Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
zvelf

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
In Reply To
motifian

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,077
Subj: Re: Dan Jurgen's take on Darkseid, Doomsday, and Superman
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 at 10:41:13 am EST (Viewed 135 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Dan Jurgen's take on Darkseid, Doomsday, and Superman
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 at 02:41:41 am EST (Viewed 151 times)



    Quote:
    So you haven't read the story too? Doomsday was resurrected in Superman 78 when Cyborg Superman threw him into space, months before Superman encountered him on Apokolips.


Hunter/Prey is a direct continuation of that.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        And it was showing the times Doomsday was killed. Hence Imperiex shown killing Doomsday.
      No, it was showing the times Doomsday was resurrected.
    Doomsday was resurrected in OWAW? Can you show us where?


The narration says it's about the times Doomsday comes back. Doomsday came back in OWAW after Doomsday Wars.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Posting some random scan that says nothing about entropy is supposed to prove your point? Amusing.
        Matter collapse and energy null attack? What do you think entropy means?
      Entropy certainly doesn't mean "energy null" while "matter collapse" is entailed in almost any kind of energy attack on a being of matter, not something unique to "entropy" attacks.
    Entropy in DC comics is straight up stated to be energy null.


Nope, "energy null" literally means no energy. Entropy is disorder or randomness in a system, not "no energy" nor the removal of energy from a system, just disorder.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:

              Quote:

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  Yes, yes, we get it. You think Darkseid is more powerful than Odin and Galactus. You think Doomsday is more powerful than Odin and Galactus. You think everyone in DC is more powerful than Odin and Galactus. I mean you're on record for thinking Odin is a weakling, so we know where you stand.
                I accept your concession. No need to pout about it.
              You said earlier that H/P Doomsday would kill any skyfather. Let's see, who was able to fight H/P Doomsday at length, for a much longer duration than Darkseid? Oh, Superman. I guess you think Superman is more powerful than Odin and Galactus too.
            Superman was powered up by kryptonite X and further boosted by mother box. As revealed in Superman man of tomorrow 9.
          Oh, a mother box! I guess that makes Orion skyfather level too. As for all that stuff about Kryptonite X, Bizarro, and Eradicator, you went to a lot of work to prove nothing. Everyone knows Superman was powered-up after he came back from dying, and Superman merely references this in Hunter/Prey. However, that power-up is different from the one you're talking about when he loses control of his powers. That story is a completely different story from Hunter/Prey. You hope to conflate them to ridiculously claim that Superman is three or four times more powerful than normal when that wasn't even stated in the storyline when he lost control of his powers. That's truly hilarious especially since nowhere in Hunter/Prey is anything of the sort mentioned. Superman wasn't remotely unable to control his powers in Hunter/Prey. I seriously can't determine whether you're deliberately attempting to mislead people or you're delusional to the point of having a tenuous grasp on reality.
        Superman only lost the ability to control his powers just after Hunter Prey. He was able to control them till the conclusion of Bizarro arc and then became a hulk like creature and lost control.
      And therefore THAT power-up is another story and does not occur in Hunter/Prey.
    It's straight up shown that H/P occurs when Superman had the extra power. This is just denial now.


Superman was more powerful than before he died, BUT that power-up is different from the extra power you are referring to when he lost control of his powers.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        It's straight up stated that Superman had extra power constantly until he lost control. That was before he encountered Bizarro.
      BUT AFTER Hunter/Prey.
    Before that actually. The issues are published simultaneously for Bizarro arc and Hunter Prey in April 1994.


"Simultaneously" means "before" for you? Heh. They are separate stories that don't have anything to do with the other. Characters appear in simultaneous stories all the time and are not affected by one story in the other because it's accepted that they are different stories taking place at different times. You are purposely trying to conflate two different stories and being misleading.


    Quote:
    So Superman is indeed a million times more powerful than Thor?


So you're taking seriously a retraction in an interview that you also say is irrelevant?


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        There is no editing to include retraction.
      Wrong. There is an editor's note put into the interview afterward that states, "Since publishing of the interview, Dan Jurgens has further expanded on his answer, contradicting the transcript of the interview."
    In another interview. It's also included.


It's the same interview. How could there be an editor's note in the interview about that interview but that interview be another interview? You make no sense.


    Quote:
    "ComicBoards has listened to the tape and finds no indication of humor, sarcasm, irony or sardonic whit in Jurgens' statements or Richard Caponetti's questions. While we can't know what Mr. Jurgens was thinking, or if he silently laughed to himself or in a manner that could not be heard by the tape or by the interviewer, by all apperarences, Jurgens' comments here are genuine. ComicBoards stands by the interviewer in his assesments." How funny is that you excluded that.


I already answered earlier that that part is irrelevant. However Jurgens appeared during the interview does not mean he didn't make an error and his subsequent admitting to that error and retracting that from the interview (as noted by the editor in the interview itself) means that citing that portion of the interview is to cite something erroneous. But you're showing your extreme hypocrisy here by trying to say this retraction should somehow count while simultaneously saying everything Jurgens states about Darkseid, Doomsday, and Superman shouldn't.




How to make an entrance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfMiOlIUGQw
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software