Hela vs Destroyer

Originally posted by h1a8
1. There is no strawman. I stated the exact facts. Your logic is refutted by a counterexample.

2. So the fact that we see an explosion is speculative?

We do not see him get hit directly with the beam.

3. The problem is that we do not know anything except that she was its master. It's possible that the lifting enchantment wasn't in place as her feet didn't sink in the ground like Hulk's did.

How strong was Hulk at the time he tried to lift it? What's Hulk's average strength?
The force he used was enough to sink in the concrete a little.

1. Quote where I said “in every way”. Otherwise, you are a liar.

Your counterexample refutes nothing. I had a whole list on why which you just ignored it, thus you conceded this point already.

2. Speculation on: a) lightning explosion being internal b) that it affected the strutural integrity in any significant way.

3. We do not know anything except that you are an idiot troll. Doesn’t prove that you are a semi-intelligent Rhesus monkey. Evidence is taken at face value. Only thing a mural proves is that she was once painted to look like she lifted Mjolnir. Nothing more. I do not have to debate against far-fetched connections to unproven non-relationships. Lern2evidence.

Hulk’s top strength is irrelvant. Unless you have a Destroyer durability “feat” to counter?

We have an apple-to-apples comparison. Hela hand > DBeam > Destroyer w/c blew up as soon as beam got turned against it.

This is another call to provide an argument on how the Destroyer would win. If you do not answer, I will simply quote and repost on your next reply.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1. Quote where I said “in every way”. Otherwise, you are a liar.

Your counterexample refutes nothing. I had a whole list on why which you just ignored it, thus you conceded this point already.

2. Speculation on: a) lightning explosion being internal b) that it affected the strutural integrity in any significant way.

3. We do not know anything except that you are an idiot troll. Doesn’t prove that you are a semi-intelligent Rhesus monkey. Evidence is taken at face value. Only thing a mural proves is that she was once painted to look like she lifted Mjolnir. Nothing more. I do not have to debate against far-fetched connections to unproven non-relationships. Lern2evidence.

Hulk’s top strength is irrelvant. Unless you have a Destroyer durability “feat” to counter?

We have an apple-to-apples comparison. Hela hand > DBeam > Destroyer w/c blew up as soon as beam got turned against it.

1. You giving Hela energy resistance greater than Mjolnir based off crushing Mjolnir. You giving her hands Asgardian stab resistance as well, although a sword EASILY impaled her.

2. At face value it was told that she was the master of Mjolnir. At face value it appears that the writer didn’t write Mjolnir with its drop enchantment at the time.

Let’s make things simple. She had the strength to compress Mjolnir.
Does this automatically make her hands resistant against Destroyer beams? We debate here.

Destroyer will D beam her to death. This fight is outside Asgard where she doesn’t grow stronger.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. You giving Hela energy resistance greater than Mjolnir based off crushing Mjolnir. You giving her hands Asgardian stab resistance as well, although a sword EASILY impaled her.

2. At face value it was told that she was the master of Mjolnir. At face value it appears that the writer didn’t write Mjolnir with its drop enchantment at the time.

Let’s make things simple. She had the strength to compress Mjolnir.
Does this automatically make her hands resistant against Destroyer beams? We debate here.

Destroyer will D beam her to death. This fight is outside Asgard where she doesn’t grow stronger.

1. Don’t lie. I used multiple avenues of proof such as: grabbing blades and blocking lightning attacks.

I KNEW that you continually insisting on using the red herring blade argument is just your attempt to strawman me. Here is my argument:

Originally posted by Nibedicus.
False Equivalence. Red Herring. Sword has no relevance to the discussion. /yawn

2. I can prove thru real life evidence that crushing something with your hands prove that a) you need to be strong enough to crush it b) your hands need to be tougher than the item being crushed to not be damaged by you crushing it.

You cannot prove thru real life that a mural of a girl lifting a hammer proves that a) she is the “master of the hammer” (whatever that means). b) That can somehow negate an enchantment that has never by its previous master and c) that this is the method she used to crush it successfully d) That she is even able to wield the hammer after the hammer has a new owner and has had a new enchantment since then.

You didn’t take evidence at face value, you molested the evidence’s face and then claimed that you have mutant face babies. Not how face value of evidence works. GTFOH with that straw grasping far fetched unsupported crap.

Sure, let’s keep it simple.

