HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

Started by OneDumbG042 pages

Originally posted by quanchi112
It's the application and purpose of the gems which changed. If you knew that then why did you continually ask questions like they changed colors or something?

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.

Because you said the "gems changed completely." Crappy quaneuver, blaming us for either your sh1tty English or your intentional lie.

1. An exponentially more powerful feat suggests that the UN is more powerful when properly used when compared to the power demonstrated by the IG when properly used.

2. HOM Wanda demonstrated more power than Thanos w/IG. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Originally posted by quanchi112
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?

When did I prove the UN operates under different levels of power? When I showed you a panel where it can nullify a tiny marble and when it nullified AND RECREATED the entire Marvel Multiverse.

So has the Cosmic Cube. So has the UN. So has Spectre. So has every cosmic macguffin. lulz Too bad Thanos wasn't absolutely powerful over Maelstrom. And was only absolutely powerful over a tiny nullification sphere. Too bad it hasn't demonstrated absolute power over the entire Marvel Multiverse such that it can instantly destroy AND RECREATE IT.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Because you said the "gems changed [b]completely." Crappy quaneuver, blaming us for either your sh1tty English or your intentional lie.

1. An exponentially more powerful feat suggests that the UN is more powerful when properly used when compared to the power demonstrated by the IG when properly used.

2. HOM Wanda demonstrated more power than Thanos w/IG. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. When did I prove the UN operates under different levels of power? When I showed you a panel where it can nullify a tiny marble and when it nullified AND RECREATED the entire Marvel Multiverse.

So has the Cosmic Cube. So has the UN. So has Spectre. So has every cosmic macguffin. lulz Too bad Thanos wasn't absolutely powerful over Maelstrom. And was only absolutely powerful over a tiny nullification sphere. Too bad it hasn't demonstrated absolute power over the entire Marvel Multiverse such that it can instantly destroy AND RECREATE IT. [/B]

Their application did so. It's not my fault you didn't understand me.

1.No, it suggest for that situation the un was very powerful but since the ig wasn't in the story and it's been described as absolute power we shouldn't immediately assume the ig lacked the raw power considering how it has been described and by whom.

2.So because someone demonstrates more power than the ig they are more powerful? By that logic Odin is more powerful since he has affected the multiverse. Ig is absolute power and more powerful than the abstracts and the un considering they were both in the same story.

That means the scale changes but the un's power doesn't change it nullifies what it intends to nullify.

So Eternity holding a hearing about the ig trumping him in power means nothing? Lt suggesting a battle between the two would destroy that reality means nothing? The un being pwned by the Magus minus the reality gem means nothing with a thought?

^ It is your fault. "[G]ems completely changed" =/= "Gems' application completely changed." Trying to act like you applied your premise to a completely different subject by inserting a word post-facto? Smelly quaneuver.

1. UN accomplished an exponentially more powerful feat than the IG. Deal with it. Using the absence of the IG from the story as some sort of proof would be interesting if it weren't so stupid.

2. When something demonstrates exponentially more power than the IG, then yes, it is more powerful than the IG. This isn't hard no matter how confused you make yourself.

The power involved is different. This isn't difficult. Nullifying a marble is not as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse. Saying otherwise is trolling.

Multi-Eternity being instantly destroyed/recreated by the UN means nothing? Reed calling the UN the most powerful weapon ever known means nothing? And yes, Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere means as much as Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem, i.e., nothing.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ It is your fault. "[G]ems completely changed" =/= "Gems' application completely changed." Trying to act like you applied your premise to a completely different subject by inserting a word post-facto? Smelly quaneuver.

1. UN accomplished an exponentially more powerful feat than the IG. Deal with it. Using the absence of the IG from the story as some sort of proof would be interesting if it weren't so stupid.

2. When something demonstrates exponentially more power than the IG, then yes, it is more powerful than the IG. This isn't hard no matter how confused you make yourself.

The power involved is different. This isn't difficult. Nullifying a marble is not as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse. Saying otherwise is trolling.

