HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

^ Well, I'm wholly interested in what parts you disagree with. As it stands, what their argument boils down to is, because Magus pwned a tiny sphere of nullification, Thanos could pwn a Multiverse-sized nullification/recreation or simulate such effect himself. Because apprently, nullifying a marble is just as powerful a feat as nullifying and RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse.

^ I see. But I'm afraid that they, and possibly you, are conflating the term "power" with the term "effect." Yes, the UN's true power is to nullify (and also recreate). So when you nullify a marble or the Marvel Multiverse, you could say, "Yeah. That's it's power, i.e., effect."

But suggesting that the level of power involved in both feats is the same... that's just not right. Or, that the UN builds the same power within to do both feats... no I don't agree. Same "effect" or "result," yes. Same "power," or "level of power involved," no.

Win-factor Reed nullifying a single marble doesn't use the same level of the UN's power as him nullifying the entire Marvel Multiverse... and then recreating it. I don't think I can fairly be accused of reductionism here. It's just patently obvious (to me anyway).

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ I see. But I'm afraid that they, and possibly you, are conflating the term "power" with the term "effect." Yes, the UN's true power is to nullify (and also recreate). So when you nullify a marble or the Marvel Multiverse, you could say, "Yeah. That's it's power, i.e., effect."

But suggesting that the level of power involved in both feats is the same... that's just not right. Or, that the UN builds the same power within to do both feats... no I don't agree. Same "effect" or "result," yes. Same "power," or "level of power involved," no.

Win-factor Reed nullifying a single marble doesn't use the same level of the UN's power as him nullifying the entire Marvel Multiverse... and then recreating it. I don't think I can fairly be accused of reductionism here. It's just patently obvious (to me anyway).

Originally posted by Black bolt z
By putting a lot of power into it and the effect is nullification.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
So you think the UN uses the same level of power to nullify a single atom... as it would use to nullify, then wholly recreate, the entire Marvel Multiverse? crackers

^ What exactly is the distinction between "level of power" and "amount of power" that you're making here? crackers

If the UN uses 100 billion gigawatts per atom, what about 10 trillion atoms? It then uses 100 billion X 10 trillion gigawatts for the blast?

This mincing words is pointless. If you recognize that the amount of power the UN has to use varies, how does this change anything I've said? What Magus did with a marble-size nullification sphere and what Thanos would have to do with a Multiverse-wide nullification AND RECREATION is utterly different based on sheer amount of power involved. That's essentially what I've always argued. I mean... do you know how many atoms there are in the infinite Marvel Multiverse? Or how many particles of energy there are in the infinite Marvel Multiverse that would also have to be nullified with such a feat? AND THEN, you'd have to recreate it all!

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ What exactly is the distinction between "level of power" and "amount of power" that you're making here? crackers

If the UN uses 100 billion gigawatts per atom, what about 10 trillion atoms? It then uses 100 billion X 10 trillion gigawatts for the blast?

If so, then how is that any different from what I've been saying the entire time? This mincing words is pointless. If you recognize that the amount of power the UN has to use varies, how does this change anything I've said? What Magus did with a marble-size nullification sphere and what Thanos would have to do with a Multiverse-wide nullification AND RECREATION is utterly different based on sheer amount of power involved. That's essentially what I've always argued. I mean... do you know how many atoms there are in the infinite Marvel Multiverse? Or how many ergs of energy would also be involved with such a feat?

The distinction i was making in that the level of power is the amount of energy released and the amount is how big the nullification sphere is.The level is always the same but the amount varies.The difference is that with a smaller sphere there would be less amount of power.The nullifier could be used on any scale therefore the larger the sphere the more amount of power released.Therefore when quasar used a smaller sphere the amount of energy released was reduced but the level is the same.If that makes any sense.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
IMO yes.
It uses the same level of power but not the same amount of power.When it increases size is when it increases the amount.
Say the Nullifier uses 100billion gigwatts of power per atom.It uses the same level of power for everything it nullifies when making the nullification sphere the larger it increases in the amount but not the level.

For instance, 10 pounds of power/force is not sufficient to lift a 20,000 pound rock.

Originally posted by Galan007
An increase in the level would denote an increase in the amount. No if's and's or but's.

