Who can beat Galactus?

Originally posted by Wodenson
The "on panel" you are talking about is a false story, told by Sssthgar to get Thor and the Asgardians to attack the ant-people for stranding them on Asgard.

I have proof that the Eye of Odin was telling Thor lies. It's not like these are two or three separate occasions. The Eye was telling Thor one big story full of lies. On the page prior to Odin attacking Arishem, he gave a false account of his own origin.

Two pages after Odin attacked Arishem, there is a false account of the Odinsword's creation told by the Eye of Odin.

It was clearly drawn, and it was mentioned that Thanos was tapping into his technology.

Simple enough.

We have seen Mephisto tell lie after lie then probably throw some truth in there but until we know they are lies we don't just assume the writer was lying to us. I guess even despite Odin preparing the eye deceived Thor because you say so though no proof can be offered much like most of your arguments.

No, it wasn't clearly drawn and wasn't shown to have been destroyed. There's no mention of it either. We see the force block get destroyed but no mention or sign of any mysterious phantom Thanos shield was ever used.

@Onedumbgo--The sort of logic he is championing is truly amusing. I guess Thor can't ever use the godblast since he's done it a few times, can't bfr since it's a tactic he rarely uses, along with anti force blast, soul steal , or any other rarely used ability. I can't wait to call him on the double standard in any thread I catch him using an exotic ability.

@ODG
1- Using powers to the best of his ability=/= performing highest feats with said ability. . Your Thor example of his 1/5th universe containing vortex is nonsensical. Thanos has used his shields much more times than Thor has used the Goblast both in regards to percentage of appearances and outright number of times (The gap in regards to percentage of appearances will be huge)

2- Laughable strawmanning. I never said he will use them in every fight he has here out of 10. I dont believe that is what "in character" as pertains to forum battles means. Rather i feel it indicates that it is a usable tactic. I never argued the degree to which he would rely on the tactic at all. But keep on going with the fallacious reasoning. You seem to be fancying it today

3- I never said that it has to be "clearly drawn only". I rather mentioned that it should be indicated on panel somehow (knowing that invisible forcefields do exist). As most powers normally are (duh). Only in a deluded world is asking for an ability a character is using to be somehow indicated on panel, "an arbitrary criteria". Keep building strawmen so you can tear them down while patting yourself on the back for your skillful use of fallacious reasoning wrapped in flowery writing. lol Gimme a freaking break.

Ok now im done seriously.

Guys, you can't report people who you have on ignore for replying to your posts. If they're on ignore then ignore them.

Originally posted by Naija boy
@ODG
1- Using powers to the best of his ability=/= performing highest feats with said ability. Your Thor example of his 1/5th universe containing vortex is nonsensical. Thanos has used his shields much more times than Thor has used the Goblast both in regards to percentage of appearances and outright number of times (The gap in regards to percentage of appearances will be huge)

Originally posted by Naija boy
2- Laughable strawmanning. I never said he will use them in every fight he has here out of 10. I dont believe that is what "in character" as pertains to forum battles means. Rather i feel it indicates that it is a usable tactic. I never argued the degree to which he would rely on the tactic at all. But keep on going with the fallacious reasoning. You seem to be fancying it today

Originally posted by Naija boy
3- I never said that it has to be "clearly drawn only". I rather mentioned that it should be indicated on panel somehow (knowing that invisible forcefields do exist). As most powers normally are (duh). Only in a deluded world is asking for an ability a character is using to be somehow indicated on panel, "an arbitrary criteria". Keep building strawmen so you can tear them down while patting yourself on the back for your skillful use of fallacious reasoning wrapped in flowery writing. lol Gimme a freaking break.

Ok now im done seriously.

Whatever, you have your standards, others have theirs'. Based on your own standards, I have ample evidence that Thanos leaves off his forcefields (intentionally or unintentionally) the vast majority of his fights. That makes him an idiot. You expect Thanos to not fight like a complete idiot and use his powers to the best of his ability. But he clearly doesn't in the comics. You deal with that conundrum however you like.

But this tedious exercise makes it painfully obvious that your standard seeks only to justify random durability feats at the expense of a character's personality. But fine. Two-way street for you and anybody else who thinks that.

you have him calling up shields against power gem wielders, galactus, drax etc other than the blatant ones you could just call it raw durability *shrug*

^ Yeah, that's fine. So long as a hypothetical Thanos fight doesn't force the presumption that he'll aways use his forcefields when he rarely uses them on-panel.