Multi-Eternity being instantly destroyed/recreated by the UN means nothing? Reed calling the UN the most powerful weapon ever known means nothing? And yes, Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere means as much as Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem, i.e., nothing.

I would think the meaning was obvious.

1.Did the ig attempt it and fail? Nope so I guess your feat arguing holds no weight at all.

2.When did this occur? You do realize the ig has infinite power, right?

It's not just me that disagrees it's mr. master as well as a few others who have argued with you over this. Whether they omega effect blasts a mountain or Superman the setting set to high doesn't change in power. Same thing with the un it either nullifies or it doesn't. It doesn't increase in power needed for the job unless you can prove it. Prove something.

That reed has ever known. When does reed say it's more powerful than the ig or even bring up the ig at all for that matter?
So pwning the nullification with a thought means nothing? Wow.

^ It's not obvious. Saying "the Gems changed completely" is you suggesting that the Gems themselves changed. When you post-facto insert the word "application," so that it now reads "the Gems' application changed completely" that's completely different. Poor quaneuver.

1. No limit fallacy. The UN hasn't attempted to nullify the combined Omniverses and failed either. So this imaginary feat still beats your imaginary feat.

2. You do realize the cosmic cube had relative infinite power also, right? You do realize that the IG's infinite power didn't mean squat against Maelstrom?

Sorry, but when Mr Master can't even bring himself to type out what I ask you to type out, i.e., "I'm Mr Master/quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly." I don't think even he places much stock in his own argument. He's just arguing for the sake of arguing to not concede, like you.

Reed knew about the IG. Don't be dense. Reed knew about the UN. He called the UN the most powerful weapon ever known. That purple prose defeats your purple prose. Sorry that I have an effective rebuttal to each and every one of your tired points. But I didn't form my opinion over nothing.

Wtfpwning a tiny nullification means nothing. Just like Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem means nothing. Sorry you cannot bring up a rebuttal to that which utterly destroys your faulty reliance on that one isolated incident.

I leave for 5 days... and it's still going on lol.

Feat wise in range individually UN>IG. But that isn't enough when they actually compared their power directly and incomplete IG owned UN.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ It's not obvious. Saying "the Gems changed completely" is you suggesting that the Gems themselves changed. When you post-facto insert the word "application," so that it now reads "the Gems' application changed completely" that's completely different. Poor quaneuver.

1. No limit fallacy. The UN hasn't attempted to nullify the combined Omniverses and failed either. So this imaginary feat still beats your imaginary feat.

2. You do realize the cosmic cube had relative infinite power also, right? You do realize that the IG's infinite power didn't mean squat against Maelstrom?

Sorry, but when Mr Master can't even bring himself to type out what I ask you to type out, i.e., "[b]I'm Mr Master/quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly." I don't think even he places much stock in his own argument. He's just arguing for the sake of arguing to not concede, like you.

Reed knew about the IG. Don't be dense. Reed knew about the UN. He called the UN the most powerful weapon ever known. That purple prose defeats your purple prose. Sorry that I have an effective rebuttal to each and every one of your tired points. But I didn't form my opinion over nothing.

Wtfpwning a tiny nullification means nothing. Just like Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem means nothing. Sorry you cannot bring up a rebuttal to that which utterly destroys your faulty reliance on that one isolated incident. [/B]

You didn't understand what I meant so no fault in you not getting it on my end.

1. The ig's power was said to have no limits so you say it does. Another example of you going against what the comics state.

2.Ig is more powerful than the cc by far so what's your point? One blast didn't defeat maelstrom while one blast couldn't do squat to Eternity either so again what's your point? Ig defeated Eternity in combat.

You can't prove the power changes at all so why even continue with this. Prove one of your claims any of them.

^ It is your fault because you misstated the sentence. Several times over. When you say "the Gems changed completely," or "the ig's power did change" or "their purpose changed" or "the Gems' powers changed" ... how is anybody supposed to presume that you really meant "the Gems' application completely changed" ... ? English motherf@cker, do you speak it?

