HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

Originally posted by quanchi112
The ig has been described as supreme power in it's reality so I fail to see your point here with what it's capable of.

So you avoid the question?

Eternity was recreated and wasn't in any real danger as Abraxas was the problem.

What question? The one based on someone saying that Gladiator can rip stars in half rather than any on-panel showing where he does in fact, rip a star in half? You... who made a ham-fisted argument over whether I could prove the UN destroyed/recreated the Marvel Multiverse on-panel even though you already knew that Reed literally said outloud beforehand that Abraxas could "obliterate all the combined realities of the Multiverse" with it. Get your phail double-standards outta my face.

Yes. Multi-Eternity was destroyed and recreated and would have been obliterated by Abraxas, but ironically was obliterated by Reed. Luckily, he was also recreated. Stating a fact in a shallow manner as it were some sort of rebuttal doesn't infuse your pointless statement with any argumentative substance.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Great. Alternative IG's were described as the supreme power in their alternate unvierses as well. Doesn't make them or the 616 IG capable of instantly destroying/recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse. UN's been described as being able to nullify anything. Doesn't mean it absolutely nullifies LT or the combined Omniverse of all comic book companies.

What question? The one based on someone saying that Gladiator can rip stars in half rather than any on-panel showing where he does in fact, rip a star in half? You... who made a ham-fisted argument over whether I could prove the UN destroyed/recreated the Marvel Multiverse on-panel even though you already knew that Reed literally said outloud beforehand that Abraxas could "obliterate all the combined realities of the Multiverse" with it. Get your phail double-standards outta my face.

Yes. Multi-Eternity was destroyed and recreated and would have been obliterated by Abraxas, but ironically was obliterated by Reed. Luckily, he was also recreated. Stating a fact in a shallow manner as it were some sort of rebuttal doesn't infuse your pointless statement with any argumentative substance.

I asked if this proves he is stronger than WW Hulk? Is this feat make all comparisons pointless as Glads has a more impressive feat than planet destroying strength.

You can't prove the ig could not do so so you have nothing.

^ Great. So what? Again, stop stating the obvious as if meant anythng in this argument. Drop the pretense.

Show me a scan of Glads ripping a star in half. If you can't, get your phail double-standard outta my face.

You can't prove the UN can't destroy the Omniverse of all combined realities + LT. Your failure to prove the negative still means you lose this argument. Shocking.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Great. So what? Again, stop stating the obvious as if meant anythng in this argument. Drop the pretense.

Show me a scan of Glads ripping a star in half. If you can't, get your phail double-standard outta my face.

You can't prove the UN can't destroy the Omniverse of all combined realities + LT. Your failure to prove the negative still means you lose this argument. Shocking.

^ Thanks for getting that phail double-standard outta my face before it got worse. doped

Also good job wasting 30 mins searching for Glad's "rip-stars-in-half" feat before realizing it didn't exist. shocklaugh

When the IG's power is compared to the UN's instantaneous Multiverse-destroying/recreating power revealed in a later storyline, let me know. Until then, I'll just compare Ironman's repulsor blasts to the combined Gem's power of the Star Gem and ignore the Infinity Sagas. K.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Thanks for getting that phail double-standard outta my face before it got worse. doped

Also good job wasting 30 mins searching for Glad's "rip-stars-in-half" feat before realizing it didn't exist. shocklaugh

When the IG's power is compared to the UN's instantaneous Multiverse-destroying/recreating power revealed in a later storyline, let me know. Until then, I'll just compare Ironman's repulsor blasts to the combined Gem's power of the Star Gem and ignore the Infinity Sagas. K.

So all in all you have not one shred of proof just a feat? That's exactly what I thought and if debating were to consist of no proof you'd have a point. You assume things like ig amping reflexes despite the fact it's never been shown on panel. You need to back your cases more.

^ There is no example. Because it never happened. Amazing point. laughcry

"Ironman's repulsors > Infinity Gems" per Star Gem saga and ignoring later stories revealing Gem's true power. Gotcha. 👆

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ There is no example. Because it never happened. Amazing point. laughcry

"Ironman's repulsors > Infinity Gems" per Star Gem saga and ignoring later stories revealing Gem's true power. Gotcha. 👆

^ I have an exponentially greater feat, i.e., instantly destroying/recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse in a blink. That overrides an old comparison whereby Magus dealt with Quasar shooting a tiny sphere (who wasn't even aware of an activated IG).

