Originally posted by -Pr-Here is my summary and the end of the debate on it for me.
Is there any way you guys could shorten or better summarise your arguments? I like that you guys are willing to write so much, but a wall of text can be a bit daunting.That, and i'm not quite sure i understand what point either of you are trying to make...
Basically he has drawn me into a moot argument. I first claimed that Superman has planet pulling feats. My statement implied the evidence was irrefutable. I was wrong and admitted to it. I made two new arguments, "There is evidence, or it is more believable, that Superman does have planet pulling feats." The other is, "Superman has proven to have enough power to pull planets solo."
My first argument is based off two things,
1. Superman's statement of being able to feel the force of Starbreaker's pull getting stronger (and then weaker). My reasoning was it is impossible to differentiate which force is changing, your partner getting weaker or your opponent getting stronger unless you are pulling alone.
And 2. The artwork makes it appear as Superman is doing the pulling while Hal is supporting the harness.
His argument is that Hal said, "We've got to pull the planet back..." in which he is taking Hal's pre-feat words literally. I proved or showed there is evidence that Hal's statement is not to be taken literally but rather it should be taken figuratively by my reasoning above (the artwork and Superman's statement) and because that is common language for humans to simply mean "We have to get the job done."
Several members here (even Marvel sided ones) have agreed that by the scan it is more believable that the writer is intending for it to appear that Superman is doing the pulling alone while Hal is supporting the harness (keeping it from breaking and such).
In conclusion, the feat is inconclusive in showing that Superman pulled solo (in which I admitted days ago). But the feat itself, assuming Hal supplied half the pulling force, proved that Superman can indeed a move the planet with along his own force, since the feat requires more than 100 Earth weight forces to achieve.
I'm done with the debate as it was pointless anyway if I won. Win or lose I have some feats that prove Superman has far more than planet pulling power. That is all I care. You win D_Dude1210!
Getting away from the planet pulling bs:
Supes had a ton of good feats in Death of the New Gods. Surviving New Genesis and Apokolips colliding, plus the energies from the Source Wall collapsing. Not to mention giving Infinity Man a decent fight.
Then there's stuff like how he tore through Ultra Man and Ultra Woman in Trinity. He's also taken on entire teams before and done well...
If it wasn't for the magic weakness thing, he might have better odds then Captain Marvel against Adam.
Originally posted by h1a8
Here is my summary and the end of the debate on it for me.Basically he has drawn me into a moot argument. I first claimed that Superman has planet pulling feats. My statement implied the evidence was irrefutable. I was wrong and admitted to it. I made two new arguments, "There is evidence, or it is more believable, that Superman does have planet pulling feats." The other is, "Superman has proven to have enough power to pull planets solo."
No. You made a claim that Superman had planet pulling feats. You didn't look at the evidence properly when you made the claim and when called on it (and being shown evidence to the contrary), you attempted to twist facts instead of admitting to your mistake. Would have been a bit easier for you to simply say "oops, didn't see that, I guess I'll retract my statement on this specific scan and will then try to present different evidences to prove my claims".
Instead, you cling to this solo feat and try your damnedest to come up with an argument to simply not be proven wrong. You THEN made a FALSE admission of being wrong (this is by retracting the very same admission in the same sentence) and then try your damnedest AGAIN to avoid being proven wrong by creating MORE false statements.
Originally posted by h1a8
My first argument is based off two things,1. Superman's statement of being able to feel the force of Starbreaker's pull getting stronger (and then weaker). My reasoning was it is impossible to differentiate which force is changing, your partner getting weaker or your opponent getting stronger unless you are pulling alone.
This is funny and fail reasoning.
I've already disproven it via the tug-of-war example I made. Let me re-post it:
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
"I know I can feel it! It's as if Starbreaker's pull was growing stronger somehow!"Could (and MOST probably) mean that he was -feeling- that the pull Starbreaker was exerting was simply INCREASING and -thus- he commented on the pull getting stronger. There was NEVER an indication that he knew the EXACT force Starbreaker was exerting.
And YES you CAN FEEL something's force increasing even if someone was helping you pull.
Kinda like being in a tug of war. If the other team is pulling harder, you'll FEEL their pull getting stronger even with other ppl helping you.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Yes, you can. I just gave you an example. And YES, you wouldn't know if they are pulling harder or your partner is getting weaker. All you'd know is relative to YOUR observation:"It's as IF the pull was getting stronger, somehow."