I mean, don't fool yourself into thinking you've successfully quaneuvered out of lying out the side of your mouth on this one. Whether you admit to lying is irrelevant. You were forced to drop that silly assertion that the "Gems inherently changed" like the turd that it was. And thus, you still cannot distinguish Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere and Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem. That's the bottom-line. Nice concession.

1. UN was said to have no limits either. So my no limit fallacy still beats yours.

2. The point is that relying on purple prose and loaded terms like "infinite power" is all relative. The Gems obviously had their limits. Maelstrom, Grandmaster, LT, etc. And despite the Cosmic Cube's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the IG due to feats. And despite the IG's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the UN due to feats.

I need to prove that nullifying a tiny marble is a less powerful feat than nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse? Why would I need to prove that? It's obvious. And nobody argues against it. Nobody has said anything stupid like:

"I'm [insert name], and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Nobody's said that yet. So why would I challenge a non-statement?

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ It is your fault because you misstated the sentence. Several times over. When you say "the Gems changed completely," or "the ig's power did change" or "their purpose changed" or "the Gems' power[b]s changed" ... how is anybody supposed to presume that you really meant "the Gems' application completely changed" ... ? English motherf@cker, do you speak it?

I mean, don't fool yourself into thinking you've successfully quaneuvered out of lying out the side of your mouth on this one. Whether you admit to lying is irrelevant. You were forced to drop that silly assertion that the "Gems inherently changed" like the turd that it was. And thus, you still cannot distinguish Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere and Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem. That's the bottom-line. Nice concession.

1. UN was said to have no limits either. So my no limit fallacy still beats yours.

2. The point is that relying on purple prose and loaded terms like "infinite power" is all relative. The Gems obviously had their limits. Maelstrom, Grandmaster, LT, etc. And despite the Cosmic Cube's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the IG due to feats. And despite the IG's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the UN due to feats.

I need to prove that nullifying a tiny marble is a less powerful feat than nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse? Why would I need to prove that? It's obvious. And nobody argues against it. Nobody has said anything stupid like:

"I'm [insert name], and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Nobody's said that yet. So why would I challenge a non-statement? [/B]

The IG has it's limits...you do realize that the IG gives the wieldier master over all aspects of reality.The only reason LT could beat IG is because TOAA says he could.Like I have said b4,the nullifier doesn't vary in power.

Nullifying something takes a certain amount of energy.Thats how it gets nullified.Nullifying a marble uses the same level of energy as destroying multiverse.It's the same level of energy but it's the scope that changes.

The UN is just that powerful that it can nullify almost anything and the only difference is that size of the object going to be nullified.So since nullifier power doesn't change and incomplete IG wtfpwned UN than thanos w/ IG>>>>>UN.Prove the nullifer varies in power and I will switch to your side.For now i'm sticking with mr. masters and...I can't believe i'm going to say this...quan.They are right...well quan is only half right.He has some wrong points which would take to long for me to type.I gotta go now.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

you still cannot distinguish Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere

and Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem[/u].


Magus wtfpwnd the same energies that nullify space-time. Simple.

You call it a 'tiny" null sphere, but actually, in the Quasar book interpretation,
the sphere expands to smother the space between Quasar & Magus including Magus' stronghold,
which then Magus pwns the UN space-time nullifying energies with but a thought.

I don't recall the specifics of the Irona Man incident, (I'll have to flip some pages)
did Iron Man overpower the Star Gem with his rays, or did he just blast the gem itself?

That aside, Thanos erased Death across an entire Universe,
and the nullification sphere was the size of a human female.
So this circle speculating the UN needs to adjust in power to do its work is unfounded.

Also,
Galactus (616) used a uni beam the size of cyclops' normal optic blast
to erase Korvac from existence, and while Korvac escaped nullification by bfring himself
it goes to show that the UN can stomp Universal powers without the need of a cosmic sized sphere.
(616 Korvac using his power cloaked his presence from Eternity & LT
and he even made subtle alterations to the 616 Reality)

That also aside,
the fact remains that the UN only needed to rub out Abraxas to remake Eternity/Infinity to its prior self.
I mean what was it Reed said? "to realign all that is, we had to end all that was"
and 'what was'? ... Abraxas collapsing the Multiverse,
therefore Abraxas should've been the target.

