Originally posted by vince_slice
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=3973564&postcount=1908
Lol ha ha ha ha ha hee. Wait can't just anyone edit that letter?
Originally posted by vince_slice
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=3973564&postcount=1908
Lol ha ha ha ha ha hee. Wait can't just anyone edit that letter?
Originally posted by vince_slice
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=3973564&postcount=1908
Just as I said. Concession accepted. That is EXACTLY what the green aura was doing as you admit ODG and why he was allowed to pierce his shield and land the killing blow. Just as I stated.
^ Don't ever mention this obscure interview (or forum exchange) to me again. It's against the rules.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiIf Drax developed new powers and lost his previous powers of flight, energy projection and strength from a previous incarnation, why are you arguing that he could never have lost this anti-Thanos aura power? How can you be so blind as to miss this ridiculously huge hole in your argument?
You keep avoiding basic question ODG.. you're better than that. I realize admitting them puts your position in a different light, but still, it makes your theory very transparant and faulty. Let me try again...First, we know that Drax doesn't control this Aura coming on or off.. it has to do with him being in close proximity to Thanos. Thus, it isn't an off or on thing.. it's ALWAYS ON. So then... I will ask again
ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT DRAX LOST HIS POWERS TO LAND THE KILLING BLOW AND NEGATE THANOS ETERNAL POWERS as stated by the writers of Annihilation? Simple question.. DID HE LOSE THE ENCODING IN HIS DNA???? Very straight forward question you keep avoding and we all know why. If he did.. please provide a scan or issue number backing up this claim. IF not, he thus still retained said power and whether it was a green aura, pink aura (your choice i'm sure) or no Aura his powers work just the same. He can land the killing blow on Thanos and negates his eternal powers.
Not only that, but where is it stated that Thanos got weaker the closer that Drax got? NOWHERE. It just gave Drax the ability to nullify his forcefield and amp him up enough to pierce right through Thanos chest with his fist. That's what it showed on-panel.
I can't tell it if you're vomiting up random sh1t that doesn't connect at all or expelling a bloody mess from your anus. Maybe both.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiYeah, and Doom could never have survived a blast from a Galactus who removed him forcibly. This makes shielding evident. Of course, you're acting like you're not trying to deflect and you go right to the exact issue I called you out on. You have no evidence that Thanos grew weaker in Drax's presence in Annihilation, much less Thanos Imperative. It's just you spinning sh1t from some obscure interview that didn't even involve the writer. That's against the rules.
Lastly, nice try and straw-man buddy but you failed like usual. We're aren't talking about the Thanos vs. Odin shield are we? No No No. we're talking about your contention that shields don't have to be drawn.. Referencing Doom even in your backup of this theory. You also reference how Thanos had a shield against Tyrant (never shown or mentioned). Nice try though but I saw right through it. So, we are talking about YOUR assertion (which you've done countless times, which is why seeing you backpedal and squirm is amusing). Have you not referenced Doom shield is sometimes draw and something not??? Simple question. Have you not also said that artist depiction change from comic to comic.. things are sometimes drawn and sometimes not?? Simple question and I can find your quotes if need be. Point is, isn't it possible under your theory you've championed.. that the aura could be there just not drawn?
Let me know when you have any evidence supporting that Thanos grows weak and loses control over his powers in Drax's presence. Until then, it's obvious you've completely fabricated a new theory and excuse to cov er up how deficient your original theory and excuse was, that Thanos died because he didn't even have a chance to recover. Now it's Thanos died because Drax depowered him. Phucking unreal. If desperation were a perfume, it'd be called le' KuRuPT.
Originally posted by NihilistDnA wrote Thanos Imperative, which is where KuRuPT Thanosi is peddling this nonsensical theory.
