Originally posted by Galan007It's not that they are stupid its just that in reality it's not their field.
So you are assuming the average reader is rather stupid, and that the writer himself also has no comprehension of the verbage he's putting into a comic? That's thin, imo. If the average writer is THIS handicapped, then why would he bother to make such specific differentiations? Supersonic, as opposed to FTL- both are really fast after all? Galaxies, as opposed to universes- both are really vast after all? 10,000lbs, as opposed to 1,000,000lbs- both are really heavy after all?It seems like you're suggesting that any 'extreme' word in a comic is used by the writer for the sole purpose of making the feat in question sound better- not because he actually has any knowledge on what the terminology literally means. Additionally, it seems like you're assuming that the readers don't comprehend that terminology in the literal sense either.
I disagree with that completely, but to each his own. 🙂
How many times on this forum have we read and explained things in comics that were wrong or used wrong or conveyed the wrong thing.
It's not that they don't have a concept of the basics but most often they don't care or its not something they have devoted to their lives to. Writers are only going to do enough research to get a basic grasp, or at least enough to not be blatantly wrong.
As for completely disregarding things. I'm not saying you should but sometimes context is important. Flash is extremely fast. Its his niche in the market. He's obviously going to have more things thrown out about speed.
Superman is also very fast, but he has never been described as a reacting in a altosecond, Wonder Woman has even less. Yet they both have beaten Speedsters some of whom can give the Flash a run for his money like Cheetah.
So I wouldn't say I'm disregarding things I'm just willing to look at the relative part of it.
That the Flash is insanely fast, but that he occupies a world that is also populated with other equally insanely powerful people.
So you can not simply say everything done against him is CIS, because relatively speaking Superman is also supposed to be insanely fast.
Just because a writer throws a number out for one character and not another does not mean that character is completely boned and out of their league. To me that is just to narrow a view to take.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0You know nothing of nuclear bombs. Radiation is released in all directions from the blast. The radiation will either fry your ass or make you a soon to be dead man if you are within a certain vicinity of the bomb. Superheated air is just extra to kill you with.
Superheated air kills "instantly." And it doesn't expand at light speeds. Knock it off. It's been stated in Elektra and Daredevil comics though. No, he didn't. That was all a ploy. He wanted people to ignore that, take only the other numbers for granted, and calculate a speed in excess of trillions of times that which was stated.That's because we comics fans are smart and not so easily fooled.
What you don't get is that the writer's mistake in the speed must be thrown out since it clearly takes more speed than the speed of light to achieve the feat.
This is like the writer claiming that Superman is lifting a 10 ton tank while in actuality the tank was a 65ton Abrams tank. Superman lifted a 65ton tank despite what the writer said.
Originally posted by h1a8
You know nothing of nuclear bombs. Radiation is released in all directions from the blast. The radiation will either fry your ass or make you a soon to be dead man if you are within a certain vicinity of the bomb. Superheated air is just extra to kill you with.What you don't get is that the writer's mistake in the speed must be thrown out since it clearly takes more speed than the speed of light to achieve the feat.
This is like the writer claiming that Superman is lifting a 10 ton tank while in actuality the tank was a 65ton Abrams tank. Superman lifted a 65ton tank despite what the writer said.
If the "numbers don't match" the feat you have two choices, ignore the numbers or ignore the feat.
Originally posted by h1a8
You know nothing of nuclear bombs. Radiation is released in all directions from the blast. The radiation will either fry your ass or make you a soon to be dead man if you are within a certain vicinity of the bomb. Superheated air is just extra to kill you with.What you don't get is that the writer's mistake in the speed must be thrown out since it clearly takes more speed than the speed of light to achieve the feat.
This is like the writer claiming that Superman is lifting a 10 ton tank while in actuality the tank was a 65ton Abrams tank. Superman lifted a 65ton tank despite what the writer said.
If it just so happens to be a tank that looks like an Abrams but there's nothing stated beyond it being 10 tons then barring conjecture its a 10 ton tank.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
If the writer actually stated it was an Abrams tank but said it was 10 tons then I'd say its a case of the writer making a factual error. I think at that point you could reasonably override the writer and say Superman lifted 65 tons.If it just so happens to be a tank that looks like an Abrams but there's nothing stated beyond it being 10 tons then its a 10 ton tank.
