Originally posted by Robtard
The lowballing of Thor here is just silly trolling, Thor's feats speak for themselves:Survived the exploding Bifrost without injury, was at ground zero
Survived the explosion at Sokovia without injury, was at ground zero
Tanked the "full force of a star" for couple minutes
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I already have. He didn't want to kill Zod as we were clearly shown at the end.OR there's no inconsistency, and Hulk's hits are >>>>>> bullets.
The only inconsistency is the one you are forcing yourself to make to downgrade Marvel characters.
The force in which Hulk slammed Loki is not that large.
We clearly see from the damage of the floor and the speed in which Hulk was slamming Loki that rifle bullets >>>>> being slammed by Hulk.
Except he didn't run from those TYPE of Bullets in AOU. Thor also fought Hulk as an equal in Ragnarok and we saw Hulk take those same bullets.
You're over obsessed with this Thor ducking for cover in the first Avengers, when he literally never went up against 21st Century man made weapons before.
You're no different to Quan who was over obsessed with Kal struggling to hold up an Oil tank, and continued to troll that info for all Superman versus threads ever (that little fact btw does prove that he was still growing in power, hence your faulty logic of comparing Superman and Zod from different time periods).
Ok I'll drop the argument since it's not strong as I like.
Thor can't withstand aircraft bullets because he has no feats to support that he can.
Is that better?
Now debate according to that.
The oil tank is due to fiction inconsistency.
You are making stuff up about him growing in power.
In that universe, Kryptonians were fully powered after just a few moments in the sunlight.
Look at Clark after he got nuked. He recovered completely after being exposed to sunlight for a few moments.
Look at Nam Ek. Dude threw a train several blocks away. That feat >>> oil tank.
Professional fighter where gloves. And they have the referee to intervene.
Otherwise continued punches are very deadly and can absolutely kill. Something Kal clearly didn't want to do.
You continue to make stuff up.
There clearly was visible damage. He looked Ill as f***. So that feat proves absolutely nothing when comparing to Thor. Not that we are comparing Superman to Thor here. ONLY YOU are doing that.
There's no evidence at all that Zod was Superman's physical equal even in MOS, let alone BvS or JL.
Writers intent was they were not equals, ergo why farmboy Superman snapped warrior soldier's neck. If they were physical equals, Zod frankly would have stomped.
Plus we factually know Kal was trying not to kill.
To say that there is no evidence to show they were equals is a lie. I gave several evidences.
1. Punches were similar in power (Zod actually hit harder).
2. Colliding with full force and canceling each other out perfectly.
You keep spouting Clark snapped neck to proves he's stronger. I rebutted that.
1. It's possible to snap the neck of an equal or superior.
2. Not wanting to snap someone's neck doesnt imply holding back full force with punches.
And You don't get to avoid basic common sense.
Of course power scaling only works if you are physically equal or superior to a 3rd character. It kind of goes out of the window when you are physically Inferior to the random other character you are bringing up and from completely different time periods to boot! There's no logic to that at all and clearly brought up for no reason but a desperate attempt to make a case where there is none.
From my estimate Zod is slightly superior to Superman (so slight that they are basically equals).
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I already have. He didn't want to kill Zod as we were clearly shown at the end.OR there's no inconsistency, and Hulk's hits are >>>>>> bullets.
The only inconsistency is the one you are forcing yourself to make to downgrade Marvel characters.
Except he didn't run from those TYPE of Bullets in AOU. Thor also fought Hulk as an equal in Ragnarok and we saw Hulk take those same bullets.
You're over obsessed with this Thor ducking for cover in the first Avengers, when he literally never went up against 21st Century man made weapons before.
You're no different to Quan who was over obsessed with Kal struggling to hold up an Oil tank, and continued to troll that info for all Superman versus threads ever (that little fact btw does prove that he was still growing in power, hence your faulty logic of comparing Superman and Zod from different time periods).
Professional fighter where gloves. And they have the referee to intervene.
Otherwise continued punches are very deadly and can absolutely kill. Something Kal clearly didn't want to do.
