Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I wish.Was a moot point, anyway. We have seen that Superman has the combat showings (ripping Doomsday in half) for it to matter.
Not to mention, surely this thread should be talking about preboot Superman?
And I am still not sure what relevance it would have to Thor, anyway.
WRT the thread, Thor clears.
Originally posted by Rao Kal ElIf Galactus jobs like he did to Thor or Sentry then Doomsday wins
I said G wins you probably didn't understand it.So let me point and laugh (^u^)=0-
If he does not job then Galactus stomps is as easy as that
Your own words.
Also.................Only crackheads would say DD wins.
You must all be crackheads.
I would rather smoke newports than Crack. 😮💨
Originally posted by JBL
His point is increasing my strength but not my durability in an attempt to trick idiots into agreeing with him. You see, a person made out of adamantium ( that can move ) and can bench a 50lb steel ball is a million times more durable than that ball, but they cannot destroy that ball with their bare hands....Now increase their strength x 100 and they can destroy it. Your friends attempt was that i had human durability with 100 x strength and had to punch that door and shatter my hand, what he failed to realize is that i could bench that door all day long but i cannot destroy it with my bare hands. 😂
I don't know why you are having a difficult time comprehending what the Professor wrote.
Your 50lb steel ball analogy is stupid, why? because do you even know what the breaking point of steel is? I don't know either, but it's a lot more than 50lbs.
Strength needed to lift earth > strength needed to destroy earth.
Your example is the complete opposite because the strength needed to lift the 50lb steel ball i<<<<<<<< strength needed to destroy that 50lb steel ball.
I hope you now understand that your 50lb steel ball analogy is useless in this debate.
You can throw analogies all day but it'd be interesting to see if someone can actually use a reputable source to compare lifting vs destroying Earth. By reputable I don't mean made up h1 math either.
Since that's not going to happen here's another shitty analogy:
I can destroy most everything holding the Earth together with a sledgehammer. That doesn't mean I can destroy it.
^
Proof that destroying it is more impressive!
Though at that level it probably means nothing in way of distinction whether you destroy or move it at least according to comics. srug
Originally posted by Branlor Swift
You can throw analogies all day but it'd be interesting to see if someone can actually use a reputable source to compare lifting vs destroying Earth. By reputable I don't mean made up h1 math either.Since that's not going to happen here's another shitty analogy:
I can destroy most everything holding the Earth together with a sledgehammer. That doesn't mean I can destroy it.
^
Proof that destroying it is more impressive!Though at that level it probably means nothing in way of distinction whether you destroy or move it at least according to comics. srug
Given time, or superspeed you could do it except those parts that are too hot or to dense, or water. You will however be never able to lift it. 😉
Originally posted by JBLthen why are you using post reboot remarks as if they hold any bearing on preboot Superman?
I know what the thread stated. I am comparing thor to a non-amped superman, now when superman amped i countered with thor turning to his hammer to match in the OWAW story thor has been placed in.
Originally posted by Branlor Swiftearths weight
You can throw analogies all day but it'd be interesting to see if someone can actually use a reputable source to compare lifting vs destroying Earth. By reputable I don't mean made up h1 math either.Since that's not going to happen here's another shitty analogy:
I can destroy most everything holding the Earth together with a sledgehammer. That doesn't mean I can destroy it.
^
Proof that destroying it is more impressive!Though at that level it probably means nothing in way of distinction whether you destroy or move it at least according to comics. srug
Nasa & Nato respectively
Originally posted by Branlor Swift
You can throw analogies all day but it'd be interesting to see if someone can actually use a reputable source to compare lifting vs destroying Earth. By reputable I don't mean made up h1 math either.Since that's not going to happen here's another shitty analogy:
I can destroy most everything holding the Earth together with a sledgehammer. That doesn't mean I can destroy it.
^
Proof that destroying it is more impressive!Though at that level it probably means nothing in way of distinction whether you destroy or move it at least according to comics. srug
I was actually thinking about using a sledgehammer in my example. In my post earlier. Was going to ask, what's easier, breaking a 50lb steel ball or a 50lb rock with said sledgehammer.
I agree, using a sledgehammer, you can destroy almost anything holding the earth, but that's what Superman's fist is but amplified however many times.
People like Drax and Terrax have destroyed a planet. Even Gladiator whose only feat to this day worth a damn is destroying a planet, needed Ronan and Quasar to move a planet. Same with Surfer and Beta Ray Bill. All off panel of course. I've yet to see any character lifting a planet's weight in marvel. What's funny is that pre-flashpoint Superman claimed he could bench the planet.
Eveybody claimed it was a hyperbole the instant it was shown.
😂
Originally posted by Prof. T.C McAbeThat same logic works in way of lifting. Given time I could lift all of Earth's weight individually.
Given time, or superspeed you could do it except those parts that are too hot or to dense, or water. You will however be never able to lift it. 😉
Though if we're working from the time angle of a human with a sledgehammer or superspeed, gravity would just put everything back together before any harm is done.
And thus I have definitively proven destroying a planet is more impressive. Using a shitty analogy with no bearing on comics.
Which is why I find this sig so intriguing. I don't give a shit about it but when people are so invested in proving one is better than the other, it's funny when stuff like this pops up. Superman can lift said Earth but can't destroy it. OMG fact!
When in reality both are impossibly impressive in both comics and the real world. Until one can definitively prove one is better than the other outside analogies that so obviously favor their stance, I see no reason to act like one is better than the other in comic logic. Sometimes a "stalemate" is a better conclusion than making cake analogies and whatever the blue dick shit JBL is talking about.
Looking at it feat wise. Superman can lift the Earth but can't destroy it. Thor can destroy the Earth but can't lift it.
Which rounds out to a screwed up average that pleases no one.
I'm sure push comes to shove both could do the other but it hasn't been shown so people get to make up horseshit about why one is better than the other that only makes them feel better about themselves and in the end proves nothing. Hell Hyperion can stop planets at half of light speed instantly and Gladiator can destroy planets. There doesn't seem to be a vast difference in strength between them.
Meh, I'll go with about equal myself.
Originally posted by Prof. T.C McAbeName 10 things that you can one shot into many pieces but you cannot pick it up. Then name 100 things that you can pick up but not one shot into 2 pieces.
Given time, or superspeed you could do it except those parts that are too hot or to dense, or water. You will however be never able to lift it. 😉
Originally posted by pym-ftwInteresting. But what you're forgetting is cake!
earths weight
6.5 sextillion tons
force needed to destroy earth
110 sextillion tons or 110 quadrillion megatonsNasa & Nato respectively
Not that I particularly care but that's an interesting tidbit. I'll go back to thinking they're around equal in terms of comics though if you don't mind.