Apoc vs Thanos

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Is he? Not sure. But given he wasn't hurt at all by QS, is pretty noteworthy. A QS who was clearly going all out, and landed 8 all out punches.

He's used his powers in many different ways depending on the opponent. Example Quicksilver.

He uses matter manip, because he can, it's the simplest way for a win.

But his TK shields were pretty OP. And he can take a punch (Quicksilver), and he has instantaneous healing abilities.

You're just gimping Apoc to give Thanos a chance. It's over.

How does resistance to Quicksilver's punches prove that he can resist being decapitated or having his limbs and torso severed by Thanos' sword?

How does that prove he won't be knocked out by a punch from Thanos?

Originally posted by h1a8
How does resistance to Quicksilver's punches prove that he can resist being decapitated or having his limbs and torso severed by Thanos' sword?

He has TK Shields for that. One lightning strike by Cap and he lost his weapon. If he drops it against Apoc he can keep it away from him, or use it against Thanos.

Originally posted by h1a8
How does that prove he won't be knocked out by a punch from Thanos?

Because QS is very powerful. That was 8 full powered punches in presumably less than a second and he wasn't knocked out. You'll have to prove 1 punch from Thanos is > 8 from QS.

Originally posted by Robtard
Prove Apoc wouldn't, prove he's too stupid to not use his abilities in a manner he's already shown. Go, clown!

This

All Apoc did in the movie was fight with his powers. He never goes H2H.

Originally posted by h1a8
You claimed that beings with matter manipulation can affect any material, regardless of its durability.

Let's examine this from three perspectives:

1. Statistical:
The null hypothesis - the status quo - is the opposite of your claim: that beings cannot necessarily manipulate all matter regardless of durability. To reject this, you must provide evidence that reaches the level of statistical significance.

2. Logical:
Your claim is a universal statement. As such, a single counterexample is sufficient to disprove it. Numerous examples exist of characters resisting matter manipulation due to high durability - Superman, for instance, has resisted such attempts.

3. Scientific:
Stronger materials require more force to break their molecular bonds. For Apoc to bypass the durability of any being or object, he would need to exert unlimited force to overcome all types of molecular structures, even fictional ones.

Again, false equivalency fallacy.

A false equivalence or false equivalency is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed, faulty, or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges."

Thanos is not Superman, and has shown in canon and comics to resist these things, Thanos has not done the same in the Cinematic universe, and on top of this, the one time he is exposed to matter manipulation, he flopped, and got disintegrated. Hard.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Again, false equivalency fallacy.

Thanos is not Superman, and has shown in canon and comics to resist these things, Thanos has not done the same in the Cinematic universe, and on top of this, the one time he is exposed to matter manipulation, he flopped, and got disintegrated. Hard.

You completely ignored the statistical and scientific perspectives.

You are mistaken - there is no false equivalence fallacy here. You're simply making things up.

From a logical standpoint, you made a universal claim. A single counterexample is enough to disprove it. Superman and other beings or objects have resisted matter manipulation due to their high durability.

The Infinity Gauntlet has demonstrated the ability to matter manipulate someone as durable as Thanos. Apoc has not. In fact, the Gauntlet matter manipulated half the universe - an astronomical feat far beyond Apoc's scope. Therefore, your argument that Apoc can manipulate Thanos simply because the Infinity Gauntlet did is faulty.

A false equivalence occurs when two things are compared as being similar when they are not. I'm not comparing two dissimilar things - I'm showing that your rule doesn't always hold.

So unless my example is entirely unrelated (which it's not), I'm simply refuting a universal claim with a valid counterexample.

Originally posted by h1a8
.

The Infinity Gauntlet has demonstrated the ability to matter manipulate someone as durable as Thanos. Apoc has not. In fact, the Gauntlet matter manipulated half the universe - an astronomical feat far beyond Apoc's scope. Therefore, your argument that Apoc can manipulate Thanos simply because the Infinity Gauntlet did is faulty.