What showings does the Destroyer have that would damage her?

a) Destroyer is a terrible shot, it will miss.
b) Hela closes in and crushes its face. Either exploding it from its own beam’s feedback or she just tears is apart.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1. Don’t lie. I used multiple avenues of proof such as: grabbing blades and blocking lightning attacks.

I KNEW that you continually insisting on using the red herring blade argument is just your attempt to strawman me. Here is my argument:

2. I can prove thru real life evidence that crushing something with your hands prove that a) you need to be strong enough to crush it b) your hands need to be tougher than the item being crushed to not be damaged by you crushing it.

You cannot prove thru real life that a mural of a girl lifting a hammer proves that a) she is the “master of the hammer” (whatever that means). b) That can somehow negate an enchantment that has never by its previous master and c) that this is the method she used to crush it successfully d) That she is even able to wield the hammer after the hammer has a new owner and has had a new enchantment since then.

You didn’t take evidence at face value, you molested the evidence’s face and then claimed that you have mutant face babies. Not how face value of evidence works. GTFOH with that straw grasping far fetched unsupported crap.

Sure, let’s keep it simple.

What showings does the Destroyer have that would damage her?

a) Destroyer is a terrible shot, it will miss.
b) Hela closes in and crushes its face. Either exploding it from its own beam’s feedback or she just tears is apart.

2. Although the JJ counter example is valid, let's go the scientific real life route. "Tougher" is not a scientific word. There are many different types of durability.
For example, an object can be highly resistant against tensile forces but not the same in compressive forces, highly resistant against heat (large melting point) but very brittle, very resistant against blunt forces but easily to melt (low resistance against heat), a good conductor of electricity, but not bulletproof or stab proof, I can go on forever.

Crushing Mjolnir has no bearing on energy resistance. The writer had her block ship's energy beams with her cape. That implies that she is not very resistant against such attacks, otherwise the writer wouldn't have had her do such things.

a) Why do you think Destroyer (loaded with tech far more advanced than human tech) was a terrible shot? It couldn't even hit what it was looking at, even if the targets were standing still. This is to protect the named characters in the film. It was PIS basically.

So I'll chalk it up and say that Destroyer will miss a lot in this fight.
And I'm still not convinced she will crush its face. Destroyer can strike and punch as well.

I come to this conclusion as far as her having the ability to damage Destroyer.

Either Mjolnir compressive durability is a little more than Thor's strength (since Hela appears to only be a little stronger than Thor in their tussles) and thus Hela can indeed damage Destroyer
or it is an outlier (far above her average showings).

In my next posts I'm only arguing
1. Writer's intentions of her blocking energy is strong evidence of her not being very resistant against strong energy.
2. Energy resistance doesn't always correlate with crushing something (in real life).
3. Either Mjolnir's compressive strength is marginally more than Thor's strength or orders of magnitude more. If the former, then Hela beats Destroyer. If the latter, then proof is required of it being magnitudes more, and a good reason to why the feat could be used here (as it's an outlier).

Originally posted by h1a8
1. DM >>>the electricity she blocked.
She didn't block blades with her hands, it was with her bracelets.

1a. Asgadian sword is not a red herring. Giving her greater energy durability for a crushing feat implies that her durability is greater in every way since resisting heat and energy has nothing to do with pressure forces. Stabbing and cutting is MORE relevant to crushing something since it is a pressure feat.

1b. A random asgardian sword cannot stab through Mjolnir, so Hela crushing Mjolnir also means that the sword can't stab through her hands either.

2. Although the JJ counter example is valid, let's go the scientific real life route. "Tougher" is not a scientific word. There are many different types of durability.
For example, an object can be highly resistant against tensile forces but not the same in compressive forces, highly resistant against heat (large melting point) but very brittle, very resistant against blunt forces but easily to melt (low resistance against heat), a good conductor of electricity, but not bulletproof or stab proof, I can go on forever.

Crushing Mjolnir has no bearing on energy resistance. The writer had her block ship's energy beams with her cape. That implies that she is not very resistant against such attacks, otherwise the writer wouldn't have had her do such things.

a) Why do you think Destroyer (loaded with tech far more advanced than human tech) was a terrible shot? It couldn't even hit what it was looking at, even if the targets were standing still. This is to protect the named characters in the film. It was PIS basically.

So I'll chalk it up and say that Destroyer will miss a lot in this fight.
And I'm still not convinced she will crush its face. Destroyer can strike and punch as well.

