Hulk with flight

Originally posted by Starscream M
honestly, pulling planets is a ridiculously stupid feat written by writers who have no idea the power necessary to do so.

no one below galactus level should have any shot of pulling any planet

I agree. All herald level beings shouldn't have any planetary power. The only reason why some seem to is because of inflation competition.

Inflation competition is when writer's, in order to sell comics, have characters perform higher and higher feats than what they previously done to keep interests up. The Competition part is when a character from a comic would perform higher in order to place him/her above another (most times their immediate counterpart), then the other would perform a feat higher, and this would just go back and forth until both have planetary power or above.

IMO, Superman and all other Heralds should have no more than million ton strength and power. Skyfathers should have no more than planetary power.

Remember when LT was created by Marvel, he was stated to be able to destroy planets. This was considered awesome at the time. Not any more though, because of inflation competition. A dollar isn't worth what it used to be worth.

^you, sir, have been reborn with good judgement👆

Originally posted by h1a8
I agree. All herald level beings shouldn't have any planetary power. The only reason why some seem to is because of inflation competition.

Inflation competition is when writer's, in order to sell comics, have characters perform higher and higher feats than what they previously done to keep interests up. The Competition part is when a character from a comic would perform higher in order to place him/her above another (most times their immediate counterpart), then the other would perform a feat higher, and this would just go back and forth until both have planetary power or above.

IMO, Superman and all other Heralds should have no more than million ton strength and power. Skyfathers should have no more than planetary power.

Remember when LT was created by Marvel, he was stated to be able to destroy planets. This was considered awesome at the time. Not any more though, because of inflation competition. A dollar isn't worth what it used to be worth.

I agree with all of this. DC rarely if ever have anyone destroying planets. It was a high end feat when Prime did it.

Moving planets and destroying is 2 different things imo.

Earth’s axis has been shifted 6.5 inches because of the Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami, along with numerous aftershocks contributing bit by bit.

Someone like Superman should be able to move the planet since that earth quake managed to move the axis.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Earth’s axis has been shifted 6.5 inches because of the Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami, along with numerous aftershocks contributing bit by bit.

Someone like Superman should be able to move the planet since that earth quake managed to move the axis.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Earth’s axis has been shifted 6.5 inches because of the Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami, along with numerous aftershocks contributing bit by bit.

Someone like Superman should be able to move the planet since that earth quake managed to move the axis.

Well the axis shifted but Earth still stayed in its normal orbit around the Sun.

But the earthquake didn't do this directly but rather indirectly. The shift of the plates cause the earth mass distribution to change in a way that made the planet speed up (like a figure skater when they pull their arms in). This speed up (by microseconds I believe) in turn help cause the 6.5 in tilt shift in the axis.

Now moving the planet off its plane or to a different location of it's plane (off it's normal orbit) is totally different than just tilting the Earth (Indirectly) by a few inches.

Some fictional characters have caused stars or planets to explode by creating a chain reaction due to creating instability. This is often misconstrued as the being HAVING THE POWER TO DESTROY STARS OR PLANETS. Well it is only true indirectly, but most are thinking directly which makes it misleading.

Originally posted by carver9

Moving planets and destroying is 2 different things imo.

'Course it is.

Brick breaking > Brick holding.

Originally posted by GRIMNIR
just because it is a comic does not mean it has to be full of PIS

i prefer stories where the characters perform superhuman feats that are within the realms of reason, otherwise lose all respect it because major BS

Even something as comparatively tame and mundane as Spider-Man shits in the face of "science" and "reason" with the explanation for his powers.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
'Course it is.

Brick breaking > Brick holding.

More like heavy vulnerable mass moving> heavy vulnerable mass breaking.

If one could lift a building then the building would crumble under its own weight and become destroyed. But if one applied a much smaller force (like a bulldozer strike) then the building would be destroyed.

In summary, when objects EXCEED a certain size, then it takes less force destroying them through hitting them than moving them at a considerable acceleration.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
But how do you define the 'realm of reason'.

Even something as comparatively tame and mundane as Spider-Man shits in the face of "science" and "reason" with the explanation for his powers.

Good point.

But what he means by reasonable is not what is defined by science but defined by your average human mind.

For example, when I was a kid I thought it was reasonable to move a metal toy wagon forward by being in it and holding a strong enough magnet in front in order to pull it forward. But according to science, that is nonsense.