Yea Reed stated that Abraxas could collapse all the Realities with the UN,
but Reed never said he himself could, let's not forget that Abraxas is a cosmic being, with cosmic senses,
while Reed is a not, just like you yourself argued Reed did not contain a map of every atom in reality.

Bottom line, by erasing Abraxas from ever having been freed, automatically realigns what was not right, and what was not right was that Galactus 'died',
which inturn lead to Abraxas fulfilling his conceptual purpose which is to collapse the Multiverse,
if Abraxas had never been freed, then Galactus could have never died.
"to realign all that is, we had to end all that was"
With a single miniscule basically insigficant difference: Sue is pregnant.

Yea I know I was the one that brought to kmc the UNremaking the Multiverse,
but this on going circle has had me thinking outside the box.

Just an observation to consider.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

1. UN was said to have no limits either.

So my no limit fallacy still beats yours.


When/where has it been said that the UN has no limit?

Because I have an issue where its literally stated that the UN does infact have a limit,
and this was from the mouth of Galactus.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

2. The Gems obviously had their limits. Maelstrom, Grandmaster, LT, etc.


Maelstrom? Thanos in his infancy wielding stage, blasted him once and nothing more,
Maelstrom himself point out how Thanos' inexperience with the IG was a plus,
and Maelstrom also stated that the IG surpassed his power.

Grandmaster? ... What? vs Loki who was being manipulated by the Gems themselves? 😬

LT? Who came as a representative of TOAA's power? Please, let's not go there.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

I need to prove that nullifying a tiny marble is a less powerful feat than nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse? Why would I need to prove that? It's obvious. And nobody argues against it. Nobody has said anything stupid like:

"[b]I'm [insert name], and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."


facepalm

How is this not spite? HOM Wanda has no way of harming Thanos

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ It is your fault because you misstated the sentence. Several times over. When you say "the Gems changed completely," or "the ig's power did change" or "their purpose changed" or "the Gems' power[b]s changed" ... how is anybody supposed to presume that you really meant "the Gems' application completely changed" ... ? English motherf@cker, do you speak it?

I mean, don't fool yourself into thinking you've successfully quaneuvered out of lying out the side of your mouth on this one. Whether you admit to lying is irrelevant. You were forced to drop that silly assertion that the "Gems inherently changed" like the turd that it was. And thus, you still cannot distinguish Magus wtfpwning a tiny nullification sphere and Ironman wtfpwning the Star Gem. That's the bottom-line. Nice concession.

1. UN was said to have no limits either. So my no limit fallacy still beats yours.

2. The point is that relying on purple prose and loaded terms like "infinite power" is all relative. The Gems obviously had their limits. Maelstrom, Grandmaster, LT, etc. And despite the Cosmic Cube's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the IG due to feats. And despite the IG's relative infinite power, we know it's not as powerful as the UN due to feats.

I need to prove that nullifying a tiny marble is a less powerful feat than nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse? Why would I need to prove that? It's obvious. And nobody argues against it. Nobody has said anything stupid like:

"I'm [insert name], and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Nobody's said that yet. So why would I challenge a non-statement? [/B]

Look I get you like to type the same things over and over again. The point is most people agree with me and not you. You have yet to prove any of these claims. Your theories can't even be proven which means you don't have a leg to stand on.

Ig>un on panel.

^ If you're going to use other people's opinions to validate your argument, then you ought to recognize that other people's opinions validates your poor debating ability. Besides, you won't even state a claim, so why are you pretending to argue with me? You haven't claimed the IG can match the UN's feat. You haven't even stated that you believe nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse. Say it:

"I'm quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly."

Originally posted by Mr Master
Magus wtfpwnd the same energies that nullify space-time. Simple.

That aside, Thanos erased Death across an entire Universe, and the nullification sphere was the size of a human female. So this circle speculating the UN needs to adjust in power to do its work is unfounded.