👆
Originally posted by Omega VisionExactly. That is what I meant, if the writer said it was an Abrams tank.
If the writer actually stated it was an Abrams tank but said it was 10 tons then I'd say its a case of the writer making a factual error. I think at that point you could reasonably override the writer and say Superman lifted 65 tons.If it just so happens to be a tank that looks like an Abrams but there's nothing stated beyond it being 10 tons then barring conjecture its a 10 ton tank.
Originally posted by Naija boyIn the US we also have one of the worst educational systems in the world. Also one of the most expensive.
This is spot on. Even in university institutions a vast majority of undergrads do not know the exact figure of the speed of light (if it doesnt concern them why would they bother?) and they would not at all know the relation between the speed of light and a microsecond.....to the point that they would ignore what was written (i.e how far something moving at light speed could go in a microsecond ). Internet forums are not the same as reality...jeez.
Originally posted by Sr J-BiebEw, you're using bad evidence my friend.
My evidence is this forum
Originally posted by leonidasEssentially, you're not giving the writers the benefit of the doubt. You're assuming they use terminology purely for show, without knowing the context behind it. I disagree.
again, why stupid? you really think someone who doesn't know which is shorter an attosecond or a picosecond is, is stupid? or that someoen on the street who doesn't know the speed of light is stupid? man, i know an awful lot of stupid people...never said no comrehension. and i'd say different writers have better understandings than others. but detailed knowledge? probably not. no real reason for them to know more than the basics.
again, your comparing a much more general knowledge (yes, most know a galaxy is smaller than a universe, that 1000 000>10 000, that a meter is bigger than a centimeter) with FAR more presice knowledge (atto vs picosecond). the comparisons STILL aren't fair partner. 😬
to the former, i think that is certainly part of it. there will be some basic knowledge, clearly (otherwise they wouldn't even KNOW a zeptosecond) but i really doubt there is much more than that which goes into it. for the latter, i would say this would very much be the case. honestly, if you truly think that most readers not only know what exactly an attosecond is, and beyond that, know the order of magnitude it represents, wellll........ i got nothing for you and we are oceans apart on this issue. shrug
👆
If a writer states that character x preformed a particular feat in, say, one microsecond, then I'm going to assume the writer knew what one microsecond is, and therefore intended character x to preform the aforementioned feat in one millionth of a second. Why? Because I take the writer's narration in the literal sense. Imo, there is absolutely no reason to question, and/or disregard particular verbage, simply because you may not think the writer understood the gravity of his narration. But w/e.
Anyhow, I doubt we'll ever seen eye to eye on this topic, but as always it's been a fun discussion. 👆
Originally posted by leonidasX-Men doesn't count for anything. Ever. biscuits
i KNEW someone would say that......but true or not, the ads still count!
Originally posted by Silent MasterI think the argument here has been that while the writer did say Flash was moving below c, he also gave very specific time and distance figures. And using those figures, Flash could not have accomplished that feat in that amount of the time if he were moving below c. Not even close.
So, if a writer states that a character performed feat x while moving at below C, shouldn't we give the writer the benefit of the doubt?
That's why the feat is ambiguous/arguable, and why the consensus is to simply throw it out entirely.
Originally posted by Galan007so much flash hate going around despite his power set supporting a lot of what has been stated despite CIS off being off being a prereq for most of it.
I think the argument here has been that while the writer did say Flash was moving below c, he also gave very specific time and distance figures. And using those figures, Flash could not have accomplished that feat in that amount of the time if he were moving below c. Not even close.That's why the feat is ambiguous/arguable, and why the consensus is to simply throw it out entirely.
Originally posted by Galan007I think it's obvious that he didn't do the math, nor did he expect anyone else to do it either.
I think the argument here has been that while the writer did say Flash was moving below c, he also gave very specific time and distance figures. And using those figures, Flash could not have accomplished that feat in that amount of the time if he were moving below c. Not even close.That's why the feat is ambiguous/arguable, and why the consensus is to simply throw it out entirely.
Comic books