To me it is far more reasonable (not taking science into account) for Spiderman to do the things he does than for a being (like Superman) to move planets with great acceleration or withstand black holes and centres of stars.

Originally posted by h1a8
More like heavy vulnerable mass moving> heavy vulnerable mass breaking.

If one could lift a building then the building would crumble under its own weight and become destroyed. But if one applied a much smaller force (like a bulldozer strike) then the building would be destroyed.

In summary, when objects EXCEED a certain size, then it takes less force destroying them through hitting them than moving them at a considerable acceleration.

Fair point, but I was speaking in terms of general comic-dom, where planets are often durable enough to not collapse in on themselves when being moved. In such a case, breaking > moving.

I think Mr. Majestic having to move planets while wearing special equipment that in effect spread out his force instead of focusing it over the area of his hands is the only instance that i can think of that acknowledges what you are talking about.

And honestly a skyscraper would probably collapse long before the energy needed to lift its weight from underneath it could be generated. I doubt the two would be too different.

No I don't see how they're different in terms of anything but scale.

Spider-Man has the proportional strength of a spider (never mind that the strength of a spider is derived from its morphology and varies wildly between spider species) because its a story. Superman can withstand a blackhole and move a planet because its a story. Now there is such thing as internal consistency, for example Batman, a normal human kicking through metal is less internally consistent than someone with stated superhuman powers doing it. But when it comes to actual stated powers so long as the way those powers work are portrayed consistently this "realm of reason" nonsense is just that, nonsense.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
No I don't see how they're different in terms of anything but scale.

Spider-Man has the proportional strength of a spider (never mind that the strength of a spider is derived from its morphology and varies wildly between spider species) because its a story. Superman can withstand a blackhole and move a planet because its a story. Now there is such thing as internal consistency, for example Batman, a normal human kicking through metal is less internally consistent than someone with stated superhuman powers doing it. But when it comes to actual stated powers so long as the way those powers work are portrayed consistently this "realm of reason" nonsense is just that, nonsense.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
No I don't see how they're different in terms of anything but scale.

Spider-Man has the proportional strength of a spider (never mind that the strength of a spider is derived from its morphology and varies wildly between spider species) because its a story. Superman can withstand a blackhole and move a planet because its a story. Now there is such thing as internal consistency, for example Batman, a normal human kicking through metal is less internally consistent than someone with stated superhuman powers doing it. But when it comes to actual stated powers so long as the way those powers work are portrayed consistently this "realm of reason" nonsense is just that, nonsense.

Superman strength level has gone from

able to lift a car
to
ability to reality warp the entire universe

this is what i hate with all the characters

their powers once established are constantly changed and altered and its stupid

Originally posted by carver9
If Hulk had the ability to fly, do you think he could pull planets?

snickermariofacepalm

Yes, I believe he can do so if the situation warranted it. I mean the guy headbutted an earth squared asteroid in two.

Comics ny virtue of the medium require a willing suspension of disbelief.

Comics by virtue of the medium require a willing suspension of disbelief. But there is a threshold for even the most imaginative of minds. I can dig a character lifing say, 100 times their own mass. Real life is full of examples of creatures being many times stronger then there relative mass would suggest. Anything over that, barring gravity control, psionics or some other explanation, I just smh.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
Considering heralds consistently fly near or into Black holes, and the gravity in a black hole is so much greater then that out star that its not even funny, means its not that far-fetched for heralds to move planets.

But I still stand by the notion that things like Black Holes get downplayed. I mean surfer is knocked on his ass by rhino(even though it did no real damage) but he doesn't even feel strain flying through a Black Hole bigger then galactus?

Or superman holding a black hole. I mean even a mini one should be waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more then many things he has been hurt by.

Originally posted by Black bolt z
Considering heralds consistently fly near or into Black holes, and the gravity in a black hole is so much greater then that out star that its not even funny, means its not that far-fetched for heralds to move planets.

But I still stand by the notion that things like Black Holes get downplayed. I mean surfer is knocked on his ass by rhino(even though it did no real damage) but he doesn't even feel strain flying through a Black Hole bigger then galactus?

Or superman holding a black hole. I mean even a mini one should be waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more then many things he has been hurt by.

For whatever it's worth, I remember it being stated that the Power Cosmic shielded Norrin from the Black Hole. And it's also been shown that they can amp him.