Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
rc

In Reply To
Olympian

Subj: Re: Here is the thing, tho..
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 05:26:25 pm EDT (Viewed 187 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Here is the thing, tho..
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 05:14:38 pm EDT



> > Yes, this is clear, but it's not as if the universe was falling like the Spectre was. It also does not address how it could be a universal feat given that the Earth didn't crack (or how it could be a planetary feat, even).

> But why would the Earth crack?

Because the universe is very, very heavy and to suggest that a planet could bear the weight of a universe without some sort of magic or other great force coming into play (which is not in the comic, yes?) is far more absurd than the building/ground example you give below -- too absurd for my tastes.

> Thats only if real world physics are into play.

Like the mass and weight of the firmament that Hercules held up? There's room to doubt the mass/weight of the feat if "real world physics" are not in play, then, yes?

> In the fictional realms, depending the genre, real world physics wont matter. In fact, how do you show someone as actually that strong, if everything crumbles beneath him?

Write magic into the comic to explain why the Earth doesn't crack. Without that, it's impossible to see this as a universe-level feat, in my opinion. I'm not asking for physics to be adhered to perfectly -- I freely accept math gaffs in most cases, but this one is too big to pass over, I believe. Same thing with the Spectre example. Spectre clearly wasn't depicted with lunar mass in that issue, in my opinion.

> In this land, if you are strong enougth, nothing happens. Not unless its the porpuse of the writer to happen. The ground doesnt fall just because Superman is stopping a falling building, and it should.

Will it? Buildings crumble to the ground and don't fell the ground. However, for the sake of argument, I will say you are right here. But it is much less believable that a planet could bear the weight of a universe than the ground could a falling building, in my opinion.

> Just my two cents.

If you take this feat at face value, fine. It is extremely more far fetched than ground remaining intact when a character catches a falling building, in my oinion, thus it invites more scrutiny, in my opinion, and is far more dubious.

There's a double standard here (not saying with you, as you haven't said anything on it): The Spectre is debunked -- rightfully, in my opinion -- as a lunar mass because the Moon didn't crack/fall/etc.; but Hercules' feat is not debunked as a universe- or planetary-level feat because the Earth didn't crack/fall/etc.

_rc


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows Vista
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software