Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who would win?

Probaby Red Hulk over time if he got ahold of him.

Pretty sure a spear through the head would take out Hulk

Yeah Namor gonna slice him up.

Yeah, the trident would be to much. I based my answer off of just a H2H scuffle.

H2H - Ross
W/ Spear - Namor

He's way too fast and maneuverable in flight for Hulk to really get a hand on him once he leaves the ground. And with that spear he's gonna do even worse than Sam did. If he stays on the ground, Hulk has a much better chance.

I see Namor possibly edging out Rulk with the spear, but it won't be easy. He has to land a stab in a vital area, which is easier said than done.

Due to the dynamic and unpredictable nature of battles, it's highly possible that Namor stabs Rulk in a non-vital area and gets wrecked immediately after (e.g., Rulk takes the hit to grab him), especially if the spear gets stuck. It's also unclear whether Namor can pierce Rulk's bones - particularly his skull - which are astronomically more durable than his muscle and flesh.

I give Namor a 6/10 with the spear.

Namor's as strong as the Hulk according to MCU lore.

Originally posted by Robtard
Namor's as strong as the Hulk according to MCU lore. Not according to on screen feats. He looked weaker as well.

I wouldn't take it literally with him being equally as strong as the Hulk. But I have no doubt he has the strength to go H2H with Thor or Hulk. The director compared him to both.

I saw no major limitations on his strength in Wakanda Forever outside of weakness exploitation. Except perhaps the scene where he couldn't punch through the Palace window. But I assume that was somehow Vibranium glass or something, and it's not like we've seen Hulk smash through it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I wouldn't take it literally with him being equally as strong as the Hulk. But I have no doubt he has the strength to go H2H with Thor or Hulk. The director compared him to both.

I saw no major limitations on his strength in Wakanda Forever outside of weakness exploitation. Except perhaps the scene where he couldn't punch through the Palace window. But I assume that was somehow Vibranium glass or something, and it's not like we've seen Hulk smash through it. Namor's limitations are evident in the speed at which he threw a 3-5 ton helicopter after spinning it multiple times to build momentum and the force he used to strike M'Baku and the force he hurled the Wakanda ship away. To a trained eye, these feats appear to generate less than 100 tons of force - with the latter being his best feat. In contrast, Red Hulk seems significantly stronger, capable of lifting hundreds of tons. This is why members here naturally believes that Rulk would win h2h while Namor would need his spear to turn the tables.

^ I meant more convincing evidence than your usual schtick.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ I meant more convincing evidence than your usual schtick.

Isn't the fact that everyone thinks Rulk would win in h2h because he appears stronger by feats already evidence?

Originally posted by h1a8
Not according to on screen feats. He looked weaker as well.

According to "writer's intent" Namor is as strong as the Hulk, which is what you go by when it suits you

Originally posted by Robtard
According to "writer's intent" Namor is as strong as the Hulk, which is what you go by when it suits you

I rely solely on the writer's intent as implied by the scene itself and avoid considering external statements or interviews (unless they are clarifying the plot) because:
1. Opinions can change over time. Writers may revise their perspectives, leading to inconsistencies between their original work and later comments.
2. On-screen feats outweigh contradictory statements. The actions depicted provide concrete evidence of a character's abilities, which should take precedence over contradictory external interpretations.
3. Different writers may have conflicting views about characters, especially whose stronger. For example, often in comics, varying opinions on characters can result in contradictory portrayals.

In conclusion, a writer's take on what actually happened or why it happened is valid. However, their statement on who is stronger - especially when it contradicts what's shown or conflicts with other writers' views - is not. Lastly, I consider a writer's intent only when it aligns with common sense and isn't up for debate.

Wrong. You've used "writer's intent" as the deciding factor when it suits your bias.

So per the writer's intent, Namor = Hulk in strength.

Originally posted by Robtard
Wrong. I'm going to ignore everything you said and ignore on screen feats.

So per one of the writer's AFTER OPINION Namor = Hulk in strength.

Understood

Originally posted by h1a8
I pick and choose when 'writers intent' is the deciding factor and when it can be ignored.

I do this because I am a clown. Look at my bright red nose *honk* *honk*

Agreed.

Originally posted by Robtard
Pretty sure a spear through the head would take out Hulk

^
Anyhow, I maintain this is how Namor wins, considering Namor's speed, agility and flight advantages.

Originally posted by Robtard
According to "writer's intent" Namor is as strong as the Hulk, which is what you go by when it suits you


He prefers to make up writers intention. He doesnt like direct quotes from them.

Originally posted by Robtard
^
Anyhow, I maintain this is how Namor wins, considering Namor's speed, agility and flight advantages.

Although possible, stabbing Rulk in the skull would be extremely difficult for Namor. The battle is dynamic, and many factors come into play.

Namor's attacking speed with the spear is only at a human level, and he tends to fight grounded and up close against single, humanoid opponents that has no ranged weapons.

Additionally, he might lack the strength to pierce Rulk's skull, which is far more durable than his skin - already highly resistant to armor-piercing bullets.

Namor wins with the spear, but only by a slight majority.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
He prefers to make up writers intention. He doesnt like direct quotes from them.
Quotes and statements that contradict on-screen feats have no evidentiary value.

I only bring up "writer's intent" when addressing those who troll or argue against clear on-screen intent.

Originally posted by h1a8
Quotes and statements that contradict on-screen feats have no evidentiary value.

I only bring up "writer's intent" when addressing those who troll or argue against clear on-screen intent.


"clear TO YOU on-screen intent" is basically whatever you imagine/wish it to be. Whilst ignoring filmmaker commentary because what they actually intended usually doesn't fit your wishes.

So my analysis of your argumentation method was 100% correct.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
He prefers to make up writers intention. He doesnt like direct quotes from them.


Not surprised.

Originally posted by h1a8
Although possible, stabbing Rulk in the skull would be extremely difficult for Namor. The battle is dynamic, and many factors come into play.

Namor's attacking speed with the spear is only at a human level, and he tends to fight grounded and up close against single, humanoid opponents that has no ranged weapons.

Additionally, he might lack the strength to pierce Rulk's skull, which is far more durable than his skin - already highly resistant to armor-piercing bullets.

Namor wins with the spear, but only by a slight majority.

Wrong.

Namor's shown to have the ability to both slice through and puncture vibranium with his "raw vibranium" spear. Red Hulk's bones shouldn't be more difficult.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
"clear TO YOU on-screen intent" is basically whatever you imagine/wish it to be. Whilst ignoring filmmaker commentary because what they actually intended usually doesn't fit your wishes.

So my analysis of your argumentation method was 100% correct. No, not clear to me, but clear to the reasonable person. There are plenty of things that are clear to me but are not to the reasonable person, and I can easily tell the difference.

I use the "reasonable person" standard - if something is clear to the reasonable person, then it's not up for debate.

As for outside statements and interviews:
1. A writer's opinion can change AFTER a film is completed, or they might even LIE (they're human) to promote a movie.

2. A producer of one film doesn't have artistic control over a character from another film, produced by someone else. Feige could very well believe Hulk is significantly stronger than Namor.

3. Statements mean nothing when they contradict on-screen showings, even if those statements come from within the movie itself.

4. "MOVIE FEATS ONLY!" - that's the rule here.


