Silver Surfer & Thanos vs Flash & Zoom

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Uh-huh. For the people that don't realize what I was pointing out by mentioning a "FTL mushroom cloud," let's examine it. Between the flash of the initial detonation and the formation of a mushroom cloud of dust, only .00001 microsecond had elapsed. We know this because some of the people hadn't even been saved by the second panel. Only by the third.

.00001 microsecond = .01 nanosecond = 1/100th of a nanosecond. Light travels 1 foot in 1 nanosecond.

So I'm supposed to believe that the dust particles forming the mushroom cloud traveled tens of thousands of feet into the sky and ballooned out -- when a beam of light itself would only have traveled 1/10th of an inch in that same time frame? You're telling me the dust traveled millions of times light speed?

Whatever, of course it did! The time cited couldn't possibly be wrong. Only the speed cited was wrong. No other number cited could possibly have been wrong either...

... just like how Chongjin, North Korea, reportedly has a population of 327,000 people (not 532,000) in a country notorious for exaggerating it's own development. But, whatever! The 532,000 population cited couldn't possibly be wrong either. Only the speed.

Because if I don't think the speed is wrong, somehow, I'm being ghey about it and just hatin... yeah.

crackers

Oooyyyy!

Originally posted by h1a8
Everything is a mistake except for the things that I want to use to prove Flash moved 13 trillion times the speed of light.

Originally posted by h1a8
The problem is that both the writer and author didn't bother to do the calculations as they didn't seem important to them nor to the reader. I say the feat is valid as Flash was moving X trillions C. Both the art of the cloud and the speed are just mistakes by the artist and writer, nothing more. The distance, the time, and the number of people are all correct as they were given in the story. The calculation on the other hand wasn't given since the writer did not bother to calculate it. The givens are always true, just not the conclusions.

... it's that a # of posters are basically saying exactly the same thing for exactly the same reasons. Whether they want to admit it or not.

Originally posted by h1a8
The problem is that both the writer and author didn't bother to do the calculations as they didn't seem important to them nor to the reader. I say the feat is valid as Flash was moving X trillions C. Both the art of the cloud and the speed are just mistakes by the artist and writer, nothing more. The distance, the time, and the number of people are all correct as they were given in the story. The calculation on the other hand wasn't given since the writer did not bother to calculate it. The givens are always true, just not the conclusions.

that instance is just as much (if not moreso going the way you don't want it to per the narration (editor approved)) against lightspeed as it is for it. that's not flash's only feat you can use. read more comics

odg is correct, america has released the hundreds of previously classified footage of nuclear explosions, the first one ever Trinity was filmed under high speed camera and all that. i've read thick books about it

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Comics aren't about math. Your example is more apt than you realize. The difference between 5 lbs and the weight of the Earth must be the millions upon millions. It is an "exponential" difference. And here, the difference is in the millions upon millions as well, another "exponential" difference.

Let's not pretend that this scene was especially catered to the "true fan" who isn't fooled by plain English and utilizes a shocking tolerance for high numbers to get to the nugget of gold hidden between the lines. If a comic wants to hit you over the head with the enormity of a feat, they'll clonk you over the head with it. It wasn't enough that Savage Hulk braced a mountain over his head, they had to plaster a number on the cover. Planet busting isn't relegated to a small corner panel, it's accorded full page or double page spreads.

Comics are about the exhausting overuse of exclamation points. They're not about the patient interpretation of coded fine print. And this isn't even an example of fine print. It's just a mistake. And it's completely counter-intuitive to choose to stretch out that mistake to its highest possible limit over simply shrugging your shoulders and accepting the simplest interpretation.

If anybody thinks 13 trillion times the speed of light was the true intention, fine. Just remember what you had to go through to get to that conclusion. I personally found it tortuous, convoluted and ultimately inane. Apparently, to some, that's supposed to be an indication that you're reading it correctly. Forgive my skepticism.

I remember having this discussion with AC like 6 years back.

Originally posted by 753
word of the author on panel> fanmade nonsensical mathematical extrapolation produced for forum debates

I disagree: the author's can make mistakes. Take the "most correct" or least conflicting interpretation. Go crazy with this conclusion. If the writer says is was just under the speed of light, but it didn't require that, the author made a mistake.