It's not my standard obviously. Otherwise Doom's pure armor durability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than people give it credit for.

Originally posted by psycho gundam
you have him calling up shields against power gem wielders, galactus, drax etc other than the blatant ones you could just call it raw durability *shrug*

Ah but you see thanos tanking attacks is due to shields alone. We should assume this regardless of what the comic depicts cause asking for comic depictions is a shitty standard. Instead we should use circular reasoning to come to our conclusion regardless of on panel depiction.

smh..logic has taken a beating these past few pages.lmfao 😂

Originally posted by Naija boy
Ah but you see thanos durability comes from his shields alone. We should assume this regardless of what the comic depicts cause asking for comic depictions is a shitty standard. Instead we should use circular reasoning to cmoe to our conclusion.

smh..logic is taking a beating these past few pages.lmfao 😂

Because common sense and logic dictates so, e.g., Doom probably couldn't survive getting wreked by Galactus, and probably isn't so stupid as to not turn them on, and it's probably not meant to be a high feat for his natural durability.

Yet, when common sense and logic dictates the same for Thanos, because Thanos who asked for Drax and Surfer, and used random exotic tech, and was testing his limits, and was getting bashed left and right, and probably didn't want to get bashed left and right, and probably isn't so stupid as to not turn them on, no... no... screw logic... it was definitely and could only be meant to be a high feat for his natural durability.

I accept your standard as you apply it, shocked that I am you would demand such a standard. I'm just amused you were offended when it was taken to its natural consequence concerning CIS and how it would bear out in hypothetical fights.

If the Eye of Odin has told Thor some 140 comic pages worth of lies or partial truths (at best), what are the chances that the select few pages featuring the Celestials can be taken at face value? Especially when there are lies/inaccuracies immediately preceding and following those pages?

It's unfortunate that the false god-cycle and Ring of Nibelungs stories (THOR #293-300) became intertwined with the Celestials.

^^ I didnt mis-interpret anything so dont shy away from you line of "reasoning" now. Its a little too late to save face.

I clearly qualified the Doom instance vs Thanos instance as it can be reasonably inferred from Dooms power level that Doom cannot survive without his shields against Galactus, hence the reason that assumption held some form of weight. The same cannot be said of Thanos and Odin....as the power level gap is not at all comparable based on their respective portrayals

To say that logic dictates the same for Thanos is quite frankly revealing your surprising bias against the Titan. nothing more.

And oh yeah you screwed logic a long time ago it seems...more like raped it actually

Originally posted by Naija boy
^ I didnt mis-interpret anything so dont shy away from you line of "reasoning" now.

I clearly qualified the Doom instance vs Thanos instance as it can be reasonably inferred from Dooms power level that Doom cannot survive without his shields against Galactus, hence the reason that assumption held some form of weight. The same cannot be said of Thanos and Odin....as the power level gap is not at all comparable.

To say that logic dictates the same for Thanos is quite frankly revealing your surprising bias against the Titan. nothing more.

And oh yeah you screwed logic a long time ago it seems...more like raped it actually

Sorry. If my arguments were a result of bias, I would have posted a sh1t ton more Doom armor feats in my respect thread based on this "if it can't be clearly proven he's using them, then he must not be!" standard. I dont' debase myself with such idiotic standards though. And I am, if anything, a Doom fanboy.

You mad? That all of a sudden Thanos fights like an idiot because he so rarely uses his forcefields even while getting tossed like a ragdoll??? That's your logic, dude. Force fields have to be clearly shown. When they are, the artists/writers go through painstaking detail to point it out, I guess. They're off almost all the time. So be it.

^lulz, reverse justifying my ass. The doom surviving Galactus and the thanos feat have a huge difference in regards to the respective power level differences involved. Only in such cases can your line of reasoning even begin to be plausible and even then it has to be qualified by the frequency in which the character clearly uses the ability. In this case however, reverse projecting thanos forcefield usage on every single one of his appearances while disregarding on panel depiction and using fallacy after fallacy just so you can uphold your apparent deluded chracterization of him is nonsensical.
Thats all their is to it.

