Originally posted by Mr MasterThe entire time you were arguing with GalacticStorm, you were lambasting him as being absolutely wrong. You've now done a complete 180 and adopted his position. And you can't even bring yourself to admit that. Which is exactly why I don't believe for one minute that you yourself trully believe the UN didn't nullify/recreate the entire Marvel Multiverse.
I'm not praising shitI 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.
So until you own up to you being wrong and GalacticStorm being right the entire time in this one debate, take your disingenuous argument to people who actually believe you. I'm not going to waste time preaching to the choir.
Originally posted by quanchi112Exponentially superior feats correlate with the respective power of each artifact. Delving into Hulk and Thor is nothing but a pointless deflection from this simple truth.
Feats don't determine superiority here especially when we have an actual comparison. Going by your logic we can ignore Hulk and Thor and should center the stronger one on who lifted the most weight.It was stated it doesn't matter it only matters as the ig can manipulate the energies with a thought. They can be the size of an anthill or Arizona it doesn't matter. To you size is everything. It's like you just don't grasp things most debaters have years ago.
I bet most of the people who have called me a terrible debater do so because they have something against me and I bet like you just did right here spelled it with an o instead of an e. It's spelled debater.
Human Torch can manipulate heat with a thought. He manipulates a marble-sized flame easily. He doesn't manipulate a Marvel Multiverse-wide heat blast as easily. And this isn't just about size, since the UN ALSO RECREATED the entire Marvel Multiverse. It's about sheer power differential.
You'd lose that bet. And don't embarass yourself by mocking people's misspelling. It didn't go over well the last time you tried it on Juntai.
Originally posted by Galan007👆
This thread is ridiculous. Obviously nullifying an infinite amount of infinite universes, nigh-instantly would require FAR more energy output then nullifying a 1" x 1" square of space....I'm not too blinded by my own bias to see that.
The only thing I would add to this is that the difference isn't just that the UN nullified exponentially more. It also recreated it. Nullifying a marble vs. nullifying the entire Marvel Multiverse AND THEN RECREATING IT. Obviously the latter requires more power than the former.
Originally posted by King KandyThe same danger is inherent, that doesn't mean a user can't limit the power building within it to nullify less.
I would not believe that the UN stayed static in power, excepting one thing: Quasar stated (and in other comics as well) that losing his concentration would take out the universe. This makes me think that no matter what it's being fired at, the power to destroy a whole universe is inherent in every shot.
And on the whole backspace keyboard analogy I saw floating around earlier: Do any of you know how much processing memory/power/time is necessary for a computer to delete a single letter as opposed to deleting AND THEN RETYPING an infinite novel across infinite universes? Because that's the difference in the size, scope and power involved between nullifying a marble and nullifying AND THEN RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse!
This entire "marble-sized nullification sphere = Marvel Multiverse nullification/RECREATION blast" is utterly retarded. A general can flip one switch and launch one nuke and destroy a city. A general can flip that same switch and launch 1 billion nukes and destroy the entire planet. Just because I break his finger or that switch with my punch, doesn't make the 1 nuke's power = 1 billion nukes' power. For that matter, it doesn't make my punch = 1 billion nuke's power either!
This entire argument is nothing short of embarassing. Frankly, I se nothing more than a few posters hugging the Infinity Gems' as if those colorful baubles represented their testicles. If that's the case, stop hugging dem nuts. Stop hugging dem Infinity Nuts. UN is exponentially more powerful (arguably less handy in a fight due to it's inherent danger), but still definitely exponentially more powerful.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
What's up my friend? Let me ask you this as it seems people have misrepresented my argument and lumped me into other people's argument. All I have argued and will continue to argue, to which there is zero on panel proof to the contrary, that the nullification properties/power remain constant. My point is this... if you nullify a person or a planet the nullifcation properties applied to said item are the same. In other words it nullifies them using the same properties it nullifies a planet with. With same forces are applied to each item it nullifies. Yes if you are erasing a multiverse more energy is needed to cover something on a grander scale. Yet increasing output and range of the nullification to cover more space doesn't mean you also increase the nullifcation properties as to nullifying something more potently. That remains the same. Thus when Magus WTF pwn said nullifcation he fought the same exact potent nullification properties as any other time. Even quasar said he needed to focus on Magus or the universe could be erased. He needed to keep the mushroom smaller or else that would happen. Hmmmmmm that fits perfectly with what I'm saying... Same direct nullification properties were needed to be overcome no matter what. That sphere quasar released had the potency to erase a universe if not directed only at MagusFurthermore, as pointed out.. Death was erased using a tiny sphere of nullifcation... even less in scale than the one against Magus. That single tiny sphere erased the concept of death. Thus size doesn't really equate to much of anything. The nullification properties and potency remains a constant. The target is nullified. Period. On the one hand ODG says oooo well it erased the concept of death thus the size of the sphere doesn't matter as it was clearly still large in scale. The flip side to that is that the sphere directed at Magus could've been equally as potent and trying to erase the concept of magus or even trying to erase the IG itself. Lets not also forget trying to erase and beat an IG user which is > than death. So that UN shot was bigger in size than the one that erased death.. yet somehow less potent LOL. So again trying to say this tiny sphere is less potent than this other tiny sphere without ANY proof is kinda silly in my opinion.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiYou're conflating "cause" with "effect." The "effect" is the same. The "cause" isn't, i.e., the "cause" being a more powerful nullification blast. A matchstick has the same "effect" of burning something as a large torch would do. However, it's not the same "cause," i.e., torch's heat is much greater than the matchstick's. Although the object will be burned and the "effect" is the same, the respective flame's power that is being applied is not the same, accordingly, the "cause" is different.
