Do the Marvel and Dc multiverses exist within the same creation?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So then everything that happens in comics must be proven with circular reasoning. The only evidence for any of it comes from within the comics themselves.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Libel. You're assuming that I mean to attack your character.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm bored 🙂

Originally posted by Creshosk
Because in comics is the only place where physics exist, so you cannot prove the possaiblity of things like gravity by using real world physics? Sorry I don't buy this dodge attempt.

I don't follow you.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Indirectly calling me a chicken is not an attack on my character? News to me.

You consider yourself a pedant?

I had no idea 😎

Originally posted by Creshosk
Well yeah I imagine that's the motivation for any of us even posting on this site in the first place. But what are you hoping to accomplish? Simply releaving the boredom?

Pretty much.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I don't follow you.

Like Wondra being a class 100 despite it never being stated on panel exactly how much she can lift. This is acheived by taking what she's lifting I.E. the freight train. and figureing out how much it weighs in the real world. In this case the model she was lifting was somewhere around 130~138 tons.

So this means that you don't HAVE to use in the comics information to prove claims about events that happen in the comics. In otherwords, no you don't have to use circular reaosning to prove things.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You consider yourself a pedant?

I had no idea 😎

Originally posted by Creshosk
You can prove things in comic books using information not solely contained in comic books.

Like Wondra being a class 100 despite it never being stated on panel exactly how much she can lift. This is acheived by taking what she's lifting I.E. the freight train. and figureing out how much it weighs in the real world. In this case the model she was lifting was somewhere around 130~138 tons.

So this means that you don't HAVE to use in the comics information to prove claims about events that happen in the comics. In otherwords, no you don't have to use circular reaosning to prove things.

Cool, but what happens when everything involved is fictional?

Originally posted by Creshosk
Your quote included "I'm a chicken" not "I'm a pendant". so this weak attempt at backpeddling fails.

I was asking you a question about pedants.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Cool, but what happens when everything involved is fictional?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was asking you a question about pedants.

Your attempt at backpeddling once again fails.

Originally posted by Creshosk

You're trying to use HIS words to justify HIS words.

Originally posted by Creshosk

Nothing logical about it. No valid arguments.
Keep trying you might finally grasp that straw you're after.

Originally posted by Creshosk

Do you have any valid logical evidence to use?
Or are you just going to keep using the circular reasoning appeal to authority of Marvel is right because Marvel says its right?

Concerning the term Omniverse,
I have to take Mark's example on this one friend.
Mark apparently was the Editor of an arc where the Omniverse was not only threatend,
but it was artistically depicted (as in illustrated)
and,
it lead to a proceeding arc,
where Galactus was in the process of absorbing said Omniverse.

Before there were some (perhaps yourself included)
that were saying Marvel just throws the term around.
Well, now we have Mark Gruenwald himself, involved in a Marvel arc,
where the term is not only used, but literally it's being put to action.
And it's being put to action in it's entirety (not a sector/section/or piece)
in it's entirety.

I don't know what more proof you want than that.
I sincerely will admit, I can't find a better source than the man who coined the phrase,
in fact, I can't see who would be a greater authority concerning this particular term,
that being, Omniverse --- invented and defined by Mark Gruenwald.

And take it easy dude,
you don't have to rile yourself up so much to try and make a point.
I'll reply with more enjoyment to a normal response. 🙂
But that needless aggresiveness is comedy to me, and will be ignored.

Just sayin, if you wish to be acknowledged again.

Originally posted by manjaro

i promised myself i would stay away but for this fanzine thing....

when MG was doing his thing his 'zine was a report on comic books....current
(at that time) and future happenings ang goings on in continuity for both companies.....
its no different from what wizard, ign, or newsarama does...
in fact the only difference was the fact that it was called "omniverse".

so first and foremost, he coined the phrase.

secondly it wasnt after he got hired by marvel that any depiction,
illustrations, or allusions to an omniverse was ever brought up....
and it wasnt until 2005 that some stupid writer made the claim that the omniverse is everything.....
even the real world and other works of fiction.....😕

then shortly therefore,
they retracted thier arrogant claims and generically labled it all universes...

et al. sooo.....where was i?...umm yeah, so marvel has its own omniverse

Originally posted by Mr Master
hum

Jeesh, take it easy mad boy.

