Originally posted by cdtm
So what if we compare marvel anti matter to marvel anti matter?Brans main point isn't to compare anti matter's.. It's that, blue simply doesn't have the feats to claim he could do what Drax's anti matter pack did to Thanos there, or anything close to it.
Basically, BM's anti matter is portrayed as a glorified, amped up Master Blow..
Wasn't Thanos still in a weakened state at the time of that incident? Context?
Originally posted by Lek Kuen
Yes to both
Find where I stated that BM would evaporate PC Superman. I said that it would light him up. Do you recall this? i didn't say anything about any of the other characters in this thread except for my doubts that Ironfist was capable of hitting harder than anyone in the thread.
Originally posted by Branlor Swift
😂Stoic brought up AM.
You being the master of debating would carry the most weight in who can debate I think. Maybe I'll go back to the drawing board.
Though I admitted it goes against some things I said. I'm glad you posted that scan to prove me wrong on some aspects... When you posted that scan.
Did I lose to you in this debate? In your angry tiny no point posts? Well, dang, thanks for the loss doc.
I have never stated anything about DC antimatter vs Marvel antimatter. In fact I stated the exact opposite.
You do realize that if anti matter is variable that that farther pushes BM's abilities with out in its own corner don't you? I was just arguing that it's a special case. Now you think AM being variable helps in any way? I don't get it.
All this does if indeed correct and not another example of a special am case is mean we should take Blue Marvel in a bubble. IE, judge him of his own merits, not of others. If indeed the case it's the difference between Galactus' PC and Surfer's PC.
I don't get why I'm trying to explain this to a halfwit though. Maybe I do indeed lose again.
No cutey, I think that when you have MORE OF something explosive, it tends to do more damage. And I find it HILARIOUS that you now want to judge BM by his own merit when before, AM was the standard........until the scans of PC Superman getting raped by an antimatter missile popped up.
Dude, you REALLY need to get that Super STD checked ASAP. I laugh at how you guys can't see yourselves. You hold him up as the be all and end all and judge the rest of the comic world by what you perceive his standard to be and you apply that to an entirely different comic book universe. The ironic thing is all of this is that you fail to properly evaluate PC Superman in the first damn place. You remind me of certain people in American who uphold the 1950's as some sort of utopia that never actually existed.
Originally posted by Blue Area Vet
No cutey, I think that when you have MORE OF something explosive, it tends to do more damage. And I find it HILARIOUS that you now want to judge BM by his own merit when before, AM was the standard........until the scans of PC Superman getting raped by an antimatter missile popped up.Dude, you REALLY need to get that Super STD checked ASAP. I laugh at how you guys can't see yourselves. You hold him up as the be all and end all and judge the rest of the comic world by what you perceive his standard to be and you apply that to an entirely different comic book universe. The ironic thing is all of this is that you fail to properly evaluate PC Superman in the first damn place. You remind me of certain people in American who uphold the 1950's as some sort of utopia that never actually existed. Why do you think DC created Crisis?
Originally posted by Stoic
If he wasn't weakened the obliteration may not have happened. He's been through worse, and remained intact. What you tried to do was spin something, while leaving out context. Wonder why you'd do something like that? Hmmm...
Thanos's durability isn't psionic based, as far as I'm aware. Yes, Rocket bluffed Thanos in believing he was vulnerable to his "super weapon", but Thanos's mind wasn't at 100% operating capacity.. His invulnerability is independent from his mental state.
I don't see how needing time to regain his footing after spending an extended time in hibernation has any bearing on his physical durability.
Originally posted by Blue Area Vet
No cutey, I think that when you have MORE OF something explosive, it tends to do more damage. And I find it HILARIOUS that you now want to judge BM by his own merit when before, AM was the standard........until the scans of PC Superman getting raped by an antimatter missile popped up.Dude, you REALLY need to get that Super STD checked ASAP. I laugh at how you guys can't see yourselves. You hold him up as the be all and end all and judge the rest of the comic world by what you perceive his standard to be and you apply that to an entirely different comic book universe. The ironic thing is all of this is that you fail to properly evaluate PC Superman in the first damn place. You remind me of certain people in American who uphold the 1950's as some sort of utopia that never actually existed.
He's right, I brought up Am as in antimatter, not the Antimonitor. He brought up the Antimonitor top raise the stakes, and make it seem like a stated something that I never did. it's what people do when they are wrong, and too small to admit it. They then attempt to slide their shit onto you. If you're soft headed enough like a few on this board are, it works, if not, they run to plan B, and so on.
Originally posted by cdtm
Thanos's durability isn't psionic based, as far as I'm aware. Yes, Rocket bluffed Thanos in believing he was vulnerable to his "super weapon", but Thanos's mind wasn't at 100% operating capacity.. His invulnerability is independent from his mental state.I don't see how needing time to regain his footing after spending an extended time in hibernation has any bearing on his physical durability.
It was said REPEATEDLY throughout that story arc that I own that Thanos was weakened from the sleep state. What do you think that means?
Originally posted by Stoic
He's right, I brought up Am as in antimatter, not the Antimonitor. He brought up the Antimonitor top raise the stakes, and make it seem like a stated something that I never did. it's what people do when they are wrong, and too small to admit it. They then attempt to slide their shit onto you. If you're soft headed enough like a few on this board are, it works, if not, they run to plan B, and so on.
Considering you specifically named COIE, the event where everyone was being killed by Anti-monitor using antimatter. It's pretty obvious you were bringing him up. Or why name drop his storyline specifically and state about it proving your case?
Originally posted by cdtm
Thanos's durability isn't psionic based, as far as I'm aware. Yes, Rocket bluffed Thanos in believing he was vulnerable to his "super weapon", but Thanos's mind wasn't at 100% operating capacity.. His invulnerability is independent from his mental state.I don't see how needing time to regain his footing after spending an extended time in hibernation has any bearing on his physical durability.
Thanos has survived from worse when he was at full capacity though. So unless that grenade was more powerful than it appeared, it shouldn't have done to Thanos what it did. For it to have done that to thanos who has survived having a star blow up in his face, it would have killed all of the GOTG with him. Here's a good question for you. Where do you think antimatter comes from? Stars? As I said, a star blew up in his face, and he survived it. What does that say to you?