Originally posted by h1a8
Alien knives with writer's no mention of them being more special = random knives. The onus is always on to prove special attributes.
Easy. AOS showed even an Asgardian farmer is completely knife and bullet proof. We've also seen Thor's physical inferior (Loki) brush of bullets.
So quit being ridiculous.
Originally posted by h1a8
We go by writer's intent, not making up stuff. Thor ran from the bullets because he wasn't bullet proof of that level. That was writer's intent.
Thor didn't run the other time because there was no where to go and he was in the middle of battle.
Lol writer's intent is just your excuse to believe whatever you like. We go by on screen feats, and Thor's durability feats are massively above bullets. Unless you think a bullet can crush a Leviathan 😂
LMAO @ no where to run. He was in an open space. Quit trolling me.
You've lost as per YOUR OWN LOGIC.
It was YOUR Logic that if he can take it he wouldn't avoid it, and if he can't then he would.
He didn't avoid it the SECOND time, Ergo, he knows now he can take it AS PER YOUR OWN LOGIC.
Originally posted by h1a8
Again, Superman hit Zod far harder than any hit that caused Thor to bleed. I went over the explosion and why it was weak. Ignoring what i said isn't a rebuttal. The leviathan punch didn't slow the leviathan more than 10%. The majority of the slowdown was through bracing and pushing against it. The original punch did almost nothing in terms of altering the momentum. Punch was less than 50 tons of force easily. And the leviathan punch is irrelevant due to we know the force Thor was hit merely by his acceleration.
He toppled the thing over, What the heck?
Let's not forget the same guy also toppled Surtur. So again quit trolling, trying your best to lowball all Marvel feats.
Thor took a Leviathan crushing punch and Surtur toppling punch straight to the nose (he basically allowed Hulk to hit him talking him down).
Onus is on you to prove Zod has taken a hit like that straight to the nose whilst standing there and being hit (remember he took multiple hits from Hulk in Ragnarok before bleeding).
You made no real rebuttal to the exploding ship. It doesn't matter which direction you think it exploded Thor was in the centre of the damn ship. So quit your trolling and show me where Zod has taken such a hit.
Originally posted by h1a8
There was 0 skin melted off. Actually there was no damage. Just drained of energy.
He looked sick AF. And was in a coma. So he didn't take it well at all. You're not proving anything here, and as already mentioned Zod didn't take the nuke.
Originally posted by h1a8
Keep reading. It states that we got the sun beat in temperature. You are confusing the amount of water as the temperature of the water. A nuclear bomb is more than 100x hotter than a neutron star. I can easily be fire hosed with 30 degree Celsius water than be lightly sprinkled with 3000 degree liquid. Plus the bomb would produce great pressures at point blank range.
Why are you avoiding my point? I posted that to prove that no force on Earth compares to the full force of our Sun. Way to miss the point.
Originally posted by h1a8
A stars total output is separated over its entire surface. The amount of radiation Flux from someone of Thor's size in comparison to the entire size of the star is microscopic.
Although we see the star still emitting energy in all directions, temperature can not be added in this way. If someone shine 1000 flashlights on you vs 1 flashlight then you wouldn't feel 1000x hotter.
Except it was explained that the beam was emitting the full force of the star. So Quit downplaying feats you dont like.
Originally posted by h1a8
Yes he did. Figurative language.
So he was going to figuratively die as well ?
Quit this nonesense. Either show an extract from the writers/directors that it was figurative, or kindly quit your lies.
Originally posted by h1a8
If you disagree then the full force of the star was weak as shit since it pushed Thor weakly through space.
Shows how strong Thor is.
Originally posted by h1a8
Stars emit little force.
I have already proved to you that's not true.
Originally posted by h1a8
The large force is their force of gravity, which is inward.
Except that beam produced the full force of a star, as noted on screen.
Originally posted by h1a8
That's not the case. Think more like a soldier in war in the middle of a battle field with no immediate cover. Plus those bullets are wayyyy weaker than the other bullets
He didn't need cover. Just needed to move out of it's path.