DnA didnt write Annihilation, it was Giffen who wrote it and brought it up iirc.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Don't ever mention this obscure interview (or forum exchange) to me again. It's against the rules. If Drax developed new powers and lost his previous powers of flight, energy projection and strength from a previous incarnation, why are you arguing that he could never have lost this anti-Thanos aura power? How can you be so blind as to miss this ridiculously huge hole in your argument?Not only that, but where is it stated that Thanos got weaker the closer that Drax got? NOWHERE. It just gave Drax the ability to nullify his forcefield and amp him up enough to pierce right through Thanos chest with his fist.
I can't tell it if you're vomiting up random sh1t that doesn't connect at all or expelling a bloody mess from your anus. Maybe both. Yeah, and Doom could never have survived a blast from a Galactus who removed him forcibly. This makes shielding evident. Of course, you're acting like you're not trying to deflect and you go right to the exact issue I called you out on. You have no evidence that Thanos grew weaker in Drax's presence in Annihilation, much less Thanos Imperative. It's just you spinning sh1t from some obscure interview that didn't even involve the writer. That's against the rules.
Let me know when you have any evidence supporting that Thanos grows weak and loses control over his powers in Drax's presence. Until then, it's obvious you've completely fabricated a new theory and excuse to cov er up how deficient your original theory and excuse was, that Thanos died because he didn't even have a chance to recover. Now it's Thanos died because Drax depowered him. Phucking unreal. If desperation were a perfume, it'd be called le' KuRuPT. DnA wrote Thanos Imperative, which is where KuRuPT Thanosi is peddling this nonsensical theory.
Nice try again but you've been caught again... You see I know very well what was said and that supports my theory further.. you were just too blind to notice. Did you notice how it states that previous incarnation didn't work.. blasting flight etc.. so he adapts till he finds one that works.. hmmm see where I'm going with this.. ONE THAT WORKS AND ACTUALLY DID WORK DIDN'T IT? DIDN'T IT ODG? So why would he need to evolve to something different when he was already evolved to land such a blow and negate his powers? So again, please give me the issue numbers and references to Dras losing his Thanos killing power and that it no longer exist. Until then, he has it and still has it and it was around in the T.I. Thanks for playing.. moving on
I ask again which you keep avoiding.. DO SHIELDS HAVE TO ALWASY BE DRAWN FOR THEM TO BE THERE. I see you skirted around me finding your quotes so don't think I didn't notice that convession that you have advocated that theory. You've advocated it with Doom and with Thanos and other characters. So, I say again.. does an Aura HAVE TO BE DRAWN in order for it to be there. If the charcter still has the same powers (you have zero proof otherwise) then he has the same powers which (whether drawn or not) come on when he gets near Thanos.
You do know who Andy Schmidt is right? You aren't confusing him with somebody else.. you do know what his position was at Marvel right?
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiI'm not proving a negative, you nunce. You're so desperate, you are openly using a logical fallacy as an argument. Usually I'd expect you to quanever and pretend you're not. At this pointm, you're in full-on embracing-the-wrong mode.
Nice try again but you've been caught again... You see I know very well what was said and that supports my theory further.. you were just too blind to notice. Did you notice how it states that previous incarnation didn't work.. blasting flight etc.. so he adapts till he finds one that works.. hmmm see where I'm going with this.. ONE THAT WORKS AND ACTUALLY DID WORK DIDN'T IT? DIDN'T IT ODG? So why would he need to evolve to something different when he was already evolved to land such a blow and negate his powers? So again, please give me the issue numbers and references to Dras losing his Thanos killing power and that it no longer exist. Until then, he has it and still has it and it was around in the T.I. Thanks for playing.. moving on
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiNice deflection. Forcefields have to be drawn and if they're invisible, there has to be evidence they're on. This anti-Thanos powerfield you're conjuring up? It's not drawn and there is no evidence it was on. Considering Drax has lost his previous powers when he resurrects, acting like I must prove that he doesn't retain this power is simply you again acting like I have to prove a negative. That's not how this works. The burden is on you to prove he retained the ability, that it was on and that it did anything to Thanos. You have no evidence. It didn't do anything to Thanos. You're completely speculating and making me apologize for your utter lack of evidence.