Mark Gruenwald invented the term Omniverse,
Mark Gruenwald also gave it it's meaning.

So again, Pointing out the first to use a term innaccurately is an appeal to authority fallacy.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Concerning the term Omniverse,
I have to take Mark's example on this one friend.
Mark apparently was the Editor of an arc where the Omniverse was not only threatend,
but it was artistically depicted (as in illustrated)
and,
it lead to a proceeding arc,
where Galactus was in the process of absorbing said Omniverse.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Before there were some (perhaps yourself included)
that were saying Marvel just throws the term around.
Well, now we have Mark Gruenwald himself, involved in a Marvel arc,
where the term is not only used, but literally it's being put to action.
And it's being put to action in it's entirety (not a sector/section/or piece)
in it's entirety.

Originally posted by Mr Master
I don't know what more proof you want than that.
I sincerely will admit, I can't find a better source than the man who coined the phrase,

Originally posted by Mr Master
in fact, I can't see who would be a greater authority concerning this particular term,

Originally posted by Mr Master
that being, Omniverse --- invented and defined by Mark Gruenwald.

Originally posted by Mr Master
And take it easy dude,
you don't have to rile yourself up so much to try and make a point.
I'll reply with more enjoyment to a normal response. 🙂
But that needless aggresiveness is comedy to me, and will be ignored.

Just sayin, if you wish to be acknowledged again.

Not surprising as its rather difficult to cite a valid source on the subject of symantics and syntax.

Omni already existed. As did the word "verse" in the context of universe.
He did not make the word universe. He did not make the word Omni. He is not the appropriate authority on either of the two words he used in conjunction with one another.

Originally posted by manjaro
i promised myself i would stay away but for this fanzine thing....when MG was doing his thing his 'zine was a report on comic books....current(at that time) and future happenings ang goings on in continuity for both companies.....its no different from what wizard, ign, or newsarama does...in fact the only difference was the fact that it was called "omniverse". so first and foremost, he coined the phrase. secondly it wasnt after he got hired by marvel that any depiction, illustrations, or allusions to an omniverse was ever brought up.... and it wasnt until 2005 that some stupid writer made the claim that the omniverse is everything.....even the real world and other works of fiction.....😕 then shortly therefore, they retracted thier arrogant claims and generically labled it all universes...et al. sooo.....where was i?...umm yeah, so marvel has its own omniverse

The fact that Mark Gruenwaold had a fanzine called OMNIVERSE before he was hired by marvel...and the fanzine had to do with marvel and dc comtinuity is all we need thank you 🙂

"The only difference was that it was called omniverse" 😱

"it wasnt after he got hired by marvel that any depiction, illustrations, or allusions to an omniverse was ever brought up"

As opposed to him being hired by marvel and depicting it for DC?

It easy to see how you can confuse yourself and even easier to see how another poster would quote this and put his thuimbs up to it.....its a desperate ploy to take a fact and twist it untill its as confusing as your post

So marvel is arrogant when there views dont go along with yours but then they are ok when it states the same thing by saying -all realities-which even in your confused state..your not sure what it means

As of now with all the evidenace gathered up.......there is one omniverse

Originally posted by Mr Master
And this circular reasoning by the man who invented the term and it's meaning:

........................................................................................................

These scans are from Avengers v1. #296 - 297

The beginning of the whole Black Celestial drama.
........................................................................................................

So in the Black Celestial arc,
evidently, Galactus was not only an OMNIVERSAL threat,
Galactus was actually going to absorb the ENTIRE OMNIVERSE,
[B]according to MARK GRUENWALD ..

that's the guy who invented the Term.

MARK GRUENWALD was the EDITOR of Marvel during this arc:
........................................................................................................

"Celestial renegade (Taimut) constructed a weapon (Galactus)
mighty enough to threaten the ENTIRE Space-Time structure of the OMNIVERSE"

........................................................................................................