For instance, 10 pounds of power/force is not sufficient to lift a 20,000 pound rock.

This argument makes no sense. The UN would have to increase it's power output in order to nullify the entire Marvel Multiverse. How is that any different from increasing it's power level?

And all semantics aside, how does that change a single argument being made (other than eviscerating Mr Master's and quanchi112's argument)?

Now think about this, because I know Mr Master and quanchi112 are obsessed with size. Like when they tried to compare the size of the visible nullification field that hit Death with one that hits a mountain. Their transparent straw-man is that I equate size with amount of power. Not at all.

Consider: 1) depowered Odin vs 2) fully powered Odin w/ Odinforce? Would the visible nullification on-panel be any bigger between the two? No. But is there a difference in things that one would have to nullify between the two? You betcha. Because while they may share the same physical body, the UN would also have to nullify the entirety of the Odinforce in the latter situation. It'd have to nullify not just Odin's physical body, but also the energy that the Odinforce represents as well.

Just because the "visible size" doesn't change, doesn't mean the amount of power involved isn't increased exponentially. Nullifying a wax statue of Death uses FAR LESS power than nullifying the avatar of Death and the entire concept of death from the entire universe. There's literally that much more to nullify.

Their transparent straw-man is that I equate size with amount of power. Not at all.

^ What is a higher level of power, 10 gigawatts, or 1,000,000 gigawatts?

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ What is a higher level of power, 10 gigawatts, or 1,000,000 gigawatts?

^ I'm trying to get you to state the obvious. A "higher amount" of power = "higher level" of power.

Nullifying a tiny marble requires more power than nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse.

BB just stop already. An important character trait for any decent debater is to know when to stop digging a hole for yourself.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
UN can nullify a single marble, or it can nullify the entire Marvel Multiverse AND RECREATE the entire Marvel Multiverse. The correlation between power differential is obvious. See above for my deconstruction of Mr Master's painfully shallow argument. I'll narrow it down for you though: what takes more power to nullify? An Odin that possesses the Odinpower, or a completey depowered Odin? Answer: the former. There's more to Odin than just the body that houses him.

And frankly, don't project your predilection for changing the subject when you're on the losing side of an argument. I still find it hilarious you try to confine Magus >>> Quasar just in Infinity War whilst ignoring Abraxas and can't admit that Ironman's repulsors >>> Star Gem in Star Gem saga whilst ignoring true Infinity Sagas.

Now say this, "[b]I'm quanchi112, and I believe that the UN nullifying a small marble is just as powerful a feat as nullifying and recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse."

In other words... this (a marble sized nullification sphere):

... is just as powerful a feat as this (the complete destruction/recreation of the entire Marvel Multiverse):

Do it! DO IT!!!! arrrgh [/B]

You never did. To suggest your feat surpasses the on panel comparison we have already addressed you need to prove the ig lacks the raw power of the feat. You can't and have been running for multiple pages and posturing from thread to thread.

The same power is used with the un when it attempts to nullify it doesn't fail at first and then use more power. It either erases you or it doesn't. It's pretty simple or so I thought until you showed up with one unprovable stance after the other.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
This argument makes no sense. The UN would have to increase it's power output in order to nullify the entire Marvel Multiverse. How is that any different from increasing it's power level?

And all semantics aside, how does that change a single argument being made (other than eviscerating Mr Master's and quanchi112's argument)?

Just say it: "I'm quanchi112, and I believe nullifying a tiny marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse."

Just do it. That's your conclusion and premise you base your entire argument around. Just say it. It's not irrelevant. It's your entire rheotric.

Why are you struggling to say what your position is? First you back down from even suggesting that the IG can match the UN's power. And now you can't even say what your initial premise is? Toughen up, cupcuke.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Just say it: "[b]I'm quanchi112, and I believe nullifying a tiny marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse."

Just do it. That's your conclusion and premise you base your entire argument around. Just say it. It's not irrelevant. It's your entire rheotric.

Why are you struggling to say what your position is? First you back down from even suggesting that the IG can match the UN's power. And now you can't even say what your initial premise is? Toughen up, cupcuke. [/B]