I ask again which you keep avoiding.. DO SHIELDS HAVE TO ALWASY BE DRAWN FOR THEM TO BE THERE. I see you skirted around me finding your quotes so don't think I didn't notice that convession that you have advocated that theory. You've advocated it with Doom and with Thanos and other characters. So, I say again.. does an Aura HAVE TO BE DRAWN in order for it to be there. If the charcter still has the same powers (you have zero proof otherwise) then he has the same powers which (whether drawn or not) come on when he gets near Thanos.
Also, good job fleeing from your initial "Thanos only died because he didn't have a chance to recover." Your new theory that Drax actually depowered him by just being in his presence isn't completely hairbrained.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiMention that obscure interview (not even an interview) that's not even from the writer of Annihilation to try to prove something that happened in a different storyline, Thanos Imperative which was written by different writers and that didn't even involve this non-writer is you breaking the rules.
You do know who Andy Schmidt is right? You aren't confusing him with somebody else.. you do know what his position was at Marvel right?
You mention it one more time to me, you're reported. Read the rules.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
I'm not proving a negative, you nunce. You're so desperate, you are openly using a logical fallacy as an argument. Usually I'd expect you to quanever and pretend you're not. At this pointm, you're in full-on embracing-the-wrong mode. Nice deflection. Forcefields have to be drawn and if they're invisible, there has to be evidence they're on. This anti-Thanos powerfield you're conjuring up? It's not drawn and there is no evidence it was on. Considering Drax has lost his previous powers when he resurrects, acting like I must prove that he doesn't retain this power is simply you again acting like I have to prove a negative. That's not how this works. The burden is on you to prove he retained the ability, that it was on and that it did anything to Thanos. You have no evidence. It didn't do anything to Thanos. You're completely speculating and making me apologize for your utter lack of evidence.Also, good job fleeing from your initial "Thanos only died because he didn't have a chance to recover." Your new theory that Drax actually depowered him by just being in his presence isn't completely hairbrained. Mention that obscure interview (not even an interview) that's not even from the writer of Annihilation to try to prove something that happened in a different storyline, Thanos Imperative which was written by different writers and that didn't even involve this non-writer is you breaking the rules.
You mention it one more time to me, you're reported. Read the rules.
Perfect... You've referenced Thanos having his shield up for the Tyrant fight and for the Maker fight and both broke his shield. So, since you NOW claim that if they are invisible there needs to be evidence they are on. So then, please point me to ANY evidence they are on? I love watching you squirm ODG.. I really do.
Furthermore, I never once changed my story. I've always maintained that BECUASE he was weakened and because it was Drax... that is why it went down the way it did. Nothing has changed in the least about that stance.
I'm still waiting ODG, did Drax LOSS HIS THANOS KILLING POWER?
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiThe deflection here is atrocious, hypocritical, desperate AND self-sabotaging. Let me point out each of these in turn: What is particularly atrocious is that you're trying to conflate a character's forcefield (which we know they have) with an imaginary AoE aura that weakens a different character (which you've never proven they ever had). I've seen characters use forcefields. I've seen a sh1tload of forcefields both visible and invisible. What I've never seen, is the character, Drax, having an AoE proximity aura that directly weakens Thanos (rather than amping himself up), much less seen a sh1tload of times where Drax had such this AoE proximity aura that was both visible or invisible. So, slight difference slick.
Perfect... You've referenced Thanos having his shield up for the Tyrant fight and for the Maker fight and both broke his shield. So, since you NOW claim that if they are invisible there needs to be evidence they are on. So then, please point me to ANY evidence they are on? I love watching you squirm ODG.. I really do.
