Comic Book Questions & Discussion

Originally posted by ODG
^ Running away from your own argument is a biting indictment of how insipid it was to begin with. As it stands, I am not as nearly invested in chasing you down for your own witless propaganda.

Let us know how you square "one timeline where everything matters" with the round peg of Superman emerging in the 1940s. Easy deconstruction is easy.

It's *you* who assert that Superman's emerging time is some substantial evidence, while in reality, it really just something you can easily chalk up to comic timeline things. Since, by your logic, Hal shouldn't have begun his career in 1959

As for whether or not my perspective is something "witless propaganda"
Scott Snyder agrees with my interpretation
Two mods on this site agree with that interpretation

So again, it really seems just you're in the denial here

He does have a point. You're arguing that Superman and Lois are a hundred years old in the current stories. They're clearly not.

It gets worse when you realize that this position isn't for the love of the stories or anything like that, but to allow for the use of Silver Age feats that are no longer representative of the characters. Everyone here knows that Superman isn't going to sneeze away any more solar systems, so if you throw out those feats Superman is back to moon or planet level.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Hmm, no. The plot is Superman was sent through time.
People don't even know what Superman is back then. It's like these people also mistook Superman as some sort of angel, doesn't mean Superman suddenly becomes a divine entity lol

And for what is worth, the first scan also notes there is the possibility that Superman doesn't die, but merely get transported to another time period

And more important, the Linear Man specifically notes it takes Superman's invulerability to endure these experiences(the ordeal Superman experienced in Time And Time Again arc. Superman endured nuclear bomb, sun-eater implosion which sends him through hundreds of lightyears, And at the finale, Superman also experienced the Moon exploded so he can be sent to his proper time period)

So the bomb sent him back in time? What's the comic and issue number?

Question, let's say if QW is right (and he's not) and he posts a scan of Pre Crisis Superman moving a planet and I post a scan of a FAR more 1990/2000 Superman struggling to move a planet. Which one has more weight? The older scan or the much more recent, consistent with current level of power scan?

Originally posted by Astner
He does have a point. You're arguing that Superman and Lois are a hundred years old in the current stories. They're clearly not.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998

Or you know, it just like when they make Superboy and Superman eternally at 14 years old/29 years old while the timeline is moving forward, back in Pre-Crisis?
https://ibb.co/vmzhmjW

Edit:
Or let an editor explain to you. Comic characters don't do timeline, which should be very obvious even back in "silly" pre-crisis comics
https://ibb.co/mBMcpqh

Originally posted by Astner

It gets worse when you realize that this position isn't for the love of the stories or anything like that, but to allow for the use of Silver Age feats that are no longer representative of the characters. Everyone here knows that Superman isn't going to sneeze away any more solar systems, so if you throw out those feats Superman is back to moon or planet level.

Originally posted by carver9
So the bomb sent him back in time? What's the comic and issue number?

Originally posted by carver9
Question, let's say if QW is right (and he's not) and he posts a scan of Pre Crisis Superman moving a planet and I post a scan of a FAR more 1990/2000 Superman struggling to move a planet. Which one has more weight? The older scan or the much more recent, consistent with current level of power scan?

Originally posted by carver9
Also, Hulk destroyed a Universe and before you post the doorway to downplay this universe, remember, a door was opened to weer the 6th dimension in DC...

https://ibb.co/Q81sksg

Hulk powered through an attack that was ripping reality apart. Hulk tanked a scream that destroyed nearby suns.

Originally posted by Astner
He does have a point. You're arguing that Superman and Lois are a hundred years old in the current stories. They're clearly not.

It gets worse when you realize that this position isn't for the love of the stories or anything like that, but to allow for the use of Silver Age feats that are no longer representative of the characters. Everyone here knows that Superman isn't going to sneeze away any more solar systems, so if you throw out those feats Superman is back to moon or planet level.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Already addressed

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
People on here still use old feats for Marvel characters, no?

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
I mean, how many times does Surfer have a nanosecond level feats?

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
What the last time Hulk destroys a universe
etc

The thunderclap that destroyed the Dark Dimension in Hulk #126, and the clash shook the multiverse in Hulk #305 were never admissible due to their ambiguity, and the 123 Ricther scale nonsense in Totally Awesome Hulk #23 was a mess-up by the writer.

Not even carver buys into this shit, otherwise he wouldn't bring up scenes like the planet-shattering clash between the Hulk and Betty from Incredible Hulks 632. It would be like emphasizing that Superman shattered a widow.

Originally posted by Astner
"You got us, it doesn't make sense," isn't an argument, it's an excuse.

We don't even need to get to some writers make statements like you need to suspend of disbelief on interviews

Originally posted by Astner

Not quite as often. No one uses them for Thor for example.

Not many. Then again, he's got demoted to B-list character when Sony got the movie rights, so he doesn't really have that many recent books to pull feats from.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone here argue that Hulk could destroy a universe, unless it's specifically brought up to show someone how bad their debating standards are.

The thunderclap that destroyed the Dark Dimension in Hulk #126, and the clash shook the multiverse in Hulk #305 were never admissible due to their ambiguity, and the 123 Ricther scale nonsense in Totally Awesome Hulk #23 was a mess-up by the writer.