That also aside, the fact remains that the UN only needed to rub out Abraxas to remake Eternity/Infinity to its prior self. I mean what was it Reed said? "to realign all that is, we had to end all that was" and 'what was'? ... Abraxas collapsing the Multiverse, therefore Abraxas should've been the target.

Human Torch has easily absorbed and redirected heat. Doesn't mean he can absorb and redirect the Sun. Just because Thanos wtfpwned a single hex blast, doesn't mean he will just as easily wtfpwn the Chaos Wave.

So nullifying a blow-up doll in the shape of Death is as powerful a feat as nullifying the abstract entity, Death, and the entire concept of Death throughout that alternate universe? Then say it. Otherwise, don't straw-man me by suggesting I equate size with power.

As I have said before, I'm not entertaining any debate over your flip-flopping until you praise Galactic-Storm for always having been right and apologize for your tirades against him on this. Sorry, but you're going to have to prove to me that you're being genuine about your switching positions.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Maelstrom? Thanos in his infancy wielding stage, blasted him once and nothing more, Maelstrom himself point out how Thanos' inexperience with the IG was a plus, and Maelstrom also stated that the IG surpassed his power.

Grandmaster? ... What? vs Loki who was being manipulated by the Gems themselves?

How does pointing out that the IG's power was limited by the character's inexperience or by plot circumstances help your argument? Because it pretty much proves my argument. The UN's power was limited by Quasar's inexperience and by plot circumstances. I mean, he specifically concentrated on limiting its effect on-panel.

If you really believe nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse, then say it. It doesn't matter if you now admit you were always wrong in your arguments with Galactic-Storm and that you believe the UN never nullified/recreated the Marvel Multiverse, because you still think a marble-sized sphere is no different from nullifying the concept of Death across an entire alternate universe. So say it:

"I'm Mr Master, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying the entire concept of Death across the entire universe."

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ If you're going to use other people's opinions to validate your argument, then you ought to recognize that other people's opinions validates your poor debating ability. Besides, you won't even state a claim, so why are you pretending to argue with me? You haven't claimed the IG can match the UN's feat. You haven't even stated that you believe nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse. Say it:

"[b]I'm quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly." Human Torch has easily absorbed and redirected heat. Doesn't mean he can absorb and redirect the Sun. Just because Thanos wtfpwned a single hex blast, doesn't mean he will just as easily wtfpwn the Chaos Wave.

So nullifying a blow-up doll in the shape of Death is as powerful a feat as nullifying the abstract entity, Death, and the entire concept of Death throughout that alternate universe? Then say it. Otherwise, don't straw-man me by suggesting I equate size with power.

As I have said before, I'm not entertaining any debate over your flip-flopping until you praise Galactic-Storm for always having been right and apologize for your tirades against him on this. Sorry, but you're going to have to prove to me that you're being genuine about your switching positions. How does pointing out that the IG's power was limited by the character's inexperience or by plot circumstances help your argument? Because it pretty much proves my argument. The UN's power was limited by Quasar's inexperience and by plot circumstances. I mean, he specifically concentrated on limiting its effect on-panel.

If you really believe nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse, then say it. It doesn't matter if you now admit you were always wrong in your arguments with Galactic-Storm and that you believe the UN never nullified/recreated the Marvel Multiverse, because you still think a marble-sized sphere is no different from nullifying the concept of Death across an entire alternate universe. So say it:

"I'm Mr Master, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying the entire concept of Death across the entire universe." [/B]

I've made numerous claims such as the ig trumping it in power on panel. You just make up random facts you can't prove and use feats to make a false distinction in power pertaining to the un and the ig.

I have made my own arguments and even blackbolt says you are off here. You are. Nothing backs you up other than your own theories which you cannot prove.

^ Why are you pretending to argue with me? UN accomplished something exponentially more powerful than the IG ever has. On-panel. You won't even say that the UN could match it. You won't even state why Magus wtfpwning tiny nullification sphere is distinguishable from Ironman wtfpwning Star Gem.

