HOM Wanda vs. Thanos w/ IG

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
How do I know the UN couldn't nullify the LT a hundred times over? This is what we call a no-limits fallacy. If you want to play with fallacies like this, recognize that my no-limits fallacy beats your's.No, I just have Black Alice stealing the Spectreforce from Spectre. I also have Doom stealing the Power Cosmic from Surfer. The only facts that are being left out are the hundreds of examples where energy manipulation doesn't presume superiority in scope of power. Hal Jordan can absorb and wield the entire Central Power Battery, doesn't make him greater than it.

So you're going to ignore that an entire issue of Quasar was dedicated to the dangers of the UN, his inability to cope with the power of the UN, despite him traveling around and trying to educate himself about it? The Infinity Gauntlet didn't even come with an inherent instability and danger to it's wielder. The UN does. Neither did it even grant a user protection. The IG does. You're really going to ignore that? LOL.

Double-standard. Pitiful. Pathetic. Miserable. Delusional. Double. Standard. The intent of Marvel once they published a story where the UN instantly destroyed and recreated the Marvel Multiverse was to place it on a far greater scale than the IG could ever hope to approach. You need to deal with it.

I am asking you a legit question here. If a character 2 performs a superior feat to character 1 after the fact character 1 was shown superior to character 2 do we then conclude character 2 is more powerful when character 1 never had the opportunity to do so and was left out of the story?

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
And Black Alice can steal Dr. Fate's and Zatanna's and Spectre's energies with a mere gesture. Doesn't change the fact that all three are more powerful than Black Alice in isolation.

What you said still avoids the point. You're trying to excuse the IG's impotence by placing the blame on the user, yet you cannot bring yourself to do the same for the UN's impotence by placing the blame on the user (who spent an entire issue agonizing over how dangerous the UN is to its own wielder). Double. Standard.

The UN accomplished an exponentially greater feat than the IG. Which has shown no evidence of being able to replicate said feat. You want to imagine that the IG could do it to bring it to the UN's level? Fine. I'll imagine the UN destroys LT a hundred times over. Quasar was owned by Magus. I can own your face with a pistol while you hold a rocket launcher. I'm not going to pretend my pistol is more powerful than your rocket launcher.

LOL. You're ignoring Pet Avengers? And Abraxas? And Maelstrom? And Black Alice? And logic? And your double-standards? 🙄

LMAO. The IG owned the Nullification energies. When has anybody don't that to it? On panel, it's even stated that out that the IG is more powerful than the UN. Black Alice can steal Dr. Fate and Spectre's powers? Woah, because they've never had their powers stolen before? Please. And did it even say that Black Alice was more powerful than them because she did that? 'Cause I recall it say the UN meant little to the IG between a contest of the two.

And yeah, why don't you do that. Say the UN destroys LT because it nullified the Multiverse which is greater than anything LT has EVER done. Start showing up in debates and make that argument since that's your position.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
And yeah, why don't you do that. Say the UN destroys LT because it nullified the Multiverse which is greater than anything LT has EVER done. Start showing up in debates and make that argument since that's your position.

LT was holding two megaverses in his hand, so no, UN doesn't have greater feat than LT.

And what UN did compared to Wanda is maybe 0.1%.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think power wise Wanda>>IG easily. But she doesn't stomp or take a huge majority because Thanos is way more clever and less unstable. He could probably trick her into erasing herself or something like that.

The UN has more "raw power" than Wanda when it comes to erasing and resetting.. yet we saw how much good that did against and Incomplete IG in the hands of a less compotent user.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
The UN has more "raw power" than Wanda when it comes to erasing and resetting.. yet we saw how much good that did against and Incomplete IG in the hands of a less compotent user.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
See here's the thing. I don't think an IG user would have any defense against remote Nullification. If you stood in another Universe and Nullified 616 I doubt the IG user could do a thing about it. When its a matter of user vs user things are different. A guy with a pistol can easily kill a man with a cannon if they're both at spitting range but its a whole different story when the cannoneer is sitting on a hill half a mile from the guy with the pistol.

