CosmicComet
Senior Member
Originally posted by abhilegend
Listen these insults would lead you nowhere, who cares if you love superman or not.
You definitely care. Since you are the same idiot who's been implying that I somehow have a bias against him and am lowballing him in this very thread. Idiot. 🙂
Forget that I am the same dude who was arguing for the Superman city building speed feat perhaps? Think before you type.
You cornered me? Lulz, says the guy who's trying to ignore two feats from different times, two different writers and performed with two different partners because he doesn't like them and it doesn't fit in his frame of logic of how comics work. No shit sherlock, most of comics don't follow real world logic. Who said anyone using this in combat threads? It happened, get over it. But as pr ruled it out, its not usable.
I like how you've not addressed a damn thing I said and just go on plugging your ears saying 'lalalalala but it happened!11'
Slowing down spectre thing? Bullshit hyperbole. He does not have the infinite weight, clearly. else trying to slow down his landing would be, you know pointless.
Infinite pages feat. Already addressed.
Doing something 'twice', years apart, over thousands of appearances does not consistency make. Especially when they are riddled with contradictory showings within the same stories and have no logical follow through. You do know what P.I.S. is yes?
It's irrelevant whether this is a combat thread or not, the point is you can't accept bits and pieces of what a feat means; trying to strictly apply real world logic towards one aspect while ignoring everything else the feat would bring implicitly. Again being that he can lift half of infinity then it must mean he's infinitely strong, you support this. BUT since he can apply infinite force in lifting, he should definitely be able to apply infinite force in punching. And being infinitely strong also means you should be infinitely fast. But, he's not an infinite force puncher nor is he infinitely fast, is he? You certainly won't say. Sometimes a nonsensical feat is just a nonsensical feat. This is why unquantifiable feats are ignored.
Yes, 'they happened', I don't have to get over it, as its not even a bother to me. Rather, it's you who needs to get over that they don't mean what you want them to mean.
She-hulk also did all that stuff. Means squat. Lobo is above kal as soon as you can prove all his losses are due to clones which as Lobo confirmed is not true in REBELS 27, I'm sure is not happening any time soon.
Lobo has some occasional bugs gunny level toon force. Jen does not; an occasional fourth wall breaker is all. Anyway, red herring. Pointless to the discussion at hand, will not address any further.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Superman, if only just. It's not by any kind of noticeable or massive degree, certainly not anywhere close to being x50 - x1000 stronger than Thor. I lol'd good about that by the way.
h1's take is far more reasonable than the other angle being implied here.
abhilegend for example, of course, supports the idea that Superman is stronger than Thor because he can lift 'infinite weight'. Which obviously has to imply that Thor CANNOT lift 'infinite weight'. Which would mean Superman is infinitely stronger than Thor, yes?
Obviously, speaking of implications again, you won't be able to get abhilegend to actually outright STATE that he believes Superman is infinitely stronger than Thor, because of course he will be laughed at.
h1 on the other hand dispenses of unquantifiable feats and focuses on what can be given a minimum figure. And I have to respect that. Afterall, if you see Savage Dragon lift a jeep sized boulder, and Luke Cage lift a tank, and we are in a thread arguing who is stronger, you would likely be WRONG if you went on visuals alone. (i.e. that the tank should be heavier just because its bigger.)
I find it a lot easier to believe that Superman could be 50 times stronger than Thor than saying he is infinitely stronger than Thor, don't you?
