HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Examples like you lying about constantly proving to me how the Gems' power changed from when Ironman blew up the Star Gem and Infinity Gauntlet? Yeah. That's just one.

Continue to compound your lie. Or just try to prove your laughable argument instead of acting like you already did and then insult me for not recognizing your imaginary argument.

If you haven't read the Thanos quest then that's your problem not mine. Don't argue in threads you are ignorant on for future reference.

Originally posted by Knowsbleed33
HoM>IG when Thanos is using it.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
BBZ bear with me. I'm not arguing that the process is any different in terms of the basic science, just that it follows that nullifying a pebble and a Multiverse are two very different things and to say otherwise is well...retarded.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Except the LT owned it. So what, the LT is Absolute-er? 😬

Originally posted by quanchi112
You acknowledged they changed and now you are spamming up the thread with nonsense. It's like someone saying prove superman can fly and running around like a jackass. It's immature and counterproductive to your position.

Originally posted by quanchi112
If you haven't read the Thanos quest then that's your problem not mine. Don't argue in threads you are ignorant on for future reference.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ How did the Gems' power change? When did the Gems' power change? Who increased their power? Scans? Or issue numbers? kinda

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
I never acknowledged that at all. I specifically challenged such an assertion. You never even suggested that the Gems inherently changed between the Star Gem Saga and Thanos Quest. I certainly did not start running around like a jackass about it either. Although I can tell you who's acting like a complete jackass about it right now. Drop the act. You never suggested that the Gems' power inherently changed until you were faced with Ironman wtfpwning Star Gem and were forced to distinguish the Gems' situation and the UN's or unilaterally concede the fallacy of your position. And now you're acting like you constantly proved it over and over again in a laughable attempt to avoid having to establish such a premise in the first place. I'd be insulted if I thought anybody at all bought into your surreptitious attempts to spread lies. But they don't. So I'm not. All you have to do is prove how the Gems' power inherently changed between the two storylines. Feel free to "repeat" this imaginary argument that was posted countless times here in this thread where I originally called you out on your lie: http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f77/t433731.html or, alternatively, do it here. Both threads involve IG either way. I invite you to quote your "countless posts" where you already and repeatedly explained it without having to rehash them from scratch.

I most certainly did but I wouldn't even have to if you actually read most of the stories concerning the gems in the nineties. I don't know why you think pretending to be ignorant gets you anywhere because it doesn't.

If you don't know about the gems why should I even answer. It's something second graders can pick up on but at this point I really don't know if you read thanos quest or the ig saga. It seems like you just saw a few scans and are confused.

^ My first reaction is, "Are you dense? I never have, and still don't acknowledge that the Gems 'changed completely.'" My second reaction is, "Of course you're not. You're just lying at this point and can't help but compound that lie desperately because you haven't yet learned how not to straw-man or concede the fallacies of your own argument."

Stop acting like you've proven your point. Stop pretending that it's so obvious that I'm being purposefully ignorant about this. Nothing changed in the Gems themselves. Just how people used them. That's what's obvious. So just like I can't hold Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem against the Infinity Gems when it was used in a poor and limited fashion, you can't hold Magus manipulating a tiny sphere against the UN when it also was used in a poor and limited fashion. So go ahead and quote all of your "countless posts" where you proved that the Infinity Gems completely changed inherently that would make such an analogy moot. Or drop the pretense.

The gall of your continued lying would be insulting if it weren't so pathetically petulant.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ My first reaction is, "Are you dense? I never have, and still don't acknowledge that the Gems 'changed completely.'" My second reaction is, "Of course you're not. You're just lying at this point and can't help but compound that lie desperately because you haven't yet learned how not to straw-man or concede the fallacies of your own argument."

Stop acting like you've proven your point. Stop pretending that it's so obvious that I'm being purposefully ignorant about this. Nothing changed in the Gems themselves. Just how people used them. That's what's obvious. So just like I can't hold Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem against the Infinity Gems when it was used in a poor and limited fashion, you can't hold Magus manipulating a tiny sphere against the UN when it also was used in a poor and limited fashion. So go ahead and quote all of your "countless posts" where you proved that the Infinity Gems completely changed inherently that would make such an analogy moot. Or drop the pretense.

The gall of your continued lying would be insulting if it weren't so pathetically petulant.