OOOOR...the Flash had moments he traveled just under c and moments he didn't travel very fast, at all. This is how I interpretted that feat. Alas: the least conflicted.

I agree. The error is him saying Flash went the speed of light. Not making him save the city. That was the ultimate intention.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I agree. The error is him saying Flash went the speed of light. Not making him save the city. That was the ultimate intention.

I think you did a much better job of explaining your position than I did. I just don't agree with the mob-mentality of blindly following the stated feats from the writers. Sometimes...it literally does not add up. What do you do, then? If the writer did something obviously quite stupid, you should not just blindly follow it.

The mushroom cloud point is probably the best one made for why the feat does not add up

There's also the problem of the initial blast being VISIBLE but all the people were still in the city. As soon as you can see it, all of that electromagnetic radiation would have killed everyone near the blast AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Because we saw the initial blast at 35 miles out, but none of them had been taken to the safe area, they were almost all already dead.

Writing fail. This is why we can't have nice things. 😄

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
"Clealry" 753 is so smart. He proceeds to call me a dumbass while having the reading comprehension, counting ability, and spelling of a toddler.

Simply amazing.

In his defense...I horribly botched my last post with wrong words, wrong punctuation, etc. Sometimes, people just get in a hurry and don't particularly pay attention to what they are typing. I rarely edit, and my posts show that. As long as what they post can be understood, there should not be a problem. Many of us are multi-national and English is not our original language (not me).

Still, the post I took that quote from was awesome. I had no idea that you had so much win. 🙂

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Comics aren't about math. Your example is more apt than you realize. The difference between 5 lbs and the weight of the Earth must be the millions upon millions. It is an "exponential" difference. And here, the difference is in the millions upon millions as well, another "exponential" difference.

Let's not pretend that this scene was especially catered to the "true fan" who isn't fooled by plain English and utilizes a shocking tolerance for high numbers to get to the nugget of gold hidden between the lines. If a comic wants to hit you over the head with the enormity of a feat, they'll clonk you over the head with it. It wasn't enough that Savage Hulk braced a mountain over his head, they had to plaster a number on the cover. Planet busting isn't relegated to a small corner panel, it's accorded full page or double page spreads.

Comics are about the exhausting overuse of exclamation points. They're not about the patient interpretation of coded fine print. And this isn't even an example of fine print. It's just a mistake. And it's completely counter-intuitive to choose to stretch out that mistake to its highest possible limit over simply shrugging your shoulders and accepting the simplest interpretation.

If anybody thinks 13 trillion times the speed of light was the true intention, fine. Just remember what you had to go through to get to that conclusion. I personally found it tortuous, convoluted and ultimately inane. Apparently, to some, that's supposed to be an indication that you're reading it correctly. Forgive my skepticism.

Agreed on all accounts

So it is basically saying that "We shouldn't use things that are too complex." I've had this discussion with AC years ago, and it came up in Iceman threads where other members used chemistry equations amongst other things.

We are in a logical debate and comics are based around the real world. Now when I'm reading a comic; I have willing suspension of disbelief. Sure Flash being hit by someone of Batman's speed is fine for the sake of the plot. In a debate, I look at things closer than when I'm reading a comic book.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I think you did a much better job of explaining your position than I did. I just don't agree with the mob-mentality of blindly following the stated feats from the writers. Sometimes...it literally does not add up. What do you do, then? If the writer did something obviously quite stupid, you should not just blindly follow it.

The mushroom cloud point is probably the best one made for why the feat does not add up

There's also the problem of the initial blast being VISIBLE but all the people were still in the city. As soon as you can see it, all of that electromagnetic radiation would have killed everyone near the blast AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Because we saw the initial blast at 35 miles out, but none of them had been taken to the safe area, they were almost all already dead.

Writing fail. This is why we can't have nice things. 😄

In his defense...I horribly botched my last post with wrong words, wrong punctuation, etc. Sometimes, people just get in a hurry and don't particularly pay attention to what they are typing. I rarely edit, and my posts show that. As long as what they post can be understood, there should not be a problem. Many of us are multi-national and English is not our original language (not me).