Nebula had control of some avengers and was planning on taking Galactus' power:

"I have learned about the great weapon in Time"

........................................................................................................

"In my hands, no being in ALL the OMNIVERSE would be safe"

........................................................................................................

A mini artistic depiction of the actual OMNIVERSE:

"Suffice to say that the weapon is Supreme,
the OMNIVERSE is vast beyond imagining"

........................................................................................................

"Soon, with the help of the Avengers,
Nebula will not only Rule the OMNIVERSE,
she will own it"

........................................................................................................

This is the clincher: (Notice at the bottom of the scan, who the EDITOR is) 🙂

"The greatest weapon in the OMNIVERSE is nearly mine"

........................................................................................................

Is MARK GRUENWALD hyperboling about his own invention? 😬

........................................................................................................

I guess Reed wasn't lying when he said:

"The time will come soon when ALL the Energy in the UNIVERSE,
through out it's HISTORY will NOT be SUFFICIENT to feed him"

The History of the Marvel Universe ... an OMNIVERSE!!! [/B]

Still no official statement from marvel concerning their own omniverse...
Threatening the omniverse and artisticly depicting an omniverse is not a claim to them having thier own

This is the same thing that has been handled before in this thread.....

Originally posted by GalacticStorm
The whole counter argument is based on the fact that Marvel characters have referred to the omniversal when talking of the scale of an event, or have said to have set in motion something of omniversal consequences.

That simply does not change what Marvel has stated.

How can any comic fan come in here and say Marvel has its own omniverse when Marvel itself says it doesn't?😕

Its unbelievable.

Copyright means that we'll only ever see a demonstration of a shared omniverse during crossovers but that doesn't change Marvels stance.

You can argue until youre blue in the face but at the end of the day, nothing short of an official statement is going to mean anything here in this debate.

👆

Originally posted by Creshosk

Irrelivent. I could make up a term "Omnifelis" and have it talk about a specific group of hamsters. when in actuality I wasn't even making up the term just combining two preexisting concepts. Are you presuming that Gruenwald has any level of control over the latin language? I certianly hope you're more inteligent than that. Despite how he wanted to use a term the words already had meaning. Being the first to use two words that already have meaning in a way that goes against either or one of the words meanings does not give him credence over the term.
So again, Pointing out the first to use a term innaccurately is an appeal to authority fallacy.
More circular arguments. Try validating the useage of terms in the events of the feat without using the source of the feat itself.
Appeal to authority fallacy and circular reasoning detected.
He's not a valid source as that is an appeal to authority fallacy.
Appeal to authority.
Using preexisting words together inaccurately does not given him credence for any level of control over the latin langauge. Fail.
So you still have nothing valid or logical to argue with on the subject of the correct useage of a combination of two previous existing terms?
Not surprising as its rather difficult to cite a valid source on the subject of symantics and syntax.
Omni already existed. As did the word "verse" in the context of universe.
He did not make the word universe. He did not make the word Omni. He is not the appropriate authority on either of the two words he used in conjunction with one another.

In what dictionary is the term Omniverse defined?

In what Latin translative dictionary does the term Omniverse exist?

From what source are you getting your definition of the term Omniverse?
(and don't show me the latin equivalence of two terms)

From what source are you getting that the term Omniverse applies to all Universes,
across real life and fictional storylines,
when in real life, there's absolutely NO proof that there's even Two Universes,
and when in fictional creations said creator can do whatever the heck they want?

Lastly, outside of Mark Gruenwald/Marvel,
where is the term Omniverse ever defined/addressed in any book fictional or not?

...................................................................................

Please don't reply with the same response:
(appeal to authority fallacy-circular arguments-circular reasoning-nothing valid or logical to argue)

Just simply answer the questions,
if you don't have an answer,
then admit it without covering that fact with cheesy insults, thanx.

Originally posted by starlock

Still no official statement from marvel concerning their own omniverse...

Originally posted by starlock

Threatening the omniverse and artisticly depicting an omniverse
is not a claim to them having thier own

And completely tearing the ENTIRE Omniverse to pieces is also inconsequential:

"Not long ago, the Omniverse was swept
by a Temporal Reality Wave of unimaginable power,
that literally tore the Continuum to bits and Re-arranged it"
........................................................................

