The X-Men Vs Doomsday

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
If you want to talk just DOS Doomsday, one good way to tell would be to compare how each did to common opponents. Superman beat Thor's brains in (and yeah, it is canon in both Marvel and DC, as despite what some Marvel fans claim, it has been mentioned in Marvel also), and Doomsday man-handled Superman, despite having fought multiple heroes before hand. There's a start.

If you truly believe DOS Superman is stronger than current Thor then something is seriously wrong with you.

Originally posted by iceman24567
Nah crossovers dont matter or is that your only argument. Crossovers and abc logic like i thought fail

Any canon appearance matters.

It's better than no argument at all, which is what you seem to have. There is ZERO evidence Thor is stronger than Doomsday. It's a fact that Superman is stronger than Thor, even the most hardcore Thor fans I know admit it. Doomsday showed to be stronger than Superman.

Saying "ABC logic is fail" is a great argument. I'm sure you saw someone say that once in some other debate and are parroting it. People love to say that without thinking it through. Sometimes ABC logic is faulty, sometimes not. You actually have to THINK before you say that though.

ABC logic actually DOES work in this case. If I am stronger than person B, and person B is stronger than person C, then it follows I am stronger than person C. Explain why that doesn't follow.

To help you out with when ABC logic doesn't work. If I said Thor beat SS, and SS beat Hal Jordan, it doesn't mean Thor can beat Hal Jordan. There are different powers at work, different circumstances, etc. ABC fails there.

When we are talking about physical strength, and that alone, ABC logic DOES work. If Ben can lift more than Joe, and Joe can lift more than Alex, then Ben can lift more than Alex too.

Does that help?

JLA Vs Avengers isn't a valid source on this forum.

Also, ABC logic is always faulty. Reasonable deduction is what's good.

Originally posted by -Pr-
JLA Vs Avengers isn't a valid source on this forum.

That's fine then, but it has been referenced in subsequent canon Marvel comics, twice that I know of, and also in DC canon comics as well. But if that's the rule, that's fine with me for future reference.

Stalemate or magnetic bfr

Thor and superman are peers in strength.

If you want to argue that fact go to one of the millions of there vs threads please.

Originally posted by -Pr-

Also, ABC logic is always faulty. Reasonable deduction is what's good.

How so in this case:

When we are talking about physical strength, and that alone, ABC logic DOES work. If Ben can lift more than Joe, and Joe can lift more than Alex, then Ben can lift more than Alex too.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
To help you out with when ABC logic doesn't work. If I said Thor beat SS, and SS beat Hal Jordan, it doesn't mean Thor can beat Hal Jordan. There are different powers at work, different circumstances, etc. ABC fails there.

When we are talking about physical strength, and that alone, ABC logic DOES work. If Ben can lift more than Joe, and Joe can lift more than Alex, then Ben can lift more than Alex too.

Does that help?

Originally posted by -Pr-
JLA Vs Avengers isn't a valid source on this forum.

Also, ABC logic is always faulty. Reasonable deduction is what's good.

Originally posted by iceman24567
Nothing you have posted so far helped anybody you included

👆

Another stunning argument. When all else fails, cheer lead. Just as good as your "fail" argument. You've certainly proven your case that Thor is stronger than Doomsday. Congratulations.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
Another stunning argument. When all else fails, cheer lead. Just as good as your "fail" argument. You've certainly proven your case that Thor is stronger than Doomsday. Congratulations.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
How so in this case:

When we are talking about physical strength, and that alone, ABC logic DOES work. If Ben can lift more than Joe, and Joe can lift more than Alex, then Ben can lift more than Alex too.

because they're can always be variables.

Originally posted by iceman24567
So now you are going to have to shown me where i said Thor was stronger 😐. You made the claim that Doomsday was multiple times stronger than Thor you tried using abc logic and crossovers to support this foolish stance. Congratulations you have failed again

Again, another great argument. Calling an argument foolish with nothing to back it up only makes you look like a buffoon. The fact is the crossover IS CANON, whether the mods think it is or not. Clearly Marvel and DC think it is.

But like I said, if that's how the rules are here, that's fine. It's like CBR, where you're only allowed to use feats, and no fights. The fights are canon, it's the rules of the site that don't allow you to use them. I'm fine with that.

