Originally posted by BrolyBlack
If MCU fans arnt going to take DCU statements as fact then why should anyone take MCU statements as fact?“Only a god can kill another god” iholds just as much weight as “you are going to take the full force of a star.”
No statement should be taken as fact regardless from which movie it is coming, UNLESS there is evidence and logic to back it up.
Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Why? It was said at the same time he took the beam from a giant advanced space machine that controlled and concentrated the full force of a star. So he literally did it right there on screen.That's what the machine did, it harnesses the power of a star and concentrates it into a beam. Thor stood in front of that beam and withstood billions of tons of matter pelting him and a lot if heat hitting him.
The only people who really hate the feat are DC fans. Everyone else takes it for what it is. The first space cheese feat in the MCU.
....Etri's words aren't to be taken literal.
For instance, Thor was being hit by a part of the beam, the rest was going arround him into the forge. That fact alone proves that he wasn't being hit by all the power of the star.
Secondly, Etri never said that the Star's matter was being drained.
Otherwise, as you claim Thousands upon thousands of tons would be pouring into the ring/forge; it would flood the station. Furthermore, it makes no sense to use matter. They use the star to melt Uru; heat is required for that not matter.
Lastly, if Thor would have been hit by matter, he would have been covered up by sticky material after landing on the station. Yet no residue was left on him.
The beam was energy from the star not matter.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Really, your whole argument is that the entire beam didn't hit Thor?
Thats like shooting someone in the face w. a shotgun and saying because theres buckshot in the wall behind him the person wasnt hit w. the full force of the blast.
Originally posted by riv6672
He’s obviously being hit by the full force. He’s in the middle of it.Thats like shooting someone in the face w. a shotgun and saying because theres buckshot in the wall behind him the person wasnt hit w. the full force of the blast.
Originally posted by Silent Master
The beam represents the full force of the star and Thor was hit with the beam, you're going into semantics and pedantry in order to dismiss what he said.
So if a guy stands in the middle of the current of a river, he is receiving the full force of the river!?
COME ON! REALLY!?
Originally posted by Silent Master
Like I said semantics and pedantry.
I am just following logic.
If the beam represents the full power of the star, then the 100% of the beam would have to cross Thor's body. Otherwise, he is just receiving a fraction of the beam ergo a fraction of the power of the star.
Originally posted by Silent Master
The beam represents the full force of the star and Thor was hit with the beam, you're going into semantics and pedantry in order to dismiss what he said.
Would you srsly argue that the person being hit is not taking its full force?
You see how wide the beam is compared to a fully grown adult by its point of origin. Anyone hit by that beam is going to have energy going all around them (unless you expect that big ass beam to suddenly narrow to the thickness of a pencil).
So, full force or not?
Because thats whats happening in the Thor scene.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
I am just following logic.If the beam represents the full power of the star, then the 100% of the beam would have to cross Thor's body. Otherwise, he is just receiving a fraction of the beam ergo a fraction of the power of the star.
Originally posted by riv6672
Question for Josh.
If someone is caught in the middle of this beam:Would you srsly argue that the person being hit is not taking its full force?
You see how wide the beam is compared to a fully grown adult by its point of origin. Anyone hit by that beam is going to have energy going all around them (unless you expect that big ass beam to suddenly narrow to the thickness of a pencil).
So, full force or not?
Because thats whats happening in the Thor scene.
Do you understand the meaning of 'full'?
Full, means entire. If the entire beam doesn't impact the body, then logically you are not being hit by the full power of the beam.
My turn to ask a question.
So everytime I go swim in the river, I am taking the full power of said river?
Man if that's the case, all this time i've been ignorant of my superhuman powers 😄 😂
Gonna give you a hint:
The bigger the turbine in a hydroelectric power plant (assuming certain conditions), the more energy can be produced.
Do you understand the meaning of 'full'?
So everytime I go swim in the river, I am taking the full power of said river?
If that river sweeps you away/under/into rocks etc and kills you, its because the full force of that river ****ed your ass up.
I’m amending my previous post’s statement to shitty logic BTW.
You have shitty logic, Josh.
I wont be replying to anything else you personally say on this subject (owing to your logic being so shitty), so dont feel the need to follow up here.
Originally posted by riv6672
Yes, i do.Yes, you are, in every meaningful way.
If that river seeeps you away/under/into rocks etc and kills you, its because the full force of that river ****ed your ass up.
I’m ammnding my previous post’s statement to shitty logic BTW.
You have shitty logic, Josh.I wont be replyingbto anything else you personally say on this subject (owing to your logic being so shitty), so dont feel the need to follow up here.
😂
This is ludicrous!!!
Do you even know the amount of power a river has!!? Are you sure my logic is the one failing here?
Originally posted by riv6672
Yeah he doesnt have a pot to piss in but just digs in and pretends to have/honestly thinks he has the upper hand/superior knowledge here.
Ah well, you can keep at it w. him if you want, i had my say, and my fun. 😛
Clearly my friend you have never been into a hydroelectric power plant. 😂
Either way, the Tribunal respects your opinion.