Originally posted by -Pr-
What evidence?
She succeeds where he does not, she trumps people and other opponents that give him great trouble, people that themselves have just claims and evidence that they are greater than him.
On the other hand, Superman fails at feats that their shared feats together suggest he should be able to do alone.
Callisto is one recent example, a moon that Superman cannot stop even with the help of a dozen other Kryptonians, whereas in JLA 58, with the help of Wonder Woman and Green Lantern Rayner, moving Earth's moon can be done at speed, and then with enough precision to avert colliding with the planet itself after bringing it into Earth's own atmosphere.
That makes sense if Diana is actually stronger than he is, and stronger than the average Kryptonian. That is, in fact, exactly what one would predict.
On the other hand, even as I'm having this debate, I'm already being realistic. You and I both know there isn't really continuity enough to hold together even Superman's history.
You, for instance, assert that a story set in 2001 shows why Superman is the premier hero in the DCU. Not coincidentally, this is the showing that showcases post-Crisis Superman at the zenith of his mainstream power. Is he given this place later on?
I've got a lot of questions I'd be interested in having you answer, but you're not around a whole lot. To start with, I wonder what you conclude from Our Worlds at War that you would like me to take from the series. I listed what I thought were the essentials as relates to this thread, but you did not respond to them, or explain why you thought it should be something kept in mind.
If it's the idea that Superman can powerup and increase his strength, you should be aware that Wonder Woman has at least one or two means of powering up that are fairly well-established for her as well.