Apocalypse has demonstrated the ability to use telekinesis on a scale far beyond anything Scarlet Witch has done, yet her TK was strong enough to force Thanos to attack his own troops to save his life. So by your own logic, Apocalypse can do just as much, and much more damage to Thanos with his own TK. You're making up your own rules about matter manip as well, but it doesn't matter since he can fold him like a pretzel with TK.

And don't think I forgot how you ignored my proof that Apocalypse when he just woke up was powerful enough to cause trigger earthquakes in Germany and Poland while he was in Cairo. Keep in mind the distance from Cairo to Poland is 2,810 miles and from Cairo to Germany is 2,939 miles. The simple act of him waking up and teleporting caused earthquakes nearly 3,000 miles away and you're still trying to downplay him.

The consensus is Apoc wins due to his vast array of powers and scale of power, vs a guy who is just a brick in this fight.

H1 will continue to spin points and gimp Apoc to force his failed arguments.

Originally posted by h1a8
.

You completely ignored the statistical and scientific perspectives.

You are mistaken - there is no false equivalence fallacy here. You're simply making things up.

From a logical standpoint, you made a universal claim. A single counterexample is enough to disprove it. Superman and other beings or objects have resisted matter manipulation due to their high durability.

The Infinity Gauntlet has demonstrated the ability to matter manipulate someone as durable as Thanos. Apoc has not. In fact, the Gauntlet matter manipulated half the universe - an astronomical feat far beyond Apoc's scope. Therefore, your argument that Apoc can manipulate Thanos simply because the Infinity Gauntlet did is faulty.

A false equivalence occurs when two things are compared as being similar when they are not. I'm not comparing two dissimilar things - I'm showing that your rule doesn't always hold.

So unless my example is entirely unrelated (which it's not), I'm simply refuting a universal claim with a valid counterexample.

I didn't ignore it, I disregarded it based on actual imperical evidence proving the very contrary to your claim. The one time Thanos was ACTUALLY exposed to matter manipulation in canon, he could not resist it. He disintegrated. You are again trying to make a comparative where none exists. Thanos, has not ever resisted matter manipulation at any level. The onus is on you to prove he can resist Apocalypse's matter manipulation by way of feats. We do not have to prove the negative, since the assertion was made by you that he can do so, you have to prove he can.

I can tell you now, if you tried this shit on a debating forum with properly enforced rules of engagement, you'd be tossed on your ass. Don't ever go to Spacebattles or Sufficient velocity mate, you'd be banned for bad faith debating practices so fast it'd make everyone's head spin.

Originally posted by Robtard
H1 will continue to spin points and gimp Apoc to force his failed arguments.

And it's just to get a rise out of people. He does this in every thread just to be heard. There is no possible way that one person can go against the majority so often and truly believe he is right.

Originally posted by KingD19
Apocalypse has demonstrated the ability to use telekinesis on a scale far beyond anything Scarlet Witch has done, yet her TK was strong enough to force Thanos to attack his own troops to save his life. So by your own logic, Apocalypse can do just as much, and much more damage to Thanos with his own TK. You're making up your own rules about matter manip as well, but it doesn't matter since he can fold him like a pretzel with TK.

And don't think I forgot how you ignored my proof that Apocalypse when he just woke up was powerful enough to cause trigger earthquakes in Germany and Poland while he was in Cairo. Keep in mind the distance from Cairo to Poland is 2,810 miles and from Cairo to Germany is 2,939 miles. The simple act of him waking up and teleporting caused earthquakes nearly 3,000 miles away and you're still trying to downplay him.

I didn't make up any rules.
There are established principles in statistics, logic, and science that refute that claim.

Scarlet Witch destroyed a weapon more durable than Cap's shield. It must be proven that Apoc can do the same.

While it's possible that Apoc could focus all his telekinetic force into a small area, we can't say that with certainty. If he could, then he should be able to rip Thanos apart with TK and win easily.