Your argument is about as relevant as saying Thor's true strength was shown when he lifted the midgard serpent and that the Hulk can't do it. That sums up your entire argument.

^ So now you're switching from lying about unproven statements like "the ig's power did change," or "the gems changed completely" to a completely different (and still unproven) statement that "their purpose changed" ... ? lolwut? Exceptionally horrid quaneuver, even for you. crackers

And where are all the countless quotes of past posts where you established this point to me over and over again? kinda

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ So now you're switching from lying about unproven statements like "the ig's [b]power did change," or "the gems changed completely" to a completely different (and still unproven) statement that "their purpose changed" ... ? lolwut? Exceptionally horrid quaneuver, even for you. crackers

And where are all the countless quotes of past posts where you established this point to me over and over again? kinda [/B]

^ So you went from "power" to "purpose" to "powers"? When are you ever going to actually prove that something inherent about the Gems actually changed? 🙄

This latest quaneuver concerning your lies wasn't well-executed at all. 😬

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ So you went from "power" to "purpose" to "power[b]s"? When are you ever going to actually prove that something inherent about the Gems actually changed? 🙄

This latest quaneuver concerning your lies wasn't well-executed at all. 😬 [/B]

^ Oh yeah. Obvious. Just as obvious as your "countless posts" proving as such. Which don't exist at all. And is as non-existent as any proof for your ridiculous assertion. doped

I'd accuse you of spamming lies, but spamming denotes some sort of disruptive, unexpected behavior. As it stands, the compounded lying here is wholly expected. Good job pretending like you actually established an argument in the first place.

Truly disarming tactic, this whole "phantom argument that you refuse to ever repeat again." kinda

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Oh yeah. Obvious. Just as obvious as your "countless posts" proving as such. Which don't exist at all. And is as non-existent as any proof for your ridiculous assertion. doped

I'd accuse you of spamming lies, but spamming denotes some sort of disruptive, unexpected behavior. As it stands, the compounded lying here is wholly expected. Good job pretending like you actually established an argument in the first place.

Truly disarming tactic, this whole "phantom argument that you refuse to ever repeat again." kinda

^ Desperately trying to project your own humiliation onto me, (aka being called out on your lies and repeatedly failing to establish your argument at all), doesn't remedy your parade of phail in this latest series of post exchanges.

You'd have my pity over this whole situation, if you didn't bring it on yourself completely and weren't such a tool about it. 😬

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Desperately trying to project your own humiliation onto me, (aka being called out on your lies and repeatedly failing to establish your argument at all), doesn't remedy your parade of phail in this latest series of post exchanges.

You'd have my pity over this whole situation, if you didn't bring it on yourself completely and weren't such a tool about it. 😬

^ The actual comparison of Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere whilst ignoring an entire storyline (Abrxas) which is utterly defused by the fact that by those same standards, Ironman wtfpwns Infinity Gems' power as long as you likewise ignore an entire storyline (true Infinity Sagas)?

All you have is a double-standard and a string of lies which pretend to have remedied that painful double-standard. In the meantime, I've got the following when it comes to a discussion over sheer power differential:

1) UN instantly destroying/recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse >>>>>>>> IG taking over single 616 universe in sheer power.

And since Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere =/= Thanos manipulating or simulating the Multiverse's instant destruction/recreation, your comparison is outdated severely.

2) Likewise, HOM Wanda reordering the Omniverse with Chaos Wave >>>>>>>> IG taking over single 616 universe in sheer power.

And since Thanos wtfpwning Wanda's simple hex blast =/= Thanos manipulating or simulating the Omniversal Chaos Wave, any comparison you would make would be similarly outdated severely.

You know what I have? Facts. Facts that aren't outdated.

Originally posted by quanchi112
At this point it's obvious what changed but if you want to continue with this ridiculousness I won't take you seriously. It borders on spamming when you know the answer and continue to act like you don't.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
Obvious.You have no proof the gems have changed and won't have any because they have never changed.Only how they are used.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ The actual comparison of Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere whilst ignoring an entire storyline (Abrxas) which is utterly defused by the fact that by those same standards, Ironman wtfpwns Infinity Gems' power as long as you likewise ignore an entire storyline (true Infinity Sagas)?

All you have is a double-standard and a string of lies which pretend to have remedied that painful double-standard. In the meantime, I've got the following when it comes to a discussion over sheer power differential:

[b]1) UN instantly destroying/recreating the entire Marvel Multiverse >>>>>>>> IG taking over single 616 universe in sheer power.