I guarantee that you and Robtard will troll, ignore every point I made, and just repeat your argument with slightly different wording.

That tells me two things:
1. My argument is too strong to be easily refuted.
2. I've already won the debate.

Originally posted by Robtard
Wrong.

Namor's shown to have the ability to both slice through and puncture vibranium with his "raw vibranium" spear. Red Hulk's bones shouldn't be more difficult.

Really?
Prove it then.
Then prove how durable this so called filtered unpure vibranium is so that we can compare it with the durability of Rulk's bones.

Originally posted by h1a8
Really?
Prove it then.
Then prove how durable this so called filtered unpure vibranium is so that we can compare it with the durability of Rulk's bones.


You want me to prove how durable vibranium is in the MCU? The stated nigh indestructible stuff?

Not using vibranium, its low point is probably Cap's thin shield being broken by repeated hits from Thanos strength hits using his infinity blade. Which isn't really a low point for vibranium, it's a very high point for Thanos and his blade.

Now you, how durable are Red Hulk's bones? Prove they're stronger than vibranium.

Originally posted by Robtard
You want me to prove how durable vibranium is in the MCU? The stated nigh indestructible stuff?

Not using vibranium, its low point is probably Cap's thin shield being broken by repeated hits from Thanos strength hits using his infinity blade. Which isn't really a low point for vibranium, it's a very high point for Thanos and his blade.

Now you, how durable are Red Hulk's bones? Prove they're stronger than vibranium. You ignored the word,"filtered".

1. Prove that he stabbed through filtered vibranium.
2. Prove how durable filtered vibranium actually is.

Stop committing the fallacy of assuming filtered vibranium is as strong as pure or raw vibranium. It's obviously weaker, given that pure vibranium pierced right through it - assuming you've even proven point number 1..

When you argue from bias, you tend to ignore key words that, when removed, completely change the meaning of what was said.

I literally gave you an example of how strong refined vibranium is using Cap's shield above you clown It took Thanos hitting it over and over with his blade to break some.

As for the spear, it's cut and stabbed through Wakandan ships and the Black Panther suit, both made of vibranium. Wakandan's using vibranium as their metal is kinda a basic MCU thing you should know.

Now, how strong are Red Hulk's bones? Prove they're stronger than vibranium. Go.

Is this where we're at now,,,,,trying to prove how strong a fantasy metal (two different forms even) and a fantasy creatures bones are and then comparing them?

Just trying to save the forum 5 pages of H1's idiotic calculations and examples.

Originally posted by tkitna
Is this where we're at now,,,,,trying to prove how strong a fantasy metal (two different forms even) and a fantasy creatures bones are and then comparing them?

Just trying to save the forum 5 pages of H1's idiotic calculations and examples.

No know what, you're absolutely correct.

Originally posted by tkitna
Is this where we're at now,,,,,trying to prove how strong a fantasy metal (two different forms even) and a fantasy creatures bones are and then comparing them?

Just trying to save the forum 5 pages of H1's idiotic calculations and examples. This website has a forum where that's all a group of virgins do.

I thought the trident was made of pure vibranium?

Namor's spear is pure vibranium yes. Like a carved, solid chunk. While the Panther Habit is a vibranium weave, otherwise T'Challa, T'Chaka, Killmonger, and Shuri wouldn't be able to move in it. While Sam's suit is a weave as well and his wings are like a flexible plating and the shield is a solid chunk.

As Ultron said "the most versatile element in the world", meaning it can be made into the solid heavy plating for a ship, a thin weave mess for a body suit or the bio-synthetic mix of Vision's body. Regardless, it's ridiculously durable.

Originally posted by Robtard
I literally gave you an example of how strong refined vibranium is using Cap's shield above you clown It took Thanos hitting it over and over with his blade to break some.

As for the spear, it's cut and stabbed through Wakandan ships and the Black Panther suit, both made of vibranium. Wakandan's using vibranium as their metal is kinda a basic MCU thing you should know.

Now, how strong are Red Hulk's bones? Prove they're stronger than vibranium. Go.

Cap's shield is made of pure vibranium.

Wakandan ships, as you assume, are made of a vibranium alloy - a mixture of vibranium and other materials. That's what I meant by "filtered" vibranium.

Black Panther's suit is also a blend of vibranium and other materials, designed for flexibility and weaving. It's not pure vibranium, making it weaker by comparison.

Thanos' sword is made of an unknown metal, so it has no relevance to this argument.

The fact remains: a vibranium spear pierced both a Wakandan ship and vibranium weave. This confirms that both are weaker than pure vibranium. Exactly how much weaker is unknown, but you can't apply the durability feats of Cap's shield to Wakandan ships.

There's no need to resort to insults. Just give effective rebuttals instead.

Originally posted by tkitna
Is this where we're at now,,,,,trying to prove how strong a fantasy metal (two different forms even) and a fantasy creatures bones are and then comparing them?

Just trying to save the forum 5 pages of H1's idiotic calculations and examples. He claimed that Namor can stab through Rulk's skull. He needs to prove it, considering Rulk's skull is significantly more durable than his skin, which is already far stronger than the toughest steel.

I don't know about you, but we prove these type of things comparing top feats.

Interesting how your methods of debate change between threads there H1. 30 to 50 tone strength for upgrade Predator because reasons, yet dies to the equivalent of a hand grenade and a few 9mm pistol rounds. Now you're giving someone the benefit of the doubt to the skull of Rulk against a dude literally in the same strength class as him, wielding a spear....

it is precisely this kind of logic that makes everyone who talks to you ask the question "Why are you drinking the wakckazaid out of a clown shoe?"

Originally posted by h1a8
He claimed that Namor can stab through Rulk's skull. He needs to prove it, considering Rulk's skull is significantly more durable than his skin, which is already far stronger than the toughest steel.

I don't know about you, but we prove these type of things comparing top feats.

You realize Sam was cutting and impaling Rulk with his vibranium wings right?

Now the question is, can Rulk grab and break Namor's spear? He tore Sam's vibranium wing pretty easily

Originally posted by KingD19
You realize Sam was cutting and impaling Rulk with his vibranium wings right?
Yup. I realized that on day one of the thread. Thanks for making sure I knew that.
Anyway
Skin=/=Skull bone

Skull bone is many times more durable than skin.

Originally posted by h1a8
He claimed that Namor can stab through Rulk's skull. He needs to prove it, considering Rulk's skull is significantly more durable than his skin, which is already far stronger than the toughest steel.

I don't know about you, but we prove these type of things comparing top feats.

But this is where common sense should automatically kick in. If Sam could pierce the Red Hulk with wings of a weaker vibranium then why wouldn't a character with significantly more strength and speed with a weapon of pure vibranium not be able to?

It's that easy. Really it is.

(And here we go with the whole flesh isn't bone crap for 5 more pages)

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Just because you discount them, doesn't mean they cease to exist or stop being relevant. You either take the bad with the good, or you cease the debate, becaus eyou are not one who gets to dictate what is or isnt relevant evidence.

I debate and compare the highest showings, as most do here. We stick to this approach to avoid biased cherry-picking.

Cherry-picking can easily change the outcome of many fights.
It's also impossible to reach a consensus when using contradictory showings. A character is either at the level of the low showing or they are at the level at the high showing. They can't be both. For example, a character can't be both bulletproof and not bulletproof at the same time.

