Originally posted by leonidas
well, when haters like you are all over him, SOMEONE'S gotta do it. 😄
I like Superman, thank you very much. 😛 I also like Darkseid. Its a few fanatical posters who argue they can beat everyone which annoys me and makes me want to debate against them.
Its like the Quan/Thanos complex. He argues for him so much everyone else then wants to argue against it, because his opinion is so over the top.
Originally posted by Philosophía
Are you really going to continue using Byrne era statements even after people have already directly adressed this (I remember Juntai specifically) in an attempt to demean Superman's feats at every turn ? And if you'd actually read Superman, having an overall view on everything, and not pick random decades old scans from a period that has mostly been retconned, there wouldn't be the need for someone to point out that using that is wrong.It sort of reminds me of the Mr Master/Phoenix complex, where he tries to demean her at every chance he gets.
But I got to admit, this has made me laugh even more:
crylaugh
Originally posted by Juntai
I'll give you that Byrne deal, as often Supermans powers are attributed to telekinetic powers [farther proven by Connor, who often did his lifting primarily with telekinesis, but the lines blurred and dileneated once he gained full Kryptonian powerset on which he was using.], however often enough, his lifting even while flying, is often attributed to strength alone as well. Most writers don't try to enter the territory of the Superman beyond his basic powerset, while others do. When Byrne wrote that, he was recreating Superman's origin and powerset, both of which should be taken with a grain of salt for better or worse, since the Man of Steel origin is no longer correct. Besides, I don't think there's anything he can't lift on the ground, that he can lift in the air. This is a guy who with a clenched hand can keep a black hole from expanding, or turn the endless wheels of maggedon, a younger Superman lifted the entirety of Metropolis from the ocean floor [lots of water displacement- think about it].
... he accepts the Byrne scan because Superman's powers are OFTEN attributed to something like tactile tk. Now he personally believes that Supes can lift anything on the ground that he can lift while flying and I don't fault him for that. I never said that Supes can't, I just said that flight feats aren't usable as strength feats.
If you have some evidence that directly suggest that the very nature of Superman's powers have been rectonned then come with it, I'm just going by the evidence that I have at the moment. If you have a scan that establishes that Supes powers don't work that way anymore I'll be more than happy to take a look, but just like I told Trick when we used to argue over whether or not Radion still existed in DC, them not mentioning it for years doesn't constitute an actual recton.
Originally posted by Enyalus
I like Superman, thank you very much. 😛 I also like Darkseid. Its a few fanatical posters who argue they can beat everyone which annoys me and makes me want to debate against them.Its like the Quan/Thanos complex. He argues for him so much everyone else then wants to argue against it, because his opinion is so over the top.
Originally posted by Philosophíawhy are you laughing pedofailia?
crylaugh
the singularity at that size should be more massive than the earth, thus the earth would revolve around the accretion disk of the singularity hopelessly falling into it's center. superman was struggling to contain it blocking the effects from harming earth = durability feat.
he sure as shit wasn't "lifting" it since there was no down for it to go, the earth would be gravitationally attracted to the singularity, like the moon to the more massive earth.
there is more to a book store than the comics section you know. 😛
Originally posted by psycho gundam
why are you laughing pedofailia?
😛the singularity at that size should be more massive than the earth, thus the earth would revolve around the accretion disk of the singularity hopelessly falling into it's center. superman was struggling to contain it blocking the effects from harming earth = durability feat.
he sure as shit wasn't "lifting" it since there was no down for it to go, the earth would be gravitationally attracted to the singularity, like the moon to the more massive earth.
there is more to a book store than the comics section you know. 😛
i thought he actually MOVED it though. which is why i said he was lifting it in the first place. the earth wouldn't revolve around it if he sealed it and if he actually MOVED it that would indeed be a TREMENDOUS strength feat.
IF he moved it . . . i don't know what book that incident took place in or i'd look it up.
Originally posted by darthgoober
Actually according to Juntai...... he accepts the Byrne scan because Superman's powers are OFTEN attributed to something like tactile tk. Now he personally believes that Supes can lift anything on the ground that he can lift while flying and I don't fault him for that. I never said that Supes can't, I just said that flight feats aren't usable as strength feats.
If you have some evidence that directly suggest that the very nature of Superman's powers have been rectonned then come with it, I'm just going by the evidence that I have at the moment. If you have a scan that establishes that Supes powers don't work that way anymore I'll be more than happy to take a look, but just like I told Trick when we used to argue over whether or not Radion still existed in DC, them not mentioning it for years doesn't constitute an actual recton.
All Juntai was agreeing upon was that during the Byrne era, what you posted concerning something other than his strength being at work when he lifted things while flying was true but, like I said, most of what was written during that era was either retconned or completly pulled out of continuity which Juntai also agrees upon.
