starters, [b]just for starters, you're making the assumption the box is pure lead. I typed in "batman lead box kryptonite" as a Google search item and found nothing of the sort, only, in fact, that there was a lead-LINED box. But lots of materials are lead-lined that Batman possesses, including part of his outfit. Not long before this fight takes place, Superman himself kept a kryptonite ring in a compartment that was lead-lined, and, in fact, used it to defeat Supergirl when they were fighting in one of the firepits of Apokolips.

If a box need only be lead-lined to block kryptonite radiation, then there's no reason whatsoever to assume the entire box is lead, and, indeed, most other things that Batman uses to block radiation are not entirely, or even mostly, lead either.

And certainly we've been shown as comic readers numerous instances of boxes of other material resisting great heat, even the heat near or in the sun.

http://www.quora.com/Superman-comics-movie-and-creative-franchise/How-do-Supermans-enemies-acquire-their-supplies-of-kryptonite [/B]

All that really matters, is Superman wasn't amped like you so desperately hope. And he's much stronger than Wonder Woman, too.

The lead box argument is basically a "the clothes weren't damaged" argument in disguise.

Though I don't get the nitpicking considering Superman immediately one shotted her. Like Carver always says "If King Hype would have kept going Blue Marvel would be dead".

But I guess any implication of an amp can't happen in SM's case.

Originally posted by Delta1938
You misunderstood me. People argue they were RIGHT BY the Sun, and I was pointing-out the fact that the lead box was still in tact as evidence. People try and dismiss it as "real world science applied to comics," but like I said, the way the Sun was suddenly out of the way and no mention of an amp(by WW, Max or Supes) argue this as well, without even getting into Rucka apparently said they never went past Venus according to his script.

If they were very close to the Sun then the Sun's diameter would appear more than 700,000,000 times larger than them.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
The lead box argument is basically a "the clothes weren't damaged" argument in disguise.

Though I don't get the nitpicking considering Superman immediately one shotted her. Like Carver always says "If King Hype would have kept going Blue Marvel would be dead".

But I guess any implication of an amp can't happen in SM's case.

Sometimes I think people think the lead box is the only point I've made.

Originally posted by h1a8
Then people are wrong. They were never next to the sun. If they were then the Sun's size compared to theirs would appear to be infinite. The Sun's diameter was at best 20 times that of their height. That means they were pretty phucking far away from the Sun.

If they were very close to the Sun then the Sun's diameter would appear more than 700,000,000 times larger than them.

And, it's unusually odd even for comics, that if they were as close to the Sun as people argue, that the Sun would suddenly teleport behind Superman(or whatever other explanation you want to give).

This entire page is about the lead box.

But sometimes I think talking about one specific part means you're talking about one specific part. Crazy idea.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
This entire page is about the lead box.

But sometimes I think talking about one specific part means you're talking about one specific part. Crazy idea.

Clearly over your head.