There clearly was visible damage. He looked Ill as f***. So that feat proves absolutely nothing when comparing to Thor. Not that we are comparing Superman to Thor here. ONLY YOU are doing that.
There's no evidence at all that Zod was Superman's physical equal even in MOS, let alone BvS or JL.
Writers intent was they were not equals, ergo why farmboy Superman snapped warrior soldier's neck. If they were physical equals, Zod frankly would have stomped.
Plus we factually know Kal was trying not to kill.
And You don't get to avoid basic common sense.
Of course power scaling only works if you are physically equal or superior to a 3rd character. It kind of goes out of the window when you are physically Inferior to the random other character you are bringing up and from completely different time periods to boot! There's no logic to that at all and clearly brought up for no reason but a desperate attempt to make a case where there is none.
Agreed
Originally posted by h1a8
You continue to ignore what I said.
Not wanting to kill someone has nothing to with holding back the power of your strikes.
I literally and directly addressed that.
Originally posted by h1a8
You are erroneously assuming that Clark was even thinking about killing or not killing Zod during the entire fight.
You think murderous intentions don't effect the way you fight?
Is Superman a villain now that he doesn't hold back? Goes all out for the kill?
Originally posted by h1a8
The force in which Hulk slammed Loki is not that large.
We clearly see from the damage of the floor and the speed in which Hulk was slamming Loki that rifle bullets >>>>> being slammed by Hulk.
Oh quit being a troll. His ragdoll smashed the the marble floor, even left Loki underneath the floor level:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YStUg14_23o
Originally posted by h1a8
Thor didn't have an opportunity to do anythin but duck a little. He was instantly showered with bullets. The shower was unexpected and only lasted a split second.
The humans moved out of the way. Of course Thor could have. We've seen how fast he can bullrush (@1:35):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLD9xzJ4oeU
Originally posted by h1a8
Ok I'll drop the argument since it's not strong as I like.
Thor can't withstand aircraft bullets because he has no feats to support that he can.
Is that better?
Now debate according to that.
Yes it's a terrible argument which pre assumes Thor knew the full power of all Shield's military aircraft before Thor ever lived on Earth.
Because an exploding Island is less destructive than a few bullets right?
Originally posted by h1a8
The oil tank is due to fiction inconsistency.
Oh that's such BS. Because you're losing the debate, you have to resort to it being an inconsistency instead of just admitting my argument is more logical and consistent than yours.
Originally posted by h1a8
You are making stuff up about him growing in power.
So he was flying from the start of the film ?
There was no training session where he was learning to grow the limits of his power?
I'll take your blatant BS as a concession that you've lost this debate.
Originally posted by h1a8
In that universe, Kryptonians were fully powered after just a few moments in the sunlight.
Oh really? That's why they had no HV or flight?
Quit the BS.
Originally posted by h1a8
Look at Clark after he got nuked. He recovered completely after being exposed to sunlight for a few moments.
Which has what to do with Zod or Thor?
Originally posted by h1a8
Look at Nam Ek. Dude threw a train several blocks away. That feat >>> oil tank.
Which has what to do with Zod or Thor?
Originally posted by h1a8
You are missing the point. The point was that it's not only possible, but extremely likely, to fight someone with full force punches but not want to kill them.
If you continually punch someone in the head then that is lethal force. You can easily kill them.
Originally posted by h1a8
You continue to make stuff up.
Funny because I'm the one backing up my points from the films, whereas you're making your own head canon, like the oil tanker scene doesn't count. That the writers and directors simply forgot how strong Kal was in that scene.
Originally posted by h1a8
No damage to the skin is what I said.
The damage was that it drained Superman of his power reserves.
That doesn't sound like he tanked it at all.
But again what does this have to do with Zod or Thor?
Originally posted by h1a8
To say that there is no evidence to show they were equals is a lie. I gave several evidences.
Lie is a hell of an accusation. Specially coming from someone who clearly makes up his own head canon and tries to present that as some sort of fact.