It would be easier for me to just prove that period is out of continuity, but, if you really want proof directly contradicting that.. I'll elaborate on why it has changed. Here's another scan besides the one you posted where Superman clearly states that that while flying he moves objects by sheer force of will and not by strength. (see how generous I am, giving you arguments uhuh)
Would a scan like this, for example, prove that he still needs his strength moving things even after flying ? (pre Dos/ZH)
No? How about something even better ?
"With my super-strength back..."
Want something even better ? Here not only is it stated that he uses super-strength while flying and moving an object by the writer but due to fluctuations in his super-strength he actually goes through the plane.
Truth is, besides some comments made in a few comics from the Byrne era, the 'super strength not being needed while flying' stuff hasn't really been accepted as a part of Superman's abilities (even some writers from that period seemed to ignore this) and especially after the ZH period it is made quite clear that's not the case.
It took quite some time to find this scans...you're lucky your username is Darthgoober and not Quarver Zone (man do I love this nickname) or something. (not that you're not also a fanboy, but at least I like reading most of your posts .. uhuh)
Originally posted by Philosophíayou actually found scans that mostly reinforce the "theory" of anti-gravitons/tactile telekinesis to be honest.
All Juntai was agreeing upon was that during the Byrne era, what you posted concerning something other than his strength being at work when he lifted things while flying was true but, like I said, most of what was written during that era was either retconned or completly pulled out of continuity which Juntai also agrees upon.It would be easier for me to just prove that period is out of continuity, but, if you really want proof directly contradicting that.. I'll elaborate on why it has changed. Here's another scan besides the one you posted where Superman clearly states that that while flying he moves objects by sheer force of will and not by strength. (see how generous I am, giving you arguments uhuh)
Would a scan like this, for example, prove that he still needs his strength moving things even after flying ? (pre Dos/ZH)
No? How about something even better ?
"With my super-strength back..."
Want something [b]even better
? Here not only is it stated that he uses super-strength while flying and moving an object by the writer but due to fluctuations in his super-strength he actually goes through the plane.Truth is, besides some comments made in a few comics from the Byrne era, the 'super strength not being needed while flying' stuff hasn't really been accepted as a part of Superman's abilities (even some writers from that period seemed to ignore this) and especially after the ZH period it is made quite clear that's not the case.
It took quite some time to find this scans...you're lucky your username is Darthgoober and not Quarver Zone (man do I love this nickname) or something. uhuh [/B]
reed richards theorized that gladiator (kallark) could attribute some of his lifting ability to psionic energy control, gladiator lifted the baxter building (35 stories/hundreds of thousands of tons) effortlessly without the building crumbling from lack of evenly distributed support (gladiator's two hands)
it's a phenomena not consciously controlled by either superman or gladiator, for instance when superman flew rapidly with lois in his arms countless times without turbulence or g force being a factor.
of coarse superman has insane strength, but under certain circumstances objects get enveloped by his field to protect them from that strength.
apparently, sentry lacks this power, and the hulk for that matter.
Originally posted by PhilosophíaWhat does that mean, exactly? I've read it before, and it always struck me as the lazy writer's explanation while not really explaining anything (a similar example would be in Fantastic Four King-Size Special #5, when Black Panther comments how Black Bolt possesses the "power of flight itself": what the hell does that mean??)
...by sheer force of will...
Anyway, I think writers have always had a hard time dealing with Superman's flight and flight-lifting because there's no natural human analog, unlike, say, strength or speed, to extrapolate from. So they write in whatever best moves the story along.
Personally, I've always like to think of Superman's flight being based on a vector-field transformation of his bioelectric aura, which, for durability is a scalar field. But, hey, that's me.
Originally posted by Philosophía
All Juntai was agreeing upon was that during the Byrne era, what you posted concerning something other than his strength being at work when he lifted things while flying was true but, like I said, most of what was written during that era was either retconned or completly pulled out of continuity which Juntai also agrees upon.It would be easier for me to just prove that period is out of continuity, but, if you really want proof directly contradicting that.. I'll elaborate on why it has changed. Here's another scan besides the one you posted where Superman clearly states that that while flying he moves objects by sheer force of will and not by strength. (see how generous I am, giving you arguments uhuh)
Would a scan like this, for example, prove that he still needs his strength moving things even after flying ? (pre Dos/ZH)
No? How about something even better ?
"With my super-strength back..."
Want something [b]even better
? Here not only is it stated that he uses super-strength while flying and moving an object by the writer but due to fluctuations in his super-strength he actually goes through the plane.Truth is, besides some comments made in a few comics from the Byrne era, the 'super strength not being needed while flying' stuff hasn't really been accepted as a part of Superman's abilities (even some writers from that period seemed to ignore this) and especially after the ZH period it is made quite clear that's not the case.