Not even carver buys into this shit, otherwise he wouldn't bring up scenes like the planet-shattering clash between the Hulk and Betty from Incredible Hulks 632. It would be like emphasizing that Superman shattered a widow.

I mean, even in 2022. we still have people use Surfer's example from 1975

Originally posted by Ambient
It’s going to be hard for Superman to continue to operate at full capacity against Surfer’s versatility. One such tactic Surfer has is solar draining blast that would constantly de-powers Clark paired with time stoppage speed is 10/10 sure win .

Draining blast … Hulks Gamma rad is being ebb here to turn him to Banner.

Time stoppage speed.

Surfer 10/10 FTW

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Hmm, except the comics itself say so?
Like, if you want a comic/on panel proof. The editor literally tells you that comic book characters have way to stop time and avoid aging
https://ibb.co/mBMcpqh

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Carver just used the Hulk example in 2022(see the post I made above)

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
I mean, even in 2022. we still have people use Surfer's example from 1975

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
The "Time stoppage speed" example comes from Fantastic Four 156

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Hmm, except the comics itself say so?
Like, if you want a comic/on panel proof. The editor literally tells you that comic book characters have way to stop time and avoid aging
https://ibb.co/mBMcpqh

We don't even need to get to some writers make statements like you need to suspend of disbelief on interviews

Carver just used the Hulk example in 2022(see the post I made above)

I mean, even in 2022. we still have people use Surfer's example from 1975

The "Time stoppage speed" example comes from Fantastic Four 156

Originally posted by Astner
I replied to this image. An excuse is an excuse whether it's peddled by a reader or writer, and it's an excuse because it doesn't explain anything in an in-universe sense.

Originally posted by Astner
I replied to this image. An excuse is an excuse whether it's peddled by a rea
I mentioned a few examples, I don't ever remember seeing any of them linked your replies of the last two pages. And I don't really care enough for a deep dive into this discussion.

I agree that 1975 seems excessive. I'd be fine with a cut-off point in the 90s, or even 00s.

I have no idea of what you're talking about.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Hmm, except the comics itself say so?
Like, if you want a comic/on panel proof. The editor literally tells you that comic book characters have way to stop time and avoid aging
https://ibb.co/mBMcpqh

We don't even need to get to some writers make statements like you need to suspend of disbelief on interviews

Carver just used the Hulk example in 2022(see the post I made above)

I mean, even in 2022. we still have people use Surfer's example from 1975

The "Time stoppage speed" example comes from Fantastic Four 156

I mentioned Hulk destroying a Universe (and I would never scale him that high) because of the argument that was being made in that thread which is kinda similar to what is being said here. When old fts are used, I bring up old fts from Marvel characters that is obviously being dismissed since we all know these characters do not operate at this level of power.

Originally posted by carver9
I mentioned Hulk destroying a Universe (and I would never scale him that high) because of the argument that was being made in that thread which is kinda similar to what is being said here. When old fts are used, I bring up old fts from Marvel characters that is obviously being dismissed since we all know these characters do not operate at this level of power.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Name any of the Marvel characters who can shatter a solar system by the shockwaves of their fights. I know WBH can't.

Originally posted by carver9
Is that even canon to Orion and even if it was, lol, Hulk have better fts like destroying a Universe for one. The same Universe you tried to downplay because they got to it through a door (Superman was able to travel to World Forger dimension through a door).

You're posting the same thing, me countering an argument when someone try to put a character at a power level their not. I've never mentioned that ft outright as a power level for Hulk. He's not that powerful. As long as you all keep putting Superman at Universal levels and Orion at solar system levels, and Supergirl at Galaxy levels, I will continue to put Hulk at Universal levels, Spiderman at UN levels, and Thor at Celestial levels. Fair game.

Originally posted by carver9
You're posting the same thing, me countering an argument when someone try to put a character at a power level their not. I've never mentioned that ft outright as a power level for Hulk. He's not that powerful. As long as you all keep putting Superman at Universal levels and Orion at solar system levels, and Supergirl at Galaxy levels, I will continue to put Hulk at Universal levels, Spiderman at UN levels, and Thor at Celestial levels. Fair game.

Originally posted by carver9
You're posting the same thing, me countering an argument when someone try to put a character at a power level their not. I've never mentioned that ft outright as a power level for Hulk. He's not that powerful. As long as you all keep putting Superman at Universal levels and Orion at solar system levels, and Supergirl at Galaxy levels, I will continue to put Hulk at Universal levels, Spiderman at UN levels, and Thor at Celestial levels. Fair game.

Lobo Vs Superman
https://ibb.co/t3Rq7Ly
https://ibb.co/r6n3hzY
https://ibb.co/Mc0Kc4f

Parasite Imp and the amped Parasite seem pretty powerful
https://ibb.co/5sQn1QX
https://ibb.co/3TKf2GC
https://ibb.co/MnMkvmk

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
No, I think you misunderstood the point here.
The point is you will use(and have used) old showings to counter recent showings.

And I will probably keep using them to prove a negative. Once you all stop jerking DC characters, I'll stray away from countering your argument with similar showings.