Originally posted by JuntaiHulk is actually stronger than ever and most of Thor's and Doc Strange's relative depowerements, for instance, have been covered in storylines as the products of actual events, not just scaling down. That's why we use classic Thor, classic Strange or classic Juggernaut to refer to the older versions and this is made clear all the time. Besides, for as many characters who were weakened, others became much more powerfull, the MU as a whole wasn't scaled down like DCU was, shit happened to individual characters, that's all. In fact, the MU as a whole has seen a steady increase in average power level among its non-abstract folk.
Of course, however Marvel moved in the same direction. Which is why it's laughable when 60's 70's and even some 80's feats are used to support the strength of say . . Thor, or Hulk, when it's been quite clear they aren't written like that -currently-. And it's not even a question of these events having actually transpired once upon a time, because of course, they did, however they are no more canon to the characters -- outside of reference alone -- than the pre-Crisis stories of DC's, which are now fully canon as well. 😉Current Superman has plenty of his own ridiculous feats anyways. Imo, outside of a few brief moments[typically specifically powered up], Superman has been more impressive over the last decade plus than either of them featwise, and quite substantially.
Using PC feats to argue for current SM is absurd, let alone using a PC statement that was hyperbole back then and treating it as statement of fact for current SM because the story was referenced post-crisis.