Superman vs Earth

Started by 75310 pages

Originally posted by cdtm
In other words, statements without feats are usually written off as hyperbole.

Although, what happens if, say, the yellow power battery is claimed as being capable of destroying the Milky Way? Obviously, it won't actually destroy the Milky Way. Should we assume it would have, or write such comments off as hyperbole?

Just by way of example. I can probably think of other examples of characters making a claim as fact, that's never going to realistically happen.. (Another example is Supermans punches on the moon threatening to knock it out of it's orbit. As it didn't, does this mean we write it off as a hyperbolic statement?)

i think it would take a case by case analysis. does the character have other feats of comparable power to what he is claiming he can do? is the claim a clear atempt embelish the narration and give a larger than life feel to the story? Is it reasonable to assume under the circumstances in which the action is taking place that the blow is indeed enough to knock the moon out of orbit if it doesnt do that and doesnt cause massive collateral damage? It is somewhat subjective though, I would agree.

Originally posted by cdtm
In other words, statements without feats are usually written off as hyperbole.

Although, what happens if, say, the yellow power battery is claimed as being capable of destroying the Milky Way? Obviously, it won't actually destroy the Milky Way. Should we assume it would have, or write such comments off as hyperbole?

Just by way of example. I can probably think of other examples of characters making a claim as fact, that's never going to realistically happen.. (Another example is Supermans punches on the moon threatening to knock it out of it's orbit. As it didn't, does this mean we write it off as a hyperbolic statement?)

n/a

I see it like this... if they have shown that they can destroy a planet then thats when any statements like that should be used as evidence.... Example... cyclops stated that he is hitting juggernaut with enough power to split a planet in half... we do not have one showing of cyclops blast being capable of destroying a planet so in other words its hyperbole. Everyone has it that is why we accept feats, showings.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Deathstroke PIS =/= current Superman is reaching PC levels. Vast difference.

not really.

his highest end stuff? sure. his average? i'm not so sure.

Plus, the fact that they've fought and Superman has held his own against his PC self needs to be considered imo.

I'm not going to argue that he can blow out stars though. Nobody else should, either.

Originally posted by carver9
I see it like this... if they have shown that they can destroy a planet then thats when any statements like that should be used as evidence.... Example... cyclops stated that he is hitting juggernaut with enough power to split a planet in half... we do not have one showing of cyclops blast being capable of destroying a planet so in other words its hyperbole. Everyone has it that is why we accept feats, showings.

and you'd be right, except when the character has equal or superior feats to said task.

Superman destroyed uranus with one finger. Heh.

Originally posted by shokosugi
Superman destroyed uranus with one finger. Heh.

Scans plz?

Originally posted by shokosugi
Superman destroyed uranus with one finger. Heh.

LOL

Btw that wasnt addressed to Pr lol

Originally posted by shokosugi
Superman destroyed uranus with one finger. Heh.
🤣

Originally posted by shokosugi
Superman destroyed uranus with one finger. Heh.

😆

Soooo wrooooong! But funny. 😈

Originally posted by -Pr-
not really.

his highest end stuff? sure. his average? i'm not so sure.

Plus, the fact that they've fought and Superman has held his own against his PC self needs to be considered imo.

I'm not going to argue that he can blow out stars though. Nobody else should, either.

Average? You mean his average from his vastly depowered PC era that immediately preceded the Crisis? Makes more sense. Adding in the 30's to 70's of PC Superman utterly wrecks this theory of averages.

Most PC-Superman feats involve PC Kal-El, not PC Kal-L. Current Kal-El never fought a "PC Superman" that possesses the level of power most posters here are familiar with.

Which is why this whole exercise of re-retconning back in PC-era events, and by extension, PC-era feats, makes no sense. You don't re-retcon them in. You retrofit them.

Originally posted by biensalsa
WOW!!! Somebody is in pain, for them to actually reply to MY ONLY SINGLE POST IN THE WHOLE WEEK.

I WONDER WHO THOSE MIGHT BE?

How does your posting habit that particular week have anything to do with the fact that I responded to your reply to my earlier post?

Stop speaking retard to me. Translate it to English first.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Average? You mean his average from his vastly depowered PC era that immediately preceded the Crisis? Makes more sense. Adding in the 30's to 70's of PC Superman utterly wrecks this theory of averages.