And via a negative proof fallacy, you're going to try to rely on a fake feat whereby the IG somehow matches the UN's feat? Fine. Via the same negative proof fallacy, I have a fake feat whereby the UN destroys/recreates the Omniverse of combined comic book companies + LT + TOAA + Presence. And you still lose. Priceless.

Or... I adopt your reliance on arbitrarily ignoring entire storylines like Abraxas and conclude Ironman's repulsor rays >>> Gems by ignoring true Infinity Sagas. And you still lose. Brilliant.

The idea that Wanda could "no more Thanos" is laughable whilst he has the IG.

Originally posted by Nihilist
The idea that Wanda could "no more Thanos" is laughable whilst he has the IG.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ I have an exponentially greater feat, i.e., instantly destroying/recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse in a blink. That overrides an old comparison whereby Magus dealt with Quasar shooting a tiny sphere (who wasn't even aware of an activated IG).

And via a negative proof fallacy, you're going to try to rely on a fake feat whereby the IG somehow matches the UN's feat? Fine. Via the same negative proof fallacy, I have a fake feat whereby the UN destroys/recreates the Omniverse of combined comic book companies + LT + TOAA + Presence. And you still lose. Priceless.

Or... I adopt your reliance on arbitrarily ignoring entire storylines like Abraxas and conclude Ironman's repulsor rays >>> Gems by ignoring true Infinity Sagas. And you still lose. Brilliant.

You don't have a leg to stand on just odg theories.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I don't see what's so laughable about it. In a face to face confrontation Thanos takes a majority due to skill, control, intelligence, and stability but if we're comparing raw power and scope of effect Thanos has nothing on Wanda.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So what? you can't prove the ig couldn't do so, it's been referred to as supreme power in it's reality, and has won an actual comparison on panel against the un.

You don't have a leg to stand on just odg theories.

Every single argument of yours is defeated via your own quanchilogic. You're quite talented at that.

Yes .

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
You can't prove the un couldn't nullify the Omniverse of combined comics, LT + TOAA. So you still lose via negative proof fallacy. Alternate IG's were described as the supreme power in their realities, they're not destroying/recreating the Marvel Multiverse either. Ironman's repulsor rays won an actual comparison on panel against the Gem's power as long as you arbitrarily ignore entire storylines.

Every single argument of yours is defeated via your own quanchilogic. You're quite talented at that.

^ When you're trying to use a negative proof fallacy, that's the exact situation where the burden of proof is not on me. You never cease to amaze at how much more wrong you can get. But even if you use a negative proof fallacy freely, then I shall do so also. And you haven't proven that the UN can't nullify the Omniverse+LT+TOAA. And you still lose.

Instantly destroying/recreated the entire Marvel Multiverse >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking over single 616 universe.

This isn't difficult and there's nothing more evident from that besides the exponential difference in power required. It's not my fault you wish to ignore what happened on-panel.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ When you're trying to use a negative proof fallacy, that's the exact situation where the burden of proof is not on me. You never cease to amaze at how much more wrong you can get. But even if you use a negative proof fallacy freely, then I shall do so also. And you haven't proven that the UN can't nullify the Omniverse+LT+TOAA. And you still lose.

Instantly destroying/recreated the entire Marvel Multiverse >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking over single 616 universe.

This isn't difficult and there's nothing more evident from that besides the exponential difference in power required. It's not my fault you wish to ignore what happened on-panel.

^ You made the claim the IG could match the UN's feat by relying on an infantile no limits fallacy. I don't have to prove it wrong, that's a transparently desperate negative proof fallacy. The burden's on you to prove it is true instead of me to prove it isn't. In any case, I'll just use your foolish no limits fallacy and say the UN has the power to destroy/recreate the Omniverse/LT/TOAA and then use your negative proof fallacy to turn the tables on you. Again. And you still lose.

Just because you don't get that comics and on-panel proof prove that the UN demonstrated exponentially greater power, doesn't mean you're winning the argument. This isn't Bizarro-world, son.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ You made the claim the IG could match the UN's feat by relying on an infantile no limits fallacy. I don't have to prove it wrong, that's a transparently desperate negative proof fallacy. The burden's on you to prove it is true instead of me to prove it isn't. In any case, I'll just use your foolish no limits fallacy and say the UN has the power to destroy/recreate the Omniverse/LT/TOAA and then use your negative proof fallacy to turn the tables on you. Again. And you still lose.

Just because you don't get that comics and on-panel proof prove that the UN demonstrated exponentially greater power, doesn't mean you're winning the argument. This isn't Bizarro-world, son.