And what you fail to remember is that I was forced to abide by Badabing's ruling on this issue that there has to be evidence of a force field. So you turning around and trying to force me to disprove the existence of an imaginary AoE proximity aura that is invisible and just happens to weaken Thanos, which is never mentioned and never displayed in the comic is a shocking display of hypocrisy coming from even you. But hey, keep trying to get me to disprove this and maybe I'll just report you to Badabing.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiYes, you changed your story. Because you are insanely desperate at this point to salvage some excuse from this trainwreck of a discussion. And don't even try lying to me. You've never focused on this imaginary anti-Thanos weakening aura when discussing your butthurt over Drax killing Thanos with an antimatter mine. It was always "Thanos could not have recovered his full strength" with you. Obviously, once you realized that you couldn't pass your farcical English miscomprehension past me, you resorted to inventing a completely new power of Drax's.
Furthermore, I never once changed my story. I've always maintained that BECUASE he was weakened and because it was Drax... that is why it went down the way it did. Nothing has changed in the least about that stance.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiOnce again, I'm not proving a negative. Should I report you to Badabing?
I'm still waiting ODG, did Drax LOSS HIS THANOS KILLING POWER?
But hey, for the sake of discussion to point out how ridiculous you are, let's use your negative proof fallacy (which, in itself, is completely hypocritical) and throw it back in your face: I'm still waiting KuRuPT Thanosi, did Thanos LOSS HIS FORCEFIELDS?
Good job, sabotaging your deflections above (which were already off-topic) where you think you actually have a point (you don't) to cover up your weak baseless speculation on the issue at hand (which is your overactive imagination and need to placate your butthurt over Thanos being disintegrated). Do you know what we people here on Earth call this? Irony.
Learn that word. Because whatever planet you're from, you couldn't have possibly planned this any worse for yourself and your arguments (or lack thereof).
Nice deflections and running with your tail between your legs. Lets address these one by one...
First, lets move away from your conveinent but transparent tactic of how you only said that line because of Bada's ruling lulz. Lets back away from that for a moment. So, it's your contention then, that aside from his ruling.. you feel like Thanos had his shields up against Tyrant and Maker correct? Your basis for that is the wonderful no limit fallacy of.. Well Thanos has shields.. he uses shields... thus he must must've used them in these situations even though we don't see them. Now, nevermind the lulz worthyness of that logic, lets focus on the other part of your theory to back it up when called for proof they were on. Well ya know, shields don't always have to be draw, sometimes they are drawn sometimes they aren't. Some writers draw Thanos shields some don't. Cool lets focus on that gem of yours which you are now backing away from. So, and I'm sure you'll avoid this question again... Artists don't always draw things the same do they? So applying that to the drax vs. Thanos case.. I'll use your exact logic and it fits perfectly. Drax didn't lose his Thanos killing power as it's encoded in his DNA.. He can't control it being on or off.. it's ALWAYS on.. Thus, being that artists draw things differently.. it's likely its was on being that he didn't lose the power. HaHa.. I love this discussion.
So you yet again avoided the question for the THIRD TIME now. I'm asking you again... DID DRAX LOSE HIS ENCODING IN HIS DNA TO KILL THANOS? Answer the question. DID DRAX LOSE HIS POWER TO KILL THANOS. Whether you believe it has changed and is now something else (which doesn't make logical sense why would the power need to change if it worked) but regardless, did he lose the encoding in his DNA to kill Thanos? Very simple question, but you continually avoiding it becomes transparent why you do so. lulz
You do know what proving a negative means right? You're the one askin ME to do so. We know drax has the DNA ENCODED IN HIM, We know he has no control over this which is even referenced in T.I. and annihilation. We know it's exists and still exists. We have this SUPPORTED BY ON PANEL NARRATION AND ARTIST DEPICTION. Now, you're asking to prove it is still on HAHHA WTF. That is proving a negative. I don't have to prove it's still on YOU HAVE TO PROOF by on panel narration that it's now off and he no longer has this ability. As it stands, he still has the ability and when he was around Thanos in the T.I. it was yet again on (which was confirmed when he said he can't control himself around Thanos.. it's inside him to kill him) So now, please PROVE it's no longer on. That isn't proving a negative you're asking me to do so. Your little games work on others but now me ODG. You're the one using a fallacy here and I expect you to prove it. If not, I'll report you to bada not the other way around.