If you disagree with this approach, that's fine. But if you want to debate me, know that this is the standard I'll be using.

Originally posted by tkitna
But this is where common sense should automatically kick in. If Sam could pierce the Red Hulk with wings of a weaker vibranium then why wouldn't a character with significantly more strength and speed with a weapon of pure vibranium not be able to?

It's that easy. Really it is.

(And here we go with the whole flesh isn't bone crap for 5 more pages)

Skull bone is vastly more durable than skin.
All we have is Rulk's skin being cut by vibranium powered by a device.

You are defeating your own argument by saying, And here we go with the whole flesh isn't bone crap

How is is crap? It's the truth.

Originally posted by tkitna
But this is where common sense should automatically kick in. If Sam could pierce the Red Hulk with wings of a weaker vibranium then why wouldn't a character with significantly more strength and speed with a weapon of pure vibranium not be able to?

It's that easy. Really it is.

(And here we go with the whole flesh isn't bone crap for 5 more pages)

Surely it is then simple?

Bone needs about 10x more energy to cut compared to skin (let's assume Rulk's skin and bones are relatively the same i.e. when human Harrison Ford becomes Rulk, his skin and bones both amp up).

Is Namor more than 10x stronger than Sam Wilson?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85

Is Namor more than 10x stronger than Sam Wilson?

Yeah it's not hard.

Originally posted by h1a8
I debate and compare the highest showings, as most do here. We stick to this approach to avoid biased cherry-picking.

Cherry-picking can easily change the outcome of many fights.
It's also impossible to reach a consensus when using contradictory showings. A character is either at the level of the low showing or they are at the level at the high showing. They can't be both. For example, a character can't be both bulletproof and not bulletproof at the same time.

If you disagree with this approach, that's fine. But if you want to debate me, know that this is the standard I'll be using.

And you'd be wrong, and have been wrong on this assumption since the very beginning. But beyond that, you are wrong. You cherry-pick only the highest showings for the side you debate for, but not always the side you debate against. Example, the T-X's legs. You cherry-picked that as it's best durability feat when it's not, and you discounted the RPG-7 hit, which put her durability beyond that of the Ultimate Predator, who lost limbs to less powerful explosions under the false assumption that you thought it took more damage from other sources.

And that is why cherry-picking both highs and lows doesn't work in a vacuum. You take the whole as a whole and debate from there. You find the consistency not just the highball, and you work from there. It is why most people disagree with your assessments, because they know it's cherry-picked nonsense. It's why your 30mm Gatling gun ammunition calculation assumption was utter bullshit, because we had actual factual numbers to prove you wrong.

And you'd again be wrong, because you don't get to decide that in a vacuum, only the thread-starter decides that kind of scrutiny. If you want to debate solely with your own metrics, make the damn threads yourself, instead of hijacking ones others have made.

Originally posted by h1a8
Cap's shield is made of pure vibranium.

Wakandan ships, as you assume, are made of a vibranium alloy - a mixture of vibranium and other materials. That's what I meant by "filtered" vibranium.

Black Panther's suit is also a blend of vibranium and other materials, designed for flexibility and weaving. It's not pure vibranium, making it weaker by comparison.

Thanos' sword is made of an unknown metal, so it has no relevance to this argument.

The fact remains: a vibranium spear pierced both a Wakandan ship and vibranium weave. This confirms that both are weaker than pure vibranium. Exactly how much weaker is unknown, but you can't apply the durability feats of Cap's shield to Wakandan ships.

There's no need to resort to insults. Just give effective rebuttals instead.

BP's claws are made of vibranium and they damaged Cap's shied. So we know vibranium can damage vibranium.

Prove Wakandan ship exteriors are made of this "alloy" you invented and not vibranium? It's not like Wakanda has a shortage of the stuff.

You've dodge again in proving Red Hulk's skull is stronger than pure vibranium. Go on, prove it.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
And you'd be wrong, and have been wrong on this assumption since the very beginning. But beyond that, you are wrong. You cherry-pick only the highest showings for the side you debate for, but not always the side you debate against. Example, the T-X's legs. You cherry-picked that as it's best durability feat when it's not, and you discounted the RPG-7 hit, which put her durability beyond that of the ultimate Predator, who lost limbs to less powerful explosions under the false assumption that you thought it took more damage from other sources.

And that is why cherry-picking both highs and lows doesn't work in a vacuum. You take the whole as a whole and debate from there., you find the consistency not just the highball, and you work from there. it is my most people disagree with your assessments, because they know it's cherry-picked nonsense. It's why your 30mm Gatling gun ammunition calculation assumption was utter bullshit, because he had actual factual numbers to prove you wrong.

And you'd again be wrong, because you don't get to decide that in a vacuum, only the thread-starter decides that kind of scrutiny. If you want to debate solely with your own metrics, make the damn threads yourself, instead of hijacking ones others have.

When you're biased and not objective, you often miss key statements made by others.

I already addressed the RPG vs. her legs scene - there are no contradictions. She couldn't lift the helicopter off herself, so she chose to rip her legs free. The RPG never struck her leg joints. In fact, it seemed to do significant damage to her shoulder. So the claim that it didn't damage her isn't true.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Surely it is then simple?

Bone needs about 10x more energy to cut compared to skin (let's assume Rulk's skin and bones are relatively the same i.e. when human Harrison Ford becomes Rulk, his skin and bones both amp up).

Is Namor more than 10x stronger than Sam Wilson?
It was the motor in the backpack wings, not Sam's strength. This same motor was responsible for generating enough stopping force to stop Rulk's full swing (bad writing since Sam's hands and forearm should have been shattered in the process).

Then there's the issue of assuming pure vibranium is as strong as Rulk's bones.

We know that Rulk's skin is comparable to Black Panther's armor when it comes to feats of conventional weaponry (armor-piercing bullets, explosions, etc.), meaning both are significantly stronger than steel.

For a material to cut through something (with sufficient force) and not just scratch or leave marks, it needs to be AT LEAST slightly harder than the material it's cutting through.

So, pure vibranium is at least a little tougher than Rulk's skin - that much is clear. But since bone, especially skull bone, is vastly tougher than skin, we can't say for sure that pure vibranium is stronger than Rulk's skull bone without actual feats to compare and prove it.

Originally posted by Robtard
BP's claws are made of vibranium and they damaged Cap's shied. So we know vibranium can damage vibranium.

Prove Wakandan ship exteriors are made of this "alloy" you invented and not vibranium? It's not like Wakanda has a shortage of the stuff.

You've dodge again in proving Red Hulk's skull is stronger than pure vibranium. Go on, prove it. The claws may have scratched Cap's shield, or they may have only scratched the coating. That scene needs a closer examination.

Assuming the claws actually scratched the shield itself and not just the coating, materials of equal hardness can leave marks on each other, but that doesn't mean you could take a steel sword and stab through a steel shield. The sword would bend or break before that could happen.

Originally posted by h1a8
When you're biased and not objective, you often miss key statements made by others.

I already addressed the RPG vs. her legs scene - there are no contradictions. She couldn't lift the helicopter off herself, so she chose to rip her legs free. The RPG never struck her leg joints. In fact, it seemed to do significant damage to her shoulder. So the claim that it didn't damage her isn't true.

