Greater feat: Thor pulling the rings vs. Superman Pulling a ship

Any thread where Thor outdoes Superman is a guaranteed barnburner.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Moving objects underwater is fairly easier than on land. Although it still requires force, it ain't the same.

The rings had it's own internal gravity it seems. Not like there was gravity outside.

Moving the rings in space is somewhat easier because there's no air resistance and other factors, but it's not unquantifiable at all.

If you were in Space you wouldn't be able to suddenly lift a building or a house sized Boulder.

Originally posted by riv6672
Any thread where Thor outdoes Superman is a guaranteed barnburner.

😂

Originally posted by NemeBro
Can anyone quantify Thor's feat?

Not that I have seen

Those rings were thousands of times bigger than the ship Superman moved, how can anyone believe Superman's feat is even 1/100th as impressive?

Science Guy already kind of broke down Thor's feat as best he could using scientific formulas and numbers and such.

YouTube video

YouTube video

Originally posted by Silent Master
Those rings were thousands of times bigger than the ship Superman moved, how can anyone believe Superman's feat is even 1/100th as impressive?

Thor's feat is bigger, overall Im just wondering why he gets complete credit for it, when Rocket was obviously needed to make it happen with his ship.

Its be like if Wonderwoman was pushing the ship from behind would Superman get complete credit, I dont think so.

The other thing is there is no gravity present, which is why the feat is unquantifiable in terms of real life. They just stated in that video above about how much gravity would be present, and its a lot, there was none.

Saying it's bigger overall is a massive understatement. All Rocket provided is something for Thor to pull against, If Thor wasn't strong enough the cable would have been ripped from his hands.

It wouldn't be like that at all.

Yes, it's massively bigger. But he couldn't put a dent in Thanos without Stormbreaker even before he had all the stones.

Yet Ironman was able to make Thanos bleed eventually with 5 stones. Yet Thor was durable enough to withstand the star, strong enough move the rings and open the forge.

It doesn't make sense, or its just inconsistent showings.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Science Guy already kind of broke down Thor's feat as best he could using scientific formulas and numbers and such.

YouTube video

YouTube video

Great videos, but I had to have the volume on like 2 because hes really fcking annoying and loud.

We have no idea what shape Thor was in during that scene, trying to act like that is an example of how Thor would normally do against Thanos is very intellectually dishonest.

Why would he have been in bad shape?

Because they had just been attacked by Thanos and his crew, it's like you haven't even seen the movie.

Correct, so when they were attacked he was 100%. So why could Thor pull off that star feat and lose to Thanos and his crew when he had Hulk, Loki, Heimdall and a bunch of other Asgardians.

Because Thanos had an Infinity stone and a group fighters with him.

Thanos had 5, and did better against 5 less powerful people. Which is why I think its inconsistent to have him pull off a star feat, while losing to Thanos with 2 stones while Thor was at full power with Hulk, Heimdall, Loki and others.

Yea and when Thor was at full power he knocked a Thanos with the full IG into the dirt and then buried SM into his chest.

Stormbreaker did that.

Thor pulled off the star feat prior to Stormbreaker, meaning he had the power to do it when he faced Thanos and crew the first time with fewer stones.

again, its an inconsistent showing. Its not hard to admit it.

Thor was also in an enclosed ship surrounded by his own people which means he wouldn't have been able to cut loose. besides one low showing doesn't negate multiple better showings.

So in a one on one, Thanos without all 5 gems or even 2 gems, Thor and team wins without Stormbreaker?