Nice try again in being and dunce and trying to convince yourself I sabotaged my argument when I did nothing of the kind. Lets rewind. The huge difference in these situations is Thanos CAN turn his shields on or off on command. He's shown this to be true countless times. He's shown to get into scraps and NOT have his shield on with no evidence of a shield. Now, that is in STARK contrast to drax and how his powers work.. he has NO CONTROL over it being on or off. None ziltch nada. It's ALWAYS ON. Thus when drax was around Thanos it was on just like it always was. See how easy it was to destroy your theory or lack there in refreence to your position and your false bravado on mine? haha
Next, at no point have I changed my story.. you can see in one of my frist response which I can quote to prove you wrong. I said.. Thanos was weakened so him dying has little relevance to a full powered Thanos and the reason he was killed. In THEN SAID, and besides, it was drax who did it and he was designed to kill Thanos and exhibited a green aura that turned off Thanos eternal powers when he got near him. I mentioend BOTH as reasons why it happened. At no point did I stick with one.. then say no it wasn't that it was this. I realize you gotting your theories turned around on you is no fun, and how I exposed your past incompetience was no fun. However, there is no need to lie about me changing my posiition when it has been the same since day one through countless threads. Both factors means it has little relevance to what others could do to a full powered Thanos.
God I'm loving this discussion as it has exposed your hypocrisy from other debates and turned those theories back on you and man you don't like it.. haha
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiYou've sent his own double standards right back at him.
Nice deflections and running with your tail between your legs. Lets address these one by one...First, lets move away from your conveinent but transparent tactic of how you only said that line because of Bada's ruling lulz. Lets back away from that for a moment. So, it's your contention then, that aside from his ruling.. you feel like Thanos had his shields up against Tyrant and Maker correct? Your basis for that is the wonderful no limit fallacy of.. Well Thanos has shields.. he uses shields... thus he must must've used them in these situations even though we don't see them. Now, nevermind the lulz worthyness of that logic, lets focus on the other part of your theory to back it up when called for proof they were on. Well ya know, shields don't always have to be draw, sometimes they are drawn sometimes they aren't. Some writers draw Thanos shields some don't. Cool lets focus on that gem of yours which you are now backing away from. So, and I'm sure you'll avoid this question again... Artists don't always draw things the same do they? So applying that to the drax vs. Thanos case.. I'll use your exact logic and it fits perfectly. Drax didn't lose his Thanos killing power as it's encoded in his DNA.. He can't control it being on or off.. it's ALWAYS on.. Thus, being that artists draw things differently.. it's likely its was on being that he didn't lose the power. HaHa.. I love this discussion.
So you yet again avoided the question for the THIRD TIME now. I'm asking you again... DID DRAX LOSE HIS ENCODING IN HIS DNA TO KILL THANOS? Answer the question. DID DRAX LOSE HIS POWER TO KILL THANOS. Whether you believe it has changed and is now something else (which doesn't make logical sense why would the power need to change if it worked) but regardless, did he lose the encoding in his DNA to kill Thanos? Very simple question, but you continually avoiding it becomes transparent why you do so. lulz
Nice try again in being and dunce and trying to convince yourself I sabotaged my argument when I did nothing of the kind. Lets rewind. The huge difference in these situations is Thanos CAN turn his shields on or off on command. He's shown this to be true countless times. He's shown to get into scraps and NOT have his shield on with no evidence of a shield. Now, that is in STARK contrast to drax and how his powers work.. he has NO CONTROL over it being on or off. None ziltch nada. It's ALWAYS ON. Thus when drax was around Thanos it was on just like it always was. See how easy it was to destroy your theory or lack there in refreence to your position and your false bravado on mine? haha
Next, at no point have I changed my story.. you can see in one of my frist response which I can quote to prove you wrong. I said.. Thanos was weakened so him dying has little relevance to a full powered Thanos and the reason he was killed. In THEN SAID, and besides, it was drax who did it and he was designed to kill Thanos and exhibited a green aura that turned off Thanos eternal powers when he got near him. I mentioend BOTH as reasons why it happened. At no point did I stick with one.. then say no it wasn't that it was this. I realize you gotting your theories turned around on you is no fun, and how I exposed your past incompetience was no fun. However, there is no need to lie about me changing my posiition when it has been the same since day one through countless threads. Both factors means it has little relevance to what others could do to a full powered Thanos.