Originally posted by h1a8
1. Punches were similar in power (Zod actually hit harder).
Which means jack if Superman was holding back more than Zod.
Also means Jack is Superman was still growing in power, given your case seems to rest on comparing BvS Superman to Thor, instead of comparing MOS Zod to Thor.
Originally posted by h1a8
2. Colliding with full force and canceling each other out perfectly.
Same as above.
Originally posted by h1a8
You keep spouting Clark snapped neck to proves he's stronger. I rebutted that.
1. It's possible to snap the neck of an equal or superior.
2. Not wanting to snap someone's neck doesnt imply holding back full force with punches.
A farm boy winning against a soldier can only be logically explained by the farm boy being physically superior.
Again what does this have to do with Thor and Zod's durability comparison.
Quit taking us for a loop with your BS attempt at head canon power scaling.
Power scaling is simple. e.g. Thor is physically > Loki, therefore Thor can take bullets.
Not Superman can do this and that many years after Zod died, and Zod once fought him and lost, ergo Zod is > Thor. That's just turd logic.
Originally posted by h1a8
From my estimate Zod is slightly superior to Superman (so slight that they are basically equals).
Im sure that true in your own head canon.
Explain to me how in your head canon version a physically superior soldier loses to a physically weaker farm boy. That should be some nice turd logic reading.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I literally and directly addressed that.You think murderous intentions don't effect the way you fight?
Is Superman a villain now that he doesn't hold back? Goes all out for the kill?
Oh quit being a troll. His ragdoll smashed the the marble floor, even left Loki underneath the floor level:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YStUg14_23o
The humans moved out of the way. Of course Thor could have. We've seen how fast he can bullrush (@1:35):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLD9xzJ4oeU
Yes it's a terrible argument which pre assumes Thor knew the full power of all Shield's military aircraft before Thor ever lived on Earth.
Because an exploding Island is less destructive than a few bullets right?
Oh that's such BS. Because you're losing the debate, you have to resort to it being an inconsistency instead of just admitting my argument is more logical and consistent than yours.
So he was flying from the start of the film ?
There was no training session where he was learning to grow the limits of his power?
I'll take your blatant BS as a concession that you've lost this debate.
Oh really? That's why they had no HV or flight?
Quit the BS.
Which has what to do with Zod or Thor?
Which has what to do with Zod or Thor?
If you continually punch someone in the head then that is lethal force. You can easily kill them.
Funny because I'm the one backing up my points from the films, whereas you're making your own head canon, like the oil tanker scene doesn't count. That the writers and directors simply forgot how strong Kal was in that scene.
That doesn't sound like he tanked it at all.
But again what does this have to do with Zod or Thor?
Lie is a hell of an accusation. Specially coming from someone who clearly makes up his own head canon and tries to present that as some sort of fact.
Which means jack if Superman was holding back more than Zod.
Also means Jack is Superman was still growing in power, given your case seems to rest on comparing BvS Superman to Thor, instead of comparing MOS Zod to Thor.
Same as above.
A farm boy winning against a soldier can only be logically explained by the farm boy being physically superior.
Again what does this have to do with Thor and Zod's durability comparison.
Quit taking us for a loop with your BS attempt at head canon power scaling.
Power scaling is simple. e.g. Thor is physically > Loki, therefore Thor can take bullets.
Not Superman can do this and that many years after Zod died, and Zod once fought him and lost, ergo Zod is > Thor. That's just turd logic.
Im sure that true in your own head canon.
Explain to me how in your head canon version a physically superior soldier loses to a physically weaker farm boy. That should be some nice turd logic reading.
1. It's possible to strike someone with all your might but have no murderous intentions. Thsts possibilty rebuts your claim. Unless you want to argue that it's impossible for a person to want to punch someone with all their might if they don't want to kill them.
2. Again resisting rifles bullets > being twice slammed into a particular area and leaving a crater of a few inches. If you disagree then you certainly can agree that it isn't much higher than resisting rifle rounds.
3. Thor had no time to run. It was totally unexpected and only lasted a split second. The fact that he kinda ducked means something.