The tremors appeared to be a chain reaction caused by some instability triggered when Apoc teleported away. I don't believe that showing is any greater the pyramid forming one.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I didn't ignore it, I disregarded it based on actual imperical evidence proving the very contrary to your claim. The one time Thanos was ACTUALLY exposed to matter manipulation in canon, he could not resist it. He disintegrated. You are again trying to make a comparative where none exists. Thanos, has not ever resisted matter manipulation at any level. The onus is on you to prove he can resist Apocalypse's matter manipulation by way of feats. We do not have to prove the negative, since the assertion was made by you that he can do so, you have to prove he can.

I can tell you now, if you tried this shit on a debating forum with properly enforced rules of engagement, you'd be tossed on your ass. Don't ever go to Spacebattles or Sufficient velocity mate, you'd be banned for bad faith debating practices so fast it'd make everyone's head spin.

Here's a summary of my points:

Statistics: You made a claim that contradicts the null hypothesis, asserting a special attribute. The burden is on you to prove it to the level of statistical significance.

Logic: I provided a counterexample that disproves your universal claim.

Science: Breaking the molecular bonds of more durable objects requires more force than weaker ones. Claiming Apocalypse can matter manipulate anything regardless of durability is a no-limits fallacy.

At this point, it's you who would be banned for ignoring valid arguments and endlessly repeating a rebutted claim.

A higher power matter manipulating Thanos doesn't mean a lower power can. That's like saying if Superman can ko WW, then anyone weaker can too.

Originally posted by Robtard
The consensus is Apoc wins due to his vast array of powers and scale of power, vs a guy who is just a brick in this fight.

H1 will continue to spin points and gimp Apoc to force his failed arguments.

If Apoc can't harm Thanos then how could he win? If he can harm Thanos then prove it.

Originally posted by tkitna
And it's just to get a rise out of people. He does this in every thread just to be heard. There is no possible way that one person can go against the majority so often and truly believe he is right.

Only a few people are debating in these threads.
If you or anyone else is right and I'm wrong, then effectively rebut my arguments and present sound ones in return.

Originally posted by h1a8

If Apoc can't harm Thanos then how could he win? If he can harm Thanos then prove it.

^

Your argument (now) implies that Thanos is invulnerable, when we've seen him take damage. LoL.

Originally posted by Robtard
^

Your argument (now) implies that Thanos is invulnerable, when we've seen him take damage. LoL.

My argument doesn't imply that. Dude, you are getting dumber by the day.

Originally posted by h1a8
My argument doesn't imply that. Dude, you are getting dumber by the day.

Irony.

Originally posted by h1a8

Only a few people are debating in these threads.
If you or anyone else is right and I'm wrong, then effectively rebut my arguments and present sound ones in return.

Your arguments have been squashed numerous times, but you refuse to accept that and continue to make ridiculous counterpoints. It's every thread your involved in. It's so common that I struggle to understand why we continue to entertain it.

If somebody said the sky was blue, you would argue for 20 pages that it was red. It's just who you are. You crave validation and throw common sense out the window to get it.

Originally posted by h1a8
You're now resorting to trolling by ignoring my arguments without addressing them. Repeating yourself while refusing to engage with the points I've raised is trolling.

Here's a summary of my points:

Statistics: You made a claim that contradicts the null hypothesis, asserting a special attribute. The burden is on you to prove it to the level of statistical significance.

Logic: I provided a counterexample that disproves your universal claim.

Science: Breaking the molecular bonds of more durable objects requires more force than weaker ones. Claiming Apocalypse can matter manipulate anything regardless of durability is a no-limits fallacy.

At this point, it's you who would be banned for ignoring valid arguments and endlessly repeating a rebutted claim.

A higher power matter manipulating Thanos doesn't mean a lower power can. That's like saying if Superman can ko WW, then anyone weaker can too.

I've not resorted to trolling. Like you I can ignore or dismiss, a claim made by you with the weight of superior evidence, which is exactly what I did. Trolling would mean I didn't answer you at all. I answered every point you made.