Yea, I got it. 👆

Originally posted by starlock

This is the same thing that has been handled before in this thread..

Originally posted by Mr Master
Questions:

In what dictionary is the term Omniverse defined?

Originally posted by Mr Master
In what Latin translative dictionary does the term Omniverse exist?

http://www.onelook.com/?w=omni&ls=a
http://www.onelook.com/?w=-verse

Originally posted by Mr Master
From what source are You getting your definition of the term Omniverse?

Originally posted by Mr Master
(and don't show me the Latin equivalence of two terms)

http://www.onelook.com/?w=omni&ls=a
http://www.onelook.com/?w=-verse

Omnifelis is not a group of hamsters. You'd have to be an idiot to think that "All Cats" in Latin means a group of hamsters in English.

Omniverse likewise is composed of two other words. Omni meaning all and Verse meaning turn or bend.

Universe is literally "turned into one," from unus "one" and verse of vertere "to turn".

Other people misusing terms does NOT justify You misusing the term.

Originally posted by Mr Master
From what source are You getting that the term Omniverse applies to all Universes,

You like wise cannot say that Omnifelis refers to a type of vegetable. IT would be a mistranslation.

Originally posted by Mr Master
across real life and fictional storylines,
when in real life, there's absolutely NO proof that there's even Two Universes,

Originally posted by Mr Master
and when in fictional creations said creator can do whatever the heck they want?

Originally posted by Mr Master
Lastly, outside of Mark Gruenwald/Marvel,
where is the term Omniverse ever defined/addressed in any book fictional or not?

Originally posted by Mr Master
...................................................................................

Please don't reply with the same response:
(appeal to authority fallacy-circular arguments-circular reasoning-nothing valid or logical to argue)

Originally posted by Mr Master
Just simply answer the questions,
if You don't have an answer,
then admit it without covering that fact with cheesy insults, thanx.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Still regurgitating other's posts I see above.

"Threatening the omniverse and artisticly depicting an omniverse"

And completely tearing the ENTIRE Omniverse to pieces is also inconsequential:

"Not long ago, the [B]Omniverse was swept
by a Temporal Reality Wave of unimaginable power,
that literally tore the Continuum to bits and Re-arranged it"
........................................................................

Yea, I got it. 👆

😆 [/B]

MArvel misusing a term does not serve as evidence for yours or their claims. My refering to a pig as a cat in my own work of fiction would make me look as foolish as Marvel does for misuing terms in their work of fiction. Please do not repeat their foolishness anymore.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Still regurgitating other's posts I see above.

"Threatening the omniverse and artisticly depicting an omniverse"

And completely tearing the ENTIRE Omniverse to pieces is also inconsequential:

"Not long ago, the [B]Omniverse was swept
by a Temporal Reality Wave of unimaginable power,
that literally tore the Continuum to bits and Re-arranged it"
........................................................................

Yea, I got it. 👆

😆 [/B]

"Still regurgitating other's posts I see above."

Coming from the master of spamming and re-posting the same scans over and over ....desperate really desperate

"Threatening the omniverse and artisticly depicting an omniverse"

And completely tearing the ENTIRE Omniverse to pieces is also inconsequential:"

