Originally posted by Igniz
No I don't remember the sword being referred to of having the weight equivalent to a Galaxy.To be honest, I asked this because a lot of people seem to buy the reasoning that it was made from a Galaxy.But I've also taken the account that said sword is forged by using magic.Surtur with the Twilight Sword gave Odin a lot of trouble.So Twilight itself gives Surtur an amp.I would probably consider it being a strength feat for Thor since I do believe Odin can wield it via the Odin power.Though if this is considered lifting and hurling a Galaxy, is still a mystery to me.Now at least we have a joke that Thor can hurl a Galaxy 😄
Originally posted by abhilegend
Can I see the scans? I thought he hurled odinsword at arishem.
Originally posted by abhilegend
People are too eager to dismiss the book feat too. I've seen real world physics and what not to disprove that feat despite the fact that he has done a similar feat 10 years ago. It's a great feat. Possibly but it has nothing to do with their strength.
I think the moment people start applying math to such a showing, they've automatically failed. How would a book with infinite pages go about existing, trying to prove how it works with real life physics? Silly.
The Spectre feat? Another one people take a bit too literally.
Trying to use these showings as evidence of infinite strength or whatever is just as bad as trying to discredit them due to butthurt (Eternity is a measure of time, the book was held by Ultraman etc.) imho.
Both those arcs have better strength feats.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Thor's hurled both the Twilight Sword and the Odinsword with a lot of force.The Twilight Sword doesn't weight as much as a Galaxy by the way. It should though be pretty heavy as it was forged from a Galactic core or whatever.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
I think the moment people start applying math to such a showing, they've automatically failed. How would a book with infinite pages go about existing, trying to prove how it works with real life physics? Silly.The Spectre feat? Another one people take a bit too literally.
Trying to use these showings as evidence of infinite strength or whatever is just as bad as trying to discredit them due to butthurt (Eternity is a measure of time, the book was held by Ultraman etc.) imho.
Both those arcs have better strength feats.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Odinsword:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e139/RageOfTheGod/Thor/ThorvsCelestials4.jpgTwilight Sword:
http://i779.photobucket.com/albums/yy73/R-O-G/Thor/ThrowHurtsSurtur1.jpg
http://i779.photobucket.com/albums/yy73/R-O-G/Thor/ThrowHurtsSurtur2.jpg
Originally posted by abhilegend
Are you implying that h1a8 is the true representation of superman fans? We are talking about lifting feats, any and all feats are allowed. When you see me talking about superman punching someone with "infinite force", you have the right to claim BS on it. Till then its a perfectly usable feat no matter whatever anybody thinks about its absurdity. And? You are talking like comic book writer always think about these concepts. Good for ultraman, it doesn't dismiss Kal's feat.
ermm
I wasn't talking about Superman fans in general. I wasn't talking about you either (Unless you have argued what I said).
It's perfectly usable, my comments were reflected on those who take it a bit too far. Like I said, it's evidence that Superman is very strong. But everyone knew that already.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Are you implying that h1a8 is the true representation of superman fans? We are talking about lifting feats, any and all feats are allowed. When you see me talking about superman punching someone with "infinite force", you have the right to claim BS on it. Till then its a perfectly usable feat no matter whatever anybody thinks about its absurdity. And? You are talking like comic book writer always think about these concepts. Good for ultraman, it doesn't dismiss Kal's feat.
No, the problem with the feat is its implications as well, which INCLUDE that superman can apply infinite force with a punch.
Afterall, it requires FORCE to lift something, does it not?
And regardless of whether a punch produces less force than a deadlift or something, even if its a fraction of 'infinite weight lifting force', it would still be 'infinite'.
It's a nonsensical feat. Discard it from usage.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
No, the problem with the feat is its implications as well, which INCLUDE that superman can apply infinite force with a punch.Afterall, it requires FORCE to lift something, does it not?
And regardless of whether a punch produces less force than a deadlift or something, even if its a fraction of 'infinite weight lifting force', it would still be 'infinite'.
It's a nonsensical feat. Discard it from usage.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
Discard it from the sense as being applicable in a combat sense.That's not what this thread is about of course, but strength is a huge part of battle boards.
Why, because you don't like it? No one is arguing about it being usable in combat but comparing feats, its perfectly usable. Unless you secretly became a mod and no one told us yet. 🙄
Originally posted by CosmicComet
Discard it from the sense as being applicable in a combat sense.That's not what this thread is about of course, but strength is a huge part of battle boards.
👆
It took only Ultraman on his own to lift the book of infinite weight.While it took Superman and Capt.Marvel to lift the book.This would mean both Supes and Cap were lifting half of infinite.But half of infinite is still infinite.This would still make Superman and Ultraman equal since its the same book they lifted.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
ermmI wasn't talking about Superman fans in general. I wasn't talking about you either (Unless you have argued what I said).
It's perfectly usable, my comments were reflected on those who take it a bit too far. Like I said, it's evidence that Superman is very strong. But everyone knew that already.
People also like to dismiss superman's feats. For how many years people pretended that T-vo doesn't exist or anytime superman does something good, its because he is the flagship character of DC? I'm not saying you did it but we have someone in this very thread who likes to dismiss this feat despite Kal doing it twice. You think I give a damn about what anybody thinks about me on an internet forum? Of course you wouldn't take it literally, but you are entitled to your opinion and I'm to mine opinion. Who's correct according to on-panel proof though? Its certainly not you.
abhilegend. Jesus Christ.
You are one of the most blatant abusers of appeal to motive fallacy I've seen on this section.
Everytime you're cornered on something you do the same old butthurt WAAAHHH U R MEAN TO CLARK routine.
Stop it.
It's especially funny when its clearly directed at someone who regularly argues that Superman by virtue of speed alone should beat Thor for a majority. (myself)
Originally posted by CosmicComet
abhilegend. Jesus Christ.You are one of the most blatant abusers of appeal to motive fallacy I've seen on this section.
Everytime you're cornered on something you do the same old butthurt WAAAHHH U R MEAN TO CLARK routine.
Stop it.
It's especially funny when its clearly directed at someone who regularly argues that Superman by virtue of speed alone should beat Thor for a majority. (myself)