Same tug-of-war example. If your partners were exerting less effort, you'd NOTICE the pull of the other side getting stronger more than you'd notice your teammates pull getting weaker.
Would be nice if you actually read all my replies and addressed them properly...
Originally posted by h1a8
And 2. The artwork makes it appear as Superman is doing the pulling while Hal is supporting the harness.
Disproven also. Let me re-post:
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
FYI: It was drawn that way because GL's don't NEED to be tugging on his ring construct to make it move. I'm not even sure if I've ever seen a GL do that at all. Either you're an absolute XXXX or you don't read GL comics.
Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Um.. GL is in FRONT of the constuct he used to pull. Just standing on the top front part of it. The fact that he was on top of the construct (w/c was in front of the object being pulled) is no different from:http://img152.imageshack.us/f/moonlo2.jpg/
The construct was in front. He was inside the cockpit of the construct and was not in any way tugging it.
It only looks like that to someone who desperately needs it to be. To a lot of people it looks like GL standing on top of a construct aiding in the pulling of the planet.
This argumentation of "art seems to indicate proof" is pure BS. It doesn't show definitive proof that Superman was pulling the planet unaided at all.
Originally posted by h1a8
His argument is that Hal said, "We've got to pull the planet back..." in which he is taking Hal's pre-feat words literally. I proved or showed there is evidence that Hal's statement is not to be taken literally but rather it should be taken figuratively by my reasoning above (the artwork and Superman's statement) and because that is common language for humans to simply mean "We have to get the job done."
Your "reasoning above" prove nothing thus any theory you may have of a "figurative use" cannot be proven due to lack of evidences supporting the claim.
My reasoning, however, not only makes more sense, it is also supported by black-and-white evidences.
Here's a little thing you might be experiencing: It is called a type of cognitive bias known as a CONFIRMATION BIAS. Lemme get the wiki definition so that I don't sounds like I'm making stuff up:
"One type of cognitive bias is confirmation bias, the tendency to interpret new information in such a way that confirms one's prior beliefs, even to the extreme of denial, ignoring information that conflicts with one's prior beliefs."
You want so much to prove your case that you ignore and misinterpret black-and-white evidences and cling to a specific belief regardless of how little proof you can accumulate to prove it. You go so far as to simply state opinion as admissible proof, running counter to what you yourself has even stated in the past.
Originally posted by h1a8
Several members here (even Marvel sided ones) have agreed that by the scan it is more believable that the writer is intending for it to appear that Superman is doing the pulling alone while Hal is supporting the harness (keeping it from breaking and such).
Please don't misrepresent and/or exaggerate the facts.
3 people agreed with you. All of them weren't even sure of what they think and only presented opinions. One was obviously biased and the other obviously didn't read the scans. The other didn't present any facts other than an opinion.
Most everyone else here think you're full of it.
Which is moot as "appeal to common belief" is a logical fallacy. You bringing up a logical fallacy over and over again speaks volumes of the type of debater you are.
Originally posted by h1a8
In conclusion, the feat is inconclusive in showing that Superman pulled solo (in which I admitted days ago). But the feat itself, assuming Hal supplied half the pulling force, proved that Superman can indeed a move the planet with along his own force, since the feat requires more than 100 Earth weight forces to achieve.
By your own argumentation, ANY feat wherein one character gets any kind of help makes a feat ambiguous at best, making it inadmissible. Bringing in inadmissible evidence into an argument kinda makes the entire argumentation useless and completely ignorable.
Originally posted by h1a8
I'm done with the debate as it was pointless anyway if I won. Win or lose I have some feats that prove Superman has far more than planet pulling power. That is all I care.
Sadly, you didn't win or even came close to it.
Originally posted by h1a8
[b]You win D_Dude1210! [/B]
Actually, I've won like 10 pages ago. It was just fun stringing you along and letting you make a fool of yourself. 🙂
But you're right about one thing. This debate is over. There is very little else needed to be said.
Oh, and to anyone NOT h1a8 who ended up reading this:
I apologize for the wall o' text... ^_^
Originally posted by carver9THIS!! 👆 They just don't get it. Smdh
So why wouldnt you give adam a majority? A character that is physically supes equal with an edge in this fight.Go back over what supes said about captain marvel in Superman/Batman. He implied that physically they're equals but cap has the advantage in a toe to toe fight.