It took quite some time to find this scans...you're lucky your username is Darthgoober and not Quarver Zone (man do I love this nickname) or something. (not that you're not also a fanboy, but at least I like reading most of your posts .. uhuh) [/B]
Glads is actually subject to the same kind of inconsistency. Back in the day his ability to lift the Baxter building without it collapsing was attributed to his psionic abilities(basically tactile tk), but in a more recent Thor comic the two of them were straining to set down an airplane without it collapsing under it's own weight. Now the second scenario MIGHT be considered a recton, but it's just as likely that the writer didn't do enough research on the characters history. If DC has started recognizing the difference "officially" that's one thing(even if it's only in bios), otherwise it seems a lot like taking the one writer who said that he no longer considers T-Vo to be part of Supes's arsenal at face value rather than weight for a comic that actually says he no longer has it.
Originally posted by EnyalusHow is my opinion so over the top?
I like Superman, thank you very much. 😛 I also like Darkseid. Its a few fanatical posters who argue they can beat everyone which annoys me and makes me want to debate against them.Its like the Quan/Thanos complex. He argues for him so much everyone else then wants to argue against it, because his opinion is so over the top.
Originally posted by MindshipSo is Gladiator.
This post regarding black holes is a little late, but I couldn't resist commenting.As I understand it, a black hole is not dependent on mass alone but on mass in relation to volume. Giant stars become black holes because of their mass in relation to their stellar volume. A walnut, too, could be made into a black hole if it could be compressed small enough (probably to a size smaller than a proton). If it's magnetically charged, then a refrigerator magnet could "hold" (suspend) such a black hole very easily and with no ill effects.
I know I'm also commenting in a vacuum w/o that Supes/black hole scan. I remember it, thinking 'That's pretty cool', but given all the discussion regarding black holes on the previous page, I felt compelled to add my 2 cents.
Anyway, I think Supes takes this because he is the master brawler.
Originally posted by darthgoober
You're scans certainly lend credence to some of Supes's writers portraying Supes's lifting abilities while flying to his strength, but it doesn't necessarily constitute an actual recton on his abilities. Don't get me wrong because it very well could, but it's also possible that his super strength can add to the effect or that it's just written inconsistently. Juntai didn't say that Supes's strength WAS often attributed to tactile tk, he said ARE. Now I don't know for sure what he's referencing there because I'm no where near as well versed in Supes as Juntai is, but if he says that it crops up from time to time I'm inclined to believe him.
If this ability wouldn't be based on a few comments from a period that has mostly been retconned and/or pulled out of continuity close to completly, if there would have been further proof that this is the case by other writers in comics that followed that period and if there wouldn't be clear evidence proving that what was said during that period doesn't apply to Superman anymore ("everything he lifts while flying he does due to willpower, similar to how he flies, and not due to strength") then maybe this would be debatable, but it isn't.
And I didn't intervene here to discuss why some objects don't collapse under their own weight when Superman is lifting them. I'm here due to something you posted:
Originally posted by darthgoober
Supes pulling a planet isn't really a strength feat, it's a flight feat. There's a scan floating around the forum where he's pulling a large ship with just his "flight" power while his strength and durability have been completely nullified.
..which, as the scans I posted show, it's not the case. It has been shown later that he does use his strength to lift/pull objects and it's not due to willpower/flight that he does, as it was during the Byrne era. The 'tacticle telekinesis' would be a discussion for another time.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
you actually found scans that mostly reinforce the "theory" of anti-gravitons/tactile telekinesis to be honest.reed richards theorized that gladiator (kallark) could attribute some of his lifting ability to psionic energy control, gladiator lifted the baxter building (35 stories/hundreds of thousands of tons) effortlessly without the building crumbling from lack of evenly distributed support (gladiator's two hands)
it's a phenomena not consciously controlled by either superman or gladiator, for instance when superman flew rapidly with lois in his arms countless times without turbulence or g force being a factor.
of coarse superman has insane strength, but under certain circumstances objects get enveloped by his field to protect them from that strength.
apparently, sentry lacks this power, and the hulk for that matter.