I come to this conclusion as far as her having the ability to damage Destroyer.

Either Mjolnir compressive durability is a little more than Thor's strength (since Hela appears to only be a little stronger than Thor in their tussles) and thus Hela can indeed damage Destroyer
or it is an outlier (far above her average showings).

In my next posts I'm only arguing
[b]1. Writer's intentions of her blocking energy is strong evidence of her not being very resistant against strong energy.
2. Energy resistance doesn't always correlate with crushing something (in real life).
3. Either Mjolnir's compressive strength is marginally more than Thor's strength or orders of magnitude more. If the former, then Hela beats Destroyer. If the latter, then proof is required of it being magnitudes more, and a good reason to why the feat could be used here (as it's an outlier). [/B]

1. Speculative and irrelevant.As that was not the argument being made, regardless of your attempt to continuously strawman.

1b. No, stop lying. The evidence was presented to show that she has variable durability with respect to other body parts (due to how her using her other body parts as a defensive tool), not as a quantified “feat” to attribute measurable energy/piercing durability to her. Nice attempt at lying to rewrite narrative via strawmanning.

2. Might be true, might not be. However, that was never the argument I made as it is all irrelevant to the discussion. Regardless of how many times you try to strawman. Nice try. Not.

“Energy” is not a real “resistance” type. So stop using it like you know what you’re talking about. The Destroyer was shown to deal damage thru concussive (kinetic) force and thru superficial heat (thermal). Onus is on you that the damage (and its type) it deals can harm Hela.

a) PIS is if something happens rarely and is something out of character. Something happening all the time is the definition of in-character behavior. Lern2PIS you POS.

Her strength >>> Destroyer, it try can punch her but she can palm that as well. Especially when a Mjolnir throw (w/c she effortlessly palmed) knocked it on its ass with ease.

Hela is far stronger than Thor, at no time was it ever shown that strength was even competitive between the two. She effortlessly held him in place with one hand while he was unable to resist it at all with both. Kurse couldn’t even do that, neither has Hulk (who many claim to be at least 2x stronger than Thor). She did it effortlessly, while monologuing. Watch the freaking movie. If you have proof to the contrary, present it, else stop making shit up.

b) 1. Irrelevant. You have not provided proof that the Destroyer beam can hurt her so it cannot. Your continuous attempt to shift burden of proof (like always, seriously don’t you have another gimmick?) notwithstanding.

2. Irrelevant. See above. Strawman.

3. Outlier or not. It is a valid showing. The proof exists and cannot be disregarded. You have provided zero contradicting evidence to the “feat” that would discredit its validity. We already covered this and you are now just trolling by ressurecting already-debunked arguments in order to artificially extend your thread.

Your entire strategy now seems to be to ignore Destroyer winning at all and going for the full STRAWMAN attack it seems.

You're not getting tired of this, Nib?

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
You're not getting tired of this, Nib?

Nah. Middle of a 2 week family vacay trip that connects to a 1 week work trip. It’s something to do while I wait for flights and bus rides. Right now insomnia is keeping me awake and I need to wake up in 2 hrs. Guess I’ll just stay awake til I gotta head to the airport.

The Destroyer beam can hurt her because
1. it is more powerful than random ship blasts that Hela evaded and also blocked with her cape.
And
2. the fact that she has no resistance feats to show otherwise.

If someone is just 1 ton stronger than you then they can pin you down against your will as well.

When Hela fought Thor, never did she appear to be much stronger. Hell, Hulk appears much stronger than Hela as he's able to knock Thor far away. Hela wasn't koing Asgardians when she struck them and not hitting Thor away far distances.

Did you just seriously claim that Hela has no energy resistance feats?

Yes

Originally posted by h1a8
The Destroyer beam can hurt her because
1. it is more powerful than random ship blasts that Hela evaded and also blocked with her cape.
And
2. the fact that she has no resistance feats to show otherwise.

If someone is just 1 ton stronger than you then they can pin you down against your will as well.

3. When Hela fought Thor, never did she appear to be much stronger. Hell, Hulk appears much stronger than Hela as he's able to knock Thor far away. Hela wasn't koing Asgardians when she struck them and not hitting Thor away far distances.