I never said that it implied that he wont be hurt by superman punches but if you look at adam showing against a Superman that wasnt pulling his punches he looked like it didnt even tickle him.
I know the flash comic said over 2000mps but thats the only thing that we have to base superman running speed off of (along with a bio that I posted of supes last year 😉 )
The bearing that it has is that its a possibility that Black adam could be faster.
Didnt flash fight amazo in the beginning going mach 1 and none of the jla that was there witnessed it? 😕
Not his opinion but the writers opinion and the guy was a scientist, I'm pretty sure he knew of superman and his powers.
Prove to me that superman was weakened because to my knowledge he wasnt. Just accept it and stop throwing everything out of the window because you dont like it.
Usually when someone say that they never felt power like that before thats a clear indication that character (A) is more powerful than character (B). Superman was in shock, studdering when he said that about caps power. Again, stop throwing things out of the window because you dont like it.
D_Dude1210, i DO read GL comics, and i can name several times i've seen Green Lanterns move to look like they were pulling with their construct. That said, it's my opinion that Hal shouldered (just like Kal) around half the work when it came to pulling the Earth against Starbreaker.
h1a8, i can see why you think what you do, but i think you made some flawed points.
Originally posted by BattleMage
THIS!! 👆 They just don't get it. Smdh
warned. uhuh
Originally posted by -Pr-
D_Dude1210, i DO read GL comics, and i can name several times i've seen Green Lanterns move to look like they were pulling with their construct. That said, it's my opinion that Hal shouldered (just like Kal) around half the work when it came to pulling the Earth against Starbreaker.h1a8, i can see why you think what you do, but i think you made some flawed points.
warned. uhuh
I'm always right. 💃
Originally posted by -Pr-I probably did. IDK.
D_Dude1210, i DO read GL comics, and i can name several times i've seen Green Lanterns move to look like they were pulling with their construct. That said, it's my opinion that Hal shouldered (just like Kal) around half the work when it came to pulling the Earth against Starbreaker.h1a8, i can see why you think what you do, but i think you made some flawed points.
But I just thought of some more reasoning. We've seen Superman break through Hal's constructs fairly easy before. Thus it would take all of Hal's will to create and maintain a construct that can withstand both the might of Superman and of Starbreaker. For Hal to have anything extra to help Superman in the pulling would mean
Hal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Superman. But comics show this isn't quite the case.
IMO, Hal's contruct would break to pieces if he even tried to pull instead of holding the construct together. It was cracking already, so he definitely needed to not pull.
Originally posted by -Pr-Warned? Where did you get this from? Care to explain?
D_Dude1210, i DO read GL comics, and i can name several times i've seen Green Lanterns move to look like they were pulling with their construct. That said, it's my opinion that Hal shouldered (just like Kal) around half the work when it came to pulling the Earth against Starbreaker.h1a8, i can see why you think what you do, but i think you made some flawed points.
warned. uhuh
Originally posted by h1a8
I probably did. IDK.But I just thought of some more reasoning. We've seen Superman break through Hal's constructs fairly easy before. Thus it would take all of Hal's will to create and maintain a construct that can withstand both the might of Superman and of Starbreaker. For Hal to have anything extra to help Superman in the pulling would mean
Hal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Superman. But comics show this isn't quite the case.
IMO, Hal's contruct would break to pieces if he even tried to pull instead of holding the construct together. It was cracking already, so he definitely needed to not pull.
More flawed logic.
ABC logic fail.
Pulling =/= breaking something. Try pulling a comic book apart if you have the strength, but tearing it is something very easy to do. Blahblahblah.
Sigh. This one's so weak not even worth going into detail to explain how wrong it is.
Originally posted by h1a8
I probably did. IDK.But I just thought of some more reasoning. We've seen Superman break through Hal's constructs fairly easy before. Thus it would take all of Hal's will to create and maintain a construct that can withstand both the might of Superman and of Starbreaker. For Hal to have anything extra to help Superman in the pulling would mean
Hal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Superman. But comics show this isn't quite the case.
IMO, Hal's contruct would break to pieces if he even tried to pull instead of holding the construct together. It was cracking already, so he definitely needed to not pull.
no... just. no.
Originally posted by BattleMage
Warned? Where did you get this from? Care to explain?
kidding man, hence the smiley.
Also, for Adam, most of 52 is unusable after the death of his wife, as he had an amp.
