HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Still not explaining the contradiction there... In EITHER CASE abraxas is erased from even existing. In one case you're saying well he wasn't just nullified because the FF4 remembered things... then you say it was the multiverse that was nullified just without him in it. You have ZERO proof that in that scenerio whether all the memories, past actions or what exactly was done specificially during the reset. You claim it's okay for the ff4 to remember stuff if the multiverse is reset.. how is this possible... It was reset and under your theory Abraxas never existed.. then how could they remember things? Contradiction.

Reed destroyed and recreated the Multiverse, in order to realign the misalignment damage wrought. He also excised Abraxas from the new Multiverse. Had he destroyed and recreated the Multiverse with Abraxas in it, the Multiverse would be realigned, but then Abraxas would end up wrecking it again. So he had to snip him from it. But he didn't snip all his past actions from the new reality. I do not, and never have, claimed that UN destroying/recreating the Multiverse to realign it required Abraxas' past actions/existence to be completely nullified. In fact, I've been proving beyond doubt, that Abraas' past actions weren't completely nullified. You're superimposing a mutually exclusive, opposite argument (that I argued against) onto my own argument.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
When did I say it would not be any different.Of course it would be different.But that reason IG wins is because of versitility.Even if it is instantaneous IG user can still stop time.Takes nullifier or he directs the energy back at the user.

The warlock analogy still wouldn't make sense because if warlock's past actions were nullified thanos would still have IG.He would know that and wouldn't do it.Just drop that notion.

The Warlock option would make sense since Thanos was originally killed by Warlock, which led to his Death upgrade, which led to him using Death's Well of Infinity, which led to him discovering the true power of the Infinity Gems, which led to him pursuing them and using them the way he did, i.e., as an Infinity Gauntlet. ullify Warlock and all his past actions and you have yourself an IG-less Thanos. You not thinking through the ramifications of such an act =/= justifiably dismissing it's notion.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
I never said it's end result can never changed.Stop putting words in other peoples mouths.You gave valid reasons as to how it is differnent.That is true and you are right on that.I never questioned it.

I never said end-result=scope=power.Once again your putting words in my mouth.End result is what the UN user wants to use the UN for(of it's different functions).Scope=power because naturally it takes more power to increase the size.No more energy yet bigger size is just a silliy notion.Yet it still doesn't increase the extent to which the targeted object is nullified.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
[QUOTE=12663056]Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
[B]I never argued that more power would need to be generated to wipe out a multiverse vs a planet.. what I'm arguing and what is backed up ON PANEL is that the nullification properties doesn't changed one bit.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
There is a difference bewteen the power used and the potency of the blast. It was a greater feat because it took more power but the potency of the blast itself never changed.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
The potency(the extent to which things are nulified)doesn't change.It's not that hard to comprehend.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
[QUOTE=12646557]Originally posted by Mr Master
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.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
You confusing yourself =/= a contradiction in my argument. I never said Abraxas was erased from ever existing in the history of the newly recreated Marvel Multiverse. In fact, that's the exact opposite of what I said. Abraxas obviously existed as the FF, Namorita, Franklin and Watcher remember him. And obviously consequences of his past actions still exist because those past actions were what led to Franklin reverting Galactus back from his star form, among other glaring things.

Reed destroyed and recreated the Multiverse, in order to realign the misalignment damage wrought. He also excised Abraxas from the new Multiverse. Had he destroyed and recreated the Multiverse with Abraxas in it, the Multiverse would be realigned, but then Abraxas would end up wrecking it again. So he had to snip him from it. But he didn't snip all his past actions from the new reality. I do not, and never have, claimed that UN destroying/recreating the Multiverse to realign it required Abraxas' past actions/existence to be completely nullified. In fact, I've been proving beyond doubt, that Abraas' past actions weren't completely nullified. You're superimposing a mutually exclusive, opposite argument (that I argued against) onto my own argument.

So then why couldn't abraxas just been nullified and not all his past actions nullified just as you're arguing for in the multiversal snip of abraxas. In either case... as I pointed out.. the ff4 remembering one thing or another makes no difference... in either case.. he could've been snipped but not all his past actions erased.. correct?

^ Why couldn't Abraxas just be physically nullified? Because the true crisis Reed faced was the Multiversal destruction and misalignment already caused by Abraxas. And according to Reed he had to use the UN to "realign all that is":

It's plain as day from Reed's own words that the UN's target was all reality ("all that is/was"😉, and not just Abraxas. This is further substantiated by the fact that when he actually activated the UN, the very next scene isn't Abraxas being hit, but Multi-Eternity being destroyed:

Had the UN been aimed at Abraxas (to nullify all his past actions, which would arguably force reality to restructure itself), don't you think Reed, at some point, would have alluded to the fact that once Abraxas' past actions were nullified, reality would restructure itself... or that at the very least, we would have seen Abraxas getting hit by the blast? No such allusion is made. No such art is depicted. Absence of proof isn't proof of absence, but it's fairly clear what happened.