Most PC-Superman feats involve PC Kal-El, not PC Kal-L. Current Kal-El never fought a "PC Superman" that possesses the level of power most posters here are familiar with.

Which is why this whole exercise of re-retconning back in PC-era events, and by extension, PC-era feats, makes no sense. You don't re-retcon them in. You retrofit them. How does your posting habit that particular week have anything to do with the fact that I responded to your reply to my earlier post?

Stop speaking retard to me. Translate it to English first.

then we agree, i think.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Average? You mean his average from his vastly depowered PC era that immediately preceded the Crisis? Makes more sense. Adding in the 30's to 70's of PC Superman utterly wrecks this theory of averages.

Most PC-Superman feats involve PC Kal-El, not PC Kal-L. Current Kal-El never fought a "PC Superman" that possesses the level of power most posters here are familiar with.

During the Crisis, Kal-L was still tossing around moons at Anti Monitor.

But to be honest, the younger Kal-L in the World War II era All Star Squadron seemed even weaker then Byrne Superman. He got KOEd by a nuke, for one, and needed Alan Scott and Wonder Woman's help to deal with it.

^ IIRC, asteroids... and a small moon?

PC Superman wasn't free from low feats. That's just characteristic of any long-standing comic character.

Superman does not have the strength to destroy the earth, he had to build up mass plus flight assist to destroy a small moon. On panel proof shows he could not do it with 500 punches.

Originally posted by Juntai
In a few of the current cases it actually references the issue numbers, such as when JLA and the Legion fought Mordru back in the 70's was referenced in a comic a bit ago, and it said the exact issue numbers. So it's not 'something like this' happened, these actual pre-crisis stories happened.

In the Mongul case, they put the Alan Moore Mongul story into a Superman"Giant Sized Special", which they did for a bunch of characters following Crisis.

It's actually the de-powering that didn't happen, rather than the stories -- Byrnes or the Pre-Crisis, they were just always that strong, give or take.


What does it matter that they're mentioning exact issue numbers when they were doing that kind of thing RIGHT after COIE?

I'm not familiar with the Mongul story so I can't really speak on that since I don't know if the objection I have with what biensalsa would like to do here applies to that story.

Well that's one theory, but is there actually anything to suggest that the extremely inconsistant powerlevel of the Pre Crisis characters wasn't being rectoned to match their Post Crisis counterparts rather than vice versa? I mean how the characters were being portrayed in 1991 seems like it would give us a pretty good idea of which version of the characters powerlevels were really being adjusted by a story from 1990...

Originally posted by darthgoober
What does it matter that they're mentioning exact issue numbers when they were doing that kind of thing RIGHT after COIE?

I'm not familiar with the Mongul story so I can't really speak on that since I don't know if the objection I have with what biensalsa would like to do here applies to that story.

Well that's one theory, but is there actually anything to suggest that the extremely inconsistant powerlevel of the Pre Crisis characters wasn't being rectoned to match their Post Crisis counterparts rather than vice versa? I mean how the characters were being portrayed in 1991 seems like it would give us a pretty good idea of which version of the characters powerlevels were really being adjusted by a story from 1990...

I'm not talking about considering Superman of 1990 or 1991 to be capable to split a diamond planet in two. I'm talking about CURRENT Superman, yes the retcon happened a while back, but it would not apply to his power level of back then. On his current power level it is a posiblity.

Now the guy can lift mini singularities, even micro singularities are supposed to be dense enough to go thru earth like rock goes thru air, how he will not be able to split a planet?

Originally posted by Starscream M
um yes they do

if superman goes full force at earth....he'll go right through it, creating a hole so small relative to the planet

think about an analogy

take a watermelon, and then you shoot a single particle of sand (superman would prob be much smaller in relation) through that watermelon. it doesn't matter how hard you shoot that sand, at best, the send travels through the watermelon...but because of its small surface area, it can't shatter the watermelon.


YouTube video

Why did that happen? The bullet should have just passed through the watermelon!

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
no way in hell

said the retarded superman hater i mean seriously you are the dumbest after quanchi around here

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
Hulk would it in one punch though

what an idiot