I see the horrible analogy started by ODG shows its ugly face again. If said pistol could manipulate the hill, the cannon, the cannon ball or whatever it chooses... that speaks volumes about superiority. You're only focused on one feat and somehow equating that to superiority.... A failed fallacy by ODG. Is Wolverine superior to Sabertooth because he has more OMG feats than Sabertooth? The Thing has more impressive lifting feats than Thanos.. does that make him stronger. Have a uber feat and somehow making that the standard for winning a battle is horrible logic. IG is more versatile than the UN and makes one God below the LT of said Universe(s). One feat in one area.. nullification and resetting hardly makes someone or something superior. Especially when said thing it's going against has never even attempted nor tried to replicate said feat. Just because Gamora is a better MA than Thanos.. does that mean she beats him in a h2h affair? No because one area of superiority means dick to an overall fight.

By the way.. no I don't agree that a remote user would be able to do anything still to an IG user. I'm not sure how that changes a thing. You're using a assumption that you can't support that IG only manipulated Quasar.. it seemed more to me like he manipulated the nullification sphere NOT quasar. Thus the user was irrelvant when you have control over said energies.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
The UN has more "raw power" than Wanda when it comes to erasing and resetting...

How so? How did conclude this? By feats? No. By what else?

Very easily.. one did both in a instant... the other started a wave that was GOING to do that over time.

didnt the wave actually desintegrate the omniverse and then remade it?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Very easily.. one did both in a instant... the other started a wave that was GOING to do that over time.

Imagine if Wanda can subconsciously destroy an Omniverse, with no one stopping it, what would that mean if directly? Oh yeah, you forgot she did it directly, putting Omniverse back with a thought instantaneously.

And didn't UN destroy and put Multiverse back? How can Multiverse compare to Omniverse, which is much much much much much... much bigger than Multiverse?. And yes, Wanda put OMNIVERSE back with a thought instantaneously.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
The UN has more "raw power" than Wanda when it comes to erasing and resetting.. yet we saw how much good that did against and Incomplete IG in the hands of a less compotent user.

So again. How did you conclude this?

So you are saying she completely ERASED EVERYTHING in the Omniverse and put it back in an instant? Is this what you're saying happening

That is the dominant interpretation. I know it sounds absurd, but there is a crap load of scans in her respect thread and some others detailing the chaos wave and what it did to the omniverse that corroborate this. Although I think it's more like she desintegrated everything down to pieces and put it back with some changes, rather than erase it.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
So you are saying she completely ERASED EVERYTHING in the Omniverse and put it back in an instant? Is this what you're saying happening

That is what happened. Chaos Wave destroyed it, then she put it back with a thought.

My favorite (Mr Master scan):

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/3195842/CW2.jpg.html

''Only a primal chaos, beyond the comprehension of any sentience, no matter how grandiose its opinion of itself...'', that is why no one could stop Wanda power and that is why Omniverse was destroyed.

Her power was simply awesome.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It's common sense. There is nothing to support it could own the Lt but when we had a writer actually compare the two there was no comparison. Just because loeb had the un perform such a feat there is no reason to assume the ig could not replicate the power required to do so especially when one writer already established the ig dwarfs it.

I am asking you a legit question here. If a character 2 performs a superior feat to character 1 after the fact character 1 was shown superior to character 2 do we then conclude character 2 is more powerful when character 1 never had the opportunity to do so and was left out of the story?

When it's an exponentially greater feat. Of course. If Surfer beats Firelord in a fight we embrace that, understanding what they're both capable of. Then when we see Firelord in a new story that demonstrates his true potential and all of a sudden he starts one-shotting entire galaxies and remaking them, then you assume the next time he sees Surfer, Surfer will be crapping silver poop.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
LMAO. The IG owned the Nullification energies. When has anybody don't that to it? On panel, it's even stated that out that the IG is more powerful than the UN. Black Alice can steal Dr. Fate and Spectre's powers? Woah, because they've never had their powers stolen before? Please. And did it even say that Black Alice was more powerful than them because she did that? 'Cause I recall it say the UN meant little to the IG between a contest of the two.

And yeah, why don't you do that. Say the UN destroys LT because it nullified the Multiverse which is greater than anything LT has EVER done. Start showing up in debates and make that argument since that's your position.

Why don't I stupidly embrace a no-limits fallacy just to fabricate an idiotic fake feat to make an artifact more powerful than what it's demonstrated on-panel because I don't like what on-panel proof there already is? I think someone has already tread that path and it isn't working out well for him.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
LMAO. Human Torch can own a tiny ball of flame that the Firelord can put out. Doesn't make him capable of manipulating Firelord's entire store of Power Cosmic. You recall you pigeon-holing this conversation to only Infinity War and wishing Abraxas never happened. I'm not sure where you get your motivation from to ignore that an artifact demonstrates exponentially greater power on-panel. But you'll just have to get over it some day.