Originally posted by h1a8
In fact, it seemed to do significant damage to her shoulder. So the claim that it didn't damage her isn't true.

Originally posted by h1a8
significant damage to her shoulder.

That entire sequence of "significant damage"

Damage she instantly heals from if there was damage at all beyond the delicate externals of the plasma cannon. Lets add a machine healing factor to her abilities.

VS

Apparently not significant damage...?

Remind me again who does not cherry pick the low ends? Mr. "Oh her legs broke from not being able to lift a helicopter" h1a8.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you... Mr. "I don't do low ends" himself, h1a8.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
That entire sequence of "significant damage"

Damage she instantly heals from if there was damage at all beyond the delicate externals of the plasma cannon. Lets add a machine healing factor to her abilities.

VS

Apparently not significant damage...?

Remind me again who does not cherry pick the low ends? Mr. "Oh her legs broke from not being able to lift a helicopter" h1a8.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you... Mr. "I don't do low ends" himself, h1a8.

I don't understand your point. Yes, she can heal from damage. And?

Are you putting words in my mouth? I never said that.

I already explained that I don't cherry-pick showings that contradict higher feats, and you haven't proven otherwise. If you want to continue this discussion about U Predator and T-X, take it to the other thread instead of derailing this one.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't understand your point. Yes, she can heal from damage. And?

Yes, heal so instantly as to be rendered absolutely pointless.

Originally posted by h1a8
Are you putting words in my mouth? I never said that.

Originally posted by h1a8
Its joints aren't as strong, as it was trapped under a 3.5-5 ton Chopa and had to rip its own legs off to escape instead of lifting the Chopa off. If it had the strength to tear itself apart, then so does the UP.

Wanna try again champ?

Originally posted by h1a8
I already explained that I don't cherry-pick showings that contradict higher feats, and you haven't proven otherwise. If you want to continue this discussion about U Predator and T-X, take it to the other thread instead of derailing this one.

It is literally the debating pattern you take in every thread, I'm explaining your pattern, don't blame me for exposing your double standards.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Yes, heal so instantly as to be rendered absolutely pointless.





Wanna try again champ?



It is literally the debating pattern you take in every thread, I'm explaining your pattern, don't blame me for exposing your double standards. I still don't see your point. Where is the double standard? Where is the cherry picking of contradictory feats?Break it down for me very simply.

This thread is not about the T-X...

Originally posted by h1a8
It was the motor in the backpack wings, not Sam's strength. This same motor was responsible for generating enough stopping force to stop Rulk's full swing (bad writing since Sam's hands and forearm should have been shattered in the process).

Then there's the issue of assuming pure vibranium is as strong as Rulk's bones.

We know that Rulk's skin is comparable to Black Panther's armor when it comes to feats of conventional weaponry (armor-piercing bullets, explosions, etc.), meaning both are significantly stronger than steel.

For a material to cut through something (with sufficient force) and not just scratch or leave marks, it needs to be AT LEAST slightly harder than the material it's cutting through.

So, pure vibranium is at least a little tougher than Rulk's skin - that much is clear. But since bone, especially skull bone, is vastly tougher than skin, we can't say for sure that pure vibranium is stronger than Rulk's skull bone without actual feats to compare and prove it.

It takes 10x as much energy to cut through skull bone as it is to cut skin.

Sam cut Rulk's skin.

He would need 10x that amount of energy to cut through Rulk's skull, assuming things being equal (his wings aren't razor sharp, Vs a spear designed purely for stabbing, but nobody seems to acknowledge that).

I reckon Namor can output 10x what Sam did, and if we allow the points of a stabbing weapon to have a smaller surface area than that of a wing's edge, he would need even less than 10x what Sam output.

Originally posted by h1a8
To a trained eye, these feats appear to generate less than 100 tons of force -.

What kind of rigorous training does one need to go through exactly?

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
What kind of rigorous training does one need to go through exactly? Calculus based Physics 1 with an A grade along with at least 100 problems done, taught, or tutored.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
It takes 10x as much energy to cut through skull bone as it is to cut skin.

Sam cut Rulk's skin.

He would need 10x that amount of energy to cut through Rulk's skull, assuming things being equal (his wings aren't razor sharp, Vs a spear designed purely for stabbing, but nobody seems to acknowledge that).

I reckon Namor can output 10x what Sam did, and if we allow the points of a stabbing weapon to have a smaller surface area than that of a wing's edge, he would need even less than 10x what Sam output.

I replied yesterday with this :

Originally posted by h1a8
It was the motor in the backpack wings, not Sam's strength. This same motor was responsible for generating enough stopping force to stop Rulk's full swing (bad writing since Sam's hands and forearm should have been shattered in the process).


You need to prove that Namor can generate at least 10 times the force of the motors powering the wings (Sam wasn't using his human strength). I even provided a feat for the motors in that post, as shown above.

Also, slashing is much easier than stabbing. A sharp knife can cut bone with a slashing motion, but stabbing completely through would be far more difficult.

Yeah I ignored it because, as you say, it was bad writing.

A key word though is a 'sharp' knife. His wings aren't sharp knives, they're wings.

Any other feats for the wings, without using an example of bad writing?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Yeah I ignored it because, as you say, it was bad writing.

A key word though is a 'sharp' knife. His wings aren't sharp knives, they're wings.

Any other feats for the wings, without using an example of bad writing?

The wings aren't sharp?
1. "Sharp" is a vague term and subjective. What seems sharp to you might not be sharp to someone else. Even a sheet of paper or a so-called "dull" knife can cut.
2. Nothing in fiction prevents wings from being sharp and used as weapons. I'm pretty sure there is another example where fictional wings are intended and shown to also function as cutting weapons.
3. The issue with the writing isn't the strength of the motor of the wings but that Sam's hands remained uninjured. The intent was that the motor in the wings generated enough force to counter Rulk's strength.
4. Feats don't require validation from other feats unless they drastically contradict all other showings. The motor forcing the wings to cut Rulk doesn't need additional feats to justify it. If the wings weren't sharp as you claim, the motor would have required exponentially more force to achieve the same effect, making the Steen the motor even more impressive.

^ Is Namor's spear not sharp ?!

Are Rulk's bones substantially harder than Vibranium ?!

Is Namor not substantially stronger than the motor in Sam's wings?!

Do you just IGNORE Director's intentions on implied strength when it suits you? Do you prefer to make up your own writer's intention?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^

1. Is Namor's spear not sharp ?!

2 Are Rulk's bones substantially harder than Vibranium ?!

3. Is Namor not substantially stronger than the motor in Sam's wings?!

4. Do you just IGNORE Director's intentions on implied strength when it suits you? Do you prefer to make up your own writer's intention?

1. It's sharp IMO. No one is arguing otherwise. We were referring to the wings.
2. Not necessarily, but they can be peers.
3. He isn't
4. There was no intentions in the plot of the movie that Namor is as strong as Hulk. I gave valid reasons why post interviews on "whose stronger" is not valid or Canon.

Originally posted by h1a8


As for outside statements and interviews:
1. A writer's opinion can change AFTER a film is completed, or they might even LIE (they're human) to promote a movie.

2. A producer of one film doesn't have artistic control over a character from another film, produced by someone else. Feige could very well believe Hulk is significantly stronger than Namor.

3. Statements mean nothing when they contradict on-screen showings, even if those statements come from within the movie itself.