God I'm loving this discussion as it has exposed your hypocrisy from other debates and turned those theories back on you and man you don't like it.. haha
@KuRuPT Thanosi: You've got to be kidding me. So basically, you've never provided evidence that Drax ever had an AoE proximity weakening aura power. That's never been seen, ever. That was never mentioned. That was never alluded to. For some reason, Thanos never even mentioned him feeling weird when he was standing near Drax for two issues beforehand.
And you're trying to tell me that this situation is just as believable as a forcefield-using character using invisible forcefields?
Drax evolving a brand new unseen power that's never mentioned or portrayed before... is the same thing as a forcefield-using character using invisible forcefields?
...
HAHAHA. I love how you keep trying to force me to prove that Drax lost this power. A power you've never even provided evidence he ever had in the first place. Let's face it, I never argued that an imaginary ghost was protecting Thanos when Odin blasted him, "But wait! Ghosts can be invisible too! Maybe an invisible ghost that hated Odin was amping Thanos during their fight in Asgard!" HAHAHA.
Anyway, good job with your atrocious, hypocritical, desperate and self-sabotaging arguments. You've fully embraced negative proof fallacies, are now arguing against the basis of a ruling you yourself wanted, completely changed positions on the whole "Thanos could not have recovered full power," and now are attacking your own rationale.
Maybe I should ask Badabing to rule on this. How do you think he'll rule? On whether or not you have to provide evidence that Drax evolved a new invisible AoE proximity weakening aura on Thanos that we've never seen before and that there is no proof of?
You tell me, slick. Shall we ask Badabing to rule?
Hell, do you want him to also rule on whether Drax evolving a brand new unseen power that's never mentioned... is the same thing as a forcefield-using character using invisible forcefields? We can do a 2-for-1 deal here.
Nice avoiding of the question for a 4TH time.. maybe it will be 5 times a charm eh dunce? I will ask again.. DID DRAX LOSE THE ENCODING IN HIS DNA TO BE ABLE TO LAND THE KILLING BLOW ON THANOS? Very simple question that you continue to avoid.. and we all know why.
You say, there is no proof... are you blind or just dumb or both? In the lead up to the sequence where Drax kills Thanos...
1. It is mentioned by ON PANEL NARRATION that Drax has encoded in his DNA the ability to land the kill blow on Thanos. He's is Thanos's silver bullet? Is this not true? Your answer has to be yes.
2. Now fast forward to the scene in question.. Now, unlike in times past Drax NOW EXHIBITS A GREEN AURA ONLY WHEN HE GETS NEAR THANOS. Hmmmm That is ARTISTIC DEPICTION backing up on panel narration. Did this not happen? The answer again has to be yes.
3. Then Drax with his green aura is now able to pierce Thanos's forcefield like butter and deal a killing blow to Thanos which he's never been able to before. Is this true or not? Again the answer has to be yes.