1. The Destroyer Beam is not a random ship blast. Yet another red herring false equivalence. If you have no “feats” for Destroyer just say so. 😆

2. She doesn’t need a resistance “feat” against an attack that has no “feats” presented to resist against.

Ergo. You not giving evidence of an attack of what she has to resist = her not needing “feats” to resist it.

3. BS Idiotlogic. You need to be at least 2x stronger than someone if you are able to overpower his 2 hands vs your 1 hand ( as 2 hands = 2x the hand strength DUH). You need to be multiples stronger than that when you do it effortlessly (not using half your strength). And even far stronger than that to do it when you have no leverage.

You are talking about characters that have multi-ton strength range.

You do not seem to know how strength works.

Use your brain pls. OMG that was dumb.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1. The Destroyer Beam is not a random ship blast. Yet another red herring false equivalence. If you have no “feats” for Destroyer just say so. 😆

2. She doesn’t need a resistance “feat” against an attack that has no “feats” presented to resist against.

Ergo. You not giving evidence of an attack of what she has to resist = her not needing “feats” to resist it.

3. BS Idiotlogic. You need to be at least 2x stronger than someone if you are able to overpower his 2 hands vs your 1 hand ( as 2 hands = 2x the hand strength DUH). You need to be multiples stronger than that when you do it effortlessly (not using half your strength). And even far stronger than that to do it when you have no leverage.

You are talking about characters that have multi-ton strength range.

You do not seem to know how strength works.

Use your brain pls. OMG that was dumb.

She has no resistance feats to support not being affected by the beams.

2. She had superior leverage over Thor when she held Gungnir in place. She used her speed, skill, and little to no resistance from Thor to get in that position. In no way did it appear that she was 2x stronger or more. Look how far Thor flew.

Outside the Mjolnir feat, Hela never appeared to be strong enough to duplicate the feat where Destroyer casually backhanded Volstagg many feet away (after he had a lot of forward momentum already).

😂

Originally posted by h1a8
1. It blew up cars, gas station support beams, there is sufficient evidence to support it being able to kill or greatly damaged Asgardians, it made Asgardians fly many feet through the air and through windows after it just hit the ground next to them. Seems like Loki didn’t really wanna kill them.

She has no resistance feats to support not being affected by the beams.

2. She had superior leverage over Thor when she held Gungnir in place. She used her speed, skill, and little to no resistance from Thor to get in that position. In no way did it appear that she was 2x stronger or more. Look how far Thor flew.

Outside the Mjolnir feat, Hela never appeared to be strong enough to duplicate the feat where Destroyer casually backhanded Volstagg many feet away (after he had a lot of forward momentum already).

1. Gotdang, finally. Some “feats”. Geez, how long does it take before you would actually get off your lazy ass and post some actual things that you need to support your position?

Post the specific “feats” via youtube that you feel will be what would damage Hela. Cuz all I’m seeing is a lot of concussive (kinetic) damage (tho nothing that even comes close to her palming a Mjolnir throw) and some superficial thermal damage.

2. Wrong showing, bucko. She pinned Thor with a neck choke against the wall with him trying to free himself with both hands to no success. In contrast, Kurse tried to do the same and Thor got himself out with a little effort.

Lol. He hit Volstagg “many feet away” 😆 ZOMG best strength “feat” evar!

Comparing that to easily overpowering Thor well beyond what the likes of Hulk and Kurse were ever able to do, catching and crushing Mjolnir, crushing an Asgardian’s head, skull and helmet and all. All without any effort whatsoever. Nonchalantly.

And you’re comparing that to “he slapped a fat guy many feet” (as if distance is the only metric for strength around here). Are you kidding me? I don’t even think that’s close to Ragnarok-Thor level strength.

h1, if you’re going to throw such retarded arguments my way, I don’t even feel that I need to refute you anymore. Just tell me if you’ve lost interest in the debate. You at least put some thought in our last debate where I had to expend a little effort to refute. Did the last debate break you or something?

Frankly, I’m feeling zero challenge in this debate and am losing interest.

h1 gets challenged by coloring books

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1. Gotdang, finally. Some “feats”. Geez, how long does it take before you would actually get off your lazy ass and post some actual things that you need to support your position?

Post the specific “feats” via youtube that you feel will be what would damage Hela. Cuz all I’m seeing is a lot of concussive (kinetic) damage (tho nothing that even comes close to her palming a Mjolnir throw) and some superficial thermal damage.