Why don't I stupidly embrace a no-limits fallacy just to fabricate an idiotic fake feat to make an artifact more powerful than what it's demonstrated on-panel because I don't like what on-panel proof there already is? I think someone has already tread that path and it isn't working out well for him.

If you don't like treading a certain path, then stop doing so. You want to believe that Abraxas feat some how retcons another story that says the IG is greater than the UN than that's your choice. The IG was stated to be greater in power than the UN. Get over it.

^ I'm not treading down it. I'm pointing out how stupid the fallacy is. You want to ignore that a new story demonstrated that the UN is capable of an exponentially greater feat, by all means, ignore the whole new story. You want to limit a vs thread to artifacts only as they are illustrated in a select few comics to the exclusion of any other comic that might come along the way, that's your cup of tea. Just don't hold it against others if we decide to not ignore new comics that shed some light.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Congratulations. You just half-explained why your own use of a no-limits fallacy is retarded. Try going the other half of the way and try not back-track in the very same sentence you debunk its use.

When it's an exponentially greater feat. Of course. If Surfer beats Firelord in a fight we embrace that, understanding what they're both capable of. Then when we see Firelord in a new story that demonstrates his true potential and all of a sudden he starts one-shotting entire galaxies and remaking them, then you assume the next time he sees Surfer, Surfer will be crapping silver poop. LMAO. Human Torch can own a tiny ball of flame that the Firelord can put out. Doesn't make him capable of manipulating Firelord's entire store of Power Cosmic. You recall you pigeon-holing this conversation to only Infinity War and wishing Abraxas never happened. I'm not sure where you get your motivation from to ignore that an artifact demonstrates exponentially greater power on-panel. But you'll just have to get over it some day.

Why don't I stupidly embrace a no-limits fallacy just to fabricate an idiotic fake feat to make an artifact more powerful than what it's demonstrated on-panel because I don't like what on-panel proof there already is? I think someone has already tread that path and it isn't working out well for him.

The ig was supreme power within the 616 universe. Can you prove the ig isn't as powerful as the un based on the feat?

^ I can assume it demonstrated exponentially greater power because it accomplished an exponentially greater feat. The thing fired and destroyed and recreated the Marvel Multiverse instantly.

Can you not ask me to prove a negative? You don't have any right to ask me to prove a negative that the IG isn't as powerful. Just like I can't just ask you to prove the UN isn't more powerful than was already demonstrated. You're waffling all over the place and switching your arguments up between different fallacies. Whether it's double standards, no limit fallacies, negative proof fallacies or simple ignorance of entire storylines, one thing does not change: the UN demonstrated exponentially greater power than the IG. Whether you demonstrate the capacity to recognize that simple fact is your issue, not mine.

Exponentially greater feat means what exactly? It means dick when we have a vs. fight where one is clearly greater in power than the other. Are you saying the UN got an amp and was weaker when the IG wtfpwned it? If so please so me the scans or bio or anything that say such. Fact is it never got an amp or a power boast... it was always capable of doing so. Just because it didn't changes nothing. Just because Thanos is shown to lift a car in his next appearance doesn't mean he was never able to lift a car before. Point being, the UN has a better feat which in the end, means dick when confronted by an IG user.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ I can assume it demonstrated exponentially greater power because it accomplished an exponentially greater feat. The thing fired and destroyed and recreated the Marvel Multiverse instantly.

Can you not ask me to prove a negative? You don't have any right to ask me to prove a negative that the IG isn't as powerful. Just like I can't just ask you to prove the UN isn't more powerful than was already demonstrated. You're waffling all over the place and switching your arguments up between different fallacies. Whether it's double standards, no limit fallacies, negative proof fallacies or simple ignorance of entire storylines, one thing does not change: the UN demonstrated exponentially greater power than the IG. Whether you demonstrate the capacity to recognize that simple fact is your issue, not mine.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Exponentially greater feat means what exactly? It means dick when we have a vs. fight where one is clearly greater in power than the other. Are you saying the UN got an amp and was weaker when the IG wtfpwned it? If so please so me the scans or bio or anything that say such. Fact is it never got an amp or a power boast... it was always capable of doing so. Just because it didn't changes nothing. Just because Thanos is shown to lift a car in his next appearance doesn't mean he was never able to lift a car before. Point being, the UN has a better feat which in the end, means dick when confronted by an IG user.