And how many people have called you a terrible debator? Do you really want to pull the 'ole appeal to the masses fallacy?

Dude ODG...let's take a vote

Who here is on quans side?

Who here is on ODG's side?

So far it seems like quan side has more supporters than yours.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
And how many people have called you a terrible debator? Do you really want to pull the 'ole appeal to the masses fallacy?
lol

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Human Torch has easily absorbed and redirected heat. Doesn't mean he can absorb and redirect the Sun. Just because Thanos wtfpwned a single hex blast, doesn't mean he will just as easily wtfpwn the Chaos Wave.

😐 ... This has absolutely nothing to do with anything relevant.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0

So nullifying a blow-up doll in the shape of Death is as powerful a feat as nullifying the abstract entity, Death, and the entire concept of Death throughout that alternate universe? Then say it.

Evidently, yes.
Nullifying the m-body of an abstract does in fact nullify the concept
the abstract represents across the abstract's entire reality it resides in.

And M-Bodys come in different sizes, from 50 to 100 ft or so (Eternity usually)
to the size of a whithered female skeleton about 5'5'' or so (Mistress Death)

So yea, there is no need to use a nullification sphere of cosmic proportions
to erase Space-Time or even Death from Reality.

There, written therefore said by Mr Master.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

Otherwise, don't straw-man me by suggesting I equate size with power.

You are equating size with power,
because you're under the impression that the nullification sphere Quasar controlled
is somehow weaker than the sphere Reed used due to size difference.
Even though they both result in the SAME exact freakin end,
that is the target is erased from existence.

Mind you,
this is your opinion without any proof and/or indirect support of any kind.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

As I have said before, I'm not entertaining any debate over your flip-flopping until you praise Galactic-Storm for always having been right and apologize for your tirades against him on this. Sorry, but you're going to have to prove to me that you're being genuine about your switching positions.

I'm not praising shit

I stomped him many times over in more debates than you'l ever know
and I was never even giving a .... "that's true."
So my pipe will be praised for doing its job right every night.

That irrelevant gibberish aside,
the argument is sound and sensible, regardless of how you gauge my sincerity,
or regardless of what I might have sided with before.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

How does pointing out that the IG's power was limited by the character's inexperience or by plot circumstances help your argument? Because it pretty much proves my argument. The UN's power was limited by Quasar's inexperience and by plot circumstances.

I disagree. Quasar handled the UN well imo,
because he actually managed to produce a precise controlled nullification sphere,
something ONLY Galactus has ever been able to do.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0

I mean, he specifically concentrated on limiting its effect on-panel.

Quasar only limited the amount of area he was going to nullify,
but this amount was to be nullified by the SAME damn energies that nullify any amount
no matter the size.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0

If you really believe nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse, then say it. It doesn't matter if you now admit you were always wrong in your arguments with Galactic-Storm and that you believe the UN never nullified/recreated the Marvel Multiverse, because you still think a marble-sized sphere is no different from nullifying the concept of Death across an entire alternate universe. So say it:

Gibberish.

It wasn't a "marble" ... it was the same energies that nullify space-time on any scale.

Again, jump off my dilsnik on what I argued before, stick to the present son,
if the sound argument is backing you up against a wall,
just ignore if you can't find the strength to concede.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0

"[b]I'm Mr Master, and I believe that nullifying a marble is as powerful a feat as nullifying the entire concept of Death across the entire universe.
" [/B]

I'm OneDumbGO, and I still can't produce even a single shred of proof that supports my personal unfounded opinion that speculates the UN can be adjusted to different levels of power in order to nullify different sized objects.

Please, enough drawn out essays that read pretty,
post the scans and or/handbook reference that even alludes to your opinion or step aside.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
Dude ODG...let's take a vote

Who here is on quans side?

Who here is on ODG's side?

So far it seems like quan side has more supporters than yours.


Let's count them. There's Mr Master, you, Kurupt Thanosi...and that's it. Against...pretty much the rest of the forum. 😬

Plus its not like having the most supporters makes something right.