4. You are making stuff up. Thor didn't run from the bullets because he falsely thought they could hurt him. There is no evidence of that.
You making up reasons doesn't fly in debates.
The objects from THAT PARTICULAR exploding island was moving far slower than a bullet. So Thor could have gotten hit with hundreds or thousands of objects that were all moving under bullet speed. In a real explosion, shrapnel moves at speeds of a rifle bullet or more.
5. Fiction inconsistency occurs a large amount of times. It is very common. I proved your logic was wrong by giving feats from the newly powered Kryptonians that exceeded the oil rig by many times.
If Clark was so much stronger than them then why did he struggle with something far weaker than what they achieved strength wise?
Why being under the sun for a few seconds fully powered Clark when he was drained? Learning to fly or use other powers has nothing to do with growing physically stronger over time. Zod learned to fly and use HV very quickly.
The point is I proved how the physics work in that universe. It only takes a few seconds of sunlight to be fully powered.
7. You lied and said there was no evidence that points to Zod and Superman being physical equals. You stated this AFTER I gave the evidence (collision as equals and similar punch power). And again, no where in the film does it point out that Clark was holding back his punches. Not wanting to kill Zod doesn't prove it because of counterexample (it's possible to try to punch someone with all your might but not want to kill them). You continue to make stuff up. And yet I suppose to be the troll.
8. The soldier showed no great fighting skill. He threw wild haymakers and failed to block or dodge many of the farm boys attacks. You can't attribute skill to someone based off their status if it contradicts what we see. Again, making stuff up. When two physically equal characters with similar shown skill fight then either can win.
Originally posted by h1a8
1. It's possible to strike someone with all your might but have no murderous intentions. Thsts possibilty rebuts your claim. Unless you want to argue that it's impossible for a person to want to punch someone with all their might if they don't want to kill them.
Okay let's assume I think it's "possible" that a guy without murderous intent might go for a full haymaker.
Tell me who will hit with more of their full potential force?
a) a trained boxer, or
b) a guy whose never been in the ring and never been in a real fight?
Don't think too hard before your inevitable troll denial and jibberish response.
Originally posted by h1a8
2. Again resisting rifles bullets > being twice slammed into a particular area and leaving a crater of a few inches. If you disagree then you certainly can agree that it isn't much higher than resisting rifle rounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YStUg14_23o
At 0:18 a single hit smashes the floor underneath. I'd love to see a single bullet do that.
Look this isn't difficult to grasp if you just stop with your trolling for a second. Bullets did jack to him, and the Hulk left him immobilised and crying. Ergo The Hulk's ragdoll was >>>>> bullets.
Try to put your blatant bias aside or admit you're not objective enough for a proper debate, ergo quit wasting my time.
Originally posted by h1a8
3. Thor had no time to run. It was totally unexpected and only lasted a split second. The fact that he kinda ducked means something.
v=pVuIszzqnrc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVuIszzqnrc
He has from 0:36 to 0:39 to jump out of the way. That's 3 damn seconds. Even Cap manages to put his shield up and get cover. And I've already shown you how fast Thor can bull rush.
Not to mention at 0:40 it clearly shoots all over the area he is at.
Will you quit talking shit now ffs.
Originally posted by h1a8
4. You are making stuff up. Thor didn't run from the bullets because he falsely thought they could hurt him. There is no evidence of that.
You making up reasons doesn't fly in debates.
I thought you were going to quit this argument because it was't a great one by your own admission. And then you accuse me of being a liar.
Watch the films. He's an alien and has no clue of Earth's defences. Why would he know? HOW would he know?
YOU'RE the one assuming he does know exactly how hard the bullets from a military aircraft fire. Heck if his math is as bad as yours he'll assume it's billions of ton of force.
Originally posted by h1a8
The objects from THAT PARTICULAR exploding island was moving far slower than a bullet. So Thor could have gotten hit with hundreds or thousands of objects that were all moving under bullet speed. In a real explosion, shrapnel moves at speeds of a rifle bullet or more.
