Originally posted by dmills
Let me set you straight about something, I don't "desperately need it" to be anything. Relax, its a forum debate about fictional characters.
I'm perfectly relaxed. But your actions -- the way you immediately jump on anything that supports the characters that make up your sig and avatar, make it obvious that you're not willing to listen to reason, and that you're coming in here with a closed mind.
Now regarding your larger point. I made the point about photons since it was mentioned that Dr. Light controlled the 'light aspect' of seemingly exotic energies so yes, Quasar could mimic that feat. And since you've offered absolutely nothing but bold proclamations to refute that point, it still stands. Offer something in the way of real proof, I.e. scans, and maybe you'll begin to make a good point. But as it stands now you've added nothing more then mere conjecture to the issue.
Why is it that all I have is bold proclamation and need specific issue numbers -- to follow the etiquiette -- when the person you continually support and take at face value has done nothing of the kind? All anyone in this thread has done has said "Well, his name is light, that's how DC physics works, it doesn't apply to Marvel physics, etc!".
The basis of my claim is seen throughout their character histories -- we KNOW that Quasar is limited by the electromagnetic spectrum. That much is clear.
We DON'T know if the Green Lantern energy is rooted in the electromagnetic spectrum. There is some evidence that supports the idea, but far more that refutes it.
The only counter-evidence being used here is that Dr. Light, a being who controls magical god lightning (outside of the electromagnetic spectrum) just as easily as sunlight, was once able to control Kyle's constructs. But, of course, he was also UNABLE to control or absorb Hal's energy on one occasion, in v3.
The majority of evidence points towards one way, but the smallest sliver of doubt or ambiguity in the subject gets the response, from you, of " game set match".
Surely you see how poorly supported the conclusion you (guys) are drawing is? Surely you must realize that you're seeing what you want to see?
P.S. No disrespect to you Desaad. You're a damn good poster, but you annoyed the hell out of me with that desperation comment.
No disrespect taken. I'm far from unbiased as well -- I created a Hal respect thread.
But in this case, while I'll admit that there IS some small amount of ambiguity, I think the majority of the evidence points to Quasar being unable to directly manipulate GL energies, and I think your proclivity to believe the 'other side' of this debate stems more from your enjoyment of that group of cosmic characters than from an honest estimation of the facts being brought to the table.