You rebuted no claim, and you gave Thanos an arbitary level of durability to an ability he has never shown. You cannot claim something as fact when it's not been shown. He has shown resistances to ordinary physical and even energy based assaults, but he has never shown resistances to a form of attack that he has no known defense or durability against.

Your claim is that Apoc's matter manip is a no limit fallacy, but my contentionto that argument is that Thanos is no more resistant to it than anyone else has been to it so far, because to claim that hie is more resistant to it requires a feat of doing so. The one time he was exposed to said ability, he didn't resist it. We have no reason to assume such an ability would not work as intended. You are trying to artificially inject both a limit on Apocalypse's ability, AND you're artificially giving Thanos a resistance he has never demonstrated before.

You have literally provided no examples whatsoever, the only think you did was try to technobabble your way through an argument. If you have nothing more of substance to say, then don't bother replying to me, I'm not going to entertain your style of 'debating' a second time.

Originally posted by h1a8
The Gauntlet didn't enhance Thanos physically. Being called "the most powerful being in the universe" is just one small part of the larger picture -it's meaningless on its own without supporting feats.

Simply being a telekinetic doesn't guarantee a win if you can't actually harm or damage your opponent with that ability.

Wait, are you saying he is or is not "the universe's most powerful being"? Because you brought up the quote and implied that it applied here, and I argued that it didn't. Are you saying that it does or does not, and if not, why did you bring it up?

Again, what resistance to telekinesis or immutability to matter manipulation has MCU Thanos shown? Comic book Thanos is effectively an entirely different character with different powers, so his comic book TK immunity doesn't apply here. MCU Thanos, even with the Gauntlet, has been shown to be susceptible to attacks by beings way weaker than Fox Apoc, who, as as opposed to Thanos, is actually way stronger than his comic book counterpart. Apoc has way too many powers to effect Thanos and the only "defense" that you've stated for Thanos is that Apoc will somehow be too stupid to utilize them in the proper manner, which is utter nonsense.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I've not resorted to trolling. Like you I can ignore or dismiss, a claim made by you with the weight of superior evidence, which is exactly what I did. Trolling would mean I didn't answer you at all. I answered every point you made.

You rebuted no claim, and you gave Thanos an arbitary level of durability to an ability he has never shown. You cannot claim something as fact when it's not been shown. He has shown resistances to ordinary physical and even energy based assaults, but he has never shown resistances to a form of attack that he has no known defense or durability against.

Your claim is that Apoc's matter manip is a no limit fallacy, but my contentionto that argument is that Thanos is no more resistant to it than anyone else has been to it so far, because to claim that hie is more resistant to it requires a feat of doing so. The one time he was exposed to said ability, he didn't resist it. We have no reason to assume such an ability would not work as intended. You are trying to artificially inject both a limit on Apocalypse's ability, AND you're artificially giving Thanos a resistance he has never demonstrated before.

You have literally provided no examples whatsoever, the only think you did was try to technobabble your way through an argument. If you have nothing more of substance to say, then don't bother replying to me, I'm not going to entertain your style of 'debating' a second time.

Matter manipulation relies on the use of force to overpower and break the molecular and atomic bonds of materials in order to restructure them. This means a matter manipulator can only affect materials whose bond strength is less than or equal to the maximum force they can exert. Consequently, more durable materials offer greater resistance to manipulation than weaker ones. In fact, highly durable beings and materials have resisted matter manipulation in various instances.

Therefore, the ability to manipulate one specific material does not automatically mean the character can manipulate a more durable material.

Your argument would be sound if Thanos were less durable than something Apoc has already manipulated. In that case, Thanos would need feats showing resistance to matter manipulation.

I rebutted your evidence about Thanos being manipulated by the Gauntlet, but you ignored my rebuttal without offering a counter and simply repeated the same argument. I'll restate my rebuttal more clearly below:

Matter manipulation exists on a spectrum of power levels. More powerful users can manipulate more durable materials than weaker ones. Just because Character A turned adamantium into air doesn't mean Character B - who's only shown turning paper into air - can do the same.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Wait, are you saying he is or is not "the universe's most powerful being"? Because you brought up the quote and implied that it applied here, and I argued that it didn't. Are you saying that it does or does not, and if not, why did you bring it up?

