Originally posted by Silent MasterLike I said you ignore direct comparisons because you're upset Hulk is stronger and more durable. He also humiliated Thor amidst a massive avengers one battle and just punched him away. People laughed at Thor. Get over it.
Like I said, I get that you don't care that Thor has better feats, but everyone else does.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I have my reasoning and a situation which involved the both of them. Also when both fell from great heights it was posed Thor may not survive while we see that the Hulk survived. Again that favors the Hulk.WW also tanks greater impact than bullets but that doesn't mean they won't hurt her. 😂
Thor dodged because they'd obviously hurt. If someone throws a feather at me I won't dodge I'll just run right through it. Unless you think he's an idiot and just sucks things for no reason.
I already gave past situations involved with both. I am confident you aren't. You are trolling and I know you don't believe Thor is more durable. ill have more evidence after the next film but I can figure things out it seems you can't.
Your reasoning is avoiding that Thor has tanked two epically large explosions and Hulk doesn't have anything that comes close
So? Thor is not Wonder Woman.
By your reasoning then Loki is more durable than Thor, because he walked right into bullets.
You're not confident, you won't even say you think Hulk's going to outright win in the gladiatorial match. Smells of zero confident, tbh
Originally posted by Darth ThorI do trust that Hulk hits with more force than bullets but he also avoided the bulletfire because they would still hurt him anything. Just not as much as the Hulk. Bullets less so but he obviously avoided them for a reason. Unless you think he wanted to show off and look cool by ducking.
You don't trust the hits he was taking off Hulk were massively harder than those bullets?
Originally posted by quanchi112
Like I said you ignore direct comparisons because you're upset Hulk is stronger and more durable. He also humiliated Thor amidst a massive avengers one battle and just punched him away. People laughed at Thor. Get over it.
You're not using a direct comparison, you're using the fact that Thor dodged an attack, rather than tank it. That is h1a8 levels of bias.
Originally posted by RobtardI admit that's impressive for Thor but that doesn't have anything to do with both of them. It proves Thor survived it not that Hulk wouldn't. I used two direct comparisons involving both characters. You have yet to address that.
Your reasoning is avoiding that Thor has tanked two epically large explosions and Hulk doesn't have anything that comes close[B]
Well my example fits the same criteria you asked for. Thor obviously used judgment to dodge the bullets because they obviously would hurt.
So? Thor is not Wonder Woman.
False, but Loki is harder to pin because we have seen him fake his own death and use magic and illusions before. Thor has been shown as more durable than Loki in direct comparison.
By your reasoning then Loki is more durable than Thor, because he walked right into bullets.You're not confident, you won't even say you think Hulk's going to outright win in the gladiatorial match. Smells of zero confident, tbh [/B]
I did say Hulk will look superior to Thor. I've said that from the beginning. I said in Thor's own film Hulk will come across as superior. Do you believe Thor will look superior in comparison ?
If so let's make a bet.
Originally posted by Silent MasterSo you believe dodging an attack that wouldn't hurt you at all makes sense? Come on this is h1 level logic. He uses feats alone like you are doing here. Difference is he doesn't mindlessly repeat himself like a parrot from thread to thread.
You're not using a direct comparison, you're using the fact that Thor dodged an attack, rather than tank it. That is h1a8 levels of bias.
Originally posted by Silent Masterh1 only uses feats just like you.
How sad, I point out that you're showing h1 level bias and you respond by basically saying "no, you".Get back to me when you have a real argument for Hulk being more durable.
You ignore facts because you're upset Hulk has humiliated Thor since Avengers 1. The punch heard round Asgard.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I admit that's impressive for Thor but that doesn't have anything to do with both of them. It proves Thor survived it not that Hulk wouldn't. I used two direct comparisons involving both characters. You have yet to address that.Well my example fits the same criteria you asked for. Thor obviously used judgment to dodge the bullets because they obviously would hurt.
False, but Loki is harder to pin because we have seen him fake his own death and use magic and illusions before. Thor has been shown as more durable than Loki in direct comparison.I did say Hulk will look superior to Thor. I've said that from the beginning. I said in Thor's own film Hulk will come across as superior. Do you believe Thor will look superior in comparison ?