All I have argued and will continue to argue, to which there is zero on panel proof to the contrary, that the nullification properties/power remain constant. My point is this... if you nullify a person or a planet the nullifcation properties applied to said item are the same.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiEquivocation. Human Torch can manipulate heat freely. The amount of heat that he can manipulate depends on it's overall power. If it's a tiny amount of heat, easy peasy. If it's on a much grander scale, i.e., universe-incinerating blast, he can't do squat about it. The amount of power he's manipulating doesn't remain the same between the two situations. The power the UN displayed in the situations didn't remain the same either.
In other words it nullifies them using the same properties it nullifies a planet with. With same forces are applied to each item it nullifies. Yes if you are erasing a multiverse more energy is needed to cover something on a grander scale. Yet increasing output and range of the nullification to cover more space doesn't mean you also increase the nullifcation properties as to nullifying something more potently. That remains the same.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiNo. Only if the UN fired a sphere that would exponentially expand and cover the universe would it have nullified the universe. Quasar only fired a limited sphere that expanded to nullify Magus only (and failed). And you completely ignore that Reed didn't only just fire a nullification blast that instantly wiped out the Marvel Multiverse. He ALSO RECREATED IT INSTANTLY. The two instances are different. If Surfer shoots a blip of Power Cosmic at something and later instantly destroys/recreates the entire Marvel Multiverse with his Power Cosmic, the latter was a much more powerful feat that involved exponentially greater power. This isn't hard. It's elementary.
Thus when Magus WTF pwn said nullifcation he fought the same exact potent nullification properties as any other time. Even quasar said he needed to focus on Magus or the universe could be erased. He needed to keep the mushroom smaller or else that would happen. Hmmmmmm that fits perfectly with what I'm saying... Same direct nullification properties were needed to be overcome no matter what. That sphere quasar released had the potency to erase a universe if not directed only at Magus
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiWe're using alternate UN's as an argument? Fine, alternate Infinity Nuts burned out fighting alternate Celestial Host. Based on using alternate universes: Infinity Nuts <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< UN.
Furthermore, as pointed out.. Death was erased using a tiny sphere of nullifcation... even less in scale than the one against Magus. That single tiny sphere erased the concept of death. Thus size doesn't really equate to much of anything. The nullification properties and potency remains a constant. The target is nullified. Period. On the one hand ODG says oooo well it erased the concept of death thus the size of the sphere doesn't matter as it was clearly still large in scale. The flip side to that is that the sphere directed at Magus could've been equally as potent and trying to erase the concept of magus or even trying to erase the IG itself. Lets not also forget trying to erase and beat an IG user which is > than death. So that UN shot was bigger in size than the one that erased death.. yet somehow less potent LOL. So again trying to say this tiny sphere is less potent than this other tiny sphere without ANY proof is kinda silly in my opinion.
Regardless, your logic is still pure straw-man. You and other Infinity Nuts proponents have continually straw-manned me by reducing my argument that power = size. I never said power = size. If you have to erase more, the power involved must also increase. That can involve size, but that's not the only thing. If the UN were to nullify a depowered human Odin, it would do it easier than nullifying a fully powered Odin who contains the entire store of Odinforce within his physical frame. There's that much more to nullify. Nullifying a blow-up doll of Death requires far less than nullifying Death and the entire concept of death across a universe. There's that much more to nullify. This is common sense.
And this all still ties back to this thread. These arguments are poor attempts to reverse-project the UN's feats onto the Infinity Nuts and amplify their power. That's utter nonsense.
Magus wtfpwning a marble-sized sphere =/= Thanos wtfpwning (or simulating) a multiversal nullification/RECREATION blast.
