Can Loki stop Superman?

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Except it doesn't apply

There are plenty of people who can hit pads fast enough but being in combat is a whole 'nother story.

There's an old cowboy type who can shoot from his holster at targets so fast that he can make two shots sound like the same fire, but he wouldn't hold a candle to keeping up with someone in a fist fight.

These things matter. If you don't have a bunch of feats demonstrating limitations in combat, that's one thing, you can make a hypothesis based on hypothetical relevance and relativity. But, when you do have a number of feats showcasing said limitations then you're dealing with a realm of known/observable statistical data and making the same hypothetical hypothesis would necessarily have to be made under the duress of "despite existing evidence to the contrary, PERIOD.

I've seen that argument presented too many times and it ALWAYS suffers the same flaws.

How can one conflate demonstrations of complex super speed as super combat speed? Like what lmao? Haha yeah I'm SURE there's merit to the perspective in some hypothetical manner but in terms of limitation? we see that limitation presented, often. Not disputable

Waste of post. Me and Pr stated two things had to be true first.
You argued a whole post as if we stated speed was the only factor.

We said both speed and reactions. If you can walk around and have a long conversation while casually unloosing your tie within the fraction of a nanosecond then you could have inserted at least several punches.

Do you believe it is possible to walk around casually while having a long conversation and while taking off your tie all within the fraction of a nanosecond and not be able to throw a punch within a nanosecond?

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Except it doesn't apply

There are plenty of people who can hit pads fast enough but being in combat is a whole 'nother story.

There's an old cowboy type who can shoot from his holster at targets so fast that he can make two shots sound like the same fire, but he wouldn't hold a candle to keeping up with someone in a fist fight.

These things matter. If you don't have a bunch of feats demonstrating limitations in combat, that's one thing, you can make a hypothesis based on hypothetical relevance and relativity. But, when you do have a number of feats showcasing said limitations then you're dealing with a realm of known/observable statistical data and making the same hypothetical hypothesis would necessarily have to be made under the duress of "despite existing evidence to the contrary, PERIOD.

I've seen that argument presented too many times and it ALWAYS suffers the same flaws.

How can one conflate demonstrations of complex super speed as super combat speed? Like what lmao? Haha yeah I'm SURE there's merit to the perspective in some hypothetical manner but in terms of limitation? we see that limitation presented, often. Not disputable

Originally posted by Damborgson
Alberto stfu.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
😂 Stay salty, keep throwing that nonsense about that feat at me and i'll keep dismantling it, fanboy.

Everyone here has dismantled you already, Mr. Salty

How about we BZ this

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Does Albert just wave his hands over the board when doing jigsaws?

More like he throws his hands up because they are to complicated. I bet he’s never folksiness a single puzzle in his whole life which is why thi fest struck such a nerve

“Superman put the MOON back TOGETHER in a comic but I can’t even do a puzzle irl, WHAT THE F!

Originally posted by h1a8
Waste of post. Me and Pr stated two things had to be true first.
You argued a whole post as if we stated speed was the only factor.

We said both speed and reactions. If you can walk around and have a long conversation while casually unloosing your tie within the fraction of a nanosecond then you could have inserted at least several punches.

Do you believe it is possible to walk around casually while having a long conversation and while taking off your tie all within the fraction of a nanosecond and not be able to throw a punch within a nanosecond?

Originally posted by Diesldude
shooting a gun as in your example is a technique and skill thats perfected by practicing the same motion repeatedly. Its not the same thing. Everything you bring up is stupid, doesnt make sense or is irrelevant. So...

And accept that youre wrong.

I never discounted Superman's possibilities on the other end of advance feats, I only also pointed to the demonstrated limitations too, and in this instance, in the SAME very instance/one moment later, in the microscope of combat.
there is some MASSIVE difference between assembling rock pieces and fighting when it comes to Superman as per his REPEATEDLY demonstrated limitations, period

If one polarity matters to you more than the other, or, you don't care for the ratio of demonstrations, that's ENTIRELY your own prerogative. Its not neccessary that ANYBODY else believes it .

"It's not the same thing"

EXACTLY, that's THE point. It's not combat applicable, idk how many times i gotta tell you dudes that. That's not an opinion

Let’s BZ it then

Originally posted by h1a8
Where's your common sense? A punch is far less complex than searching space for the right moon piece, moving to the exact location, and placing it in its correct spot. You could have thrown multiple punches by then.

Requires for combat speed
1. Move very fast from a stand still
2. Perceive and react in very small increments of time

That's part of it. But it's also more complex than that. Have you had many fights? (prob not)
If you did, then you know about adrenaline spikes and dumps, breathing, experience, training, agility, flexibility and mind-state all being a part of combat. It's probably even more complex than that but this is enough at the moment to make my point. There's more to combat than sheer speed, or even sheer reflex.They HELP, but physical ability alone doesn't make a good fighter capable of capitalizing on those physical aspects.

