Originally posted by Blue Area Vet
No, I can't answer and enigmatic question and neither can you. You can ask it again, but nothing chances.Do you have proof that Captain America with GL ring cannot effectively deal with Superman's speed?
Do you have proof that Captain America with a GL ring cannot defend against Superman?
The answer to both rhetorical questions is no. There is no proof either way as the character doesn't exist in comics. If there was "proof" then there wouldn't be anything to debate. What other new questions to you have that aren't guised versions of the old questions?
I have to stop getting distracted with your red herrings and strawmans.
Anyhow
Your "argument " is invalid
Burden of proof fallacy
This is when someone attempts to make someone else prove a claim when the burden of proof is really on them to prove it. The burden of proof is always on the positive claim, and the person who makes the claim.
Example:
"Do you have proof that Captain America with GL ring cannot effectively deal with Superman's speed?
Do you have proof that Captain America with a GL ring cannot defend against Superman?"
In this case, the person in the example makes a claim (Cap with a GL will beat Superman), and without providing evidence for it himself, he asks his opponent to prove him wrong.
In reality, the person who made that claim would be the one required to prove it.
All in all WE provide evidence that suggest that Superman will be able to steal the ring away from GL Cap. As speedsters have done this in the past.
Captain America is no faster than a microsecond reaction time, superman is at least nanosecond reaction time meaning that superman has the advantage too.
Cap GL auto shields will also prove innefective against Superman as shown in scans that support this.
While you only base your argument in wishful thinking