And since Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere =/= Thanos manipulating or simulating the Multiverse's instant destruction/recreation, your comparison is outdated severely.

2) Likewise, HOM Wanda reordering the Omniverse with Chaos Wave >>>>>>>> IG taking over single 616 universe in sheer power.

And since Thanos wtfpwning Wanda's simple hex blast =/= Thanos manipulating or simulating the Omniversal Chaos Wave, any comparison you would make would be similarly outdated severely.

You know what I have? Facts. Facts that aren't outdated. [/B]

1.It's nice and all but has nothing to do with the ig. It's not in the same story so I guess exclusive strength feats are really proof of Thor's superiority over the Hulk by the same logic.

2.Whether or not someone's powers work in the multiverse or the universe that doesn't mean multi is more powerful. This is horrid logic and always has been.

So facts change? When do they expire?

Incomplete IG >>>>>>> UN

Any day, all day, every way. 🙂

So ... complete IG (in Thanos' hand no less) vs UN ... 😆

There is NO proof of any kind that even suggests the UN operates at different levels of power.
(nullification is the primary purpose of the UN,
and it does this no matter what the size of the target with the same energy,
that is ... the so called "nullification sphere"😉

Simple. Anyone have any proof to the contrary ... bring it.
(not drawn out self imposed logic filled with speculations ... Marvel on panel/handbook evidence only)

^ Incomplete IG >>>>>> tiny nullification sphere. True.

I have no proof the UN operates at different levels of power... ? Except that I do? Listen and learn: Tiny nullification sphere, Multiverse destruction/recreation. Multiverse destruction/recreation, tiny nullification sphere. This isn't difficult. But if you really believe your argument holds any water:

Say this: "I'm Mr Master, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Go ahead. Say what you believe. kinda

Originally posted by quanchi112
When I say changed what do you think I mean? It's their application I don't mean they have physically changed. The obvious yet escapes you.

Except we see that no matter the size of the nullification it can be manipulated with a thought minus the reality gem.

1.It's nice and all but has nothing to do with the ig. It's not in the same story so I guess exclusive strength feats are really proof of Thor's superiority over the Hulk by the same logic.

2.Whether or not someone's powers work in the multiverse or the universe that doesn't mean multi is more powerful. This is horrid logic and always has been.

So facts change? When do they expire?

When has Magus manipulated anything but a tiny nullification sphere?

1. Entire Marvel Multiverse destroyed/recreated instantly. That far outstrips anything the IG has ever done. Plainly.

2. When somebody messes up the Omniverse something fierce as opposed to taking over a single universe, that means the former is more powerful than the latter.

They no longer remain relevant when the story's outdated. Otherwise, Ironman's repulsors >>> Gems' power. kinda

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Incomplete IG >>>>>> tiny nullification sphere. True.

I have no proof the UN operates at different levels of power... ? Except that I do? Listen and learn: Tiny nullification sphere, Multiverse destruction/recreation. Multiverse destruction/recreation, tiny nullification sphere. This isn't difficult. But if you really believe your argument holds any water:

Say this: "[b]I'm Mr Master, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Go ahead. Say what you believe. kinda Actually, that's what everyone here was thinking you said. So it's nobody's fault but your own. A character's different use and application of the Gems is not the Gems changing. At all. Just like how somebody using the UN differently is not the UN changing. Lukewarm quaneuver. Good job eviscerating your argument that you can distinguish the situations.

When has Magus manipulated anything but a tiny nullification sphere?

1. Entire Marvel Multiverse destroyed/recreated instantly. That far outstrips anything the IG has ever done. Plainly.

2. When somebody messes up the Omniverse something fierce as opposed to taking over a single universe, that means the former is more powerful than the latter.

They no longer remain relevant when the story's outdated. Otherwise, Ironman's repulsors >>> Gems' power. kinda [/B]

1.A more powerful feat does not suggest their power changed. My Thor example destroys your logic.

2.Not at all. The ig was only interested in one universe and by your logic Ds being ripped through the timestream and destroying all of reality in foundations is greater than the ig since it applied to more than one universe. Laughs.

When did you prove the un operates under different levels of power? I guess Thor operates under different levels of strength as well going by your logic.

Ig is described as absolute power is the un?