I don't know where the disconnect is between Superman's Flash-like speed feats and his poorer and more abundant combat performances not demonstrating that, but there's some disconnect as far as I can tell t's possible it's a character induced flaw on Clark's part, but, then you have to account for MULTIPLE TIMES where Superman has been demonstrated as possessed, mind controlled, or unleashed with some degree of bad intentions and not all of them being comparable to Hush, where, he still gets caught or dodged or some such in close quarters combat.
Even Clark in character, WAS being unable to catch a bunch of bullets before they hit their targets. I can't tell it's an low speed for Clark or if, again, there's some sort of disconnect with him the second a situation involves living beings and combative elements.

I need to appeal to something akin to Occam's razor until something else changes my mind.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
I never discounted Superman's possibilities on the other end of advance feats, I only also pointed to the demonstrated limitations too, and in this instance, in the SAME very instance/one moment later, in the microscope of combat.
there is some MASSIVE difference between assembling rock pieces and fighting when it comes to Superman as per his REPEATEDLY demonstrated limitations, period

If one polarity matters to you more than the other, or, you don't care for the ratio of demonstrations, that's ENTIRELY your own prerogative. Its not neccessary that ANYBODY else believes it .

"It's not the same thing"

EXACTLY, that's THE point. It's not combat applicable, idk how many times i gotta tell you dudes that. That's not an opinion

He doesn’t believe in anything he’s saying cause he refuses to BZ it

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
That's part of it. But it's also more complex than that. Have you had many fights? (prob not)
If you did, then you know about adrenaline spikes and dumps, breathing, experience, training, agility, flexibility and mind-state all being a part of combat. It's probably even more complex than that but this is enough at the moment to make my point. There's more to combat than sheer speed, or even sheer reflex.They HELP, but physical ability alone doesn't make a good fighter capable of capitalizing on those physical aspects.

I don't know where the disconnect is between Superman's Flash-like speed feats and his poorer and more abundant combat performances not demonstrating that, but there's some disconnect as far as I can tell t's possible it's a character induced flaw on Clark's part, but, then you have to account for MULTIPLE TIMES where Superman has been demonstrated as possessed, mind controlled, or unleashed with some degree of bad intentions and not all of them being comparable to Hush, where, he still gets caught or dodged or some such in close quarters combat.
Even Clark in character, WAS being unable to catch a bunch of bullets before they hit their targets. I can't tell it's an low speed for Clark or if, again, there's some sort of disconnect with him the second a situation involves living beings and combative elements.

I need to appeal to something akin to Occam's razor until something else changes my mind.

Fighting is just flying up to someone and throwing a single punch against a statue. What's complex about that? If you can perform many complex tasks in a particular interval of time then you can easily insert a punch in that same interval.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
He doesn’t believe in anything he’s saying cause he refuses to BZ it

Try and help me find it do we can embarrass him

Originally posted by h1a8
We use full capacity here.

Fighting is just flying up to someone and throwing a single punch against a statue. What's complex about that? If you can perform many complex tasks in a particular interval of time then you can easily insert a punch in that same interval.

And, you're appealing to some form of gaslighting by "logical" assumption.
Can those alien monsters Who hit Superman and mobbed him Immediately after the lunar feat Also reproduce the reassembly feat themselves? I'LL WAIT

😂

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Try and help me find it do we can embarrass him

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
And, you're appealing to some form of gaslighting by "logical" assumption.
Can those alien monsters Who hit Superman and mobbed him Immediately after the lunar feat Also reproduce the reassembly feat themselves? I'LL WAIT

😂

That's irrelevant to the discussion. This is fiction. There is no consistency like real life. Character's have contradictory showings all the time. That's why we use full capacity.

Can Superman throw a punch in the first nanosecond?
Can Superman perceive time on the level of a nanosecond or less?
Yes or no.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
😂 Stay salty, keep throwing that nonsense about that feat at me and i'll keep dismantling it, fanboy.

Oh you idiot.

He already ran from my BZ challenge in this subject like a coward, he’s just trolling at this point

Originally posted by h1a8
That's irrelevant to the discussion. This is fiction. There is no consistency like real life. Character's have contradictory showings all the time. That's why we use full capacity.

Can Superman throw a punch in the first nanosecond?
Can Superman perceive time on the level of a nanosecond or less?
Yes or no.

NAH NAH NAH You don't get plaster your preference over fictional content and pretend that's what matters more than the content in the fiction.

You don't convince OTHER thinkers by gaslight.

your opinion about ignoring on panel evidence <<<<<<<<<<< On panel evidence, If you want to ignore that, there's nothing else to discuss.

far as nanosecond punching, In a comic sure Superman can do that but it's not really as impressive as it seems when compared to a laundry list of street level high end feats. Iron Fist has several 3rd person impartial narrative statements about being as fast as thought. That's an extreme example but you find these all over the place. But knowing YOU that doesn't matter because i've seen you assume your preference over written, on panel material when you don't like what that material represents, and it's bullshit. 😂

There's no REAL discourse to have at that point. If you prefer the appeal of your opinion over actual evidence based on a "logical" assumption, then you can't ACTUALLY have a conversation about this material, period.

I don't bz something that's been factually proven on this thread already. Maybe 12 year olds will believe Superman comes remotely close to gladiator in combat speed

You have been proven wrong. Let’s BZ it you coward