4. "MOVIE FEATS ONLY!" - that's the rule here.

Originally posted by h1a8

3. He isn't


LMAO



Originally posted by h1a8
4. There was no intentions in the plot of the movie that Namor is as strong as Hulk. I gave valid reasons why post interviews on "whose stronger" is not valid or Canon.


Not only was it stated by the director, but also mentioned in the film. So that's clearly the writer's intention.

Your opinion is what's not canon.

Rulk should win this on paper, but on screen if he lost to Falcon then I don't see him winning against Namor without any kind of water-restriction for Namor.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
LMAO






Not only was it stated by the director, but also mentioned in the film. So that's clearly the writer's intention.

Your opinion is what's not canon.

Good. It was addressed in the interview (commentary), not in the actual film. The commentary was created after the film was.

Now address the 1st point. Then point 2. And then point 3.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Rulk should win this on paper, but on screen if he lost to Falcon then I don't see him winning against Namor without any kind of water-restriction for Namor. He didn't lose to Falcon - he just calmed down and chose not to kill him.

Everyone agrees Namor wins with the spear. Personally, I've got him taking it 6/10

"Namor is as strong as Hulk" -Director

"Namor is as strong as Hulk." -Film character

Conclusion: Namor is not as strong as Hulk, nor is this the writer's intent durpoop

I wanna know why H1 is stuck up on Namor stabbing Rulk in the skull. All of his organs are in the same place as a human, and just like Hulk, he hasn't shown a significant healing factor like Ang Lee Hulk. He can be stabbed in the heart or plenty of other places to mess him up and slow him down.

Also what everybody else has said ad infinitum and h1 has ignored because it's not what he wants.

I initially said Namor wins via spear through the head, but yes, spear through the heart would be an insta-kill too.

Originally posted by Robtard
I initially said Namor wins via spear through the head, but yes, spear through the heart would be an insta-kill too.

Originally posted by h1a8


As for outside statements and interviews:
1. A writer's opinion can change AFTER a film is completed, or they might even LIE (they're human) to promote a movie.

2. A producer of one film doesn't have artistic control over a character from another film, produced by someone else. Feige could very well believe Hulk is significantly stronger than Namor.

3. Statements mean nothing when they contradict on-screen showings, even if those statements come from within the movie itself.

4. "MOVIE FEATS ONLY!" - that's the rule here.


I guarantee that you and Robtard will troll, ignore every point I made, and just repeat your argument with slightly different wording.

That tells me two things:
1. My argument is too strong to be easily refuted.
2. I've already won the debate.

Originally posted by KingD19
I wanna know why H1 is stuck up on Namor stabbing Rulk in the skull. All of his organs are in the same place as a human, and just like Hulk, he hasn't shown a significant healing factor like Ang Lee Hulk. He can be stabbed in the heart or plenty of other places to mess him up and slow him down.

Also what everybody else has said ad infinitum and h1 has ignored because it's not what he wants.

That's why I said Namor will win 6/10. The thread was derailed by BS claims that Namor can stab through Rulk's skull and that Namor is as strong as the Hulk.

Note: Rulk can win 4/10 due to Rulk sometimes being able to beat the shit out of Namor without Namor being allowed to land a vital strike.

Funny thing is you actually think you're clever there. My argument never changed, I think Namor wins via spear through the head, but I also agree with KingD that a spear through the heart will be just as effective.

Originally posted by Robtard
Funny thing is you actually think you're clever there. My argument never changed, I think Namor wins via spear through the head, but I also agree with KingD that a spear through the heart will be just as effective.

But you haven't proven that Namor can stab Rulk through the skull. You are only assuming it.

Also, do you think that Namor can stab through Cap's shield (1 attempt)?

Originally posted by h1a8

Also, do you think that Namor can stab through Cap's shield (1 attempt)?

Good question, but if Panthers claws could actually scratch it, I would think a character with a sharp, purer form of vibranium and immense strength should be able to stab through it.

Originally posted by tkitna
Good question, but if Panthers claws could actually scratch it, I would think a character with a sharp, purer form of vibranium and immense strength should be able to stab through it.

BP's claws didn't scratch the shield itself - they only scratched the outer coating. I just rewatched the scene in slow motion, and there was absolutely no damage to the shield.

It would be unreasonable to believe Namor could stab through Cap's shield in a single strike when Thor and Rulk, using all their might with Mjolnir, couldn't even dent it.

Originally posted by h1a8
BP's claws didn't scratch the shield itself - they only scratched the outer coating. I just rewatched the scene in slow motion, and there was absolutely no damage to the shield.

It would be unreasonable to believe Namor could stab through Cap's shield in a single strike when Thor and Rulk, using all their might with Mjolnir, couldn't even dent it.

Well we really don't know the durability properties of Mjolnir compared to vibranium. Hela crushed the hammer. Could she do that with vibranium? Mjolnir is a blunt force object too compared to Namors spear. Also, doesn't Caps shield have concussive properties that repels blunt force?

Again, not debating as nothing can be proved, but just stating some opinions.

Thanos cut through Cap's shield which according to the Russo's was likely Uru metal (same as Mjolnir, but clearly not under Thor's control). Although tbf that could be more due to Thanos's strength.

Namor sliced through Vibranium ships. No reason to think he couldn't cut through Cap's shield, given he has the same metal as a weapon and clealry tremendous strength.

Someone will say that the ships are of a weaker "vibranium alloy", which they never proved.

Apparently Wakanda has a vibranium shortage where they need to make the hulls of their ships not pure refined vibranium.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Thanos cut through Cap's shield which according to the Russo's was likely Uru metal (same as Mjolnir, but clearly not under Thor's control). Although tbf that could be more due to Thanos's strength.

Namor sliced through Vibranium ships. No reason to think he couldn't cut through Cap's shield, given he has the same metal as a weapon and clealry tremendous strength.

What Thanos did is irrelevant since his sword was made of a metal stronger than Cap's shield.

Namor slicing through the ships directly proves they're less durable than his spear and Cap's shield.


Originally posted by Robtard
Someone will say that the ships are of a weaker "vibranium alloy", which they never proved.

Apparently Wakanda has a vibranium shortage where they need to make the hulls of their ships not pure refined vibranium.

Vibranium alloy ≠ Cap's shield, which is pure vibranium.

What the ships were made of is irrelevant (we actually don't know) - since they're clearly weaker than the spear and Cap's shield.

Or you know, vibranium can destroy vibranium if there's a significant amount of force behind the attack. Maybe someone with strength level comparable to the Hulk's. *mind blown*

No, it's not irrelevant, as Namor destroying them with his spear is a high-end feat, as Wakandan ships are made of vibranium. You want it to be irrelevant because it counters your clown arguments.

Originally posted by Robtard
Or you know, vibranium can destroy vibranium if there's a significant amount of force behind the attack. Maybe someone with strength level comparable to the Hulk's. *mind blown*

No, it's not irrelevant, as Namor destroying them with his spear is a high-end feat, as Wakandan ships are made of vibranium. You want it to be irrelevant because it counters your clown arguments.

No material can stab through another of equal durability without being greatly damaged or destroyed in the process. That's not just basic science - it's common sense.

I explained why it's irrelevant, and instead of addressing my reasoning, you just replied like a stubborn child, "No, it's not irrelevant," without offering an actual rebuttal.