Still, the post I took that quote from was awesome. I had no idea that you had so much win. 🙂

That's my point. The cloud was there, it was a nuke, they had to be brought far away, and he had to be going faster than light. But yea.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. He started to insult me and then he made stupid errors in his own post. He obviously didn't know my reputation I had back when I first came and if he read my profile he would. I'm an easy going person, but I can unload when I feel the need. I just try not to do it anymore as it is a waste of time. I've seen more pissing contests than anybody lol. I had threads aimed at me for hate threads and I was nominated everywhere in best poster threads, blah blah blah. Those days are past me. I just want to chill out and post and discuss, but when someone becomes an idiot I have to put them in their place. He got what he deserved.

You type and speak fine and you weren't being an obtuse ******* either. 🙂 You've never bothered me.

ODG arguing about how were supposed to read comics now. This has nothing to do with the debate were having.

In the comic it says under the speed of light and that's fine for the comic but in a debate why would I hold up something that's obviously false like your trying to do and pass it off as an undeniable truth looking like a fool in the process.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Comics aren't about math. Your example is more apt than you realize. The difference between 5 lbs and the weight of the Earth must be the millions upon millions. It is an "exponential" difference. And here, the difference is in the millions upon millions as well, another "exponential" difference.

Let's not pretend that this scene was especially catered to the "true fan" who isn't fooled by plain English and utilizes a shocking tolerance for high numbers to get to the nugget of gold hidden between the lines. If a comic wants to hit you over the head with the enormity of a feat, they'll clonk you over the head with it. It wasn't enough that Savage Hulk braced a mountain over his head, they had to plaster a number on the cover. Planet busting isn't relegated to a small corner panel, it's accorded full page or double page spreads.

Comics are about the exhausting overuse of exclamation points. They're not about the patient interpretation of coded fine print. And this isn't even an example of fine print. It's just a mistake. And it's completely counter-intuitive to choose to stretch out that mistake to its highest possible limit over simply shrugging your shoulders and accepting the simplest interpretation.

If anybody thinks 13 trillion times the speed of light was the true intention, fine. Just remember what you had to go through to get to that conclusion. I personally found it tortuous, convoluted and ultimately inane. Apparently, to some, that's supposed to be an indication that you're reading it correctly. Forgive my skepticism.

👆

Originally posted by King Kandy
For all you know the town could have had 5000 people.

How dumb can people actually get?

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Whatever, of course it did! The time cited couldn't possibly be wrong.

Well then, damn, let's shorten the distance he travelled. Oops. It still makes him faster than light, not only because of the fact that the art clearly depicts the distance as being several miles, but also because since it's a nuclear bomb, it has to have been quite a long distance for them to be unaffected.

Well then, let's randomly say that the population is smaller. No logical reason, but it suits your argument. Oops, the town is a real world one. But I already ignored the fictional number, why not ignore the real world number? There.

"I finally re-wrote all of the data given, the way it suits me, in order for it to go in line with my agenda. Hooray.

But I'll just say that "time" is the problem because otherwise it would have totally been under lightspeed! Yeah, not really. I would have to re-write all the statistics to my liking. But I hope they're dumb enough to think otherwise! "

I feel like in every thread I go, I find you say even dumber things that the last time to further your agendas.

I want play the "ignoring comic statements and making up crap" game. Ok, Gladiator was hit by a solar system destroying blast that pushed him back by the planet Pluto. After getting hit by this blast, he made it to Earth in 2 panels, before Reed could even finish his sentence. With that said, he had to been going much faster than 100 times the speed of light. So since we are in the "making up craps for a character" mood, I'm going to say he was going at least 300 times the speed of light, and that's the minimum. Forget what the writer said, I don't like him...300 is the number I want to use.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/370/wtfship2tj8.jpg/

I have some more feats that I want to do the same things with. I'll be back with them...this is kind of fun.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Uh-huh. For the people that don't realize what I was pointing out by mentioning a "FTL mushroom cloud," let's examine it. Between the flash of the initial detonation and the formation of a mushroom cloud of dust, only .00001 microsecond had elapsed. We know this because some of the people hadn't even been saved by the second panel. Only by the third.