So I guess a bullet proof vest would protect you if we put you at the centre of that exploding Island 😂
Quit making a fool out of yourself.
Originally posted by h1a8
5. Fiction inconsistency occurs a large amount of times. It is very common. I proved your logic was wrong by giving feats from the newly powered Kryptonians that exceeded the oil rig by many times.
If Clark was so much stronger than them then why did he struggle with something far weaker than what they achieved strength wise?
Why being under the sun for a few seconds fully powered Clark when he was drained? Learning to fly or use other powers has nothing to do with growing physically stronger over time. Zod learned to fly and use HV very quickly.
The point is I proved how the physics work in that universe. It only takes a few seconds of sunlight to be fully powered.
Firstly, making up your own head canon isn't proving jack.
Second we don't just assume fiction inconsistency due to not liking a feat. Inconsistency is clear cut. Like when Wolverine gets KO'd by a single bullet in one film, then shrugs bullets to the head in another (a prequel film no less).
Inconsistency is not you playing mental gymnastics.
Your comparison to other Kryptonians is completely faulty given how Zod began to fly the same day he was on Earth, whereas Kal wasn't flying his whole life until his first training session from Jor-El. And EVEN THEN he did not manage it on his first attempt.
Clearly Kryptonian soldiers were just better trained and more easily able to adapt.
There was no inconsistency, you simply can't compare different Kryptonians with different levels of training, and different amounts of time spent on Earth.
So interchanging feats between them is not legitimate for a debate.
Originally posted by h1a8
7. You lied and said there was no evidence that points to Zod and Superman being physical equals. You stated this AFTER I gave the evidence (collision as equals and similar punch power). And again, no where in the film does it point out that Clark was holding back his punches. Not wanting to kill Zod doesn't prove it because of counterexample (it's possible to try to punch someone with all your might but not want to kill them). You continue to make stuff up. And yet I suppose to be the troll.
Similar punch power is down to all sorts not just strength. What does that have to do with durability anyway?
And how does that make Zod the equal of BvS Superman in durability, and what is the nuclear explosion which Kal barely survived supposed to prove anyway?
Your mental gymnastics of comparing one thing to another to another is why your points are invalid. This is why you can't simply interchange feats. You can only power scale with CLEAR, SIMPLE, and DIRECT Comparisons.
Originally posted by h1a8
8. The soldier showed no great fighting skill. He threw wild haymakers and failed to block or dodge many of the farm boys attacks. You can't attribute skill to someone based off their status if it contradicts what we see. Again, making stuff up. When two physically equal characters with similar shown skill fight then either can win.
v=06Qm8cKJ-jo&t=123s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo&t=123s
At 1:57, Kal had already physically overpowered Zod before the headlock.
So clearly they were not physical equals.
Zod was not only a soldier, but didn't need training to fly. Clearly he had all sorts of advantages over Kal, and yet was still clearly physcially overpowered. The only logical explanation is that Kal was physically superior.
And that's as of the end of MOS. Who knows how much stronger Kal was by BvS.
Now quit this Kal vs Zod shit. Set up another thread for that if that's waht you want to discuss.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Okay let's assume I think it's "possible" that a guy without murderous intent might go for a full haymaker.Tell me who will hit with more of their full potential force?
a) a trained boxer, or
b) a guy whose never been in the ring and never been in a real fight?
Don't think too hard before your inevitable troll denial and jibberish response.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YStUg14_23o
At 0:18 a single hit smashes the floor underneath. I'd love to see a single bullet do that.
Look this isn't difficult to grasp if you just stop with your trolling for a second. Bullets did jack to him, and the Hulk left him immobilised and crying. Ergo The Hulk's ragdoll was >>>>> bullets.
Try to put your blatant bias aside or admit you're not objective enough for a proper debate, ergo quit wasting my time.
v=pVuIszzqnrc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVuIszzqnrc
He has from 0:36 to 0:39 to jump out of the way. That's 3 damn seconds. Even Cap manages to put his shield up and get cover. And I've already shown you how fast Thor can bull rush.