As for the ships - we don't know what they're made of. The movies never state or imply their composition. It's reasonable to assume they're made of either no vibranium at all or a vibranium-based composite alloy that's weaker than pure vibranium.

So supposedly Wakandan's got cheap on their vibranium usage when it came to their military vessels?


Originally posted by Robtard


No, it's not irrelevant, as Namor destroying them with his spear is a high-end feat, as Wakandan ships are made of vibranium.


Don't forget the ease with which he was chucking them around!

Originally posted by Robtard
Or you know, vibranium can destroy vibranium if there's a significant amount of force behind the attack. Maybe someone with strength level comparable to the Hulk's. *mind blown*

No, it's not irrelevant, as Namor destroying them with his spear is a high-end feat, as Wakandan ships are made of vibranium. You want it to be irrelevant because it counters your clown arguments.

Pretty sure T'challa wrecked a ship with a Vibranium spear too back in the first movie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d09lpHURU4o&t=29s

Vibranium supply isn't infinite. They aren't going to make every single ship out of it. At least one wouldn't think so.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
So supposedly Wakandan's got cheap on their vibranium usage when it came to their military vessels?





Don't forget the ease with which he was chucking them around!

This is fiction - none of it actually happened. If the writer intended the ships to be as durable as Cap's shield, then he wouldn't have shown BP easily throwing a spear through one or Namor effortlessly stabbing into one. After all, the same writer made it clear that vibranium claws couldn't even scratch Cap's shield.

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Pretty sure T'challa wrecked a ship with a Vibranium spear too back in the first movie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d09lpHURU4o&t=29s

If two vibranium objects hit each other, wouldn't they just bounce off really hard?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
So supposedly Wakandan's got cheap on their vibranium usage when it came to their military vessels?


Don't forget the ease with which he was chucking them around!


It's the only natural conclusion. Save the pure vibranium for cups and forks.

Anyhow, Namor's stabbing Red Hulk through the skull with his spear, if he wants. h1 has yet to prove this can't can't happen.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's the only natural conclusion. Save the pure vibranium for cups and forks.

Anyhow, Namor's stabbing Red Hulk through the skull with his spear, if he wants. h1 has yet to prove this can't can't happen.

Stabbing Rulk through the skull qualifies as a special attribute to be proven, given that:

1. He jumped through the White House, smashing through multiple layers of stone and granite weighing many tons.

2. He completely demolished two government buildings (constructed from stone/granite and reinforced materials) using a thunderclap from over 100 yards away.

The force required to level those two full-sized government buildings from that distance is astronomically high - easily in the minimum of thousands of tons. Yet his hands, which are structurally weaker than his skull and also which endured many times greater force than those buildings did (since the buildings only experienced the diluted residual force that his hands experienced), remained completely undamaged.

For the slow:
The buildings endured a minimum of thousands of tons of collateral force - and not the direct impact force that Rulk's hands absorbed (which is many times more than what the buildings received). And those hands are structurally weaker than his skull.

For the super slow:
Imagine two strong men swinging sledgehammers at full strength and smashing them together. The resulting shockwave barely rustles a nearby piece of paper. The force the sledgehammers absorb (Rulk's hands) is vastly greater than what the paper experiences (the residual force that hit the buildings). And remember: his hands are less durable than his skull.

Originally posted by h1a8
It was the motor in the backpack wings, not Sam's strength. This same motor was responsible for generating enough stopping force to stop Rulk's full swing (bad writing since Sam's hands and forearm should have been shattered in the process).

Then there's the issue of assuming pure vibranium is as strong as Rulk's bones.

We know that Rulk's skin is comparable to Black Panther's armor when it comes to feats of conventional weaponry (armor-piercing bullets, explosions, etc.), meaning both are significantly stronger than steel.

For a material to cut through something (with sufficient force) and not just scratch or leave marks, it needs to be AT LEAST slightly harder than the material it's cutting through.

So, pure vibranium is at least a little tougher than Rulk's skin - that much is clear. But since bone, especially skull bone, is vastly tougher than skin, we can't say for sure that pure vibranium is stronger than Rulk's skull bone without actual feats to compare and prove it.

Just rewatched. It wasn't the motor in the wings in the first instance.

Then normal pistol bullets were leaving weals on his skin.

Then his feathers were piercing Rulk.

Then Cap kicked one of these feathers deeper into Rulk, without any motor assistance.

Namor wins.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Just rewatched. It wasn't the motor in the wings in the first instance.

Then normal pistol bullets were leaving weals on his skin.

Then his feathers were piercing Rulk.

Then Cap kicked one of these feathers deeper into Rulk, without any motor assistance.

Namor wins.

My man (in Denzel's voice).

Any contradictory evidence against a low showing - especially overwhelming evidence - invalidates the low showing.

I don't recall seeing any damage from pistol shots. Red Hulk tanked 20mm cannon shells without any damage and withstood at least tens of thousands of tons of force to his skin without injury when he struck himself to generate a shockwave that delivered at least that much force. Therefore, the pistol showing is dismissed.

The motor inside the backpack controls the movement of the wings, so it was the motor that applied the force.

Once a material is cut, it becomes compromised and easier to cut through. Cap only kicked it in less than half an inch - a small, negligible amount.

With that said, Rulk either one-shots Namor with a thunderclap or outright kills him with a single strike - since the strike would be astronomically more powerful than the shockwave generated by the thunderclap.

It was with a sideswipe of the wings, so that was with Sam's arms.

You also forgot the metal darts that he shot. And rewatch the scenes, you'll see bruises and marks every time he got shot.

Prove it gets compromised to the point a normal powered human can move it half an inch - he was kicking it into 'fresh' body tissue, which should still be incredibly dense/durable.

Also, you aren't using the Denzel meme correctly.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85

Also, you aren't using the Denzel meme correctly.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
It was with a sideswipe of the wings, so that was with Sam's arms.

You also forgot the metal darts that he shot. And rewatch the scenes, you'll see bruises and marks every time he got shot.

Prove it gets compromised to the point a normal powered human can move it half an inch - he was kicking it into 'fresh' body tissue, which should still be incredibly dense/durable.

Also, you aren't using the Denzel meme correctly.

The wings were moved by the motor in the backpack, the same motor that operates them during flight.

I didn't say half an inch, I said LESS THAN half an inch. In reality, it didn't look like any measurable amount was pushed in. Obviously, there was some movement, but it was too small to visually detect. It's well within the suspension of disbelief that a human could kick a vibranium dart in by a tiny, unnoticeable amount.

If you disagree, my other point still holds:
Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence - invalidates a low showing.

Denzel, playing the role of Frank Lucas in American Gangster, clearly said the exact words "My man!" multiple times. You're clearly mistaken on that point.

Edit: I still don't see any bruises on Rulk after he was shot. But even if I'm mistaken and there were some, my point still stands:
Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence - invalidates a low showing.

Damn dude is such an utter troll.

Originally posted by h1a8
The wings were moved by the motor in the backpack, the same motor that operates them during flight.

I didn't say half an inch, I said LESS THAN half an inch. In reality, it didn't look like any measurable amount was pushed in. Obviously, there was some movement, but it was too small to visually detect. It's well within the suspension of disbelief that a human could kick a vibranium dart in by a tiny, unnoticeable amount.