.00001 microsecond = .01 nanosecond = 1/100th of a nanosecond. Light travels 1 foot in 1 nanosecond.

So I'm supposed to believe that the dust particles forming the mushroom cloud traveled tens of thousands of feet into the sky and ballooned out -- when a beam of light itself would only have traveled 1/10th of an inch in that same time frame? You're telling me the dust traveled millions of times light speed?

Whatever, of course it did! The time cited couldn't possibly be wrong. Only the speed cited was wrong. No other number cited could possibly have been wrong either...

... just like how Chongjin, North Korea, reportedly has a population of 327,000 people (not 532,000) in a country notorious for exaggerating it's own development. But, whatever! The 532,000 population cited couldn't possibly be wrong either. Only the speed.

Because if I don't think the speed is wrong, somehow, I'm being ghey about it and just hatin... yeah.

crackers

...That's bordering on Mr Master's 'universe=omniverse' line of idiocylogic. g007-psyduck

Originally posted by King Kandy
For all you know the town could have had 5000 people. That is just one more number that you arbitrarily select as being the "constant" the others relate to.

Originally posted by Galan007
To accept one comment from the writer is to accept them all. That said, if you are going to accept his statements that Flash was moving just short of light speed, then you MUST accept the specific numbers he gave us regarding distance and time, as well.

35 miles one way?
532,000 individual people?
Flash carried 1, sometimes 2 people, at a time?
It took him .00001 microseconds?

Those are all ridiculously specific values. Considering Joe Kelly's portfolio, it's hard to believe he just pulled numerics like that out of his ass without putting any thought into them. My God, you can tell it's an FTL feat just by looking at those numbers. No math involved.

Anywho, it's just not cut and dry one way or the other = all I'm saying.

It can be looked at both ways- it is VERY subjective. That's why I never use that feat in any Flash-related threads.

Personally, I think Flash HAD to have been going > c to accomplish that feat because it couldn't have been done in that amount of time if he were moving < c. However, it's not something I would argue simply because of it's subjectivity.

Again it seems like there is some disconnect my friend. Let me try this again... One narration talks SPECIFICALLY about speed. The other is extrapolation of what he auther COULD"VE been meaning to show. I don't know how those can be considered the same level of proof when talking about the speed he was going. Nobody is denying those figures carry the same weight in a GENERAL sense. However, by no means do they carry the same weight when talking specifically about his speed. Why.. because one says EXACTLY what speed he writer wanted him to travel... the other stuff is circumstancial-plot related facts that need to be extrapolated on further in order to come up with what the author could've been talking about. Put it like this.. do we KNOW that the author was meaning those figures to indicate speed... NO we don't know that at all, in fact that is very unlikely considering he gave us the speed he wanted flash to be traveling. One is a clear cut indication.. the other.. is conjecture on what the author was really intending. Not nearly the same level of proof... The best example I can give is this... A woman is murdered... They have two suspects.. One had his blood on the scene (DNA) and semen on the scene.. Pretty convincing and absolute. The other suspect.. was thought to have been seen in the area.. had a grudge against the woman and could'n't explain where he was at the time.. Yet all that is circumstancial evidence.. while the other is concrete evidence.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
semen

Spoiler:
Srsly though, now people are nitpicking at the values the writer gave us (because I guess those must be wrong..?), while clinging to his < light speed comments as the absolute gospel... Which makes no sense to me.

But w/e, it's all trivial BS at this point anyway /shrug.

you don't agree that one is VERY SPECIFIC and convincing on how fast the author wanted flash to be traveling.. and the other, is well, no solid proof or convincing on what the other could've wanted flast to travel. One he made it very clear and specific... the other.. you need proof that the author KNEW the value and numbers he was giving would indicate the speed he wanted him to go. Do ANYBODY have an interview or any proof that this was the case.. NO. Thus, that isn't nearly as convincing at the author specifically and two times even saying the speed he wanted him to travel. In a general sense, narration is narration and carries the same weight... however, they don't carry the same wieight when talking specifically about the speed the author wanted him to travel. I agree though.. it is kinda silly and pointless.. then again my friend.. we are on a comic book versus forum 🙂