You lose as per your own logic.
You're a self defeating debater.
Originally posted by h1a8
No, the walls are charged. He exhibited little to no force since the explosion originated in the walls and went outward. No shrapnel ever traveled through the center as, seen.
There was no force or shrapnel in the centre of an exploding ship? Wow.
Btw even Valkyrie was caught in an explosion with literally no harm at all. Not to mention Thor survived Sokovia exploding FFS.
Are you getting tried of your ridiculous Marvel lowballing yet? Because we all sure are.
Originally posted by Darth ThorFarmer wasn't knife proof. He bent the knife from the side.
Easy. AOS showed even an Asgardian farmer is completely knife and bullet proof. We've also seen Thor's physical inferior (Loki) brush of bullets.So quit being ridiculous.
Being bullet proof isn't enough. You have to be bulletproof of the highest level (aircraft bullets).
Superman is Thor's physical superior. Should Superman get his durability feats too?
Hulk punch did almost nothing to the Leviathan. I went over that already. If you disagree then address what I said about the feat. Also, even if the feat was legit, it still has no bearing on the force we actually see Hulk hit Thor with.Lol writer's intent is just your excuse to believe whatever you like. We go by on screen feats, and Thor's durability feats are massively above bullets. Unless you think a bullet can crush a Leviathan 😂
LMAO @ no where to run. He was in an open space. Quit trolling me.
You've lost as per YOUR OWN LOGIC.
It was YOUR Logic that if he can take it he wouldn't avoid it, and if he can't then he would.
He didn't avoid it the SECOND time, Ergo, he knows now he can take it AS PER YOUR OWN LOGIC.
Thor is not a speedster. Where the phuck was he going to go? The fire didn't last long. Those bullets were less powerful than the other ones.
He toppled the thing over, What the heck?
Let's not forget the same guy also toppled Surtur. So again quit trolling, trying your best to lowball all Marvel feats.
Thor took a Leviathan crushing punch and Surtur toppling punch straight to the nose (he basically allowed Hulk to hit him talking him down).
Onus is on you to prove Zod has taken a hit like that straight to the nose whilst standing there and being hit (remember he took multiple hits from Hulk in Ragnarok before bleeding).
You made no real rebuttal to the exploding ship. It doesn't matter which direction you think it exploded Thor was in the centre of the damn ship. So quit your trolling and show me where Zod has taken such a hit.
He didn't topple shit with the punch. Hulk didn't slow it down enen 5% with the punch. More than 95% of the slow down was Hulk pushing and holding back the Leviathan AFTER THE PUNCH.
I don't have to prove things that you can see. The walls of the ship were charged with energy. The walls exploded outward. Thor was relatively safe by being in the center. You see little to no shrapnel pass through the center. You are confusing that feat with an explosion that originates in front of Thor and towards him.
Zod has taken hits that knocked him almost a mile through the air. Taken hits that created large craters as a side effect.
Taken hits that launched him through skyscrapers.
All of those are far more powerful than the hits we actually see Thor get hit with.
You argued hypothetically if both can survive a nuke then it still is less than the star feat.He looked sick AF. And was in a coma. So he didn't take it well at all. You're not proving anything here, and as already mentioned Zod didn't take the nuke.
If you disagree with the reasoning "since Zod is a near equal to Clark in the physical department then he gets his durability feats" then the same can be applied to Thor. Thor gets no one's feats .
But his skin wasn't melted was all I was addressing. Superman didn't die. Thor would have.
The article didn't mention force, it mentioned energy output. Then mentioned we have the sun beat in temperature. What does more damage? :Why are you avoiding my point? I posted that to prove that no force on Earth compares to the full force of our Sun. Way to miss the point.
"Force force of the Sun" has no meaning just as the "full force of a crayon" doesn't. That's the common sense reason why it was figurative talk. It makes no sense to be literal (has no meaning).