Not to mention at 0:40 it clearly shoots all over the area he is at.
Will you quit talking shit now ffs.
I thought you were going to quit this argument because it was't a great one by your own admission. And then you accuse me of being a liar.
Watch the films. He's an alien and has no clue of Earth's defences. Why would he know? HOW would he know?
YOU'RE the one assuming he does know exactly how hard the bullets from a military aircraft fire. Heck if his math is as bad as yours he'll assume it's billions of ton of force.
So I guess a bullet proof vest would protect you if we put you at the centre of that exploding Island 😂
Quit making a fool out of yourself.
Firstly, making up your own head canon isn't proving jack.
Second we don't just assume fiction inconsistency due to not liking a feat. Inconsistency is clear cut. Like when Wolverine gets KO'd by a single bullet in one film, then shrugs bullets to the head in another (a prequel film no less).
Inconsistency is not you playing mental gymnastics.
Your comparison to other Kryptonians is completely faulty given how Zod began to fly the same day he was on Earth, whereas Kal wasn't flying his whole life until his first training session from Jor-El. And EVEN THEN he did not manage it on his first attempt.
Clearly Kryptonian soldiers were just better trained and more easily able to adapt.
There was no inconsistency, you simply can't compare different Kryptonians with different levels of training, and different amounts of time spent on Earth.
So interchanging feats between them is not legitimate for a debate.
Similar punch power is down to all sorts not just strength. What does that have to do with durability anyway?
And how does that make Zod the equal of BvS Superman in durability, and what is the nuclear explosion which Kal barely survived supposed to prove anyway?
Your mental gymnastics of comparing one thing to another to another is why your points are invalid. This is why you can't simply interchange feats. You can only power scale with CLEAR, SIMPLE, and DIRECT Comparisons.
v=06Qm8cKJ-jo&t=123s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Qm8cKJ-jo&t=123s
At 1:57, Kal had already physically overpowered Zod before the headlock.
So clearly they were not physical equals.
Zod was not only a soldier, but didn't need training to fly. Clearly he had all sorts of advantages over Kal, and yet was still clearly physcially overpowered. The only logical explanation is that Kal was physically superior.
And that's as of the end of MOS. Who knows how much stronger Kal was by BvS.
Now quit this Kal vs Zod shit. Set up another thread for that if that's waht you want to discuss.
1. Irrelevant. It's possible to strike with all ones might but have no murderous intentions. You are trying to change the goalposts. So your made up theory is not proven.
2. Ultron starts firing at 0:37. Thor is shown at 0:39-0:40. Thor ducks. Stop ignoring that. You have to prove that Thor didn't run away because he knew he was resistant. Good luck.
Again Thor has no feats to show him being resistant against aircraft bullets.
3. If the exploding bits of the island where hitting the only vest but at speeds far less than bullet speed then yes, the vest will protect you. Duh.
4. You say that Clark was stronger than Zod because he was on Earth longer. Yet you can't explain why Zod and the other Kryptonians have strength feats beyond the oil rig.
Note: I already proven the physics of that universe (a few seconds to be fully powered).
5. Both are Kryptonians (same species) with equal shown physicality. Therefore Zod has the same (or damn near the same) durability as Superman.
6. A weaker person can easily overpower a stronger in a headlock position. So again, you failed to prove that Clark overpowered Zod due to him supposedly being stronger.
7. Kal wasn't stronger in BvS because he wasn't shown to be.
Originally posted by FrothByte
I see H1 has turned this into another clusterf*ck of a thread... all because he refuses to back his arguments up with feats.
I gave feats. Zod against Superman showings remember?
Weren't you the one trying to scale Thor and Sif off Asgardian farmer.
Darth scaling Thor off Loki, etc?
Originally posted by h1a8
I gave feats. Zod against Superman showings remember?Weren't you the one trying to scale Thor and Sif off Asgardian farmer.
Darth scaling Thor off Loki, etc?
No you repeatedly IGNORED feats in favour of your own head canon.
