Can Thor replicate Superman's nuke feat?

Originally posted by WolvesofBabylon
People seem to think Thor tanked the Star feat when in reality he was probably going to die without stormbreaker.

It took minutes for the full force of a neutron star to injure Thor that badly. that is at the very least trillions of times better than the tiny fraction of a nuke that almost killed Superman.

Originally posted by Silent Master
1) Thor's feats aren't irrelevant
2) You have consistently said that a writer's intention trumps everything. Per the writer, Thor withstood the full force of a neutron star, not just the heat / temperature.

Per the writer's intention Thor withstood the temperature of a star and nothing more. Heat melts metal, stars have heat, this is common knowledge where a full audience understands. Intentions are clear.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
So, when it comes to things like CW Jimmy Olsen making the million ton key claim, H1 insists it's "undeniable writer's intent for the key to be that heavy, or they wouldn't have added the statement". Yet when it's a character statement that hurts his argument, like the Thor one, it's hyperbole? Lol, okay.

The million ton key was a reference to AS Superman.
Its clear what the writer's intent was. But you guys tried to dismiss it. Now you have a problem with me here? Hypocritical.

Anyway this case is common sense.

Originally posted by h1a8
Per the writer's intention Thor withstood the temperature of a star and nothing more. Heat melts metal, stars have heat, this is common knowledge where a full audience understands. Intentions are clear.

Post where the writer says that his intention was that Thor only withstood the temp and nothing more, or you're a liart.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Post where the writer says that his intention was that Thor only withstood the temp and nothing more, or you're a liart.

I don't have to. It's common sense. Heats melts metal, stars have heat, forges uses heat, heat was shown hitting Thor, heat was shown as becoming fire, etc.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't have to. It's common sense. Heats melts metal, stars have heat, forges uses heat, heat was shown hitting Thor, heat was shown as becoming fire, etc.

IOW you know that the writer never said that his intention was that Thor only withstood the temp. which means you knowingly told a untruth.

That makes you a liar.

Originally posted by h1a8
The million ton key was a reference to AS Superman.
Its clear what the writer's intent was. But you guys tried to dismiss it. Now you have a problem with me here? Hypocritical.

Anyway this case is common sense.

People argued that it was an outlier based on consistent showings, and that she didn't have striking feats reflecting that level of strength (because you were arguing all her punches were going to be that hard). It was only after people made a comparison between that and the Cap offscreen bulldozer feat that was given as a comment, which you also tried to dismiss as hyperbole or a lie, that they started applying your own dismissal tactics against you. So, even then, you were the one who started claiming one statement is 100% fact while another isn't, based on nothing but your personal opinion.

Without the sun to heal him, Superman was one step away from death after the nuke. If that's what Thor needs to replicate then yes, he can definitely do that. Probably even better. My guess is he gets knocked out for a bit with some injuries. One advantage Thor has over Superman is that Thor seems able to self-heal at an accelerated rate. So even if he's knocked out and injured he'll probably come through eventually, whereas Superman needed the sun to heal.

Originally posted by h1a8
Hyperbole. We all know it takes ONLY heat to melt metal. Stars have heat. The star’s heat was harnessed. This is common sense.

do you even know what hyperbole is?? hahahhaha..

Originally posted by Silent Master
1) Thor's feats aren't irrelevant
2) You have consistently said that a writer's intention trumps everything. Per the writer, Thor withstood the full force of a neutron star, not just the heat / temperature.

exactly

Originally posted by cdtm
1. PIS. Thor has nothing remotely comparable, and far too many lesser things that could have hurt/killled him (Like that fall in the Hulk Proof cage.)

2. Even if accepted, It nearly killed him.

Consistency trumps a one off feat that nearly killed him.

i don't deal in the stupidness such as PIS..

IT MUST BE accepted since it is clearly stated and shown

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
People argued that it was an outlier based on consistent showings, and that she didn't have striking feats reflecting that level of strength (because you were arguing all her punches were going to be that hard). It was only after people made a comparison between that and the Cap offscreen bulldozer feat that was given as a comment, which you also tried to dismiss as hyperbole or a lie, that they started applying your own dismissal tactics against you. So, even then, you were the one who started claiming one statement is 100% fact while another isn't, based on nothing but your personal opinion.

But can’t the same be applied to Thor’s feat. Wouldn’t it too be an outlier?

Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW you know that the writer never said that his intention was that Thor only withstood the temp. which means you knowingly told a untruth.

That makes you a liar.

It’s called common sense. It doesn’t need to be said or explained.
We all know stars have heat and heat is needed to MELT metal. We see phucking fire heating up the metal.

It's called, you're a liar that can't back up his claims.

@ H1, if you want to claim Thor's feat is also an outlier, then go ahead and prove it. Because people could actually refer back to multiple feats of striking power, or lack thereof, in the Supergirl instance.

Thor's neutron feat isn't an outlier because it's pretty consistent with his other durability feats like withstanding the Bifrost and Sokovia blasts without a single scratch.

Supergirl's key feat on the other hand would have been in direct contradiction with her other feats if we accepted the weight of that key.

^ Yep. In one episode SG seriously struggled to hold two halves of a small plane.

Whereas no real limit has been put on Thor’s outer durability before. Hes only been KO’d by those electric discs which effect him on the inside.

To be fair though, the plane scene was blatant PIS. That whole setup was only to force Supergirl to have to make a choice, IIRC. Because she actually has multiple feats to suggest a plane that size would be no issue for her (though said plane was also nowhere near a million tons, obviously).

Yeah she has lifted an oil tanker IIRC

Originally posted by FrothByte
Thor's neutron feat isn't an outlier because it's pretty consistent with his other durability feats like withstanding the Bifrost and Sokovia blasts without a single scratch.

Supergirl's key feat on the other hand would have been in direct contradiction with her other feats if we accepted the weight of that key.

lol H1 has in the past claimed that Captain America would have survived Sokovia without serious injury, while simultaneously arguing in another thread that Cris Johnson from Next with a knuckleduster would seriously mess him up. So, Cris Johnson with a knuckleduster > city level explosion, according to H1.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
lol H1 has in the past claimed that Captain America would have survived Sokovia without serious injury, while simultaneously arguing in another thread that Cris Johnson from Next with a knuckleduster would seriously mess him up. So, Cris Johnson with a knuckleduster > city level explosion, according to H1.

Remember the pick an ability thread where he picked the Next ability over NZT because he essentially didn't think he was smart enough to really benefit from NZT?

What's NZT?