2. Wrong showing, bucko. She pinned Thor with a neck choke against the wall with him trying to free himself with both hands to no success. In contrast, Kurse tried to do the same and Thor got himself out with a little effort.

Lol. He hit Volstagg “many feet away” 😆 ZOMG best strength “feat” evar!

Comparing that to easily overpowering Thor well beyond what the likes of Hulk and Kurse were ever able to do, catching and crushing Mjolnir, crushing an Asgardian’s head, skull and helmet and all. All without any effort whatsoever. Nonchalantly.

And you’re comparing that to “he slapped a fat guy many feet” (as if distance is the only metric for strength around here). Are you kidding me? I don’t even think that’s close to Ragnarok-Thor level strength.

h1, if you’re going to throw such retarded arguments my way, I don’t even feel that I need to refute you anymore. Just tell me if you’ve lost interest in the debate. You at least put some thought in our last debate where I had to expend a little effort to refute. Did the last debate break you or something?

Frankly, I’m feeling zero challenge in this debate and am losing interest.

2. Thor had little leverage. She was in a position of strength. I can do the same thing to someone slightly weaker if I got them pressed against the wall. Thor didn't seem to be struggling tremendously. In the next scene Thor had no problem stopping her attacks. In other words, he matched her strength.

3. Volstagg had great momentum. Destroyer changed his momentum greatly in a fraction of a second. Force = change in momentum over change in time.The slap was casual. This implies Destroyer is capable of generating multiple times more strength.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. The throw wasn't fast. She didn't stop a lot of kinetic energy.
The blasts are capable of killing or greatly damaging Asgardians. That's enough.

2. Thor had little leverage. She was in a position of strength. I can do the same thing to someone slightly weaker if I got them pressed against the wall. Thor didn't seem to be struggling tremendously. In the next scene Thor had no problem stopping her attacks. In other words, he matched her strength.

3. Volstagg had great momentum. Destroyer changed his momentum greatly in a fraction of a second. Force = change in momentum over change in time.The slap was casual. This implies Destroyer is capable of generating multiple times more strength.

......

This is just lazy now. Lowballing Mjolnir throw. Lying about leverage and presenting a non-argument about a slap well below Thor’s ‘feats” within the movie.

I’m just embarassed for you now.

Tell you what, I’ll give you a mulligan. Why don’t you give it a little more thought and come back when you have better arguments?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
......

This is just lazy now. Lowballing Mjolnir throw. Lying about leverage and presenting a non-argument about a slap well below Thor’s ‘feats” within the movie.

I’m just embarassed for you now.

Tell you what, I’ll give you a mulligan. Why don’t you give it a little more thought and come back when you have better arguments?

It's pretty funny how he is trying to use that feat from the Destroyer to imply he is much stronger than Hela, when Thor, who is below Hela, has done things like this, at 0:24:

YouTube video

And because we have timestamps for when things happen, and know the formula for objects in free fall etc. we can quantify the feat.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
......

This is just lazy now. Lowballing Mjolnir throw. Lying about leverage and presenting a non-argument about a slap well below Thor’s ‘feats” within the movie.

I’m just embarassed for you now.

Tell you what, I’ll give you a mulligan. Why don’t you give it a little more thought and come back when you have better arguments?

If you have someone pinned to a wall like Hela had Thor then it would be extremely difficult (even if they were the same strength as you) for them to break free in the position Thor was in. This is not a lie.

Good job of ignoring the next scene where Hela throws an attack and Thor, with his strength, easily stops it. So much for her being vastly stronger.

Good job of ignoring the fact that it was a casual backhand. Good job of ignoring the fact that Volstagg initially had a good amount of momentum that had to be stopped before being sent back.
This feat can be quantified though.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
It's pretty funny how he is trying to use that feat from the Destroyer to imply he is much stronger than Hela, when Thor, who is below Hela, has done things like this, at 0:24:

YouTube video

And because we have timestamps for when things happen, and know the formula for objects in free fall etc. we can quantify the feat.

You are forever using the fallacy of equating feats.
Characters aren't the same strength in every scene.
Characters don't share feats. Hela doesn't get Thor's peak feats just because she was shown stronger.
I can't say that since Gladiator busted a planet then Colossus can withstand planet busting punches. I'm pretty sure you can think of some good examples.

Both Thor and Hela were operating at low level superhuman strength when they fought each other.

The feat can be quantified though. Good find. You are the king of mining for feats for your characters.