What ended up occurring, was the catastrophic calamity that Reed warned would happened three issues prior in a turn of dramatic irony: that the UN would be found and be used "to obliterate all the combined realities of the Multiverse":

As I have stated NUMEROUS times… you are preaching to the choir on this subject in regards to what happened. I feel the multiverse was recreated not just Abraxas nullified. However, my point is and still stands, that memories either way aren't proof of ANYTHING. In either case.. they could still remember things.. and you were using that fact as proof Abraxas wasn't just nullified. What I'm saying is that in either case they could remember things and did remember things and that isn't proof which occurred. The proof lies in the pudding of the arc.. where it is almost flat out stated.

^ Memories are proof that Abraxas' past actions weren't completely nullified. Those memories were consequences of Abraxas' actions. They still exist, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed.

Galactus was changed back from a star form, another consequence of Abraxas' actions as it was the only way Franklin/Valeria figured could stop Abraxas. He isn't in star form, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed. Obviously, Franklin's powers were exhausted in that endeavor, another consequence of dealing with Abraxas' actions. They were exhausted for years, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed.

Concomitantly, Valeria was now an unborn infant inside Susan's womb, whose still-birth decades ago had nothing to do with Abraxas' actions. Had Abraxas' past actions been erased, Valeria should have stayed with Roma. Again, this disproves Abraxas' past actions were erased.

There are other on-panel facts which disprove this "erase-Abraxas'-past-actions" hypothetical (not to mention the fact nobody ever explained/mentioned such an idea in the actual storyline). Rremembering Abraxas is but one of many on-panel facts that COULD NOT happen in such a hypothetical case scenario. I don't see how anybody can justify memories can still exist, of a foe whose entire past existence is wiped out. That's contradictory. That's exactly the opposite of what would happen in such a hypothetical case scenario.

Daaaamn ODG 😆

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Memories are proof that Abraxas' past actions weren't completely nullified. Those memories were consequences of Abraxas' actions. They still exist, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed.

Galactus was changed back from a star form, another consequence of Abraxas' actions as it was the only way Franklin/Valeria figured could stop Abraxas. He isn't in star form, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed. Obviously, Franklin's powers were exhausted in that endeavor, another consequence of dealing with Abraxas' actions. They were exhausted for years, hence Abraxas' past actions still existed.

Concomitantly, Valeria was now an unborn infant inside Susan's womb, whose still-birth decades ago had nothing to do with Abraxas' actions. Had Abraxas' past actions been erased, Valeria should have stayed with Roma. Again, this disproves Abraxas' past actions were erased.

There are other on-panel facts which disprove this "erase-Abraxas'-past-actions" hypothetical (not to mention the fact nobody ever explained/mentioned such an idea in the actual storyline). Rremembering Abraxas is but one of many on-panel facts that COULD NOT happen in such a hypothetical case scenario. I don't see how anybody can justify memories can still exist, of a foe whose entire past existence is wiped out. That's contradictory. That's exactly the opposite of what would happen in such a hypothetical case scenario.

Damn ODG you're still not getting it man. Usually you're pretty good with the understanding facts, and drawing logical conclusions from them. However, in this case... you just aren't doing a very good job. I will try again to get you to understand where your logic went wrong...

The UN can by your admission and what you are arguing for... totally erase and recreate the universe.. BUT... still give certain people memories of what happened. As you have preached before.. the UN's scope can be that good. Now, you're telling me that it couldn't erase just Abraxas actions.. and still hvae people remember things just as they did in the former? That makes zero logical sense. In EITHER case the UN is capable of letting people still have memories of what has occured. Which is my entire point, that this isn't proof of anything. Hopefully now you understand and see where your logic went wrong.

IG beats Wanda, she's overrated. In terms of raw power the UN outclasses the IG however in a battle a skilled IG user would win over a UN wielder more times than not.

Originally posted by GalacticStorm
IG beats Wanda, she's overrated. In terms of raw power the UN outclasses the IG however in a battle a skilled IG user would win over a UN wielder more times than not.

Pretty much how I see it myself.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Damn ODG you're still not getting it man. Usually you're pretty good with the understanding facts, and drawing logical conclusions from them. However, in this case... you just aren't doing a very good job. I will try again to get you to understand where your logic went wrong...