The UN doesn't use the same power it does for the former that it does for the latter. That's just stupid. And the rules don't change just because we're now comparing the UN to the Infinity Nuts. Take those arguments and apply it to a comparison of HOM Wanda's power and you'd still be wrong:
Originally posted by OneDumbG0No, he wouldn't. Because even though in the most facile shallow way, it's the "same power" involved, i.e., Wanda's power, it's not the same level of power involved in both. The latter was an exponentially greater manifestation of Wanda's power. Thanos w/ IG would not deal with it as easily. Common sense isn't discarded and the rules don't change just because we talk about him or the IG. Stop hugging dem nuts. Stop hugging dem Infinity Nuts.
Because by that logic, they're arguing that Thanos would use just as much of the IG's power doing this to Wanda's hex blast:... as he would dealing with all of this ripping across the entire Marvel Omniverse, the Chaos Wave:
Those two blasts by Wanda were the same power. So he'd deal with both situations just as easily. dur
Originally posted by Black bolt zI never said I saw the interview I said mr. m did.
Getting others to do your dirty work huh?!?!?!?!
OK.
No, discussing how these characters match up is the only way to see who is more powerful. Otherwise it's a feat war which makes no sense. All you have is unsupported speculation while I have on panel domination and the ig being right beneath Lt. Is the un?
Prove the power levels change. If you can't then I accept your concession.
Originally posted by quanchi112Are you still trying to pigeonhole this conversation into which artifact is more useful in a fight? Just so you can avoid the real argument I've put forth about their relative scope of power? You've tried this quaneuver before. Didn't work then, doesn't work now. All you have is the IG capable of a certain amount of power, taking over the single 616 universe. Compared to instantly nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly. It's obvious which one is more powerful.
No, discussing how these characters match up is the only way to see who is more powerful. Otherwise it's a feat war which makes no sense. All you have is unsupported speculation while I have on panel domination and the ig being right beneath Lt. Is the un?Prove the power levels change. If you can't then I accept your concession.
Here's the proof: Nullifying a marble is not as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly. Thus, it's proved. Your concession is duly noted.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0That doesn't mean it's more powerful anyways. if something can affect the mulitverse while something else makes you supreme in that reality then I go with the supreme power in that reality. This is neutral ground here on kmc so the ig wins.
Are you still trying to pigeonhole this conversation into which artifact is more useful in a fight? Just so you can avoid the real argument I've put forth about their relative scope of power? You've tried this quaneuver before. Didn't work then, doesn't work now. All you have is the IG capable of a certain amount of power, taking over the single 616 universe. Compared to instantly nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly. It's obvious which one is more powerful.Here's the proof: Nullifying a marble is not as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly. Thus, it's proved. Your concession is duly noted.
Prove the power levels change. You can't can you?
^ Yes, it does mean it's more powerful. It is capable of an exponentially more powerful feat. That's what being more powerful entails. The IG is less powerful. Deal with it.
Just did. Look to the earlier post. Unless you're willing to say, "I'm quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a tiny marble is just as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly." then I won't bother repeating my proof. Because you're not willing to state a position.
If you can't say that sentence word for word, your concession is accepted.
Originally posted by quanchi112
That doesn't mean it's more powerful anyways. if something can affect the mulitverse while something else makes you supreme in that reality then I go with the supreme power in that reality. This is neutral ground here on kmc so the ig wins.Prove the power levels change. You can't can you?
Originally posted by OneDumbG0You don't have the same scenario for the ig to see if it can replicate it so the on panel comparison trumps all.
^ Yes, it does mean it's more powerful. It is capable of an exponentially more powerful feat. That's what being more powerful entails. The IG is less powerful. Deal with it.Just did. Look to the earlier post. Unless you're willing to say, "[b]I'm quanchi112, and I believe that nullifying a tiny marble is just as powerful a feat as nullifying AND RECREATING the entire Marvel Multiverse instantly.
" then I won't bother repeating my proof. Because you're not willing to state a position.If you can't say that sentence word for word, your concession is accepted. [/B]
Originally posted by "Id"His whole case is centered on a feat which proves nothing. He can't prove the ig could or couldn't do it so we go by actual comparisons on panel. Ig is supreme power in the 616 while the un isn't.
What? isn’t this a clear case of you asking ODG to prove a negative?srsly
Originally posted by OneDumbG0Prove it varies in power...it doesn't.It varies in size/scope.Whatever it touches gets nullified so when the incomplete IG wtfpwned the nullfier it proves IG is stronger.
^ It can build up its power within to create a slowly expanding tiny marble-sized sphere or an instantaneous Multiverse-wide nullification blast that also recreates said Multiverse. Happy?