And it's clear you have no idea what "ABC logic" is, since you used it wrong, and simply ignored me correcting you, and went on to say "fail", the go-to phrase for people with no argument, or ability to think of one.

As I said, it's obvious to even the most die-hard Thor fans that Superman is stronger than Thor, and Doomsday was stronger than Superman. If you think that's an example of the ABC logic fallacy, I'd recommend a course on logic when you get to college.

Originally posted by -Pr-
because they're can always be variables.

That can be true of "reasonable deduction" also. there are variables in everything.

If "ABC logic" was always false, there'd be no such thing as half of mathematics. (i.e. 1<2, 2<3, so 1<3. this is a lynch pin of infinite series).

It's only a fallacy when it's applied incorrectly. Like the example I showed with fights

I agree just because someone beat someone, and that someone beat someone in a fight, then yeah, it doesn't imply the first guy beats up the third guy. But in pure lifting....

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
That can be true of "reasonable deduction" also. there are variables in everything.

If "ABC logic" was always false, there'd be no such thing as half of mathematics. (i.e. 1<2, 2<3, so 1<3. this is a lynch pin of infinite series).

It's only a fallacy when it's applied incorrectly. Like the example I showed with fights

I agree just because someone beat someone, and that someone beat someone in a fight, then yeah, it doesn't imply the first guy beats up the third guy. But in pure lifting....

Reasonable deduction is generally educated, though. ABC logic is generally the preserve of idiots.

ABC logic is false in comic book debates. I'm not talking about maths here.

Pure lifting? You really want to break everything down to such pointless extremes? That isn't even the totality of strength.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
If you want to talk just DOS Doomsday, one good way to tell would be to compare how each did to common opponents. Superman beat Thor's brains in (and yeah, it is canon in both Marvel and DC, as despite what some Marvel fans claim, it has been mentioned in Marvel also), and Doomsday man-handled Superman, despite having fought multiple heroes before hand. There's a start.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
Again, another great argument. Calling an argument foolish with nothing to back it up only makes you look like a buffoon. The fact is the crossover IS CANON, whether the mods think it is or not. Clearly Marvel and DC think it is.

But like I said, if that's how the rules are here, that's fine. It's like CBR, where you're only allowed to use feats, and no fights. The fights are canon, it's the rules of the site that don't allow you to use them. I'm fine with that.

And it's clear you have no idea what "ABC logic" is, since you used it wrong, and simply ignored me correcting you, and went on to say "fail", the go-to phrase for people with no argument, or ability to think of one.

As I said, it's obvious to even the most die-hard Thor fans that Superman is stronger than Thor, and Doomsday was stronger than Superman. If you think that's an example of the ABC logic fallacy, I'd recommend a course on logic when you get to college.

Originally posted by iceman24567

i recommend you read a comic every now and then

good one. did you come up with that one all by yourself. never heard it before. arguing with u is about as pointless as arguing with carver. except he at least attempts to make arguments.

Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
good one. did you come up with that one all by yourself. never heard it before. arguing with u is about as pointless as arguing with carver. except he at least attempts to make arguments.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Reasonable deduction is generally educated, though. ABC logic is generally the preserve of idiots.

ABC logic is false in comic book debates. I'm not talking about maths here.

Pure lifting? You really want to break everything down to such pointless extremes? That isn't even the totality of strength.

Again, I agree for the most part, but my point was, "ABC logic" isn't ALWAYS false, which you claimed it was. Reasonable deduction is educated by definition, but there are variables in that as well.

And again, I agree in terms of fights, yeah, it fails. But let's say Flash beat Superman in a foot race, and then Superman beat Quicksilver in a foot race. Flash and Quicksilver never end up racing. If there were no extenuating circumstances, would you agree that Flash is, at the very LEAST....more likely than not faster than quicksilver, just based on what I just said?

We use ABC logic here all the time, and people don't even realize it. Thanos showing to be stronger than Hulk is a big one that's used ALL THE TIME.

There's ABC logic, and then there's ABC logic fallacy.

And yeah, I know pure lifting isn't the only part of strength.

DOS doomsday isn't oneshotting namor but he is stronger than thor.