Why would I be mad at anothers retardation?. Funny indeed ODG. Funny indeed

Originally posted by Wodenson
If you don't see a shield here, you are smoking some serious Thanos pole.

i just think, looking at the pretty picture, the drawing is SHOWING a forcefield. the blast clearly changes colour well short of striking thanos's body adn there is a pretty clear rounded form to the blast. there is also that space right in front of his right fist and you can CLEARLY see the blast projecting PAST his fist.

i think the colour change is quite definitive imo that the blast STRUCK something. and from where the colour change took place--well in front of thanos--i'm not sure how it COULDN'T be a shield. even i wouldn't draw a figure so poorly as thanos would have had to have been drawn for there to be no shield. 😬

Originally posted by leonidas
i just think, looking at the pretty picture, the drawing is SHOWING a forcefield. the blast clearly changes colour well short of striking thanos's body adn there is a pretty clear rounded form to the blast. there is also that space right in front of his right fist and you can CLEARLY see the blast projecting PAST his fist.

i think the colour change is quite definitive imo that the blast STRUCK something. and from where the colour change took place--well in front of thanos--i'm not sure how it COULDN'T be a shield. even i wouldn't draw a figure so poorly as thanos would have had to have been drawn for there to be no shield. 😬

After looking at that scan, again and again, that is certainly plausible i now feel. But once again you came to that conclusion without disregarding on panel depiction entirely...but instead relying on it. thats the core of the issue whether we allow ourself to be guided by on panel depiction or we project our assuptions onto it.

Originally posted by Naija boy
^lulz, reverse justifying my ass. The doom surviving Galactus and the thanos feat have a huge difference in regards to the respective power level differences involved.

Originally posted by Naija boy
Only in such cases can your line of reasoning even begin to be plausible and even then it has to be qualified by the frequency in which the character clearly uses the ability. In this case however, reverse projecting thanos forcefield usage on every single one of his appearances while disregarding on panel depiction and using fallacy after fallacy just so you can uphold your apparent deluded chracterization of him is nonsensical.
Thats all their is to it.[

Why would I be mad at anothers retardation?. Funny indeed ODG. Funny indeed

Do I think Doom is spectacularly retarded for not using his forcefields when being assaulted by Magneto, Iron Man and Wonder Man? Yea. Do I think this is just a completely uncontroversial instance where Jimmy Cheung just happened to not draw his forcefields but they're on? Of course. But whatever, to aggrandize Doom's natural durability, we don't care that this would completely strike you as dumb, since the power differentials aren't completely off, it's totally a natural durability feat. Totally citable!

Whatever, Thanos is dumb as bricks. Guy calls Drax and Surfer to his aid. Uses experimental tech. Gets outclassed completely. Somehow he rushed in while forgeting (conveniently) to turn on his forcefields. Dur dur. I also like how Thanos wholly tested his might against Tyrant and then while getting railed, desperately reached for the Orb against Tyrant seeking an edge... and this whole time his fight would have been a lil bit easier if he didn't just forget his forcefields. Dur dur.

But hey, screw it. It's not like we can assume the shields were just invisible and ignored (like so many artists are wont to do). Nah. That isn't a more logical possibility. Like you said. Logic's been raped. You lil rapist, you.

Originally posted by Naija boy
After looking at that scan, again and again, that is certainly plausible i now feel. But once again you came to that conclusion without disregarding on panel depiction entirely...but instead relying on it. thats the core of the issue whether we allow ourself to be guided by on panel depiction or we project our assuptions onto it.

oh, i get what you were saying. just the whole thing came up cuz of the 'lack' of on-panel evidence.

i actually feel both of you have a point, but it doesn't HAVE to be one or the other. intrepretation is part of this (at time VERY) imprecise medium and inevitably, comics will ALWAYS fail under the insane scrutiny we place them under.

so, i just usually look at the pretty pictures. g007-psyduck

(a quick shout out to my partner galan for the hilarious smilie. it's funnier when i use it though 😄 )

^ No, screw it. I like Naija boy's logic. Doom's got a sh1t ton more armor feats now. I shall revamp that respect thread completely now. Thanos is sh1t ton dumber now. I shall troll Thanos apologists even more now.

Win-win.

I shall not relinquish this. Nor will I countenance that an invisible forcefield not clearly being drawn or explicitly narrated can still be there. Damn that sensible logic that it makes sense that it's there otherwise the character is an idiot. Damn it to hell.

this is turning into a faith-based argument

Originally posted by leonidas
g007-psyduck

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
I shall troll Thanos apologists even more now.

😆

well, least something positive came out of this love-fest.