The UN can by your admission and what you are arguing for... totally erase and recreate the universe.. BUT... still give certain people memories of what happened. As you have preached before.. the UN's scope can be that good. Now, you're telling me that it couldn't erase just Abraxas actions.. and still hvae people remember things just as they did in the former? That makes zero logical sense. In EITHER case the UN is capable of letting people still have memories of what has occured. Which is my entire point, that this isn't proof of anything. Hopefully now you understand and see where your logic went wrong.

1) Theoretically, it makes sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would occur if past actions are nullified entirely -- even though that's never actually happened before. 2) It doesn't make sense that it would occur if only some of those past actions are nullified. 3) It doesn't make sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would sustain itself, if some of those past actions ended up being recreated afterwards.

You're trying to deflect from this by aggrandizing the UN's capabilities. A transparent maneuver. The weakness in your argument is, it's not the UN's capabilities that are in question here. It's the round-about method of temporal resetting that's in question. I'm not arguing that the UN doesn't have the ability to destroy and recreate what it wants. I'm arguing that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset is only achieved, and sustained, through past actions being totally eliminated and remaining eliminated.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Your tenuous explanation can be summarized succinctly: Reed decided to nullify only Abraxas and Abraxas' past actions which caused Multi-Eternity to reset itself... EXCEPT for a bunch of Abraxas' past actions... OR... Reed recreated those bunch of Abraxas' past actions... right.

[b]1) Theoretically, it makes sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would occur if past actions are nullified entirely -- even though that's never actually happened before. 2) It doesn't make sense that it would occur if only some of those past actions are nullified. 3) It doesn't make sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would sustain itself, if some of those past actions ended up being recreated afterwards.

You're trying to deflect from this by aggrandizing the UN's capabilities. A transparent maneuver. The weakness in your argument is, it's not the UN's capabilities that are in question here. It's the round-about method of temporal resetting that's in question. I'm not arguing that the UN doesn't have the ability to destroy and recreate what it wants. I'm arguing that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset is only achieved, and sustained, through past actions being totally eliminated and remaining eliminated. [/B]

Sound argument. When i originally argued that the UN could still be universal and that either Abraxas or his actions were nullified therefore resulting in a temporal reset, i never considered how some of the characters actually remember what happened and how some things were left unaltered. With all of the evidence out there, im now open to the idea that the UN did a direct multiversal reset.

The only alternative explanation i can think of is that under Reeds direction, the UN nullified Abraxas and the damage he'd done. Not so Abraxas or his actions never took place, but removed Abraxas and the resultant damage from existence. This would explain why the characters still remember what happened and why certain characters remain in their post Abraxas Saga state. I guess it would also explain why the handbooks still rate the UN as a universal power. Because i suppose erasing localized damage to dimensional walls in multiple universes doesnt necessarily equate it to a multiversal power. Furthermore Reed or Abraxas referring to how the UN can destroy the combined realities of the multiverse doesnt give us enough info to assume they mean directly. Some sources argue that destroying 616 would result in the end of the entire multiverse due to it being the core reality. Who knows?

So a viable alternative unless i've overlooked something? Which is a possiblity given how much effort it took to read through this stuff and respond. You tell me. To be honest i dont care about this shit nearly as much as i used to. After today laziness will mean i probably wont post again for months 😂

Originally posted by GalacticStorm
The only alternative explanation i can think of is that under Reeds direction, the UN nullified Abraxas and the damage he'd done. Not so Abraxas or his actions never took place, but removed Abraxas and the resultant damage from existence. . . .

So a viable alternative unless i've overlooked something? Which is a possiblity given how much effort it took to read through this stuff and respond. You tell me. To be honest i dont care about this shit nearly as much as i used to. After today laziness will mean i probably wont post again for months 😂

You don't obsess over comics anymore like the rest of us? Weak. Time to toughen up, cupcake! uhuh

You can start by reading through every page of the Infinity Gauntlet Vs. Cosmic Armor thread. biscuits

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
You don't obsess over comics anymore like the rest of us? Weak. Time to toughen up, cupcake! uhuh

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
We see Multi-Eternity get blown up. If he was just repaired, then the art would have shown him getting better, not being blown to pieces.

Youre right. The art does lend itself to your interpretation. Until we get further clarification from future stories or other Marvel sources i agree, the most likely interpretation is that the UN reset the multiverse. Its up there with the M'kraan crystal without a doubt.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
You don't obsess over comics anymore like the rest of us? Weak. Time to toughen up, cupcake! uhuh

I just cant be bothered anymore. Im not the 20 yr old student i was when i joined 😉

Galactic storm just expressed my precise point that I've been making. The UN could very well as you admit.. choose for people tp remember certain things and certain things to remain in tact. What couldn't remain in tact was the actions that directly caused the damage to the multiverse. As you admit, the UN is more than capable of doing so in either case... it could erase the multiverse.. but still keep some of abraxas actions still in tact and some memories. Just as it could erase Abraxas only and still keep some of his actions and memories of such in tact that didn't flush things down the toilet. THe point is and what is totally undisputable in what I'm saying... is that the UN could do either, and those things you list are proof of which one was done. The proof to me lies in the narration and illustration that took place. The bio contradicts this, which isn't the best thing but meh.