So what do we have.. we have on panel narration and on panel artistic depiction backing up what we see happen when Drax kills Thanos. Check
4. Fast forward to the Interview of Andy Schmidt.. who as you know is only just the editor of annihilation.. ya know that comic we are discussing. Him along with (i've seen it before.. giffen) takl about WHY drax was able to do what he did. He talked about being reborn with new powers to get the job done.. talks about how when drax is around Thanos he shuts his eternal powers off etc etc. Hmmmm I think the writer and editor have a pretty good idea (better than you) on what they wre trying to convey in the scene.. we saw the aura.. we saw Thanos killed in a way he's never been before and his shield dealt with like never before. All back up what the heads over at Marvel say. Check
5. Fast forwrad to T.I. we have drax SAYING ON PANEL he can't control himself when he gets near Thanos.. something INSIDE of him makes hiim go after Thanos. What does this tell us you ask? What that and common sense knowing the character.. That Drax still has this DNA encoded in him to land the killing blow.. something nobody else in the universe has. So, he still has it encoded him if..
A) You have ANY ON PANEL NARRATION saying he no longer does.. then post it. You know you don't. As it stands then HE STILL HAS THIS POWER which is backed up by on panel narration.
Check and mate.
I know you liked how I listed your theory about shielding... Thanos uses shields.. he has shields... he must've used shields we just can't see it LULZ... Hmm Drax has the DNA encoded in him to kill Thanos.. it hasn't gone away.. thus he still has it right? Isn't that how your logic works? Only problem is Thanos turns his off and on which makes you theory about his shields lulz worthy... we've seem him turn them off and on. Drax on the otherhand IS ALWAYS ON. So if it's always on then it was on in the T.I. when he was near Thanos.
Thanks for playing.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiDrax once amped himself up with flashing green energy to tear through Thanos forcefields and punch through his chest.
Nice avoiding of the question for a 4TH time.. maybe it will be 5 times a charm eh dunce? I will ask again.. DID DRAX LOSE THE ENCODING IN HIS DNA TO BE ABLE TO LAND THE KILLING BLOW ON THANOS? Very simple question that you continue to avoid.. and we all know why.
Drax never showed the ability to weaken Thanos just by being near him invisibly so that an antimatter device would kill him.
Those two things have nothing to do with each other. They're not similar at all. Anyway, I love how this brand new power has become your go-to excuse. All the times that Drax was standing near Thanos in the two issues prior... you never once mentioned that Thanos was being affected. Heck, you're not even mentioning it now. Oops.
Also, good job acting like a brand new never-befre-seen power is the same thing as a forcefield-using character using invisible forcefields. Maybe I should act like an imaginary ghost was attacking Odin during his fight with Thanos in Asgard...
Do you want to ask Badabing to rule on whether you have to show evidence of this brand new imaginary power that Drax has never exhibited? Or shall I?
^ lawlz
Hey, I'm beginning to like KuRuPT Thanosi's line of thinking. Thanos was enhanced by Death to combat the Cancerverse, right? She gave him self-immortality and the offensive power-amp to bring permanent death. Thanos was like Death's silver bullet to all Life-amped characters... So I guess it's basically the same thing as an invisible Drax-durability depowering AoE proximity aura (based on his logic).
You know what this means? It wasn't Thanos being weakened in Thanos Imperative... it was ACTUALLY Drax being weakened the whole time! Drax would never have been killed without it!
I'm totally right. And KuRuPT Thanosi can only ever prove this wrong by proving that THANOS LOST HIS DEATH ENHANCEMENTS. Basically, unless THANOS LOST HIS DEATH ENHANCEMENTS, Drax was weakened enough by Thanos' invisible aura otherwise he would have never died. Never mind that it was invisible. Or that nobody ever mentioned Thanos having this power before, during, or after Drax's death. Now all I need is some irrelevant interview by someone who wasn't the writer or editor and continually reference it against the KMC rules. Which, btw, I'm reporting KuRuPT Thanosi for now since he did it again after I warned him about the rules three times:
Originally posted by Digi
No Non-canon Sources
Non-canon sources are invalid for evidence. With rare exceptions, comics not in continuity such as Elseworlds, What Ifs, or alternate universes are not used for evidence in debates of a particular mainstream character.A canon source is one that is regarded as being 'in continuity'. In the example of Star Trek; instances from the series and movies can be used, but books are definitely out. Comic book crossovers are usually unusable as they ignore common sense most of the time (DC vs. Marvel is certainly unusable in some cases in our debates!).
