Thor vs Aquaman [pure strength]

Originally posted by Newjak
Yes I see you like to nitpick words I get it.

Actually he took no action. You're the one who said he's actually taking action and making the scenario more complicated all to downplay a feat like a child arguing on the playground.

You're suggesting that the Celestial actively lowered his durability to allow the sword to pierce him so he could then remove said sword to examine it. When the sword bouncing off of him would have produced the same result and the Celestial wouldn't have had to do anything.

So instead of realizing this is a comic book and the allowed entry part simply means the Celestial didn't actively stop the sword, ie via force field or vines, you've chosen to nitpick the words to create a scenario that places the feat at the least likely interpretation because it fits your end goal of downplaying said feat.

Ok

No need for name calling, you're starting to get sensitive again Newjak.

There is reasonable doubt brought up by the text which DS exposed.

The fact that you insist on a specific scenario of "lowering his durability" because it sounds the most ridiculous to you and thus easiest to hand wave is telling. Arishem doesn't necessarily have to "lower his durability" to let the sword pass through. He could have just as easily allowed it to phase through or opened a wide enough gap in his armor to allow it to catch.

All of that may have simply been easier to than telekinetically stopping it mid air or what have you. He was already on the ground when it happened and didn't budge at all when it pierced him so that brings extra doubt.

You'd think something thrown with the force to cleave right through you would also knock you back a bit. But he didn't even budge.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
No need for name calling, you're starting to get sensitive again Newjak.

There is reasonable doubt brought up by the text which DS exposed.

The fact that you insist on a specific scenario of "lowering his durability" because it sounds the most ridiculous to you and thus easiest to hand wave is telling. Arishem doesn't necessarily have to "lower his durability" to let the sword pass through. He could have just as easily allowed it to phase through or opened a wide enough gap in his armor to allow it to catch.

All of that may have simply been easier to than telekinetically stopping it mid air or what have you. He was already on the ground when it happened and didn't budge at all when it pierced him so that brings extra doubt.

You'd think something thrown with the force to cleave right through you would also knock you back a bit. But he didn't even budge.

Well that was the scenario brought up by other posters on here so I thought it most apt to address.

Either way though the other scenarios you mentioned all fall under the same category of nitpicking a word to raise the outcome you want even though it would also require the most effort by the Celestial to do. If he was durable enough to just withstand the sword he could have done nothing. Had it bounced off and then just picked up the sword. So same outcome incredibly less work on his part.

Like I said you guys have latched in to nitpicking a word to raise doubt even though it is the least likely scenario considering it would actually require effort from the being in question and there is no visual representation of the Celestial doing anything on panel to back those claims.

The only way to reach this conclusion is to nitpick a word.

For instance if intention was to have the Celestial open a hole in its chest you would think there would be some visual indication on panel of this being the case.

You are equating DS to a 'child on the playground' when he's been nothing but neutral with no hint of emotion.

You have a dog in this race. An emotional investment. He doesn't.

You repeating your apparent favorite word nitpick ad nauseam doesn't do your argument any favors and doesn't dissuade the reasonable doubt established.

Why would Arishem allow the sword to bounce off and then have to go retrieve it? That's more work than just allowing it to pierce him.

Yeah showing the art showing arishem opening up a gap in his armor would have been intensely helpful. But given the darkness and muddiness of 70s comic art it may have been hard to decipher.

What the art *did* show however was that despite Arishem already sitting on the ground, the sword impale failed to move him at all.

If you had a sword thrown straight through you front to back, you'd be knocked down or at least knocked back. Arishem stayed in a seated position with no acknowledgement of the apparent force of the throw.

Like it or not that lends credence to DS argument.

Either option is as likely as the other. Is the writer still alive? Serious question. Jim Shooter was the editor at the time and he's still around. Maybe he is reachable?

Originally posted by Newjak
Can you show me where I started to name call?

Well that was the scenario brought up by other posters on here so I thought it most apt to address.

Either way though the other scenarios you mentioned all fall under the same category of nitpicking a word to raise the outcome you want even though it would also require the most effort by the Celestial to do. If he was durable enough to just withstand the sword he could have done nothing. Had it bounced off and then just picked up the sword. So same outcome incredibly less work on his part.

Like I said you guys have latched in to nitpicking a word to raise doubt even though it is the least likely scenario considering it would actually require effort from the being in question and there is no visual representation of the Celestial doing anything on panel to back those claims.

The only way to reach this conclusion is to nitpick a word.

For instance if intention was to have the Celestial open a hole in its chest you would think there would be some visual indication on panel of this being the case.

Ok. You're wrong, though.

Closing by request.