What does this have to do with my discussion with Goober ? We were discussing whether or not Superman applies his strength when flying while lifting things, and as I proved, eventough during Byrne era the object was moved using pure willpower and not strength, that's not the case afterwards. I don't care what Gladiator, Sentry or Hulk can or cannot do and your assumptions on what you think Superman does, since that is simply not what I'm arguing. 🙂
Originally posted by Philosophía
If this ability wouldn't be based on a few comments from a period that has mostly been retconned and/or pulled out of continuity close to completly, if there would have been further proof that this is the case by other writers in comics that followed that period and if there wouldn't be clear evidence proving that what was said during that period doesn't apply to Superman anymore ("everything he lifts while flying he does due to willpower, similar to how he flies, and not due to strength") then maybe this would be debatable, but it isn't.And I didn't intervene here to discuss why some objects don't collapse under their own weight when Superman is lifting them. I'm here due to something you posted:
..which, as the scans I posted show, it's not the case. It has been shown later that he does use his strength to lift/pull objects and it's not due to willpower/flight that he does, as it was during the Byrne era. The 'tacticle telekinesis' would be a discussion for another time.
They're not a clear indication that it's a strength feat when he lifts/pulls something while flying, just that his strength is a factor(it's a strength+flying feat).
Your argument was entirely dependent on the scans from the Byrne era where it's stated that he moves objects not by strength, but by willpower, similar to how he flies, and thus anything he moves while flying is not due to his strength, but due to his flying ability. I proved, using scans from later instances, that part to be wrong.
Your stance wasn't "I've never contended that strength doesn't factor into it, just that his flight does as well.", that's just something you put up now, because it was entirely based on the scans from that period, which state what I've written above. Now, once those scans have been nullified, you, heh, retcon your stance into something it never was, ignoring what your stance was initially/the scans and start assuming/speculating that flying plays a part in his strength feats, despite this having nothing to do with what we were initially discussing.
So you see, since your stance was based on those scans, it was pretty much "what he moves while flying has nothing to do with his strenght" while your current stance is "flying plays a part in his strength feats while in the air, so they don't count".
Anyhow..
Originally posted by Philosophía
Your argument was entirely dependent on the scans from the Byrne era where it's stated that he moves objects not by strength, but by willpower, similar to how he flies, and thus anything he moves while flying is not due to his strength, but due to his flying ability. I proved, using scans from later instances, that part to be wrong.Your stance wasn't "I've never contended that strength doesn't factor into it, just that his flight does as well.", that's just something you put up now, because it was entirely based on the scans from that period, which state what I've written above. Now, once those scans have been nullified, you, heh, retcon your stance into something it never was, ignoring what your stance was initially/the scans and start assuming/speculating that flying plays a part in his strength feats, despite this having nothing to do with what we were initially discussing.
So you see, since your stance was based on those scans, it was pretty much "what he moves while flying has nothing to do with his strenght" while your current stance is "flying plays a part in his strength feats while in the air, so they don't count".
Anyhow..
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11175620#post11175620
And you'll see that this statement...
Originally posted by darthgoober
What do you mean what does it represent? His strength is turned off and he's still able to pull that ship through flight. He also comments that there's something other than strength at work when he lifts something while flying. Thus lifting feats while fly AREN'T feats of pure strength for Supes. Strength might help in the effort, but the fact that there's something else at work means that those type's of feats aren't valid evidence of his being physically stronger than someone like the Hulk or Thor. To make that kind of determination you have to go by strength feats that AREN't aided by flight.
Was made exactly 1 hour and 21 minutes after I busted the myth 8 months ago. And even when I originally busted the myth an hour and a half previously, I never said that strength didn't factor into it. I just said...
Originally posted by darthgoober
"Supes moving *insert large object* while flying is a major strength feat"http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=advsupes43617yl7.jpg
http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=advsupes43618cr4.jpg
First panel of the second scan...
"And as I discovered some time ago, when I lift an object while I'm flying, there's something other than strength at work."Myth busted.
You didn't catch me changing my argument, you jumped in on me pointing out an incomplete argument to leo. Me and leo go way back so I didn't feel the need to go into a lot of detail because I knew an all out debate wouldn't be necessary for leo to bring up feats that were unassisted by flight rather than feat that were flight aided 😬 .
You don't seem to understand what is wrong with your stance. The Byrne era and the scans from that era, the very scans on which you base your entire argument clearly state that when flying, he moves objects due to willpower and not strength. Thus since you support those scans, it means you agree with them in the sense that strength has nothing to do with moving/lifting things while flying. Your later stance, your attempted backdoor with the 'it's both strength and flying' post is not in concordance with what the scans which form your entire argument say, and it's more in line with "if they bring proof of him using his super-strength, I'll say it's a combination of both, eventough the scans clearly beg to differ"
Let's see some facts.
*In the Byrne era, Superman's lifting ability while in the air was attributed to his flight/will power and not due to strength.
*As I've shown, after this period, it was made quite clear that he uses super-strength/physicall force in order to move objects even while in air, and thus whatever stance you'd try to make using those scans, it still wouldn't apply to Superman after that period.
True ?