Forces push and pull (by definition).
Stars only forces are gravity and magnetism. Thor wasn't getting hit by gravity or magnetism was he? Lol. It was a pure beam of radiation used to heat and melt the metal.
Except it was explained that the beam was emitting the full force of the star. So Quit downplaying feats you dont like.
Wrong terminology. You mean a character stated, "full force of a star" as figurative language to mean full temperature.
So he was going to figuratively die as well ?
Quit this nonesense. Either show an extract from the writers/directors that it was figurative, or kindly quit your lies.
Shows how strong Thor is.
I have already proved to you that's not true.
Except that beam produced the full force of a star, as noted on screen.
He didn't need cover. Just needed to move out of it's path.
You lose as per your own logic.
You're a self defeating debater.
There was no force or shrapnel in the centre of an exploding ship? Wow.
Btw even Valkyrie was caught in an explosion with literally no harm at all. Not to mention Thor survived Sokovia exploding FFS.
Are you getting tried of your ridiculous Marvel lowballing yet? Because we all sure are.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Zod has never taken on a nuke.
Since you are lazy.
I stated that Thor could possibly take more heat than Zod (which is in the thread) assuming Zod =/= Superman.
Darth then stated Thor can take more heat than Superman (both of them). That's where I disagreed and argued from there.
So me assuming Zod =/= Superman is not a correct one?
I somehow derailed the thread.
Darth equating Thor to feats of other characters not in the thread is ok though? You didn't address him on that. Pick and choose for your bias.
Originally posted by h1a8
Incorrect
Stop lying, you were the first person in this thread to mention Superman
Originally posted by h1a8
Thor has been cut everytime. He can not be above them in cutting resistance.Zod has better blunt force feats than Thor. He can take more powerful punches without bleeding. Thor can possibly take heat better (assuming Zod =/= Superman).
Zod is bulletproof of the highest level. Thor isn't (no feats to back it up by your logic).
There is no way Thor is more durable than Zod. You are a bias troll Thorbag for saying otherwise.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Stop lying, you were the first person in this thread to mention Superman
If one part of a multifaceted statement is incorrect then the whole statement is incorrect. My reply "incorrect" wasn't referring to who mentioned Superman first, it referred to another part of the statement.
With that said
I stated assuming Superman =/= Zod.
Was that a wrong statement?
What about Darth mentioning feats by Loki for Thor to share or him mentioning characters not in the thread (Hulk, etc)?
Originally posted by h1a8I stated assuming Superman =/= Zod.
Was that a wrong statement?
What about Darth mentioning feats by Loki for Thor to share or him mentioning characters not in the thread (Hulk, etc)?
The difference is Thor has proven time and time again to be stronger and more durable than Loki.
Zod is not proven to be Superman's equal even as of MOS, let alone by BvS.
IIRC, in materials outside of the film (maybe one of the official fim comics), it was stated that Zod was not as powerful as Superman since his exposure to a yellow sun and Earth's atmosphere was very short compared to Kal's lifelong exposure. But Zod's superior fighting ability and genetic-warrior makeup allowed him to contend. Zod specifically brags about the later.
The maths checks out.
Originally posted by Robtard
IIRC, in materials outside of the film (maybe one of the official fim comics), it was stated that Zod was not as powerful as Superman since his exposure to a yellow sun and Earth's atmosphere was very short compared to Kal's lifelong exposure. But Zod's superior fighting ability and genetic-warrior makeup allowed him to contend. Zod specifically brags about the later.The maths checks out.
Yeah backed by the fact that ultimately Superman snapped Zod's neck.
Originally posted by h1a8
If one part of a multifaceted statement is incorrect then the whole statement is incorrect. My reply "incorrect" wasn't referring to who mentioned Superman first, it referred to another part of the statement.With that said
I stated assuming Superman =/= Zod.
Was that a wrong statement?