If so let's make a bet.
It means Thor has superior durability feats as of right now
You acknowledge Thor tanking epic explosions, but cling that he had to dodge bullets or risk injury. Your logic is as always whacked and flippant.
No, do you think Hulk will decisively defeat Thor in their fight, thereby putting an end to the debate. Not this "looks superior" nonsense. Yes or no.
Originally posted by Robtard
It means Thor has superior durability feats as of right nowYou acknowledge Thor tanking epic explosions, but cling that he had to dodge bullets or risk injury. Your logic is as always whacked and flippant.
No, do you think Hulk will decisively defeat Thor in their fight, thereby putting an end to the debate. Not this "looks superior" nonsense. Yes or no.
Feats don't determine superiority alone. We go by peer by peer comparisons especially when given the chance.
I do not believe either feats would have affected the Hulk worse at all. Do you disagree ? I also believe a direct comparison is relevant whereas exclusive feats isn't especially when in the same universe and films.
Do you believe Thor will put Hulk down ?
You also ignored what I said and didn't answer any questions at all doing your troll thing.
Let's bet.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Feats don't determine superiority alone. We go by peer by peer comparisons especially when given the chance.I do not believe either feats would have affected the Hulk worse at all. Do you disagree ? I also believe a direct comparison is relevant whereas exclusive feats isn't especially when in the same universe and films.
Do you believe Thor will put Hulk down ?
You also ignored what I said and didn't answer any questions at all doing your troll thing.
Let's bet.
We go by what's shown and Thor's shown to take more. Thus far.
I'd like to think so, but again, my feelings are different than what's shown.
I'm thinking it will end with a stalemate, leaving the debate to go on. With Hulk being the greater aggressor. I've already said this.
What's to bet? You won't take a solid stance and say you believe Hulk will take out Thor decisively, you're skirting and it's telling, considering your general "Hulk is far superior" stance. Take a stand or just shut it.
Originally posted by RobtardSo you don't believe Hulk could tank either feats and want to ignore direct comparisons in the same film. Odd.
We go by what's shown and Thor's shown to take more. Thus far.I'd like to think so, but again, my feelings are different than what's shown.
I'm thinking it will end with a stalemate, leaving the debate to go on. With Hulk being the greater aggressor. I've already said this.
What's to bet? You won't take a solid stance and say you believe Hulk will take out Thor decisively, you're skirting and it's telling, considering your general "Hulk is far superior" stance.
So you don't believe Hulk will come across as superior. you disagree with me and then pretend that isn't a stance. You don't even believe Thor will look superior so you don't believe what you're saying. Trolling. Thanks for admitting that indirectly.
Originally posted by RobtardI said he will come across as superior in the film. You do not think anyone will look superior just one as the aggressor. I believe Hulk will have even more evidence to being the powerhouse which you deny. You won't accept a bet because you don't believe in Thor. Accept a bet and be a man for once.
Maybe read what I said and go with thatIt's a rather simple. Do you believe Hulk will decisively win over Thor? Yes or No. Stop skirting, its telling everyone you have no real confidence in Hulk.
Originally posted by quanchi112
I said he will come across as superior in the film. You do not think anyone will look superior just one as the aggressor. I believe Hulk will have even more evidence to being the powerhouse which you deny. You won't accept a bet because you don't believe in Thor. Accept a bet and be a man for once.
Again with the word games. Seems you can't say you believe Hulk will decisively defeat Thor in their fight. All I wanted to know and it's telling everyone you don't have all the confidence in the Hulk you pretend to have.
Originally posted by RobtardWhen did I claim that ? I said he will look superior in this film throughout. You then begged me to change my opinion without accepting a bet. You believe Thor is more durable and the powerhouse between the two. Prepare to be mocked this November.
Again with the word games. Seems you can't say you believe Hulk will decisively defeat Thor is their fight. All I wanted to know and it's telling everyone you don't have all the confidence in the Hulk you pretend to have.