If you disagree, my other point still holds:
Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence - invalidates a low showing.

Denzel, playing the role of Frank Lucas in American Gangster, clearly said the exact words "My man!" multiple times. You're clearly mistaken on that point.

I didn't question your quote. I questioned the usage/context of it.

Again, it was with the side swipe, and the stopping was also provided by the vibranium - so not equivalent.

It wasn't a tiny, unnoticeable amount though? As Rulk screamed in pain.

What 'overwhelming' evidence have you provided? Because I have shown vibranium darts clearly piercing his flesh and lodging in him. A vibranium spear would be much deadlier.

In any case, you have already conceded that Namor would win, so no need for me to go further as I have won again.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85


1. I didn't question your quote. I questioned the usage/context of it.

2. Again, it was with the side swipe, and the stopping was also provided by the vibranium - so not equivalent.

3. It wasn't a tiny, unnoticeable amount though? As Rulk screamed in pain.

What 'overwhelming' evidence have you provided? Because I have shown vibranium darts clearly piercing his flesh and lodging in him. A vibranium spear would be much deadlier.

4. In any case, you have already conceded that Namor would win, so no need for me to go further as I have won again.

1. The quote was simply because I was glad you joined the debate, nothing more.

2. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say with that.

3. I had a glass splinter lodged in my finger a week ago. When I touched it and it penetrated just a tiny bit deeper, I yelled in pain. Have you ever experienced something like that?

4. I never claimed Namor couldn't stab through Rulk and win. I acknowledged that possibility from the start. The tangent debate between me and Robtard was specifically about whether Namor could stab through Rulk's skull. He thinks he can, I think he can't.

Note: Initially, I gave Namor the win because of the spear, but I had forgotten about Rulk's thunderclap feat. That completely changed my view. Rulk would now absolutely stomp Namor.

2. The part about vibranium, was to do with this comment:

Originally posted by h1a8
It was the motor in the backpack wings, not Sam's strength. This same motor was responsible for generating enough stopping force to stop Rulk's full swing (bad writing since Sam's hands and forearm should have been shattered in the process)..

It wasn't the motor that stopped Rulk's punch. It was the vibranium:
https://giphy.com/gifs/Ej2GzawdZKogrEff3F

When Sam first cut Rulk, he just flew past:
https://giphy.com/gifs/QQzfwrkflKRu5QleIX

When Rulk jumped on his wing, he impaled himself. That shows waaay less than the force you are suggesting is needed to cut him:
https://giphy.com/gifs/vG4o11lT45TOQLgFbo

All Sam did was hold his wing out, and he fell on it. You can assume a high end mass to him if you like, and try and calculate a speed that a falling Rulk has, if you want.

And as I said before, it only takes ~10x more energy to pierce a skull vs skin, and I am pretty sure Namor would be able to output 10x the force of those feathers/Rulk landing on a wing.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85

1. It wasn't the motor that stopped Rulk's punch. It was the vibranium:
https://giphy.com/gifs/Ej2GzawdZKogrEff3F

2. When Sam first cut Rulk, he just flew past:
https://giphy.com/gifs/QQzfwrkflKRu5QleIX

3. When Rulk jumped on his wing, he impaled himself. That shows waaay less than the force you are suggesting is needed to cut him:
https://giphy.com/gifs/vG4o11lT45TOQLgFbo

4. All Sam did was hold his wing out, and he fell on it. You can assume a high end mass to him if you like, and try and calculate a speed that a falling Rulk has, if you want.

5. And as I said before, it only takes ~10x more energy to pierce a skull vs skin, and I am pretty sure Namor would be able to output 10x the force of those feathers/Rulk landing on a wing.

1. I was referring to when Red Hulk swung the pole through solid concrete and Sam stopped it with the help of the thrust produced by the motor.
Exhibit A: Look at 1:15 to 1:18

CISv7xytBA0

Hence, flight strength is proven.

2. Flight strength is proven. Sam FLIES as he swipes Rulk with his wing.

3 and 4. The motor held the wing in place, not Sam's strength. Rulk also had a horizontal component to his motion from the power of his jump.

5. All these points are moot, even if Sam used his own strength to pierce Rulk.

Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence - invalidates a low showing.

Exhibit B: Look at 1:11 to 1:14 then read my quote that follows.

CISv7xytBA0


Originally posted by h1a8
Stabbing Rulk through the skull qualifies as a special attribute to be proven, given that:

2. He completely demolished two government buildings (constructed from stone/granite and reinforced materials) using a thunderclap from over 100 yards away.

The force required to level those two full-sized government buildings from that distance is astronomically high - easily in the minimum of thousands of tons. Yet his hands, which are structurally weaker than his skull and also which endured many times greater force than those buildings did (since the buildings only experienced the diluted residual force that his hands experienced), remained completely undamaged.

For the slow:
The buildings endured a minimum of thousands of tons of collateral force - and not the direct impact force that Rulk's hands absorbed (which is many times more than what the buildings received). And those hands are structurally weaker than his skull.

For the super slow:
Imagine two strong men swinging sledgehammers at full strength and smashing them together. The resulting shockwave barely rustles a nearby piece of paper. The force the sledgehammers absorb (Rulk's hands) is vastly greater than what the paper experiences (the residual force that hit the buildings). And remember: his hands are less durable than his skull.

Whilst Sam was in flight, there was no thrust shown from the motor (blue glow). So flight thrust is moot.

Then calculate the horizontal component of this jump.

This isn't a mere single low showing. EVERY time vibranium was involved (and I noticed that once more, you have ignored the vibranium dart feathers easily piercing Rulk), Rulk has been stabbed/slashed.

Namor has a spear of vibranium, backed up by Namor's strength AND his flight 'thrust', which would be concentrated over a single sharp point.

Skull tissue needs 10x more energy to pierce than skin.

Namor stabs Rulk in the skull, ending the fight.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
1. Whilst Sam was in flight, there was no thrust shown from the motor (blue glow). So flight thrust is moot.

2. Then calculate the horizontal component of this jump.

3. This isn't a mere single low showing. EVERY time vibranium was involved (and I noticed that once more, you have ignored the vibranium dart feathers easily piercing Rulk), Rulk has been stabbed/slashed.

4. Namor has a spear of vibranium, backed up by Namor's strength AND his flight 'thrust', which would be concentrated over a single sharp point.

Skull tissue needs 10x more energy to pierce than skin.

Namor stabs Rulk in the skull, ending the fight.

I see you didn't address all my points. The last one alone makes all your vibranium cutting arguments irrelevant. I addressed your points, one by one. Isn't that proper debating to prevent troll tactics?

1. Sam can't fly without thrust - he can only coast/glide. We cannot see the part of the backpack where the thrust would come out - the screen cuts it off - so it's speculation either way whether there was thrust or not. Assuming he coasted, the initial thrust already created his forward momentum. Think of a bullet fired from a gun: there's no more thrust once it leaves the barrel, yet it retains enough energy and momentum to penetrate objects.

2. I don't need to address that. We all know Rulk jumps with superhuman-level power.

3. I already addressed the darts in a previous post. They were shot out by a mechanical mechanism, not propelled by human strength.

4. Rulk's thunderclap feat contradicts any claim that he can be cut by vibranium through human-level force. Remember: Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence -invalidates a low showing.

