Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Which is irrelevant in THIS debate. Yes, I believe that there was a link between Superman/Zod. It was heavily implied to by the story.
I'm asking you for EVIDENCE of this. Because I'm reading it as a literary device, one that is used COMMONLY, where as you're reading it as a scientific/quasi-mystical connection between two beings and a physical world. Fine, but shouldn't that have been spelled out somewhere? How is it more likely that something like that exists than simple creative description of a fight?
But for the purposes of this thread, I DID mention that the ambiguity of the feat DOES NOT PROVE IN ANY WAY the argument presented by the Superman camp.
You admit the ambiguity of the feat when it's brought to your attention. But you specifically refute the idea all across these boards unless someone actually familiar with it brings it up.
That's biased, and dishonest. Which would have been fine with me, frankly, if you didn't start this conversation with accusing me of the same. At the very least, I'm presenting the ambiguous nature of both feats in full.
Your statement of "present definitive proof of X occuring EXACTLY as you say it" is not a refutation but a transfer of burden of proof. Place YOUR interpretation of what the feat was and present YOUR proof?
Your interpretation requires numerous special dispensations of logic; mine is taken at base level.
They never mention any special connection between the characters and a physical planet, so there is none. They never show that Gladiator has the ability to contain giant energy blasts, so he didn't.
Your interpretation requires the invention of powers, of special and strange and never hinted at connections. Mine, via occams razor, are the more likely. But NEITHER are definitive, and I'm fine with that.
The scans themselves heavily imply it:"As our skin splits, so does the Earth..."
"Tectonic plates roil under a hide of jaundiced leather", comes from a famous story describing Mongul fighting Superman. Am I to take it literally that Mongul is composed of tectonic plates and jaundiced leather?
I'm asking for some genuine evidence that they are connected, scientifically. It's such an out there concept that it shouldn't be something that was left to the audience to assume; you can see that, right? It requires all manner of logical stretching and reaching, where as my interpretation is simple and basic and requires nothing special.
"For one thing, Johnny, that explosion would have annihilated half the solar system--unless it was somehow deliberately contained"There exists evidence that seems to imply a certain truth in our interpretations. You need to present proof that:
1) Superman and Zod WERE indeed directly destroying the planet via the force of their blows against each other alone.
2) Some OTHER force other than Gladiator would have tried to contain the blast.
No, I don't. My interpretations are the simpler interpretations, the interpretations that require less invention of outside circumstance or individual super power.
Characters have been shown to "contain explosions" by physical means without the need to add in another power unique to that situation. Hulk thunderclap and Superman containing black holes, anyone?
Superman wouldn't be able to hold a black hole unless it was already compressed to the size of his palms. He's not going up to a sun and holding it in his hands, is he? Gladiator was CAUGHT in the explosion, he would have had to create some sort of GL-like force field around the blast to contain it. It's an ability he's never shown before.
The problem is your "face value" seems to be: "whatever interpretation suits my argument/side regardless of evidence since it is YOUR job to present it and not mine".That, sir, is bias.
No, it only appears that way to YOU because you're on the OTHER side.
Here's the difference between us -- from the beginning, I've admitted, and even gone so far as to explain how the two feats in question are ambiguous, and open to multiple interpretation, then elected my own based on what I feel is the simpler, less desperate interpretation.
You and yours didn't feel the need to bring up any of that ambiguity until it was thrown in your face, by me, instead pretending that your interpretations were the only valid ones. That's dishonest. That's bias.
Why did you choose only to respond to me, to address my point, rather than say to someone on your side "Hey, actually, while I think you're right it could definitely be interpreted...?"
I've seen you on this thread or another, I honestly dont' know which, outright dismiss the idea that Superman and Zod battling could have been a literal destruction of the planet. "Carver already proved that, lol ur stpid!". Where was your even handed fairness then?