FFS Kal > Zod (he clearly overpowered him then snapped his damn neck), whereas Thor is the strongest of all Asgardians minus Odin and Hela (notice how nobody is scaling Thor off Hela).
Plus youre scaling an earlier Zod against a later possibly much stronger Kal. Whilst in the Abom vs Aquaman thread youre claiming Abom is weaker because he went up against Hulk from a time when he had less showings. Complete hypocrisy.
Not to mention youre comparing bullets to a massive ground zero explosion. And not just one, but multiple massive ground zero explosions! Just zero logic and common sense there all down to bias.
And purposely ignoring on screen statements about the force Thor took then have the nerve to talk about writers intention.
The sheer hypocrisy, bias and purposely ignoring common sense is exactly why youre wasting everyones time and no one can be bothered with you.
Carry on living in your own head canon. Im done here.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
No you repeatedly IGNORED feats in favour of your own head canon.FFS Kal > Zod (he clearly overpowered him then snapped his damn neck), whereas Thor is the strongest of all Asgardians minus Odin and Hela (notice how nobody is scaling Thor off Hela).
Plus youre scaling an earlier Zod against a later possibly much stronger Kal. Whilst in the Abom vs Aquaman thread youre claiming Abom is weaker because he went up against Hulk from a time when he had less showings. Complete hypocrisy.
Not to mention youre comparing bullets to a massive ground zero explosion. And not just one, but multiple massive ground zero explosions! Just zero logic and common sense there all down to bias.
And purposely ignoring on screen statements about the force Thor took then have the nerve to talk about writers intention.
The sheer hypocrisy, bias and purposely ignoring common sense is exactly why youre wasting everyones time and no one can be bothered with you.
Carry on living in your own head canon. Im done here.
Kal never overpowered Zod. He snapped his neck yes, but that is not equivalent to overpowering someone (as proof of being stronger).
Both were shown as equals when they collided at full force. Zod took Clark's best shots without damage. So either he is a peer or slightly greater (Zod hit harder than Clark did).
P. S you are the one creating head canon (making up shit the writer never intended). Im going by facts, not made up head canon as you are doing.
If Abom failed to break a metal chain then by what insane logic should he be stronger than AM?
I explained why full force was figurative language. I didn't ignore anything.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
No you repeatedly IGNORED feats in favour of your own head canon.FFS Kal > Zod (he clearly overpowered him then snapped his damn neck), whereas Thor is the strongest of all Asgardians minus Odin and Hela (notice how nobody is scaling Thor off Hela).
Plus youre scaling an earlier Zod against a later possibly much stronger Kal. Whilst in the Abom vs Aquaman thread youre claiming Abom is weaker because he went up against Hulk from a time when he had less showings. Complete hypocrisy.
Not to mention youre comparing bullets to a massive ground zero explosion. And not just one, but multiple massive ground zero explosions! Just zero logic and common sense there all down to bias.
And purposely ignoring on screen statements about the force Thor took then have the nerve to talk about writers intention.
The sheer hypocrisy, bias and purposely ignoring common sense is exactly why youre wasting everyones time and no one can be bothered with you.
Carry on living in your own head canon. Im done here.
It's what he does.
In summary, Darth is claiming that Kal is stronger than Zod because he snapped his neck.
The conclusion does not follow.
He claims that Kal was stronger because he was on Earth longer.
Well Zod and the other kryptonians have strength feats far beyond the oil rig. Yet he cant explain why is that. He does not accept fiction inconsistency as a possible explanation. It has been shown that a few seconds of sunlight gives kryptonians full power. Clark was powerless on Zods ship and gained full power once he left the ship. Kal was drained completely from a nuke and gained full power as a few seconds in the sun. Kryptonians have greater strength feats than him in MOS.
He claims that "full force" is meant literally and not figuratively when the term makes no sense literally. we all know that heat is needed to melt metal (not force). Stars have heat. Writer intends for the heat of the star to be used to melt metal.
He claims that Thor can resist aircraft bullets when Thor has no feats that are equivalent or greater.