5. Here's another argument against you: It's possible for vibranium to be less durable than Rulk's skull while still being more durable than his skin without contradicting any showings of him being cut by vibranium. Therefore, we must rely on feats to determine which is more durable. Rulk's thunderclap feat is greater than any durability feat shown by pure vibranium. Therefore, it is not a given that vibranium can stab through Rulk's skull with ANY amount of force.

Note: If you respond, please do not continue arguing the vibranium cutting evidence. Points 4 and 5 make that irrelevant. Those two points are the crux of the debate; anything else is just nitpicking.

Originally posted by h1a8
Points 4 and 5 make that irrelevant.


Maybe in your head.

You've not actually proven anything and are making poor rebuttals as usual.

ON SCREEN FEATS (which is what we go by here) clearly show Vibranium cuts through Hulk. Sure bones are harder, but Namor is infinitely stronger than Sam (or his wings thrusters lol).

Originally posted by h1a8
I see you didn't address all my points. The last one alone makes all your vibranium cutting arguments irrelevant. I addressed your points, one by one. Isn't that proper debating to prevent troll tactics?

1. Sam can't fly without thrust - he can only coast/glide. We cannot see the part of the backpack where the thrust would come out - the screen cuts it off - so it's speculation either way whether there was thrust or not. Assuming he coasted, the initial thrust already created his forward momentum. Think of a bullet fired from a gun: there's no more thrust once it leaves the barrel, yet it retains enough energy and momentum to penetrate objects.

2. I don't need to address that. We all know Rulk jumps with superhuman-level power.

3. I already addressed the darts in a previous post. They were shot out by a mechanical mechanism, not propelled by human strength.

4. Rulk's thunderclap feat contradicts any claim that he can be cut by vibranium through human-level force. Remember: Any contradictory evidence - especially overwhelming evidence -invalidates a low showing.

5. Here's another argument against you: It's possible for vibranium to be less durable than Rulk's skull while still being more durable than his skin without contradicting any showings of him being cut by vibranium. Therefore, we must rely on feats to determine which is more durable. Rulk's thunderclap feat is greater than any durability feat shown by pure vibranium. Therefore, it is not a given that vibranium can stab through Rulk's skull with ANY amount of force.

Note: If you respond, please do not continue arguing the vibranium cutting evidence. Points 4 and 5 make that irrelevant. Those two points are the crux of the debate; anything else is just nitpicking.

1. So assuming no more thrust, then it was less than what was shown when it was at full thrust. Additiionally, he was not at full speed, so even IF the thrusters were firing, it wasn't at full thrust. Namor can thus exceed this.

2. OK? But Namor can exceed this, and all he needs do is exceed the times Rulk was cut by vibranium by 10x, to stab through the head,

3. OK? I never said they were fired by human strength - poor attempt at a strawman.

4. It isn't a single instance of a low showing, however. EVERY time vibranium was involved, Rulk was cut. Originally posted by Darth Thor
Maybe in your head.

You've not actually proven anything and are making poor rebuttals as usual.

ON SCREEN FEATS (which is what we go by here) clearly show Vibranium cuts through Hulk. Sure bones are harder, but Namor is infinitely stronger than Sam (or his wings thrusters lol).

Namor is also stronger than the mechanical firing mechanisms in the wings.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Maybe in your head.

You've not actually proven anything and are making poor rebuttals as usual.

ON SCREEN FEATS (which is what we go by here) clearly show Vibranium cuts through Hulk. Sure bones are harder, but Namor is infinitely stronger than Sam (or his wings thrusters lol).

Just so you're aware, the debate is about whether Namor can stab through Rulk's skull, not who would win in a fight. I agree that Namor has a good chance to win by stabbing Rulk in a vital area. Outside of the that, Namor is phucked.

I'm glad we agree that feats are what matter. Based on feats, you need to prove the following:

1. That vibranium is stronger than Rulk's skull. I've already provided feats demonstrating the magnitude of his skull's durability; you need to provide feats that match or surpass that.


2. That Namor is significantly stronger than the wing motor, the same motor that was able to withstand the force of Rulk's strength.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
1. So assuming no more thrust, then it was less than what was shown when it was at full thrust. Additiionally, he was not at full speed, so even IF the thrusters were firing, it wasn't at full thrust. Namor can thus exceed this.

2. OK? But Namor can exceed this, and all he needs do is exceed the times Rulk was cut by vibranium by 10x, to stab through the head,

3. OK? I never said they were fired by human strength - poor attempt at a strawman.

4. It isn't a single instance of a low showing, however. EVERY time vibranium was involved, Rulk was cut.

Namor is also stronger than the mechanical firing mechanisms in the wings.

1. Movement speed alone, especially during contact, doesn't prove the strength of a thrust. For instance, Sam wasn't moving when the thrust countered Rulk's strength. Thrust generates acceleration, meaning initial speeds are always lower than later ones. It's the acceleration, not speed, that determines force. It's fair to say that Rulk is significantly stronger than Namor and that the full thrust matched Rulk's strength. So it would be difficult to prove that Namor can exceed 10 times even a partial 1/10 of that thrust.


2. There's no evidence that Namor can exceed 10x the strength of Rulk's jumping power, or 10x the force of any attack that has ever cut Rulk.


3. It's not a strawman. You're speculating that Namor can exceed 10x the strength of the mechanism with no supporting evidence. Also, sharpness plays a major role. For instance, if the wings or darts have an edge thickness 1/100 that of the spear, it would take 100 times more force with the spear to match their cutting ability.


4.
A. The instances of Rulk being cut are not necessarily low showings.
B. Contradictory high feats invalidate all low showings, regardless of how many there are.

5. This point stands, then. By feats, the durability of Rulk's skull matches or exceeds that of vibranium.

Originally posted by h1a8
I agree that Namor has a good chance to win by stabbing Rulk in a vital area. Outside of the that, Namor is phucked.


All you've demonstrated is how phucked you are in the head.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
All you've demonstrated is how phucked you are in the head.
You're entitled to your opinion. Honestly, some of these arguments are so silly they feel like they're making me dumber. Or maybe it's just your bias skewing your perception? DS, at least, seems to be making some solid points here and there.

Originally posted by h1a8
Honestly, some of these arguments are so silly they feel like they're making me dumber.

Your safe. Not possible.

Originally posted by h1a8
Or maybe it's just your bias skewing your perception? DS, at least, seems to be making some solid points here and there.


Good for him. You've made none. And your double standards (like imagining writer's intent, yet ignoring writers' statements to suit your argument) reeks of the the dumbest and most blatant bias.

At some point you have to wonder that if your arguments were so objective and rational why no one seems to agree with you (or even agree you're making a rational argument). Like ever.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Good for him. You've made none. And your double standards (like imagining writer's intent, yet ignoring writers' statements to suit your argument) reeks of the the dumbest and most blatant bias.

At some point you have to wonder that if your arguments were so objective and rational why no one seems to agree with you (or even agree you're making a rational argument). Like ever.

A writer's statements hold no weight if they contradict on-screen evidence.

Also, a single writer has zero artistic license to claim their character is just as strong as another character for several reasons, one being that the other character's writer may disagree. Opinions change after the fact, and people often exaggerate to promote movies, shows, etc.

Writer intent should be inferred from what's actually shown in the film, show, or comic.