What about Darth mentioning feats by Loki for Thor to share or him mentioning characters not in the thread (Hulk, etc)?
You're the one that brought him up, thus FrothByte's statement was correct. no need for you to continue lying about it
Originally posted by Robtard
IIRC, in materials outside of the film (maybe one of the official fim comics), it was stated that Zod was not as powerful as Superman since his exposure to a yellow sun and Earth's atmosphere was very short compared to Kal's lifelong exposure. But Zod's superior fighting ability and genetic-warrior makeup allowed him to contend. Zod specifically brags about the later.The maths checks out.
It's really the only explanation that would have made sense considering Kal'el was a farm boy who's never been in a decent fight his entire life whereas Zod is a bred and trained warrior who's the head of the kryptonian military.
Originally posted by Silent Master
You're the one that brought him up, thus FrothByte's statement was correct. no need for you to continue lying about it
Ill talking to an illiterate fool. Multifaceted is the key. Focusing on one part of a statement and not all the parts shows your level of intelligence. FrothByte said multiple things in the statement i replied incorrect to. Use your common sense to find out which part he said was incorrect.
Originally posted by Darth ThorA human can snap another humans neck. Vultrimites can gore other stronger vultrimites.
Yeah backed by the fact that ultimately Superman snapped Zod's neck.
Snapping someones neck doesn't prove stronger.
I replied to your lengthy post before you commented here. Did you miss it?
Originally posted by Robtard
IIRC, in materials outside of the film (maybe one of the official fim comics), it was stated that Zod was not as powerful as Superman since his exposure to a yellow sun and Earth's atmosphere was very short compared to Kal's lifelong exposure. But Zod's superior fighting ability and genetic-warrior makeup allowed him to contend. Zod specifically brags about the later.The maths checks out.
I disagree. Zod was hitting Clark with more force than the other way around. No where in the film do we get a sense where Clark is stronger. Both rammed with pure force (not skill) into each and canceled each OTHER out AS EQUALS. What is shown by movie >>> interviews.
Originally posted by Darth ThorZod proven that he is a close peer to Superman in MOS. Actually Zod hit Superman harder than Superman hit him. Anyone unbiased will tell you that. Its clear as day the two were close as hell physically in MOS.
The difference is Thor has proven time and time again to be stronger and more durable than Loki.Zod is not proven to be Superman's equal even as of MOS, let alone by BvS.
Also you are now equating different durabilities (heat, cut, blunt, etc) when at first you were separating them.
Tbh I have no problem giving Thor Loki's durability feats. But i have a problem when the same isnt done for other characters when they are clearly about equal. Clark wasn't shown stronger than Zod. Actually maybe slightly weaker imo.
Zod is more durable than Thor against blunt force.
Zod is more durable than Thor against high temperatures assuming Superman is more than Zod but less than 2x Zod.
Blunt force is the most important aspect of durability, then cutting, then energy.
My rankings
Zod
Silver Samurai
Mjolnir
Ultron
Thor (Thor has Ultron beat in temperature though)
Wonder Woman
Aquaman
Iron man.
The last 3 and be changed around.
Originally posted by h1a8
Ill talking to an illiterate fool. Multifaceted is the key. Focusing on one part of a statement and not all the parts shows your level of intelligence. FrothByte said multiple things in the statement i replied incorrect to. Use your common sense to find out which part he said was incorrect.
His entire statement was correct, thus even with your backtracking, you're still wrong.
BTW, it's "I'm" not "Ill", a literate person would know that.
Originally posted by h1a8
Zod is more durable than Thor against blunt force.
Zod is more durable than Thor against high temperatures assuming Superman is more than Zod but less than 2x Zod.
Blunt force is the most important aspect of durability, then cutting, then energy.My rankings
Zod
Silver Samurai
Mjolnir
Ultron
Thor (Thor has Ultron beat in temperature though)
Wonder Woman
Aquaman
Iron man.The last 3 and be changed around.
Problem is you still haven't provided any feats to back up your claims.