Again, what resistance to telekinesis or immutability to matter manipulation has MCU Thanos shown? Comic book Thanos is effectively an entirely different character with different powers, so his comic book TK immunity doesn't apply here. MCU Thanos, even with the Gauntlet, has been shown to be susceptible to attacks by beings way weaker than Fox Apoc, who, as as opposed to Thanos, is actually way stronger than his comic book counterpart. Apoc has way too many powers to effect Thanos and the only "defense" that you've stated for Thanos is that Apoc will somehow be too stupid to utilize them in the proper manner, which is utter nonsense.

Thanos is not the most powerful being in the universe, especially based off later movies introducing more powerful characters (SW, etc). I never claimed such. But such a claim in a movie gives evidence to Thanos being extremely physically powerful.

I don't see Apoc starting the fight by lifting Thanos into the air and holding him there indefinitely, that's completely out of character. He doesn't need to be stupid to avoid doing that. He'd more likely begin by defending against Thanos' attacks using telekinesis, blocking blows, sending Thanos flying, and so on. At some point during the fight, he may attempt matter manipulation.

It's amazing how people assume a character is stupid just because they don't act exactly how they would.

Originally posted by tkitna
Your arguments have been squashed numerous times, but you refuse to accept that and continue to make ridiculous counterpoints. It's every thread your involved in. It's so common that I struggle to understand why we continue to entertain it.

If somebody said the sky was blue, you would argue for 20 pages that it was red. It's just who you are. You crave validation and throw common sense out the window to get it.

Okay, be specific. Describe a typical scenario, other than matter manipulating Thanos, where Apoc wins the fight. Let's start from there.

Originally posted by h1a8
Matter manipulation relies on the use of [b]force to overpower and break the molecular and atomic bonds of materials in order to restructure them. This means a matter manipulator can only affect materials whose bond strength is less than or equal to the maximum force they can exert. Consequently, more durable materials offer greater resistance to manipulation than weaker ones. In fact, highly durable beings and materials have resisted matter manipulation in various instances.

Therefore, the ability to manipulate one specific material does not automatically mean the character can manipulate a more durable material.

Your argument would be sound if Thanos were less durable than something Apoc has already manipulated. In that case, Thanos would need feats showing resistance to matter manipulation.

I rebutted your evidence about Thanos being manipulated by the Gauntlet, but you ignored my rebuttal without offering a counter and simply repeated the same argument. I'll restate my rebuttal more clearly below:

Matter manipulation exists on a spectrum of power levels. More powerful users can manipulate more durable materials than weaker ones. Just because Character A turned adamantium into air doesn't mean Character B - who's only shown turning paper into air - can do the same. [/B]

You didn't rebute it though. Nowhere in your entire diatribe of technobabbling statements did you refute anything I brought up other than what appeared to be a gigantic middle finger at me and a "No U!!!" statement.

You argue now that you think Thanos is resistant to matter manipulation because he was surviving physical trauma due to concussive, or kinetic forces being applied, which are two completely different damage values, and two completely different means of receiving damage. If what you said was anywhere close to accurate, he'd never have had anything to fear from Storm Breaker, or just about anything else. However, we know this isn't true, as he's had his arm f@cked up by the gauntlet, we've seen Storm breaker pierce his chest and cut off his head, we've seen others harm him, including Tony Stark. We know he's far from invulnerable.

Now, as to your assertion that matter manipulation requires the use of physical force to do it's work, how in the ever loving blue hell can you POSSIBLY assert this? How would you know this? As far as anyone else is aware, it is a MENTAL power Apocalypse uses, not a physical one.

And now, you need to prove that Thanos's atoms are more durable than anyone elses. I do not know how you are supposed to actually prove atomic toughness from a fictional setting, but please, this should be entertaining.