^ GalacticStorm expressed that my rebuttal to your argument was sound. The narration and illustration show that Multi-Eternity himself was destroyed the instant Reed fired the UN and was Reed's target "everything that was." We didn't see Abraxas get destroyed and then Multi-Eternity fade/repaired. What are you talking about?

Your deflections have already been pointed out and addressed:

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Your tenuous explanation can be summarized succinctly: Reed decided to nullify only Abraxas and Abraxas' past actions which caused Multi-Eternity to reset itself... EXCEPT for a bunch of Abraxas' past actions... OR... Reed recreated those bunch of Abraxas' past actions... right.

[b]1) Theoretically, it makes sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would occur if past actions are nullified entirely -- even though that's never actually happened before. 2) It doesn't make sense that it would occur if only some of those past actions are nullified. 3) It doesn't make sense that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset would sustain itself, if some of those past actions ended up being recreated afterwards.

You're trying to deflect from this by aggrandizing the UN's capabilities. A transparent maneuver. The weakness in your argument is, it's not the UN's capabilities that are in question here. It's the round-about method of temporal resetting that's in question. I'm not arguing that the UN doesn't have the ability to destroy and recreate what it wants. I'm arguing that a Multiverse-wide temporal reset is only achieved, and sustained, through past actions being totally eliminated and remaining eliminated. [/B]

Originally posted by GalacticStorm
IG beats Wanda, she's overrated. In terms of raw power the UN outclasses the IG however in a battle a skilled IG user would win over a UN wielder more times than not.

Annnnnyway. This IG vs UN stuff is boring. Im more interested in what you guys think of Wanda. She is so overrated.

As far as im concerned she altered events in history resulting in the HOM reality. However her control over reality wasnt absolute. As stated on panel she required Xavier to help co-ordinate her efforts to give everyone what they wanted and mental support from her brother so she could cope. And whilst this reality was in place she was hidden away on the sidelines maintaining it, not an active character in a new role, further supporting the fact that it was an intense effort.

Another point to note is that the reality she created wasnt a solid transformation. It was more like a veil over the proper 616 reality. Layla Miller and the Skrull Queen Veranke could see through Wandas efforts.

People overrate her by looking at how her 'No More Mutants' affected realities throughout the multiverse, forgetting to acknowledge that many mutants in 616 and various other realities were left unaffected. Plus all the alternate realities of the multiverse spring from 616 which is what makes it a multiverse. So any application of power made to 616 would indirectly be carried across to these other realities. Not through exertion by Wanda who at no point showed such power, but due to the nature of 616 and its spin off realities.

Any medium to high level cosmic with powers on a universal scale(think Galactus and above) would be too much for her.

Furthermore looking at the chaos wave and all the damage it did and using that as a direct guide to her power level is also illogical, because the chaos wave as directly stated on panel was a side affect of Wandas reality warping in 616. It wasnt directly created, sustained or directed by Wanda so all it did cannot be attributed to her. Its like me setting off an avalanche through reckless shouting, destroying a nearby village. Am i directly responsible for the destruction or did i trigger it? Could i go down to buildings of the village and directly shout them to pieces? 😬

Wanda is overrated. Shes a novice reality warper with little control over her powers. She required help to get HOM up and running, help from Xavier to keep it maintained which is why he was absent and behind the scenes along with Wanda herself. The realities foundations werent solid, it was a thin veil over the true reality and the illusion could be seen through. Her No More Mutants spell was a shoddy job and its application throughout 616 history saw it carried through to other realities because they are like branches off the trunk that is 616. The Chaos Wave was triggered by Wandas amateur tamperings, it was not a created and manned weapon.

IG 100% 🙂

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ GalacticStorm expressed that my rebuttal to your argument was sound. The narration and illustration show that Multi-Eternity himself was destroyed the instant Reed fired the UN and was Reed's target "everything that was." We didn't see Abraxas get destroyed and then Multi-Eternity fade/repaired. What are you talking about?

Your deflections have already been pointed out and addressed:

You are the only one deflecting here and have no rebuttal for my point. Simple question... Could the UN have erased just abraxas and fixed Eternity AND still have memories of certain events taking place or certain events not being erased that didn't do critical damage to the multiverse. Simple. IS THIS POSSIBLE ODG?