This includes JLA/Avengers. Canon or not, people just aren't going to agree on it in most cases. Besides, there should be plenty of other comics with which to make your point.
Comics released strictly online or on web sites will not be considered proof in the Comic Book Versus Forum.
An obscure interview given by someone involved in a story arc is not proof to refute feats. There have been too many of these so called interviews which go against what's shown on panel. Especially when there is no dialogue to refute what's happening on panel. Most writers are clear with the intentions of the plot and story arc.
This principle extends to characters with multiple versions, alternate timelines, etc. Unless specified by the thread starter, only current-version canon feats are allowed.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Drax once amped himself up with flashing green energy to tear through Thanos forcefields and punch through his chest.Drax never showed the ability to weaken Thanos just by being near him invisibly so that an antimatter device would kill him.
Those two things have nothing to do with each other. They're not similar at all. Anyway, I love how this brand new power has become your go-to excuse. All the times that Drax was standing near Thanos in the two issues prior... you never once mentioned that Thanos was being affected. Heck, you're not even mentioning it now. Oops.
Also, good job acting like a brand new never-befre-seen power is the same thing as a forcefield-using character using invisible forcefields. Maybe I should act like an imaginary ghost was attacking Odin during his fight with Thanos in Asgard...
Do you want to ask Badabing to rule on whether you have to show evidence of this brand new imaginary power that Drax has never exhibited? Or shall I?
Your common sense and logic seem to be gone the last few days. Well that, and you inability to get my argument right. This is WHAT WE KNOW AS FACTS:
1. Drax has in his DNA encoded to be Thanos silver bullet. He continues to evolve to a point where he can finally get the job done and kill Thanos.
2. We saw this manifested in a new green aura that we've never seen before, which was a new adaptation to get the job done. Which he did
3. We know that he has NO control over this kicking on when he's around Thanos. It's always on when in proximity to Thanos. We saw the reinforced AGAIN in the Comic in question when he said he had no control over his actions when he gets around Thanos.
4. We also know that being this encoding in his DNA STILL EXISTS.. he STILL has the power to Kill Thanos and that hasn't changed one bit
IF YOU HAVE ANY PROOF HE'S LOST THE ENCODING IN HIS DNA THEN POST IT. YOU KNOW YOU DON'T and THuS HE STILL HAS THIS POWER.
So, we are left with two distinct posibilities
1. First, as you've argued COUNTLESS TIMES, sometimes artists don't always draw things the same. If it's a given that when Drax is around Thanos.. he gets a boost in power or it stops Thanos from using some of his Eternal powers.. We know he has SOME KINDA power going on just when he gets around Thanos. So, it could be argued.. as you have, that he artist didn't feel the need to draw a green aura.. just liike (you claim) some artists don't draw shields.
2. We know he constantly adapts his power till he can finally get the job done. This manifested itself by a new green aura and lack of flight and blasting. So we know it can adapt to be something never seen before. So not only could the green aura just not have been drawn, it could any number of new ways that still affects Thanos in a negative way.. seen or unseen. We know he still has it in his DNA.. so how it's manifested nobody knows.. what we DO KNOW FOR A FACT is he still has it BY HIS ACTIONS IN THE COMIC IN QUESTION. " I can't control myself when I'm around Thanos.. there is something in inside of me that I can't control" i.e. he still has it DUH it was never taken away and is in his DNA
Also, don't think I didn't notice how you had NO retort for who was actually wanting somebody to prove a negative. That was YOU and I see you dropeed that when called on it. You have to prove it doesn't exist anymore, that burden is on you to prove, not for me to prove a negative.
Again, you do know who Andy Schmidt is right? Ya know the guy who edited the comic in question. Ya know a person more familiar with the comic and what the intent was than yourself or I. Yet, you want to take his comments about a book HE edited and go.. No I know better than him.. LULZ... Dunce doesn't even suffice with you sometimes.