Yes it is... i see your getting it now...it was a marvel comic

Originally posted by Creshosk

Irrelevant. Again, try to actually read this time. The word is composed of two other words that already have meaning. Omni means ALL. If it is not all it is not omni. You can choose any damned Latin dictionary You want. Omni means all.
The Latin language. Which supersede people missing the terms.
Why not? Because it proves that You and He are wrong? That's exactly what I'm going to do then.
Omnifelis is not a group of hamsters. You'd have to be an idiot to think that "All Cats" in Latin means a group of hamsters in English.
Omniverse likewise is composed of two other words. Omni meaning all and Verse meaning turn or bend.
Universe is literally "turned into one," from unus "one" and verse of vertere "to turn".
Other people misusing terms does NOT justify You misusing the term.
Latin the language that the word comes from.
You like wise cannot say that Omnifelis refers to a type of vegetable. IT would be a mistranslation.
Irrelevant. The term atom from atomos was defined before there was evidence of atoms even existing.
And still misuse terms? Yes. but You'll note that in THIS thread we are talking about MORE than just marvel. Therefore MArvel is no longer allowed to get away with misusing terms in THIS thread. I backed off the subject in the marvel thread as it dealt only with marvel. You no longer have the protection. You can no longer misuse the term in here and expect to be treated like You are speaking logically. Especially in light of the fact that You are not. Your appeals to authority will not supersede the fact that the word is composed of other words and putting them together will not allow You to change THEIR meanings.
Irrelevant. Your appeal to authority is illogical, invalid and thus ignored as Irrelevant. Please provide empirical evidence of your claims to justify your logical fallacies.
And I ask You not to respond by making these fallacies again.
I ask You to do the same. As I DO have answers I will not however answer any leading questions. That is fallacy in and of itself and is not logical and serves no function other than to give credence to YOUR illogic.

You didn't answer one question,
you beat around the bush with your wannabee smart talk, and insults,
you didn't present a single source that defines the term Omniverse.

The term Omniverse does NOT exist anywhere outside of Gruenwald/Marvel,
(DC used it once)
you can't accept that, that's on you.

Have fun, come back and insult some more. 🙂

I promise you, it will all be ignored, but waste your time if you wish.

Originally posted by starlock

"Still regurgitating other's posts I see above."

Coming from the master of spamming
and re-posting the same scans over and over ....

Oh, and incase you didn't notice, (how could you)
You homie, are the true master of spam,
only not with info, but with your T ...

I won't say it, lest you go running to the mods again. 🙂

Originally posted by starlock

desperate really desperate

Originally posted by starlock

i see your getting it now...it was a marvel comic

I see now you're getting it.

Originally posted by Mr Master
All of this is Irrelevant.

Originally posted by Mr Master
You didn't answer one question,

Originally posted by Mr Master
you beat around the bush with your wannabee smart talk, and insults,

Originally posted by Mr Master
you didn't present a single source that defines the term Omniverse.

Originally posted by Mr Master
The term Omniverse does NOT exist anywhere outside of Gruenwald/Marvel,

Originally posted by Mr Master
(DC used it once)
you can't accept that, that's on you.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Have fun, come back and insult some more. 🙂

Originally posted by Mr Master
I promise you, it will all be ignored, but waste your time if you wish.

Originally posted by Creshosk
As are your posts in this thread, don't be hypocritical on things you have no room to talk about.
You just didn't like the answers. Doesn't mean I didn't answer them.
Again you have no room to talk.
Because it's latin dude. You can't just mistranslate from another language. The terms already mean other things. and when used together they already have a meaning. He never "coined the phrase" it already meant something in that combination. You don't have to like it, you don't have to accept it. But that's just the way things are.

Bullshit. Now you're straight up lying, continue to do so and you will be reported for trolling.
And you forgot his fanzine called the omniverse and the ****ing fact that its latin. I linked you the words. It'd be like me taking a set of words from another language and mistranslating them into english. It doesn't make me right. It would make me using the term incorrectly. Just as they and you are doing now. You don't have to accept the fact that words have meaning but that's just the way things are.

I should report you for trolling just for this. It's completely irrelivant to the topic and asking someone to insult you is flamebaiting.

As you should be... in fact you are now reported for trolling.

Go ahead homie,
Report away, in fact, I'll report myself for ya. 😂

Again,
the term Omniverse does NOT exist anywhere outside of Gruenwald/Marvel.

There, again! (in BOLD this time)

Report, report, please report me for saying that,
go ahead, Creshy, do it, report.

Wait, let me help you out ... there,
I just reported myself again. 🙂

Ask the Mods if I'm lying about reporting myself.

You've crossed the line dogs, (and you couldn't even complete your mission)
yes you'l be put on ignore, but I gotta say this,
last thing ever directed at you from me,
you're hilarious. 😆